Using the 1st and 2nd point in Writing analytically under the method of 1 to 10 or 10 to 1 to propose at least two different ideas for possible papers:
As directed in class, I attempted to analyze my work through the categories of claim and examples or backing up details to support said claim. While it would be more easy to write from the perspective of someone who made claims for often then showing evidence or just quoted straight from the book, that did not seem to be my problem for as I analyzed my work I only grew more confident in the presence of my examples in order to support my idea. most of my claims are followed by at least one piece of supporting evidence however based on the theory mounted in the 1 to 10 and 10 to 1 aspect we are meant to apply my main topic for each paragraph was revealed to be my problem. While i supported each claim with evidence I did not support the connection between each claim which is where i need to take the concept of 1 to 10 and step back.
In the two paragraphs of my essay I analyzed, my pattern shown very prominently as 1 to 1. Meaning for every claim i had i had at least one example taken straight from the text. In fact upon further analyzing the concept of both the evidence and claim sometimes appear multiple times in the same sentence which leads me to believe structure is the aspect of the 10-1 method I should focus on. As I stated previously for all my pieces of analytical writing I tend to follow a similar format which is why I now pull into this analyzation a direct quote from my essay at this point in time:
“One exception to this being Multatuli interjection at the end of the book. Declaring “I, Multatuli” repeatedly to ensure that the reader not wonder, for the first time this entire book, who in fact is speaking.”
While this is still one claim, the bolded sections are the parts in which directly show evidence from the book while the unbolded parts are the assumptions or meanings i pull from that information.