final paper

profiledodescape

i wroth this paper and get some comont in it 

plaes writh the another eassy and fix all the notes 

 

the profsor notes

1) This is not a careful paper.  It’s very repetitive, which means that it is poorly organized.  And, there are so many little errors like not capitalizing proper names or “gambler house.”  This is not a trivial point.  It makes the paper very difficult to read and take seriously as scholarship.
2) As I said in the last paper, I do not understand or really approve of the discussion of the Villa Mairea by Aalto.  It is not the building that we agreed upon.  You may compare certain specific aspects of the Gamble House to the Villa Mairea, but you can’t just say that they are two of the most “lovable” modern homes and leave it at that.  The class is a graduate-level formal history course.  You must therefore discuss the forms of the primary house in an analytical and intense way.  You can’t just spew out factoids and hope that they stick.  This paper ends up making very little sense overall.  It has no cohesion.  It tells no story.  There is no analysis, only the most basic description.  For example, you keep referring to items and furnishings as “attractive or “well-arranged” but you do not qualify as to what makes something attractive.  In addition, you make many errors of speaking about the houses as if they were “changing,” but you give no reference as to what they might change from or to.
3) You must use proper footnotes throughout the paper.  Not paratheses.
I am very disappointed in this paper, on top of it being late.  There are many fine examples in the Library of papers for my class that were done correctly.  If you want to get a sense of how to organize and present that material, then please consult those papers.  Finally, you must stick to the Gamble House.  I do not want a final paper on both.

 

 

 

 

  • 10 years ago
  • 20
Answer(1)

Purchase the answer to view it

blurred-text
  • attachment
    the_gamble_house_1.docx