Week 5 Study Group Clarification and Rubric Reminder

Dear Class,
Many of you have already posted insights in your study groups about themes and symbols from the text. I love what I am reading so far. If you're confused about this assignment, read the instructions on the Week 5.02 Themes and Symbols Instructions page and then click on the Week 5.02 Lesson 11 discussion board. You'll see your group number posted there, and you'll address the corresponding prompt for that number. Be sure to offer feedback on your study group mates' posts on that board per instructions.
Also, as you draft Essay #1 for our class (remember that the draft is due this Saturday!), review the rubric posted on the Week 5.10 Peer Review Discussion Board. For every small assignment you submit, and for all your major assignments, I use this rubric. I am always looking for content, organization, language, and source integration. Each category is worth 25 points in Essay #1. Please make sure you meet the following requirements:

• sufficient content (5-6 pages of textual support and analysis, excluding the Works cited page)
• great organization (including a thesis in the last sentence of your introductory paragraph that serves as a road map for the rest of your essay and topic sentences that stem from the thesis in order)
• beautiful, clear writing, wherein every word counts
• MLA formatting used throughout the piece.

I am attaching a student sample essay to help you see how one student worked to honor the rubric requirements and how I interacted with the text and scored it. I hope this all helps; email me if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Sister Bowen

(post Amy's Essay 1 with Sister Bowen's Feedback 1-1)

Amy Carpenter

Sister Bowen

ENG 335

4 June 2016

War Deglamorized: The Story of Editha

            William Dean Howells’ “Editha” [TB1] is a short story that exposes not only the realities of war, but also the false sentiments that were held by many people of the early 20^th century, the time period in which Editha was written and set, that war is glamorous. It brilliantly challenges the notion that war is glorious and unveils the suffering, pain, and devastation that war leaves in its path. While Editha, the story’s title character, naively believes that participation in war is the duty of every upstanding young man, the text reveals that perhaps war is not always necessary, let alone anyone’s duty. Throughout “Editha” war is deglamorized through each of Howell’s symbolic characters: Editha embodies the falsely romanticized view of war; George, her fiancé, represents the questionable nature of war; and George’s mother illustrates the pain and destruction caused by war. [TB2] 

            It becomes apparent almost immediately in the text that Editha is an immature, impressionable young girl. [TB3] With these qualities, she becomes characterized as someone foolish and simultaneously disqualifies herself as a credible character in the story. She is naive and rash,; two characteristics that make for a dangerous combination. Barely after the opening of the text, George simply mentions war and then kisses Editha. “She kissed him back intensely, but irrelevantly, as to their passion, and uttered from deep in her throat. ‘“How glorious!’”” (54). It is entirely[TB4]  evident that Editha is impulsive and immature as she kisses George “irrelevantly.” Her naivety is likewise acknowledged as she claims that war is “glorious”; ”, [TB5] an idea that she has no basis for aside from the “war feeling” in the air (54).

            As the text continues, Editha’s romanticized view of war becomes even more apparent and even more foolish. Her melodramatic nature becomes clear very early on: “But making light of a cause so high and noble seemed to show a want of earnestness at the core of [George’s] being” (54). She also later shows herself to be thoughtless and insensitive regarding war and George. She feels that she must “sacrifice anything to the high ideal she had for him” (54-55). This passage blatantly shows Editha’s thoughtlessness as well as her romanticized view of war, given that she considers a soldier the “ideal.” Because of the idyllic picture she has conjured in her mind, she makes it clear that if George refrains from going to war, he will be a disappointment to her. She further proves herself insensitive when after George’s death and her subsequent encounter with George’s mother, she relates to the woman sketching her that George’s mother “wasn’t quite in her right mind” (66), simply because she was grieving and upset with Editha for pushing George into a war that he did not even support.

            George’s character deglamorizes war from the start as he calls its necessity into question. The first thing that George says about war is that it “breaks the peace of the world” (55). This idea is one that has not been examined until this point in the text, since Editha has continuously reflected upon the necessity of war. This question itself becomes a theme for the text — is war necessary? George further establishes this idea as he sardonically notes that their country must be supported “right or wrong” (55). This is an idea that Editha fervently agrees with, but it also blatantly[TB6]  suggests that perhaps what their country is doing is wrong.

            George later reasons, “I suppose that at the bottom of his heart every man would like at times to have his courage tested, to see how he would act” (56). He informs Editha that this would be the only reason he would go to war, because even though she believes it is a “holy war,” (56) he does not. He even proclaims that it is not this particular war that he has a problem with, “though this [war] seems peculiarly wanton and needless; but it's every war --so stupid; it makes me sick. Why shouldn't this thing have been settled reasonably?” (57). This logic again penetrates the very question of the work itself as to whether war is ever necessary. George is a striking contrast to the senseless Editha, who says things such as “God meant it to be war,” with absolutely no foundation for her argument (57). While Editha seems inane and frivolous, George seems significant and insightful. As George provides this contrast, he establishes himself as a highly credible character. He asks heartfelt and thought-provoking questions, and he becomes the voice of reason throughout this short work.

            In spite of this, George does eventually succumb to Editha’s request to go to war only in an effort to secure her heart and their future. He does this much to the chagrin of his adoring mother, whose fears for her son are confirmed when she receives word shortly thereafter that he has been killed. Editha goes to visit her, as she promised George she would if he passed away at war (62), and her visit with Mrs. Gearson is far from pleasant. It is clear that Editha realizes that she is at least partly at fault for George’s death. (Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, she later proves to be too immature to take responsibility for her part in George’s death when she is speaking to the woman sketching her.) Editha speaks to Mrs. Gearson “more like a culprit than a comforter” (65), acknowledging the guilt that she feels. Mrs. Gearson is devastated at the loss of her son. It is obvious that at least on some level, Editha realizes that George’s death is because of her hasty and foolish behavior.

            The pain that Mrs. Gearson feels is evidenced through her anger at Editha. She has lost one of her sons and she knows that he would not have gone to war if it had not been for his foolish fiancé. “I suppose you would have been glad to die, such a brave person as you! I don't believe he was glad to die. He was always a timid boy, that way; he was afraid of a good many things; but if he was afraid he did what he made up his mind to” (65). Her sarcasm in calling Editha “a brave person” is an illustration of the frustration and heartbreak that George’s mother feels. Mrs. Gearson becomes an even more poignant representation of the destruction and pain caused by war when she exclaims, “I had already been through one war before” (65). This suggests that war had already affected George’s mother’s life in a negative way, and she blames Editha for the pain that she is feeling this second time. Mrs. Gearson points out on a larger scale the pain felt by everyone who has lost a loved one at war — “You thought it would be alright for my George, your George, to kill the sons of those miserable mothers and the husbands of those girls that you would never see the faces of” (66).  The text again beautifully illustrates her indignation toward Editha as Mrs. Gearson asks her, “What you got that black on for?” She continues, "Take it off, take it off, before I tear it from your back!” (66). Her emotional demand depicts the pain and anguish she has felt at the loss of her son, as well as the wrath she feels toward the person whom she feels has caused his death and is thereby unworthy to mourn his loss.

            Each character in “Editha” plays a vital role. Editha portrays to the reader that her view of war was is unfounded through her negative qualities and lack of credibility as a main character. George’s thoughtfulness, on the other hand, provides a powerful contrast to her thoughtlessness and inspires the idea that war is not, or at least not always, essential. Mrs. Gearson further solidifies this concept through her anger that is a result of much pain and suffering. Each of these characters works together to tear down the romanticized and glamorous view of war as noble and God-inspired, and builds the idea that war does a great deal more bad than it does good.[TB7] 

Works Cited

Howells, William Dean. “Editha." American Literature. Vol. II. William E. Cain. New York: Penguin Academics, 2004. 54-66. Print.

AREA	AUDIENCE NEEDS	POINTS AWARDED	POINTS POSSIBLE
CONTENT	FOCUS:  Can the audience restate the document's main idea? Will the audience consider the document’s scope to be neither too broad nor too narrow? DEVELOPMENT:  Is the audience satisfied with how thoroughly the subject has been explored? LOGIC:  Does the audience see the reasoning as sound, sensible, and free of fallacies? EVIDENCE:  Is the audience satisfied with the amount of direct support provided (i.e., details, examples, surveys, statistics, quotations, textual references, etc)?	24	25
ORGANIZATION	STRUCTURE:  Can the audience follow and recall the document's organization? UNITY:  Can the audience see how each detail, paragraph, and section contribute to the document's main idea?	25	25
LANGUAGE	CLARITY:  Does the audience understand the document without having to re-read sentences or guess at intended meaning? STYLE:  Is the audience comfortable with the way sentence structure, tone, and vocabulary convey meaning? MECHANICS:  Is the audience comfortable with the level of grammatical and mechanical control?	23	25
SOURCE INTEGRATION	INTEGRATION:  Is the audience comfortable with how needed source material is worked into the document? DOCUMENTATION:  Is the audience satisfied with how needed sources are documented?	25	25
GRAND TOTAL =		___97____      /100
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: This is an incredibly strong piece, and I’d love to use it as a sample. For an additional point or two, I’d love to see you submit a revision that addresses my feedback. It’s your choice. I would really like to see you include a powerful “so what” at the end.

---

 [TB1]Correct formatting for short story.

 [TB2]Strong thesis!

 [TB3]Great topic sentence stemming from thesis

 [TB4]Necessary? Make every word count

 [TB5]Study semi-colon and comma rules

 [TB6]Again, the word feels unnecessarily. I’m pointing out small things because your prose is beautiful, overall.

 [TB7]Excellent summation, but I’d like to see the “so-what?” takeaway. What should the reader think or do as a result of this knowledge?