Improving My Writing...And Having Fun Doing It

Ricky A. Meadows

Professor Redding

English 1102 (Summer)

Gainesville State College

Improving My Writing…

And Having Fun Doing It

Improving My Writing…And Having Fun Doing It

Ricky A. Meadows

Professor Redding

English 1102 (Summer)

Note: The image on cover is property of Schlock Mercenary and its creator Howard Taylor.

Improving My Writing…And Having Fun Doing It

Table of Contents

Analytical Cover Letter…………………………………………………………………..1

Quality Comparison………………………………………………………………………2

Least Successful Paper (Original Draft)………………………………………….2

Most Successful Paper (Original Draft)…………………………………………5

“What’s the Difference” Essay…………………………………………………..9

Revision Samples………………………………………………………………………...11

Least Successful Paper (Mark-up)……………………………………………….11

Least Successful Paper (Final Draft)…………………………………………….15

Most Successful Paper (Mark-up)………………………………………………..18

Most Successful Paper (Final Draft)……………………………………………..22

Free Choice Essay (Mark-up)…………………………………………………….26

Free Choice Essay (Final Draft)………………………………………………….29

Ricky A. Meadows

English 1102

Prof. Redding

26 June 2012

Mrs. Redding,

To say the least, being a student in your class has been interesting. My only regret is that

it was a summer semester class so we only had one month to explore the topic of good and evil,

which I find most interesting. Going totally unstated, naturally, is the fact that it definitely would

have been much easier on my nerves if we had had more than one month to complete the

multitude of writing assigned to us; you really strained my procrastination reflex. It has,

however, made me a better writer, despite our constant running battle about the use of the

passive voice.

The most obvious area of improvement in my writing is in creating proper conclusions

for my papers. My preference to let papers end naturally instead of summarizing them in a

concluding paragraph, coupled with the intent to make my readers actually think on their own

instead of just parroting my thoughts has made me particularly resistant to the process involved

in creating a good conclusion. This is compounded by the fact that my previous English teacher

agreed with me, and felt conclusions to be unnecessary if the reader had actually read the entire

paper and not just skipped to the end. Your insistence that I write a conclusion forced me to

expand my writing skills in an effort to come up with something that would summarize the

essay, expose my conclusions, and yet still encourage the reader to come to their own, or at least

think about why I came to mine. Ironically enough, the paper I consider to be my best work in

this class does not have a conclusion, but that only shows that there are still improvements to be

made in my writing.

Another exercise that was very helpful in improving me as a writer was the literary

analysis of the movie Pan’s Labyrinth. Not only was it difficult to write a literary critique of a

film, thus depriving me of the author’s words to use as a starting point for my ideas, but my

chosen topic of motion meant that I had to describe something that has no context vividly enough

that my readers could understand the point I was trying to make. An example of this is trying to

put the gestures and walk of Pan into words by describing it as “incredibly convoluted…His

walk makes it seem as if his joints do not bend as those of normal humans would” (Redding,

Film Critique). This exercise in portraying pictures in the form of words, however, has been not

only a learning experience, but a genuinely fascinating one.

Writing has always come easily to me, most likely because I enjoy reading so much and

read so often that a template writing style has already been instilled in me from a young age

almost through osmosis. This has led to a natural laziness when learning about specific details

and formats that are important in writing. Your stringent attention to detail and corrections have

helped enormously, and your class was imminently enjoyable. Hopefully, I will get to the

position where I can publish works publicly, and if you see them, you will be able to see your

influence on me as a writer...and not cringe too much.

Sincerely,

Ricky A. Meadows

Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows

English 1102, Redding

25 June 2012

In the Eye of the Beholder:

How Motion Can Affect Perception

Motion has always been a detail of special importance to human beings. It attracts the eye

often before any conscious thought and can subtly or even not so subtly influence how an object

is perceived. In the 2006 movie Pan’s Labyrinth, director Guillermo Del Toro uses this effect of

motion to further emphasize the difference between the inhabitants of the fairy realm and those

of the human realm as well as that between sympathetic and unsympathetic characters.

Fairytale creatures in the movie, such as Pan and his minions tend to move in swift, jerky

movements. From the moment the viewer is introduced to Pan, they feel unsettled on an almost

subconscious level due to his incredibly convoluted movements. His walk makes it seem as if his

joints do not bend as those of normal humans would, he tends to stoop suddenly when talking,

and he is constantly twitching. His minions also display some of these characteristics. In fact, the

minion is first shown as a type of bug, before it morphs to Ofelia’s idealized image of a fairy.

Even once they have assumed the shape of the fairy, the minions maintain the movements of an

insect: scurrying and flitting quickly around. An especially vivid example of this use of motion

to affect the viewer’s perception can be found when examining the movements of the monster in

Ofelia’s second task. The viewer is already disquieted by the monster’s humanoid face, which is

missing its eyes. The initial statue-like motionlessness of the creature only adds to this

discomfort. Once the monster is awakened by Ofelia’s actions, its movement quickly widen this

gulf between it and humanity. The swaying, stumbling walk of the monster would seem to

indicate slowness of movement, however, it is very close to catching up to Ofelia, even when she

Meadows 2

is at a full run. Its arms wildly flail about as it uses the eyeballs in its palms to see its

surroundings, yet even these movements are not smooth as you would expect from a being trying

to see, but jerk around in a method that would likely make even the most hardy of individuals

seasick.

The director also uses movement to distance the viewer from the unsympathetic

characters of the movie. Even though the Captain and his soldiers are human, their motion seems

to de-emphasize this humanity. The Captain is very controlled in his movements, even down to

the smallest ones such as putting on his gloves, always quickly shifting positions, without

fluidness. An excellent example of this is when the viewer watches him shave as part of his

morning routine. His movements are swift and measured, almost robotic. He constantly consults

his timepiece, and uses that to regulate his days and actions. The same is true of his troops; they

do not walk or stand normally, they march and are braced at attention when still. Their actions

are snappy, such as when they salute or respond to an order.

In startling contrast to these supernatural creatures and robotic soldiers, the director gives

the movements of sympathetic characters such as Ofelia, Mercedes, and the rebels grace and

fluidity in their movements. Ofelia runs about with the careless abandon commonly found in

children, and is quite agile, as can be seen when she is running through the maze, crawling

through the bowels of the tree, or climbing the chair to escape the dungeons of her second task.

Mercedes performs many of her tasks in the same fashion as the Captain, smoothly, as if they

had been done a thousand times before, but still manages to make her movements graceful,

whereas his remain halting and proper. She even manages to maintain this grace and economy of

movement when sneaking around the house or woods, running errands for the rebel forces. The

rebel forces, are also portrayed as sympathetic characters, and so are given this grace and

Meadows 3

freedom of movement by the director. Where the soldiers have imposed themselves on the land,

building fortifications and crashing through the woods, the rebels blend seamlessly with it,

moving around without leaving a trace. They evince none of the military discipline of the

soldiers and seem much more natural when talking with each other or any of the main characters,

as can be seen by their casualness and the camaraderie found when Mercedes visits them in the

caves. Despite their dire straights, their movements retain an element of hope.

This use of motion to separate the natural and the unnatural, the sympathetic and

unsympathetic subtly plays out through the entire movie. Although there are other, more obvious

plot effects, such as the storyline, and the obvious use of magic, as well as the brutal tactics used

by the Captain’s forces to differentiate for the viewer, the director’s use of motion helps to

emphasize and reinforce these differences.

Work Cited

Pan’s Labyrinth. Dir. Guillermo Del Toro. 2006

Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows

Prof. Redding

English 1102

18 June 2012

Society and Morality:

The Cost of a Utopian Existence

In Ursula K. Le Guin‟s 1976 short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,” she

invites the reader to imagine a festival taking place in a seemingly utopian society. The city of

Omelas is one of peace and prosperity, a clean and open place with parks and beautiful

buildings; the PEOPLE happy and content, marching in various parades as they come together to

celebrate the great Festival of Summer. However, underneath this bliss lies a dark secret, and the

source of their society‟s comfort: a child, tortured and alone. Le Guin incorporates the reader

into the story by inviting them to fill in this vague utopia by using their imagination to add

details until it is their own, then once they are fully involved in the creation of this place, uses

direct unavoidable description of the suffering of the child to force the reader to not only

acknowledge the conflict, but decide what is morally correct.

Le Guin uses words such as “we, I, and you;” speaking directly to the reader. She invites

the reader to fill in the blanks in her description of the town and its PEOPLE with their own

imagination, such as when she says, “oh but I wish I could describe it better. I wish I could

convince you...Perhaps it would be best if you imagined it as your own fancy bids” (733). In

order to keep the reader involved but in the creation of the city and its PEOPLE, but also

following the storyline, Le Guin speaks vaguely of the town and its PEOPLE, offering brief and

incomplete descriptions that almost force the reader to flesh them out with their own thoughts.

She mentions the beautiful, sunny weather, and the slight breeze that is just enough to move the

banners around the racetrack but does not describe the banners. She mentions houses with red

Meadows 2

roofs and painted walls but does not talk of materials or what is painted on them. Le Guin also

discusses the habits of the PEOPLE, suggesting that if this society was too perfect and innocent

the reader could imagine orgies where beautiful priests and priestesses issue forth from buildings

to freely give themselves to the PEOPLE, imagine beer overflowing the mugs of joyous

celebrators, and even a drug name drooz which “first brings a great lightness and brilliance to the

mind and limbs, and then after some hours a dreamy languor, and wonderful visions at last of the

very arcana and inmost secrets of the Universe, as well as exciting the pleasure of sex beyond all

belief; and it is not habit-forming” (734). She speaks of the wonderful smells of food coming

from the feast tents but does not describe any of the foods, and of a young boy playing beautiful

music on a wooden flute but mentions not the melodies that he plays, forcing the reader to

populate the feast with their favorite foods and what kind of music they think best fits in this

festive atmosphere.

Once the reader is inextricably mired in the story, once the festival, city, and it PEOPLE

have become something the reader has helped create through their imagination, Le Guin forces

the reader to experience the conflict in the city by exposing them to the child‟s woes. She uses

specific and unavoidable description of the torture the child experiences. “There is a room. It has

one locked door, and no window...the floor is dirt, a little damp to the touch...Perhaps [the child]

was born defective, or perhaps it has become imbecile through fear, malnutrition, and neglect”

(735). PEOPLE visit the child on rare occasions: to feed it, and to show it to children they deem

to be old enough to understand, each visit another torture to the child. “The people at the door

never say anything, but the child, who has not always lived in the tool room, and can remember

sunlight and its mother‟s voice, sometimes speaks. „I will be good,‟ it says. „Please let me out. I

will be good!” (735).

Meadows 3

The reader is now faced with incredible moral conflict as Le Guin goes on to explain that

not only must this incredible torture continue, but that it is this torture which allows the city to

leave in such peace and happiness, and in fact, is the catalyst which inspires them to even greater

heights. Truthfully, the PEOPLE of the city feel disgust as the situation and wish to end the

child‟s torment, but “they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the

tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill

of their makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weather of their skies, depend

wholly on this child‟s abominable misery” (735). As children thought to be mature enough to

understand the circumstances which force this child‟s misery are made aware of it, they too feel

outrage and disgust and wish to end its torment, but know that this can never happen, for if the

child were to be released, all that was good in Omelas would “wither and be destroyed” (735).

Adults explain that “it is the existence of the child that makes possible the nobility of their

architecture, the poignancy of their music, the profundity of their science” (735) and so the

torture must continue, emphasizing the unspoken but still pertinent saying that the needs of the

many must outweigh the needs of the few.

Just as the reader comes to the conclusion that there are only two non-coexisting paths: to

forever deny the PEOPLE of Omelas and condemn their actions, or to accept their reasoning and

respect how they try to live as amazing a life as possible in order to make the child‟s sacrifice

worth it, the author introduces a third group that the reader may choose to follow if the other two

choices are unpalatable: those that see the child, and cannot accept what is happening. With no

communication to those who might feel the same way, indeed without a word to any, they simply

leave. Alone, they walk away from the prosperity and beauty of the city and its PEOPLE, away

from the horrible torture of the one child locked in a dim basement. “They walk ahead into the

Meadows 4

darkness and they do not come back. The place they go towards is a place even less imaginable

to most of us than the city of happiness. I cannot describe it at all. It is possible that it does not

exist. But they seem to know where they are going, the one who walk away from Omelas” (736).

Work Cited

Le Guin, Ursula K. “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas.” The Bedford Introduction to

Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin‟s, 2008. 732-736. Print.

Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows

Professor Redding

English 1102

27 June 2012

Comparative Essay

For my most successful essay I chose my fiction analysis “Society and Morality: The

Cost of a Utopian Existence” and for my least successful my film analysis “In the Eye of the

Beholder: How Motion Can Affect Perception.” This may seem counterintuitive as I scored a

higher grade on the “worst” essay than I did the “best” essay; however, I felt that in my fiction

analysis I did a much better job of fully exploring the author’s purpose. Both essays had a strong

and easily provable thesis, but the film analysis definitely offered more of a challenge.

Additionally, both essays spent entirely too much time in the passive voice, but I blame that on

my overly scientifically oriented background, and hope to improve my use of the active voice as

I continue writing.

The most difficult part of writing the critique for Le Guin’s short story “The Ones Who

Walk Away from Omelas” was in not quoting the author excessively. This essay has more quotes

in it than any of my others, yet I felt that this was necessary in order to fully explain how Le

Guin drew her readers into the story and fully exposed them to the setting. It was also difficult

not taking a stance or favoring one group of people over another. The issue of personal rights is

one that I feel very strongly about, and it was a constant battle to keep the critique neutral. The

easiest part of writing the essay was in adapting Le Guin’s rich and colorful, yet vague,

descriptions into my own words to help explain her purpose. I feel that this essay definitely gave

a thorough explanation of her tactics, if not entirely exposing her purpose, as she maintained a

neutral narrator’s voice throughout the story.

Meadows 2

The most difficult aspect of writing the film analysis was absolutely trying to create the

sense of what director Del Toro intended with his creation’s movements without simply writing

the scene step by step. It is much more difficult to attempt to show the director’s purpose when

there are only images to use, and his words are not available to provide context. While I believe

that I was able to successfully convert the motion of the film into words on paper, I remain left

with a nagging sensation of only having described the scenes partially. Even though the essay is

complete and thorough within the constraints of the assignment, it still has a half-finished feel to

it, and leaves me lacking a sense of fulfillment when I read it. On the other hand, I feel, at least

to my mind, justifiably proud of being able to analyze exactly how the director shaded his

mythical, unsympathetic, and sympathetic characters with motion in such a way that my

audience can see the degree to which he did so.

Overall, I feel satisfied with both essays, although they both certainly could use

improvement in many areas, especially in not violating your 38 picky rules guide as

systematically as they do. As mentioned earlier, I feel that both essays are strong, and really the

only thing that makes the fiction critique “better” than the film analysis is the vague sense of

incompleteness felt when I read it. With any luck, further education and practice writing will

allow me to one day look back and say, “Oh, that’s what its missing,” and be able to fix it.

Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows


25 June 2012



Motion ishas always been a detail of special importance to human beings. It attracts the

eye often before any conscious thought, and can subtly or even not so subtly influence how an

object is perceived. In the 2006 movie Pan’s Labyrinth, director Guillermo Del Toro uses this

effect of motion to further emphasize the difference between the inhabitants of the fairy realm

and those of the human realm as well as that between sympathetic and unsympathetic characters.

Fairytale creatures in the movie, such as the FaunPan and his minions tend to move in

swift, jerky movements. From the moment Del Torothe viewer is introducesd to Panthe Faun,

they feel unsettled on an almost subconscious level due to his incredibly convoluted movements.

His walk makes it seem as if his joints do not bend as those of normal humans would, he tends to

stoop suddenly when talking, and he is constantly twitching. His minions also display some of

these characteristics. In fact, the minion is first shown as a type of bug, before it morphs to

Ofelia’s idealized image of a fairy. Even once they have assumed their fairy shapes of the fairy,

the minions maintain the movements of an insects: scurrying and flitting quickly around. An

especially vivid example of this use of motion to affect the viewer’s perception can be found

when examining the movements of the monster in Ofelia’s second task. The viewer is already

disquieted by the monster’s humanoid face, which is missing its eyes. The initial statue-like

motionlessness of the creature only adds to this discomfort by creating a sensation of impeding

menace. Once the monster is awakened by Ofelia’s actions, its movement quickly widenits

movement quickly widens this gulf between it and humanity. The swaying, stumbling walk of

Formatted: Font: Italic

Formatted: Font: Italic

Meadows 2

the monster would seem to indicate slowness of movement,movement; however, it lacks the

customary slowness of a human and is very close to catching up to Ofelia, even when she is at a

full run. Its arms wildly flail about as it uses the eyeballs in its palms to see its surroundings, yet

even these movements are not smooth as you would expect from a being trying to see, but jerk

around in a method that would likely make even the most hardyhardiest of individuals seasick.

The director also uses character movement to distance the viewer from the unsympathetic


to de-emphasize this humanity. The Captain is overly controlled in his movements, even down to











through the bowels of the tree in her first task, or climbing the chair to escape the dungeons of

her second task. Mercedes performs many of her tasks in the same fashion as the Captain,

smoothly, as if they had been done a thousand times before, but still manages to make her

movements graceful, whereas his remain halting and proper. An excellent example of this is the

scene where she is cutting potatoes while her mind is on other things. Even through her distress

Comment [R1]: Explains why the swaying and stumbling walk are inhuman. Did not want to keep repeating demonstrating inhumanity.

Comment [R2]: Instead of using specific scenes I mentioned multiple cases in which this was displayed.

Meadows 3

and distraction, she continues cutting the potatoes into perfect slices until the other cooks draw

her attention back to the present then she wipes off the blade and puts it in her apron in an almost

unconscious motion. She even manages to maintain this grace and economy of movement when

sneaking around the house or woods, running errands for the rebel forces. The rebel forces, are

also portrayed as sympathetic characters, and so are given this grace and freedom of movement

by the director. Where the soldiers have imposed themselves on the land, building fortifications

and crashing through the woods, the rebels blend seamlessly with it, moving around without

leaving a trace. This woodsmanship was displayed in the scene where the Captain arrives at a

rebel fire and searches around for them but cannot find them, and the minute he leaves they walk

out of the woodline. They evince none of the military discipline of the soldiers and seem much

more natural when talking with each other or any of the main characters, as can be seen by their

casualness and the camaraderie found when Mercedes visits them in the caves. Despite their dire

straightsstraits, their movements retain an element of hope.






Work Cited

Meadows 4

Pan’s Labyrinth. Dir. Guillermo Del Toro. 2006. Comment [R3]: I didn’t put any of the actors in because according to my MLA guide, that is only necessary if they are famous/recognizable names which none of these are being Spanish actors.

Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows


25 June 2012



Motion is a detail of special importance to human beings. It attracts the eye often before

any conscious thought, and can subtly or even not so subtly influence how an object is perceived.

In the 2006 movie Pan’s Labyrinth, director Guillermo Del Toro uses this effect of motion to

further emphasize the difference between the inhabitants of the fairy realm and those of the

human realm as well as that between sympathetic and unsympathetic characters.

Fairytale creatures in the movie, such as the Faun and his minions tend to move in swift,

jerky movements. From the moment Del Toro is introduces the Faun, they feel unsettled on an

almost subconscious level due to his incredibly convoluted movements. His walk makes it seem

as if his joints do not bend as those of normal humans would, he tends to stoop suddenly when

talking, and he is constantly twitching. His minions also display some of these characteristics. In

fact, the minion is first shown as a type of bug, before it morphs to Ofelia’s idealized image of a

fairy. Even once they have assumed their fairy shapes, the minions maintain the movements of

insects: scurrying and flitting quickly around. An especially vivid example of this use of motion

to affect the viewer’s perception can be found when examining the movements of the monster in

Ofelia’s second task. The viewer is already disquieted by the monster’s humanoid face, which is

missing its eyes. The initial statue-like motionlessness of the creature only adds to this

discomfort by creating a sensation of impeding menace. Once the monster is awakened by

Ofelia’s actions, its movement quickly widens this gulf between it and humanity. The swaying,

stumbling walk of the monster would seem to indicate slowness of movement; however, it lacks

Meadows 2

the customary slowness of a human and is very close to catching up to Ofelia, even when she is

at a full run. Its arms wildly flail about as it uses the eyeballs in its palms to see its surroundings,

yet even these movements are not smooth as you would expect from a being trying to see, but

jerk around in a method that would likely make even the hardiest of individuals seasick.

The director also uses character movement to distance the viewer from the unsympathetic


to de-emphasize this humanity. The Captain is overly controlled in his movements, even down to











through the bowels of the tree in her first task, or climbing the chair to escape the dungeons of

her second task. Mercedes performs many of her tasks in the same fashion as the Captain,

smoothly, as if they had been done a thousand times before, but still manages to make her

movements graceful, whereas his remain halting and proper. An excellent example of this is the

scene where she is cutting potatoes while her mind is on other things. Even through her distress

and distraction, she continues cutting the potatoes into perfect slices until the other cooks draw

Meadows 3

her attention back to the present then she wipes off the blade and puts it in her apron in an almost

unconscious motion. She even manages to maintain this grace and economy of movement when

sneaking around the house or woods, running errands for the rebel forces. The rebel forces, are

also portrayed as sympathetic characters, and so are given this grace and freedom of movement

by the director. Where the soldiers have imposed themselves on the land, building fortifications

and crashing through the woods, the rebels blend seamlessly with it, moving around without

leaving a trace. This woodsmanship was displayed in the scene where the Captain arrives at a

rebel fire and searches around for them but cannot find them, and the minute he leaves they walk

out of the woodline. They evince none of the military discipline of the soldiers and seem much

more natural when talking with each other or any of the main characters, as can be seen by their

casualness and the camaraderie found when Mercedes visits them in the caves. Despite their dire

straits, their movements retain an element of hope.






Work Cited

Pan’s Labyrinth. Dir. Guillermo Del Toro. 2006.

Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows

Prof. Redding

English 1102

18 June 2012






buildings; the inhabitants PEOPLE happy and content, marching in various parades as they come

together to celebrate the great Festival of Summer. However, underneath this bliss lies a dark

secret, and the source of their society‟s comfort: a child, tortured and alone. Le Guin incorporates

readers the reader into the story by inviting them to fill in this vague utopia by using their

imagination to add details until it is their own, then once they are fully involved in the creation of

this place, uses direct unavoidable description of the suffering of the child to force readersthe

reader to not only acknowledge the conflict, but decide what is morally correct.

Le Guin uses words such as “we, I, and you;” speaking directly to readersthe reader. She

invites them reader to fill in the blanks in her description of the town and its citizens PEOPLE

with their own imagination, such as when she says, “oh but I wish I could describe it better. I

wish I could convince you...Perhaps it would be best if you imagined it as your own fancy bids”

(733). In order to keep the readers involved but in the creation of the city and its inhabitants,

PEOPLE, but also following the storyline, Le Guin speaks vaguely of the town and its PEOPLE,

offering brief and incomplete descriptions that enticealmost force the readers into fleshing them

out with their own thoughts. She mentions the beautiful, sunny weather, and the slight breeze

that is just enough to move the banners around the racetrack but does not describe the banners.

Comment [R1]: Changing reader to readers eliminates the need for a non-gender specific singular pronoun

Meadows 2

She mentions houses with red roofs and painted walls but does not talk of materials or what is

painted on them. Le Guin also discusses the habits of the inhabitantsPEOPLE, suggesting that if

this society was too perfect and innocent the reader readers could feel free to imagine less

“puritanical” pursuits such as orgies where beautiful priests and priestesses issue forth from

buildings to freely give themselves to the celebrantsPEOPLE, imagine beer overflowing the

mugs of joyous celebrators, and even a drug name drooz which

“fFirst brings a great lightness and brilliance to the mind and limbs, and then after some

hours a dreamy languor, and wonderful visions at last of the very arcana and inmost

secrets of the Universe, as well as exciting the pleasure of sex beyond all belief; and it is

not habit-forming” (734).

She speaks of the wonderful smells of food coming from the feast tents but does not describe any

of the foods, and of a young boy playing beautiful music on a wooden flute but mentions not the

melodies that he plays, invitingforcing the reader to populate the feast with their favorite foods

and formswhat kind of music they think best fits in this festive atmosphere.

Once Le Guin has the reader is inextricably mired her readers in the story, once the city,

festival, city, and it participantsPEOPLE have become something they reader haves helped create

through their imagination, Le Guin forces herthe readers to experience the conflict in the city by

exposing them to the woes of the outcast childchild‟s woes. She uses specific and unavoidable

description of the torture the child experiences such as,. “There is a room. It has one locked door,

and no window...the floor is dirt, a little damp to the touch...Perhaps [the child] was born

defective, or perhaps it has become imbecile through fear, malnutrition, and neglect” (735).

CaretakersPEOPLE visit the child on rare occasions: to feed it, and to show it to children they

deem to be old enough to understand, each visit another torture to the child. “The people at the

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", First line: 0"

Formatted: Indent: First line: 0"

Meadows 3

doorThe visitors “never say anything, but the child, who has not always lived in the tool room,

and can remember sunlight and its mother‟s voice, sometimes speaks. „I will be good,‟ it says.

„Please let me out. I will be good!” (735).

The readers areis now faced with incredible moral conflict as Le Guin goes on to explain

that not only must this incredible torture continue, but that it is this torture which allows the city

to lieave in such peace and happiness, and in fact, is the catalyst which inspires them to even

greater heights. Truthfully, the good peoplePEOPLE of the city feel disgust as the situation and

wish to end the child‟s torment, but “they a

All understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their

friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their

makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weather of their skies, depend

wholly on this child‟s abominable misery” (735).

As children thought to be mature enough to understand the circumstances which force this

child‟s misery becomeare made aware of it, they too feel outrage and disgust and wish to end the

child‟sits torment, but know that this can never happen, for if the child were to be released, all

that was good in Omelas would “wither and be destroyed” (735). Adults explain that “it is the

existence of the child that makes possible the nobility of their architecture, the poignancy of their

music, the profundity of their science” (735) and so the torture must continue, emphasizing the

unspoken but still pertinent saying that the needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the

few.


forever deny the peoplePEOPLE of Omelas and condemn their actions, or to accept their

reasoning and respect how they try to live as amazing a life as possible in order to make the

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", First line: 0"

Formatted: Indent: First line: 0"

Meadows 4

child‟s sacrifice worth it, the author introduces a third group that the reader may choose to follow

if the other two choices are unpalatable: those that see the child, and cannot accept what is

happening. With no communication to those who might feel the same way, indeed without a

word to any, they simply leave. Alone, they walk away from the prosperity and beauty of the city

and its multitudesPEOPLE, away from the horrible torture of the one child locked in a dim

basement. Quietly and peacefully, “tThey walk ahead into the darkness and they do not come

back. The place they go towards is a place even less imaginable to most of us than the city of

happiness. I cannot describe it at all. It is possible that it does not exist. But they seem to know

where they are going, the one who walk away from Omelas” (736).

Le Guin‟s master stroke is that she does not condone or condemn the actions of the city

of Omelas. She merely lays out the situation in such a way that readers must examine every part

of it, and then examine their own principles and morality. She does not offer advice as to which

of the paths is the correct one, or try to influence readers in any way. In a society where the

majority are content with being told what to do and think, and the minority are content with

doing the telling, she has created a masterpiece in which readers must truly ponder their core

philosophies, and then, hopefully, readers will apply these conclusions to their everyday choices

and lives.

Work Cited



Comment [R2]: I enjoyed creating the almost poetic introductions to each of the sentences. If you say it with the right rhythym, I hope it mixes with the author’s prose properly.

Comment [R3]: To be honest, I really wanted to leave this as the last paragraph. The symmetry of ending a review in the same manner as the author appeals to me, but I could not figure out how to introduce a conclusion without the paper seeming jumbled and out of order.

Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows

Prof. Redding

English 1102

18 June 2012






buildings; the inhabitants happy and content, marching in various parades as they come together

to celebrate the great Festival of Summer. However, underneath this bliss lies a dark secret, and

the source of their society‟s comfort: a child, tortured and alone. Le Guin incorporates readers

into the story by inviting them to fill in this vague utopia by using their imagination to add

details until it is their own, then once they are fully involved in the creation of this place, uses

direct unavoidable description of the suffering of the child to force readers to not only

acknowledge the conflict, but decide what is morally correct.

Le Guin uses words such as “we, I, and you;” speaking directly to readers. She invites

them to fill in the blanks in her description of the town and its citizens with their own

imagination, such as when she says, “oh but I wish I could describe it better. I wish I could

convince you...Perhaps it would be best if you imagined it as your own fancy bids” (733). In

order to keep readers involved in the creation of the city and its inhabitants, but also following

the storyline, Le Guin speaks vaguely of the town, offering brief and incomplete descriptions that

entice the readers into fleshing them out with their own thoughts. She mentions the beautiful,

sunny weather, and the slight breeze that is just enough to move the banners around the racetrack

but does not describe the banners. She mentions houses with red roofs and painted walls but does

Meadows 2

not talk of materials or what is painted on them. Le Guin also discusses the habits of the

inhabitants, suggesting that if this society was too perfect and innocent readers could feel free to

imagine less “puritanical” pursuits such as orgies where beautiful priests and priestesses issue

forth from buildings to freely give themselves to the celebrants, imagine beer overflowing the

mugs of joyous celebrators, and even a drug name drooz which

First brings a great lightness and brilliance to the mind and limbs, and then after some

hours a dreamy languor, and wonderful visions at last of the very arcana and inmost

secrets of the Universe, as well as exciting the pleasure of sex beyond all belief; and it is

not habit-forming (734).

She speaks of the wonderful smells of food coming from the feast tents but does not describe any

of the foods, and of a young boy playing beautiful music on a wooden flute but mentions not the

melodies that he plays, inviting the reader to populate the feast with their favorite foods and

forms of music they think best fits in this festive atmosphere.

Once Le Guin has inextricably mired her readers in the story, once the city, festival,, and

it participants have become something they have helped create through their imagination, Le

Guin forces her readers to experience the conflict in the city by exposing them to the woes of the

outcast child. She uses specific and unavoidable description of the torture the child experiences

such as, “There is a room. It has one locked door, and no window...the floor is dirt, a little damp

to the touch...Perhaps [the child] was born defective, or perhaps it has become imbecile through

fear, malnutrition, and neglect” (735). Caretakers visit the child on rare occasions: to feed it, and

to show it to children they deem to be old enough to understand, each visit another torture to the

child. The visitors “never say anything, but the child, who has not always lived in the tool room,

Meadows 3

and can remember sunlight and its mother‟s voice, sometimes speaks. „I will be good,‟ it says.

„Please let me out. I will be good!” (735).

The readers are now faced with incredible moral conflict as Le Guin goes on to explain

that not only must this incredible torture continue, but that it is this torture which allows the city

to live in such peace and happiness, and in fact, is the catalyst which inspires them to even

greater heights. Truthfully, the good people of the city feel disgust as the situation and wish to

end the child‟s torment, but

All understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their

friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their

makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weather of their skies, depend

wholly on this child‟s abominable misery (735).

As children thought to be mature enough to understand the circumstances which force this

child‟s misery become aware of it, they too feel outrage and disgust and wish to end the child‟s

torment, but know that this can never happen, for if the child were to be released, all that was

good in Omelas would “wither and be destroyed” (735). Adults explain that “it is the existence

of the child that makes possible the nobility of their architecture, the poignancy of their music,

the profundity of their science” (735) and so the torture must continue, emphasizing the

unspoken but still pertinent saying that the needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the

few.


forever deny the people of Omelas and condemn their actions, or to accept their reasoning and

respect how they try to live as amazing a life as possible in order to make the child‟s sacrifice

worth it, the author introduces a third group that the reader may choose to follow if the other two

Meadows 4

choices are unpalatable: those that see the child, and cannot accept what is happening. With no

communication to those who might feel the same way, indeed without a word to any, they simply

leave. Alone, they walk away from the prosperity and beauty of the city and its multitudes, away

from the horrible torture of the one child locked in a dim basement. Quietly and peacefully, “they

walk ahead into the darkness and they do not come back. The place they go towards is a place

even less imaginable to most of us than the city of happiness. I cannot describe it at all. It is

possible that it does not exist. But they seem to know where they are going, the one who walk

away from Omelas” (736).

Le Guin‟s master stroke is that she does not condone or condemn the actions of the city

of Omelas. She merely lays out the situation in such a way that readers must examine every part

of it, and then examine their own principles and morality. She does not offer advice as to which

of the paths is the correct one, or try to influence readers in any way. In a society where the

majority are content with being told what to do and think, and the minority are content with

doing the telling, she has created a masterpiece in which readers must truly ponder their core

philosophies, and then, hopefully, readers will apply these conclusions to their everyday choices

and lives.

Work Cited



Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows

English 1101, Spring 2012

Dan Cabaniss

13 March 2012

Essay 3: Explanatory Synthesis

The Chasm That Can’t Be Crossed

The time during and immediately following the Vietnam War is considered by many to

be one of the most controversial periods of American history. ManyMost civilians disagreed with

America’s continued participation in the conflict, and were shocked and disgusted by reports of

massacres and atrocities being committed by our troops. Soldiers were unprepared for the

nonlinear guerrilla combat, and often came home traumatized by the horrors of warfare. The

worst part for soldiers, however, was coming home to find a wide gulf between them and

civilians in American society. Veterans of combat in Vietnam often felt isolated and alone, that

no matter what they did or how they tried, there was simply no way for people who did not share

their experiences to understand the emotions and issues associated with those experiences.

One of the biggest issues that veterans returning from war had to deal with is what is

currently known as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD. Veterans would experience

nightmares, flashbacks to particularly traumatic events, the inability to handle large crowds of

people, and many more symptoms. This disorder has gone by many names in the past, but has

never truly been concentrated on as an issue until modern day psychology. Instead, psychologists

would blame other events for any issues that veterans were experiencing. Veteran Robert Cagle

describesd the way counselors would ignored his time in Vietnam when diagnosing him and

instead focused on his marriages or childhood. “It’s anything but Vietnam,” saysid Cagle, “Not

once have I been to a counselor who asked anything. They knew about it, knew I was in

Vietnam, never asked a thing” (221).

Meadows 2

Veterans of any war or conflict have often had difficulties opening up to civilians who

haven’t experienced what they have. They often experienced the feeling that they can’touldn’t

talk to others, and don’tidn’t know where to go for help. Cagle lamentsed his inability to talk to

others during his speech in Vietnam during a memorial tour of the country, crying, “how do you

tell – how do you tell somebody these things?” (222). Lynda Van Devanter, a combat nurse in

Vietnam, writesote in her memoir that even when she talksed to her ex-husband about what had

happened in-country, she felt that he doesn’tidn’t really understand what she went through and

caouldn’t help her. These feelings of separation arewere displayed when she wriotes that he

“could listen to me, yet I hadn’t figured out how to say all that was inside, and probably like the

other, he wouldn’t want to know anyway….Did he take away the pain? Could he? Could

anyone?” (177). This inability to connect is believed to be one of the major factors in why so

many veterans seem unable to maintain healthy relationships and experience failed marriages

and divorce.

This self-imposed isolation was further exacerbated by a sense of shame that many

veterans felt due to the fact that wartime atrocities, an event common on both sides of any war,

were often magnified by the press and focused on by the people. One such example is when, in

what many veterans consider a traitorous and cowardly act, John Kerry freely admitted to

Americans committing war crimes during a congressional hearing. “We saw America lose her

sense of morality,” he saysid, deriding the idealized image of American soldiers and helping to

further the destruction of this ideal in the eyes of American civilians, “as she accepted very

coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate

bars and chewing gum” (Kerry 219). This was a terrible blow to many veterans, especially

former prisoners of war, because one of the main goals of Vietnamese torturers was to get PoWs

Comment [R1]: Little bit of difficulty switching between tenses here.

Meadows 3

to sign a statement saying that they and other American soldiers had committed war crimes.

Many soldiers resisted torture for years, with no hope of being rescued in order to not do this,

and Kerry, along with others like him, stood up and said it freely, making their brave sacrifice for

naught.

Despite the amount of time that has passed, many of these feelings of isolation and

inability to connect have not gone away. Around the country, veterans of Vietnam and other

wars still feel uncomfortable when around civilians, and tend to gravitate towards other veterans

in social settings. Many go down to the local Veterans of Foreign Wars building or can be found

hanging out in gun stores, telling their stories to others who they believe can understand what

they went through. This companionship with other veterans helps, but the feelings of despair and

isolation remain. These feelings are best summed up by Van Devanter when she saysid, “ours is

a solitary pain…there was a time when I didn’t understand that, when I didn’t know how alone I

was, how alone we all were” (178).

Works Cited

Cagle, Robert. “One Vet Remembers.” “Takin’ It to the Streets”: A Sixties Reader. 3rd

ed. Eds.

Alexander Bloom and Wini Breines. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. 220-24.

Print.

Kerry, John. “Vietnam Veterans Against the War.” “Takin’ It to the Streets”: A Sixties Reader.

3rd

ed. Eds. Alexander Bloom and Wini Breines. New York: Oxford University Press,

2011. 217-20. Print.

Van Devanter, Lynda. “Home Before Morning.” “Takin’ It to the Streets”: A Sixties Reader. 3rd

ed. Eds. Alexander Bloom and Wini Breines. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.

167-82. Print.

Formatted: Left, Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0.5", Line spacing: single

Formatted: Line spacing: single

Meadows 1

Ricky A. Meadows

English 1101, Spring 2012

Dan Cabaniss

13 March 2012

Essay 3: Explanatory Synthesis

The Chasm That Can’t Be Crossed

The time during and immediately following the Vietnam War is considered by many to

be one of the most controversial periods of American history. Many civilians disagreed with

America’s continued participation in the conflict, and were shocked and disgusted by reports of

massacres and atrocities being committed by our troops. Soldiers were unprepared for the

nonlinear guerrilla combat, and often came home traumatized by the horrors of warfare. The

worst part for soldiers, however, was coming home to find a wide gulf between them and

civilians in American society. Veterans of combat in Vietnam often felt isolated and alone, that

no matter what they did or how they tried, there was simply no way for people who did not share

their experiences to understand the emotions and issues associated with those experiences.

One of the biggest issues that veterans returning from war had to deal with is what is

currently known as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD. Veterans would experience

nightmares, flashbacks to particularly traumatic events, the inability to handle large crowds of

people, and many more symptoms. This disorder has gone by many names in the past, but has

never truly been concentrated on as an issue until modern day psychology. Instead, psychologists

would blame other events for any issues that veterans were experiencing. Veteran Robert Cagle

describes the way counselors ignored his time in Vietnam when diagnosing him and instead

focused on his marriages or childhood. “It’s anything but Vietnam,” says Cagle, “Not once have

I been to a counselor who asked anything. They knew about it, knew I was in Vietnam, never

asked a thing” (221).

Meadows 2

Veterans of any war or conflict have often had difficulties opening up to civilians who

haven’t experienced what they have. They often experienced the feeling that they can’t talk to

others, and don’t know where to go for help. Cagle laments his inability to talk to others during

his speech in Vietnam during a memorial tour of the country, crying, “how do you tell – how do

you tell somebody these things?” (222). Lynda Van Devanter, a combat nurse in Vietnam,

writes in her memoir that even when she talks to her ex-husband about what had happened in-

country, she felt that he doesn’t really understand what she went through and can’t help her.

These feelings of separation are displayed when she writes that he “could listen to me, yet I

hadn’t figured out how to say all that was inside, and probably like the other, he wouldn’t want

to know anyway….Did he take away the pain? Could he? Could anyone?” (177). This inability

to connect is believed to be one of the major factors in why so many veterans seem unable to

maintain healthy relationships and experience failed marriages and divorce.

This self-imposed isolation was further exacerbated by a sense of shame that many

veterans felt due to the fact that wartime atrocities, an event common on both sides of any war,

were often magnified by the press and focused on by the people. One such example is when, in

what many veterans consider a traitorous and cowardly act, John Kerry freely admitted to

Americans committing war crimes during a congressional hearing. “We saw America lose her

sense of morality,” he says, deriding the idealized image of American soldiers and helping to

further the destruction of this ideal in the eyes of American civilians, “as she accepted very

coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate

bars and chewing gum” (219). This was a terrible blow to many veterans, especially former

prisoners of war, because one of the main goals of Vietnamese torturers was to get PoWs to sign

a statement saying that they and other American soldiers had committed war crimes. Many

Meadows 3

soldiers resisted torture for years, with no hope of being rescued in order to not do this, and

Kerry, along with others like him, stood up and said it freely, making their brave sacrifice for

naught.

Despite the amount of time that has passed, many of these feelings of isolation and

inability to connect have not gone away. Around the country, veterans of Vietnam and other

wars still feel uncomfortable when around civilians, and tend to gravitate towards other veterans

in social settings. Many go down to the local Veterans of Foreign Wars building or can be found

hanging out in gun stores, telling their stories to others who they believe can understand what

they went through. This companionship with other veterans helps, but the feelings of despair and

isolation remain. These feelings are best summed up by Van Devanter when she says, “ours is a

solitary pain…there was a time when I didn’t understand that, when I didn’t know how alone I

was, how alone we all were” (178).

Works Cited

Cagle, Robert. “One Vet Remembers.” “Takin’ It to the Streets”: A Sixties Reader. 3rd

ed. Eds.

Alexander Bloom and Wini Breines. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. 220-24.

Print.

Kerry, John. “Vietnam Veterans Against the War.” “Takin’ It to the Streets”: A Sixties Reader.

3rd

ed. Eds. Alexander Bloom and Wini Breines. New York: Oxford University Press,

2011. 217-20. Print.

Van Devanter, Lynda. “Home Before Morning.” “Takin’ It to the Streets”: A Sixties Reader. 3rd

ed. Eds. Alexander Bloom and Wini Breines. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.

167-82. Print.

Documents

Improving My Writing...And Having Fun Doing It