In assembling this portfolio, I knew I needed to choose my four strongest micro-essays to revise and expand upon. The four that I chose were the ones that included higher stakes, less summary, and more precise, unique arguments than those that I didn’t choose.
In my essay on Emily Dickinson’s “The Brain—is wider than the Sky—” I argued that Dickinson sees the human mind as so powerful that it dwarfs God’s abilities and intellect by comparison. I also noted that Dickinson comes near to making an atheist argument at certain points, implying that God may have been created inside the human mind, since the brain can “contain” him “with ease.” Finally, I remarked that Dickinson’s word choices imply the human brain to be more sophisticated and developed …show more content…
E. B. Du Bois’ work. My thesis is unclear; upon re-reading it I was unable to tell what point I was trying to make. Was I trying to say that Du Bois’ work contests the writings of Booker T. Washington? That much is obvious, even from a cursory reading of Du Bois’ piece. Was I trying to say that Du Bois comes closer to making a fair “compromise” between races than Washington ever did? If that was my thesis, it was far from apparent. The essay wanders all over the place, going to great lengths to try to connect a passage about the inutility of Washington’s propaganda to a much earlier (and unrelated) excerpt where Du Bois first uses the phrase “the problem of the color line.” My essay is heavily based in summary, merely restating Du Bois’ points instead of crafting an argument about them. The final sentence of my essay says, “Du Bois’ argument succeeds where Washington’s fails” because Du Bois knows that the “problem of the color line” requires “a more in-depth solution” than the compromise proposed by Washington. Yet, I do not include any evidence for the existence of Du Bois’ supposed solution. This essay lacks a detailed close-reading and focused thesis (or indeed, any thesis at
In my essay on Emily Dickinson’s “The Brain—is wider than the Sky—” I argued that Dickinson sees the human mind as so powerful that it dwarfs God’s abilities and intellect by comparison. I also noted that Dickinson comes near to making an atheist argument at certain points, implying that God may have been created inside the human mind, since the brain can “contain” him “with ease.” Finally, I remarked that Dickinson’s word choices imply the human brain to be more sophisticated and developed …show more content…
E. B. Du Bois’ work. My thesis is unclear; upon re-reading it I was unable to tell what point I was trying to make. Was I trying to say that Du Bois’ work contests the writings of Booker T. Washington? That much is obvious, even from a cursory reading of Du Bois’ piece. Was I trying to say that Du Bois comes closer to making a fair “compromise” between races than Washington ever did? If that was my thesis, it was far from apparent. The essay wanders all over the place, going to great lengths to try to connect a passage about the inutility of Washington’s propaganda to a much earlier (and unrelated) excerpt where Du Bois first uses the phrase “the problem of the color line.” My essay is heavily based in summary, merely restating Du Bois’ points instead of crafting an argument about them. The final sentence of my essay says, “Du Bois’ argument succeeds where Washington’s fails” because Du Bois knows that the “problem of the color line” requires “a more in-depth solution” than the compromise proposed by Washington. Yet, I do not include any evidence for the existence of Du Bois’ supposed solution. This essay lacks a detailed close-reading and focused thesis (or indeed, any thesis at