Please use COLOR RED for every change you make.
1-) Read all the comments from professor.
2-) Fix minor changes.
3-) Choose an argument
---I think you should focus on the argument; the director did a courageous(bold) job at making this film about this topic in a conservative society.
4-) Implement your argument into the essay.
5-) Erase all the contradictive arguments
6-) Write two more paragraph about the argument.
7-) Write a conclusion paragraph summarizing the point and giving a message.
Teachers comments on First essay...
This is a beautiful description of the film that considers the context in which it was presented and its larger cultural significance. You make a lot of compelling claims-I think you could keep that comprehensive view of the film while also focusing in more closely on a single, original argument. What do you want me to learn from this reading of the film in context that might not be immediately obvious to me just by watching the film itself. Make that more explicit.
Second Essay: About David Shield's Essay
1-) Read all the comments from professor.
2-) Fix minor changes.
3-) Your argument for the essay is below.
There are many creative works that are beneficial to the society, yet would not be admissible in any institution of higher learning. This raises genuine concerns over whether most universities really encourage creation of ideas whose significance go beyond intellectual use to societal benefits
4-) ADJUST THE ESSAY ACCORDING TO THE ARGUMENT
5-) Write a paragraph inside the brackets that I commented it RED in the document
6-) Write a conclusion
Teachers comments on second essay...
Are you, perhaps, suggesting that Shields's claim about originality and the relaxing of standards of plagiarism should apply to the university as well? Does that perhaps explain why you have used so many quotations without attribution? Are you perhaps making your argument through the style of your essay? If so, that is very clever indeed. But I don't have enough evidence that this was intentional and not just a happy accident. And you need to provide more clues, more evidence, to what you are thinking. Otherwise, you ask your reader to do too much work. And, with a project like this, you take too much of a risk that the argument is insufficient and the approach fails to meet (even violates) academic standards.