Mary Shelley uses Rousseau’s three influences on education – nature, man, and things – to also support Rousseau’s theory of one’s natural potential for goodness by showcasing the different degrees of impact that each has on the individual, experience (things) being the most, through the monster in her novel, Frankenstein. Abandoned by his creator, the monster’s potential for goodness becomes questionable as his education becomes skewed due to what he learns from his experiences.
One thought on “Skewed Goodness”
Comments are closed.
What’s good:
1-You have a literary and a theory text.
2- You make a claim
Concerns:
1- Your language is hard to follow. It’s either covering up the complexities of your thought (which is what I believe), or it’s inflating half formed thoughts to seem like they are doing more than they are (which I doubt, but shouldn’t have to wonder about). I want you to break your sentences into shorter sentences. Be clear about each move you make. Let each tiny thought have it’s own sentence. If you have to use dashes, extra commas, parenthesis, conjunctions, and prepositional phrases, STOP. These are allowing you to try to squish everything together. I know a thesis is supposed to be two sentences, but you need to unpack. I’d rather you have six sentences that clearly stated your argument than two that don’t.
From what I understand of your thesis, you are gesturing to a possible so what, but you need to spell one out. You need to introduce your “it” and make your claim and how you’re going to illustrate that claim AND tell us how that claim affects the way we read some part of Shelley or Rousseau or both.