Semester 1 Final: Frankenstein Literary Argument Essay
This essay serves as the culmination of our study this semester. Over the past months, we have focused on analyzing characterization, plot, setting, structure, narration, and literary argumentation, using various texts to develop these skills. This final project will test your ability to synthesize these elements by crafting a thoughtful, well-supported literary argument.
Prompt:
"Throughout Frankenstein, Mary Shelley explores the consequences of creation and responsibility. If Victor Frankenstein were put on trial for his actions, would he be found guilty of negligence, or should he be lauded as a visionary who simply fell victim to forces beyond his control? Write an argumentative essay that defends your position.
In your response, incorporate:
Evidence from Frankenstein to analyze Victor’s character, decisions, and their consequences.
A discussion of how Shelley’s historical and cultural context might influence her portrayal of Victor’s ambition and responsibility.
A reflection on a modern equivalent to Victor’s choices (e.g., technological innovation, scientific ethics, or leadership responsibility)."
Requirements:
Write a formal, multi-paragraph essay that includes:
A clear, defensible thesis statement.
Organized body paragraphs with claims supported by textual evidence and insightful commentary.
A logical progression of ideas and transitions to develop a cohesive argument.
Sophisticated and error-free writing that adheres to conventions of academic style.
Your essay should be approximately 650–1,000 words
Submit your work as a Google Doc by the provided deadline.
Important Note About AI Usage:
You may use AI tools, such as Magic School or ChatGPT, to assist in brainstorming, organizing, or editing your essay. However:
Your grade will be impacted if your work contains more than 35% AI-generated content.
Your essay must reflect your original thinking, analysis, and voice. AI-generated contributions should be thoroughly reviewed, edited, and integrated by you.
Using a detailed rubric, essays will be graded on their thesis, evidence and commentary, organization, and sophistication. Use the skills you’ve developed this semester to create a polished, insightful final essay. Make this your best work!
Frankenstein Literary Argument Essay Rubric
| Category | 6 (Exemplary) | 4-5 (Proficient) | 2-3 (Developing) | 0-1 (Needs Improvement) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thesis (1 Point) | Responds to the prompt with a defensible thesis that clearly establishes a position on whether Victor Frankenstein is guilty of negligence or a visionary. The thesis also incorporates Shelley’s historical and cultural context and modern parallels where appropriate. | Responds to the prompt with a clear thesis, though it may lack depth in addressing Shelley’s context or modern parallels. | Presents a thesis, but it may be overly simplistic, vague, or unrelated to the prompt. Little to no attention is given to context or modern parallels. | Lacks a thesis or provides a thesis that is irrelevant to the prompt. |
| Evidence and Support (4 Points) | Provides ample, well-chosen textual evidence from Frankenstein that fully supports claims about Victor's character, decisions, and consequences. Commentary effectively connects this evidence to the thesis while incorporating analysis of Shelley’s historical and cultural context and modern parallels. | Includes sufficient evidence to support most claims. Commentary explains evidence but may lack depth in addressing Shelley’s context or modern parallels. | Uses minimal or weak evidence. Commentary is limited, leaving connections to the thesis unclear or incomplete. Little to no attempt is made to address Shelley’s context or modern parallels. | Offers little or no textual evidence. Commentary is missing or fails to connect evidence to the thesis. |
| Line of Reasoning (1 Point) | Develops a logical and coherent progression of ideas that clearly supports the thesis. Transitions and organization enhance the argument. | Demonstrates a clear progression of ideas, though connections may occasionally lack clarity. | Shows some attempt at logical organization, but reasoning may be unclear or inconsistent. | Lacks logical organization; ideas are disjointed or unrelated to the thesis. |
| Sophistication (1 Point) | Demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the text by integrating analysis of Victor’s ambition and responsibility, Shelley’s historical and cultural context, and its relevance to modern ethical dilemmas. | Shows some insight into the text, though analysis may lack depth or complexity. Attempts to address context or modern parallels but with limited success. | Demonstrates basic understanding but misses key complexities or connections. Context and modern parallels are minimally addressed or not well-integrated. | Displays superficial understanding or misinterprets the text. Analysis of context and modern parallels is absent or irrelevant. |
| Conventions (1 Point) | Writing is virtually error-free, demonstrating control over grammar, mechanics, and style. Academic tone is maintained throughout. | Writing is mostly free of errors. Minor issues do not detract from clarity or meaning. | Errors in grammar or mechanics sometimes interfere with clarity or meaning. | Errors significantly interfere with readability or obscure meaning. |