Is this a good paper???

Question

A little background info:
This is a short essay that is written about "Their Eyes Were Watching God", relating the themes, etc. to the period when the book was published (the 30's). It also incorperates subordinative conjunctions, clauses, that sort of stuff.
I will put the paper in in a few minutes.

Ban Oversimplification, Ban Unnecessary Themes

In Zora Neale Hurston’s novel Their Eyes Were Watching God, the author tells a simplistic story that portrays Janie, the main character, as a woman who leads a normal life, but the book itself has no relevant theme. Because the theme has unsuitable for the time period, critic Robert Wright puts it best, writing that the book “carries no theme, message, or thought”, since the theme is not based firmly around racism. Wright also says it has “dogged ***** expression.” Hurston proves Wright’s point, writing that Janie is “way too old for a boy like Tea Cake” (3), which comes up when some woman are gossiping on the porch. This leads up to when Janie falls in love with him as if the book were based on love, not racism. Since the 30’s was a racist time period, which was when the book was published, the theme should have been based around racism. Although critic reveres Hurston for being a talented writer, Alain Locke says that now...

(Cont'd):
we have “gotten rid of condescension, [we should] now get over simplification”, meaning we need to stop just telling stuff like it is because if one over simplifies, another may not understand a piece as it was intended to be understood. Hurston proves Locke’s point, writing that Janie and Mrs. Turner “got to be visiting friends” (139), but she never acutely explains how they got so close-knit, only that they used to be far apart. She proves his Locke’s point once again when she plainly writes “after a while [the mule] died” (59), but never gave any context to why the mule did die, only that “it [lay] down on [its] side and died like any other beast” (59). In addition, she also makes the characters seem as though they are superficial, and not real. An example would be when Sam makes fun of Matt for not properly taking care of his mule because “[Sam’s] wife and some other women... [were] usin’ [the mules’] sides as a washboard” (52). Because Matt’s character...

(Cont'd):
is only in the novel for humor, it is not fully developed, nor is it in there for theme. This shows that Hurston does oversimplify and that her themes are not correct for the time period, because the 30’s was a horrible time period to live in, with lynchings and racism, and that sort of thing needs to be told. For these reasons, we need to ban oversimplification, and ban unnecessary themes.
Thank you for your time. I appreciate all relevant answers.

I am a freshman in high school.

Answer 1

you say the book has no relevant theme...relevant to what? racism? the '30's? this book has many issues in it including women's role in society, race, socioeconomic status...

<>

how does hurston prove wright's point though this example?

<>

how do these examples illustrate oversimplification? think about the characters and their perspectives....it's been a while since i read this book, but i'm pretty confident in saying the characters aren't well educated and are somewhat isolated--if lynchings weren't an immediate issue to them, they wouldn't focus on them in their day to day lives...

work on supporting your statements and conclusions, and check for grammar mistakes and typos.

Answer 2

That seems good enough. What grade is this?