Conclusion analysis
Good conclusions usually refer back to the question or title and address it directly - for example by using key words from the title.
How well do you think these conclusions address the title or question? Answering these questions should help you find out.
- Do they use key words from the title or question?
- Do they answer the question directly?
- Can you work out the question or title just by reading the conclusion?
-
Discuss the significance of seemingly unrealistic or apparently implausible characters, places or events in literature you have studied.
"In conclusion, the seemingly unrealistic or implausible characters in the context of each novel do play a crucial role in the development of the ideas the author wants to portray. In the first case, the Savage acts as the ambassador of our proper human passions in the Brave New World so that Huxley's point of view on the conflict presented, the trading of freedom and high art for ignorant bliss, is conveyed properly, using the necessary narrative subjective ness. However small carelessness's in the plot create an involuntary implausibility in this character making it not at all convincing in the underlying levels, yet no less effective in the conceptual clash and further debate, which is the whole point of the novel. In Captain Corelli's Mandolin a much different technique is employed by De Berniéres as we have observed, making of Alekos equally effective in transmitting the authors ideas as John, but doing so in a more artful and thought up way than Huxley through a subtle symbolic representation of the human values behind the author's call to innocence and modesty as the ultimate form of wisdom."