Mini-Lesson on Words in the Play

December 16, 2022

Mini-Lesson on Words in the Play

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Mini-Lesson on Words in the Play

Mini, Lesson, Words, Play

When Medea first argues with Jason in Medea, she confronts her husband with his violation:

Screen Shot 2021-09-08 at 1.17.11 AM.png

In a pre-literate world, one’s word society possible. Verbal contracts must be binding, and Jason breaks his word. The gods must care.

However, that Jason is smooth talker. It’s just that Medea sees right through his words: “In my view, someone who is both unjust/and has a gift for speaking–such a man/incurs the greatest penalty.”

That’s one of the delicious ironies of the play’s conclusion: all Jason has left are words. And those words have no effect. That Medea rides off on the chariot of a god (her grandfather, Helios) suggests that the gods have brought about justice for her. Children may be the future, but one’s word was crucial to the present.

An Assignment Asking You to Help Jason Find Better Words

If you check out Jason’s story on Wikipedia (Links to an external site.), you’ll see how it ends:

Screen Shot 2021-09-08 at 1.08.46 AM.png

We know from Euripides, however, that stories can develop or otherwise change. After all, he seems to have added the bit about Medea killing the sons she had with Jason. In the spirit of Euripides, then, let’s add something to the story. To make this addition, you’re going to pretend to be a speechwriter for Jason, writing an apology for him to deliver to the people of Corinth after the events of the play. Here’s what to do:

Here’s an article David P. Boyd’s “Art and Artifice in Public Apologies.”

art_and_artifice_of_public_apologies.pdf Download art_and_artifice_of_public_apologies.pdf

Read the article and think about how, in the play, Jason violates Boyd’s sequence for a good apology. Next—and here’s your addition to the story—use Boyd’s model to write Jason’s apology to the people of Corinth. (You don’t have to be rigid in following Boyd’s model, but be sure to incorporate all the elements he lists.) The apology itself should reflect both your familiarity with the events of the play and your understanding of Boyd’s article.

Your submitted essays should begin with the apology you have written. Then, referring to your apology, the play, and Boyd’s article, identify the main differences between your analyze how far Jason is in the play from satisfying Boyd’s criteria and how close he holds to Boyd’s model in your apology.

To state the (perhaps) obvious: your apology will need to be much more than “I’m sorry. My bad.” Length-wise, think in terms of a page or a little more (250-300 words). Your analysis, which does not include the apology you have written, should fall between 800-1000 words.

[Order Now]

Mini-Lesson on Words in the Play

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.