I chose the last paper on the list by Amber Mckay
However, I argue that twenty-first
century Shakespearean adaptations that translate the original text into modern English
vocabulary provide new ways to express the same universal social commentaries
on love,
sacrifice, and ambition for a wider audience, while honoring Shakespeare's
innovative wordplay
and word-creation with our changing, growing millennial vocabulary.
I think this is an evaluation claim. It argues how modern adaptations should be viewed in comparison with the standards we have in language and writing. I think this is a good thesis, and it's interesting and arguable.
To change it into a policy claim you could instead say that, "Twenty-first century Shakespearean adaptations should be viewed as modern ways of expressing the same universal social commentaries on love, sacrifice, and ambition for a wider audience, while honoring Shakespeare's innovative wordplay and word-creation with our changing, growing millennial vocabulary."
Its not much different but the claim is slightly changed.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete(My original comment, just posted by the correct email address this time)
ReplyDeleteI like how you preserved the core argument of the thesis even though you changed its type. Nice work!
I was impressed that, even though you changed claim types, you were able to keep a lot of the same words and kept the same sentiment. Good job!
ReplyDeleteI like how you made the statement more palatable. I am not much of an advocate for modernizing Shakespeare, and so this is something that takes a REALLY good argument to convince me. I think you did a good job with this.
ReplyDelete