'Why We Crave Horror Paper\r'

'Essay 5: Position Paper50 pts Description:4-5 pages, double-spaced, plus a get out MLA-format Works Cited page Skills:Everything! Due:First write:Friday, 10 December (in-class discussion) Final Draft:Monday, 13 December (Submit during Final Exam time: 2:45-4:45pm) Sources:Reading Critically, Writing Well (RC) pp. 517-534, 582-595; Stephen pouf, â€Å"Why We request Horror,” â€Å"Crouch End;” Fritz Leiber, â€Å"Smoke Ghost;” Algernon Blackwood, â€Å"The vacant House;” Noel Carroll, â€Å"The Nature of Horror” (optional)For your final paper, you ordain be required to make use of the supra resources to explain, support, and defend your position against critique on the surmount of iniquity in the absence of easily recognizable violence, gore, or monsters. You may argue with or against King and Carroll, or provide your own description of horror and how it anticipates gore-less horror better than previous definitions. Since there argon no ri ght or wrong answers in this discussion, you will be judged on the strength of your joust for your position and how you present your analytic thinking. Assignment: ) Present the issue. • add up the King and Carroll definitions of horror and their successes/failings.• Establish your credibility by generously discussing previous arguments on the function of horror. o Make sure to avoid emotional/ individualised opinions and instead stick to the texts. 2) Assert your position. • Give examples from the readings that expire well/do not fit with the definition of horror as presented by King and Carroll. o Critique your own analysis using all of the Developing Your Argument skills (RC pp. 360-361), as well as Evaluating the Logic of an Argument (p. 24-640. 3) Argue directly for your position. • go by to establish your credibility with your audience by screening how your position alters/upholds the definition of horror as established. o Be willing to take a ar ray in the argument, but avoid setting up straw-man arguments for the opposition. Carroll and/or King don’t stool to be wrong for you to be right.4) Critique whatever germane(predicate) counter-arguments, objections, questions, or alternatives. • Since no position will be perfect, try to accommodate any concerns or issues relating to your discussion of horror. Options (you may choose one or all): ? Accommodation: modify your position to suit relevant objections. ? Refutation: show the reader that any probably alternatives will not be as hard-hitting in describing the function of horror as you perk it. ? Integration: demonstrate how your position can contribute together with other options to provide a more(prenominal) comprehensive take on the horror genre.Criteria for rating: • Analysis: 20 consigns o Has a strong, centre explanation of the sources using RC skills learned so far. o Supports the initial thesis with evidence (i. e. details from the source ) and offers in-depth analysis of those details. • Sources: 10 points o Productively uses both the RC and the sources. o Features effective paraphrasing and selective quotation. • Organization: 10 points o Offers strong topic sentences that logically develop and boom the analysis (i. e. , no random accumulation of facts or bullet-point narrative). o Proceeds logically from one point to the next in a climactic sequence. o Clearly links claims and evidence. o Uses smooth transitions mingled with points. • Readability: 10 points o Uses correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, and MLA citation.\r\n'