“The Known World” Essay (Blog Post #4)

                In the passage from, “The Known World”, Edward P. Jones reveals the character of Moses as the transition from despondence to rebirth.  The author identified themes that would correlate with Moses’s simplistic analysis of the dirt and his adherence the nature surrounding him, especially with the field and the rain.  This is accomplished by utilizing literary elements such as third-person limited point of view, specific details and allusion, in addition to despondent and nature-like imagery. 

                One of the most critical aspects in identifying the character of Moses comes from the author’s use of third-person limited point of view.  The author examines the character in describing the character’s history, core beliefs, and present thoughts.   Through this we see that Moses is a highly individualistic, and agriculturally-oriented person. To quote, “he ate it not only to discover the strengths and weaknesses of the field, but because the eating of it tied him to the only thing in his small world that meant almost as much as his own life” (29).  Characterization would reveal Moses’s logical play-out of eating the soil and utilizing its symbolism of literal dirt to describe both the life and liveliness contained within it, and the connection to the bondage that he is presumably oppressed by either through slavery or his economic situation. 

                Another crucial aspect in identifying the character of Moses comes from the author’s selection of detail throughout the passage.  He specifically refers to the critical details about Moses and where he lives that will provide just enough of the story to identify his character.  A part of the passage describes Moses as, “the only man in the realm, slave or free, who ate dirt…” (24). It is clearly distinguishable that Moses is both African-American, and uniquely oriented to eating dirt.  In describing the taste of the soil, and proceeding to discuss how the taste determines the season or months of the year, Moses and Jones are in essence connecting the sour moldiness to instances of strife and relief from the working conditions that Moses must endure as a farmer or similar occupation.  It describes the small world that only Moses has grown to know, and cherish at the same time. 

                Finally, the author utilizes the imagery of nature to convey the character of Moses.  He does this by contrasting the two scenes depicted in the passage, one of the field, and one of the rain.  The soil is dry and crisp, and has a distinct metallic taste that Moses can connect to and understand.  The rain begins towards the end of the passage to signify the end of the day, and liberation of his duties from the previous day.  It is almost like a baptism, especially when the author has Moses take off his shirt and lie down in the forest to collect the falling the rain.  The former despondent and life-less Moses can now experience a rebirth in emotional tranquility and feel freedom from his current economic and social condition. 

Reflection

 



My secondary attempt in writing the prose essay for "The Known World", served to emphasize areas where I could improve my writing, but also revealed some strengths.  I believe that a great strength that I have is adhesion to the topic, especially in understanding what the prompt asks for and responding the prompt.  I also believe that I do well at organizing a 'basic' essay that meets the requirement for a minimum score of a five.  However, the biggest issue for me when reading or writing literature is understanding complexity.  This past essay demonstrated the effect of writing without examining in a sophisticated manner, and I firmly believe that the root cause of the problem is not having enough time.  The more time allotted, the better my analysis would be, but unfortunately, one must be able to write within a 40 minute time period.  After close examination of my essay and the AP Prose rubric, I believe that my essay falls in between a 4-5.  It is borderline a four, but I believe that the essay leans towards the five because it is well organized, offers a plausible reading while answering all aspects of the prompt, and contains some degree of an analysis while presenting the effect that literary techniques have on the passage.  Let me highlight three areas of improvement to work towards in the future. 

First, is understanding how to identify complexity in a passage.  Before I can write about why a certain situation or literary work is complex, I need to understand what that means, and how might the author demonstrate complexity in their work.  I understand that there are a few key analytical and literary devices identify complexity such as paradox, irony, contrast, and satire to name a few.  Having a better understanding of these will allow for me to make more connections throughout a selection of reading, and provide me the knowledge to identify significant and complex situations.
In addition, I believe that understanding how to write about complexity in a passage is critical to obtaining the higher scored essay.  If I'm able to make the connection that their is a complex situation occurring inside a passage, how do I connect that back to the meaning?  More importantly, how do I write to make that connection?  I make it a goal, to devote time to understanding the various forms of complexity in literature so that I may know and write about them, in writing additional prose essays.

Second, I know that my essay did well in addressing the prompt, especially when the prompt asked, "...analyze how the author reveals the character of Moses."  I would be able to write three body paragraphs that utilized specific references to the literature and make a brief interpretation of that evidence.  However, I think I lacked a number of references that would have enhanced my argument, and I believe that the way I explained the "how" demonstrated explicit and surface level discussion of the passage.  A goal would then be to practice examining for more evidence inside of the passage, while underlying how the meaning connects to each reference.  This offers a wider body of evidence to support my claim, while strengthening my body analysis.

Third, is underlying meaning.  I often have trouble understanding what the main idea of the passage is like.  I also seem to have trouble identifying common themes that can be seen throughout a work of literature.  It isn't so much that I have trouble finding it, but that I have trouble placing the name to describe that idea or thematic approach.  I believe  one way of solving this includes multiple readings of literary work to gauge different approaches that the author makes.  If I can identify why the author made a certain literary choice, it might allow me to better connect with the overall meaning or theme of a literary work.  I also think understanding a variety of archetypes would help in understanding meaning, so I would make it a goal to learn more archetypes throughout the year, while reading passages with varying ideas and thematic approaches.