Final Essay Project Review
Here is where you get a chance to help a fellow scholar make as much sense with his or her paper as you want to with your own. Your job as reviewer is to assess how convincing, clear, and effective the paper is. So read it through once without making any comments. Then, reread it, and respond to it on the basis of the questions that follow. The more precise – whether it’s a short or long comment – your response, the more you will be helping the writer make a stronger and more solid essay.
For the First Part:
1. Is it clear to you what the struggle is, exactly? The introductory paragraph should clearly and concisely set up and guide the reader as to what the paper will address. If there’s anything in the introduction that seems to be too vague, too
oad, or too unclear, point out what you feel could be misleading or confusing for the reader.
2. Remember, the key here to an effective paper is to be specific about the issue (the challenge). Address any general statements or observations that may hinder the author’s intent to stay specific. Look at the entire first part of the paper and note where a problem is and what that problem is – as you see it.
3. Is there enough background information on the struggle – how it evolved, how the people involved dealt or didn’t deal with it, and/or what ongoing challenges remain – to help you understand the focus on the issue? To respond, you might consider posing questions as to what more you feel you need to know.
4. Consider the sources being used. First, consider if they seem appropriate and fitting for the argument being made; if any source citation seems out of place or doesn’t make sense, point this out. If you’re at all confused or can’t see how the source provides support to a point being made, then there’s a problem and the writer needs to know this – but he/she needs to know exactly where any such problems exist. Part of a problem could be the type of source used; if you find it questionable, based on the requirements of the assignment, flag it for the writer to re-consider a more fitting source.
For the Second Part:
5. The primary concern with this part of the paper is how flushed out it is. In other words, the writer may have just rushed through and threw something together that doesn’t really seem thought out. You should be able to “sniff” this out pretty quickly; if the paper falls short of what’s expected here (see the “Final Essay Project Prompt”), identify what requirements are either missing, vague, or just too darn confusing. So consider:
a. Who or what the writer is asserting is responsible for this struggle
. If there’s an address as to this struggle as a cu
ent problem (and why)
c. How fully the writer’s rationale is explained (point out what is “vague”)
d. If there is a clear connection to specifics in the first part that validate what the writer is asserting (if not, something is missing)
Nyamjav
Lkham- Erdene Nyamjav
Professor John (Gregg) Williams
Human 105
8 Dec 2021
What and Makes Oedipus’ a Hero and Why?
In this paper, the main focus is subjected to Oedipus, who is considered the hero here. The life and the journey of Oedipus were considered heroic considering the several circumstances that existed in his life and the way he responded to those situations. The several sources that are considered in this paper help in establishing a viewpoint regarding how the title hero is justified to Oedipus. Why the journey and the life of Oedipus are considered heroic is channelized through this context. The paper further focuses on a strong thesis statement that considerably complied with the situation. Oedipus’ lack of knowledge of his origin and circumstance has to lead to his tragic fall despite his emergence as a hero. Oedipus’ velour and capacity to lead, make him a hero against odds but makes him a tragic character at the end for his ignorance of the truth.
There are a number of notions as to whether Oedipus ought to be really considered a hero or not. It is to be mentioned at the very outset, that, different people have different ideas regarding a hero; they have various notions and different sorts of ideals as well. However, Oedipus is truly and really a hero for a number of reasons. The reasons will be discussed one by one and the heroic nature of Oedipus will also be unfolded through the help of this particular research paper. However, at the very beginning, the definition of a hero can be given as an individual who defies all the expectations of a regular being. Oedipus too, does the same, as it will be found out in this particular paper.
Oedipus is a tragic hero, as Aristotle had defined him, in his book Poetics. In the case of a tragic hero, as outlined by Aristotle, the audience first feels a sense of strong connection to the hero, that is, here, Oedipus. After that, the audience fears that a tragedy will befall him and finally a tragedy truly befalls the hero as a result of which the audience feels a sense of catharsis of purgation of feelings. In the case of Oedipus, all these elements are present in a highly detailed manner. Again, most importantly, according to Sidoli, Oedipus is an extremely strong as well as complicated and complex character who is extremely difficult to judge. Oedipus is a hero as well as a tragic hero as he has been made exemplary in the different chapters of Poetics by Aristotle.
Oedipus is of royal origin. That is to say, he is the son of King Laius and Queen Jocasta. They are the King and Queen of Thebes. Therefore, it can be said that, by birth, Oedipus is of noble birth as well as origin. nobility and virtue are two of the greatest qualities that are observed in Oedipus, as it is seen in the other Greek heroes. However, it was said in the myth, that the son of Laius will murder the king. As a result of this, the King, that is, Laius had ordered his son to be pierced in the ankles as sent far away. However, that was not the case that actually happened. The King of Corinth actually found Oedipus and adopted him as their own son. Therefore, from that day onwards, Oedipus became the royal son of King Polybus and Queen Merope, the King and Queen of Corinth (Tutt). Yet again, Oedipus became the successor of a royal and noble family. Therefore, this time too, Oedipus gains the second kind of nobility, although a false one.
As illustrated by (Hassnain) there are aspects that preferably tend to establish Oedipus as a hero. The main reason behind the fact is Oedipus was not like the normal heroes that are channelized in a way that pacifies a hero can deal with all the problems and he is a born hero. In the case of Oedipus, it was depicted that how he battled all the odds that were prevalent in his life and how he possibly learned from his e
ors and then pacified his decisions.
Oedipus was considered a hero as there are several aspects that vocalized these facts the main thing that concerns point is Oedipus was not a person who was born with a
ight future rather he practiced and showcased the velour that established him as a hero overall. His learning from the mistakes, his guilt over the wrong decisions, his grief over the things that he committed mistakenly all perceived that why his character is a hero for everyone. His life, his decisions as well as his performance made him stand out in this world. Though the tragic word was associated with his heroism he was a hero of the common people.
As illustrated by (Primak) the notion of free will and fate has a lot to do with the story of Oedipus. The author illustrated that the overall circumstances that prevailed in the life of Oedipus made it difficult to understand what kind of hero he was whether he was an infamous, complex, or existential hero.
The Greek word Hamartia can be translated into English as a tragic flaw. Oedipus was considered as one of the
avest, intellectual as well as most tragic characters. The tragic word is associated with him as he has fought several odds in his life, his life was very challenging from the very beginning but still, he made a way in these challenges and established himself prominently. But the circumstances as well as the situations that prevailed in his life made it quite difficult for him to hold on. Despite all his efforts, he found no way to hold himself and as a result, he has a
eakdown. His character was tragic due to the circumstances that led to his
eakdown.
Hamartia or the notion of tragic flaw in Oedipus was that he was unaware of his original identity. As stated by (Alshalan) he was considered a good man by the audience as his story implies his character. As, when he was traveling, he had mistakenly killed his father Laius. Again, when his mother’s hand was given in ma
iage, he ma
ied his own mother Jocasta. After unwrapping the secrets of the oracle, according to Fiore, Oedipus got to know about his original identity. As a result of which, he chose to have a baneful fate for himself. He blinded himself out of utmost shame and emba
assment. Actually, no amount of foresight could prevent Oedipus from facing that baneful fate. However, Oedipus takes the responsibility of his own fate in an absolutely heroic manner, as a result of which, he can be truly called a hero, and a tragic hero, for that matter.
The downfall of Oedipus evokes a great sense of pity from the entire audience. That is to say, the actions that follow the self-discovery of Oedipus are truly heart-wrenching and painful as a result of which, pity is evoked to a significant extent. Oedipus, as it can be observed, does not commit suicide, which can be considered an easy form of death. Rather he self-blinds himself. As a result of this, according to Hokmabadi and Salmani, it can be proven that Oedipus achieves a sense of su
ogate death which intensifies his suffering even more compared to a death by suicide. He also comments on the notions of darkness, not merely the literal darkness. Rather he comments on the