BEFORE YOU BID ON THIS PAPER: You must be able to read “Dracula” by Bram Stoker and provide direct evidence from it! If this is an issue please do not bid! The only source needed is the book Dracula, no other source is needed! Create a 4-5 pp. paper in MLA format. 12 font, times new roman. Due 5 December 2020. 1. Create an argument that clarifies what function Stoker’s representation of Lucy OR Mina in chapter 5 serves. After reading the end of Dracula, you know which female character Stoker allows to survive the end of his novel. So how might we see chapter 5 as Stoker’s introduction to “proper/improper” women? To answer this question in your thesis, you might consider: how might Stoker’s representation of your chosen female character affect readers, particularly female readers? How does Stoker’s representation of your chosen female character depend upon another female character? Where and how? How does Stoker’s passage “design” and promote a specific type of women? How does Stoker guide us to interpret Lucy or Mina, particularly when comparing her to other women in other parts of the novel? 2. Supply evidence for your argument by closely reading how Stoker’s specific literary tools demonstrate your argument about Stoker’s women. One of your tools/paragraphs MUST address point of view / narrator. You pick 2 other literary tools/paragraphs. Since this is a novel, I highly recommend that you consider one of your remaining two paragraphs to address “narrative order” (that is, where does chapter 5 appear in the novel, and how might this ordering affect readers? What comes before the chapter? What comes after it? What is unique about this chapter as opposed to earlier / later chapters?) CLOSELY READ!! When you slow down and ask how a writer’s use of language proves an argument about the poem, you are closely reading. If, instead, you ask “what is the writer saying?” then you are not closely reading but simply becoming the writer’s xerox-copying machine. However, when you ask how a writer’s use of language proves your argument, you are correctly analyzing and interpreting evidence from the poem to generate your thesis. Close-reading is a process; thus, if you skip any of the following steps or do them out-of-order, you will not properly slow down to produce a plausible thesis for the text’s function. Slow down and ask how the writer’s use of language proves your thesis. ANALYZE Slow down and ask how the writer’s use of language affects you. Pull the work apart into its elements and ask how the smallest details affect readers. For example: How does the text’s organizational structure (punctuation, verse-paragraphs, stanza-length, syntax, caesura, chiasmus, enjambment, end-stopping) affect you? How does the text’s point-of-view or voice (first-person, second-person, third-person, omniscient, limited omniscient, character-narrator vs. writer) affect you? How do the text’s sound-devices (rhyme, alliteration, consonance, assonance, onomatopoeia, end-rhyme, near-rhyme, meter, feet, pace) affect you? How does the text’s figurative language (similes, metaphors, tenors, vehicles, metonyms, personifications, periphrasis, puns, oxymorons, anaphora) affect you? How does the genre in which the writer chooses to write (epic, mock-epic, satire, sonnet, monologue, dialogue, sonnet) affect you? INTERPRET How do some of your analyzed literary tools gesture towards a single argument? Bring together (synthesize) several literary tools that produce similar effects to generate a single argument about what the poem does (aka its function). Do the effects of certain literary tools point towards a common argument? For example, do all of the metaphors have a common effect? Does the use of rhyme also point towards that argument? Does the point-of-view support that argument? Outline your evidence into paragraphs that support this thesis. Remember: there is not “one correct interpretation” to the poem; however, this does not mean “every interpretation is correct.” More than one plausible interpretation exists if there is enough evidence/proof for each argument. For example, you might see a literary tool that other readers do not; thus, both readers will present a plausible interpretation since they provide enough closely read evidence to prove their theses. The only way your interpretation/thesis can be “incorrect” is if you do not provide closely-read evidence for your argument.