Does anybody know anything about quality essay writing?

[mickmoranis]

Originally Posted by America [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

LOL's forum is pop in today

https://youtu.be/UX7V-rrjm_E

[America]

Originally Posted by mickmoranis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

https://youtu.be/UX7V-rrjm_E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TKhe45jl1w

[Schaduwridder]

who would hire a tranny teach?

Answer: No one LOL

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Rhetoric can be used to explain anything which legitimizes bullshit and the pretense of English majors. I majored in English and it's almost insufferable, but most papers are graded upon grammar and structure rather than content.

Dude, you went to a terrible college (or at least a college with a terrible English department)!

I too was an English (well Literature, same diff) major and my professors were nothing like that.

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Dude, you went to a terrible college (or at least a college with a terrible English department)!

I too was an English (well Literature, same diff) major and my professors were nothing like that.

I went to rice and my professors graded papers based on our ability to prove our argument as opposed to the content of the argument. Ahl describes rhetoric. You’re describing bias, unless I’m misunderstanding. A paper should not be graded on the position taken by the author unless it’s absurd. I wrote that Heart of Darkness was Conrad being racist against Europeans since why else would Kurtz be German, French, English, and Belgian? I’m sure no one like reading a young Patriam’s bull shit take on a British classic, but it was well written and so the grade reflected it

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Dude, you went to a terrible college (or at least a college with a terrible English department)!

I too was an English (well Literature, same diff) major and my professors were nothing like that.

University of Houston for me. You? I had a litersture concentration as well. Even had a professor, David Mikics, ask to be told something new about Hamlet. I lol'd in class that day.

[mickmoranis]

Originally Posted by Schaduwridder [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What kind of loser goes to college to major in English

jesus I bet you suck at life and make jack shit

both the libtards lol

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Schaduwridder [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What kind of loser goes to college to major in English

jesus I bet you suck at life and make jack shit

I made six figures, before I decided to take time off and teach an online class.

[mickmoranis]

Just a reminder I have written some seriously publishable works on the boards.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I went to rice and my professors graded papers based on our ability to prove our argument as opposed to the content of the argument. Ahl describes rhetoric. You’re describing bias, unless I’m misunderstanding. A paper should not be graded on the position taken by the author unless it’s absurd. I wrote that Heart of Darkness was Conrad being racist against Europeans since why else would Kurtz be German, French, English, and Belgian? I’m sure no one like reading a young Patriam’s bull shit take on a British classic, but it was well written and so the grade reflected it

Oh I totally agree (well, except about Heart of Darkness being racist; it was definitely anti-European, but I don't think "racist" is accurate). But I was referring to the part about:

but most papers are graded upon grammar and structure rather than content.

That's not rhetoric, that's grammar/structure. If you're in a college course and you're being graded on grammar, that is not a good course (or you're bad at English and shouldn't be in a college-level English/Literature course).

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

University of Houston for me. You? I had a litersture concentration as well. Even had a professor, David Mikics, ask to be told something new about Hamlet. I lol'd in class that day.

University of California, Santa Cruz. On the Hamlet thing, I think it's the same with a lot of Shakespeare (and classics in general). I took a class on Postcolonial Literature that looked at the Tempest, and at the start I felt the same way: what could there possibly be new to say about The Tempest?

But when you start looking at it from a postcolonial angle you realize that all those people commenting on The Tempest for hundreds of years all looked at it the same way. None of them ever thought about how Caliban and Ariel represented the good/bad native being conquered by the European Prospero.

When you look at stuff from a different angle, even stuff like Shakespeare that has been analyzed to death, it's possible to find new things to say about it.