Analytical Essay on "A very old man with Enormous wings" by Gabriel Garcia Criteria Format:4-6 pages (suggested page length)Canvas online submissiondouble-spaced; basic margins, format, & headi

Analytical Essay on "A very old man with Enormous wings" by Gabriel Garcia Criteria Format:4-6 pages (suggested page length)Canvas online submissiondouble-spaced; basic margins, format, & heading; 12 pt. font (Arial or Times New Roman)one outside researched source, Works Cited page, and MLA formatMicrosoft Word document only Guidelines:analyze one short story from the syllabus (may analyze 2 but must be by the same author);use formal language (no “I,” “we,” or “you”);audience=informed reader; andresearch and cite from at least one outside source.  Must use in-text citation. Must include a Works Cited page. Source(s) must be reliable and valid. Purpose:Analyze one short story, and using a formal voice, at least one outside source, and one critical literary approach, write a literary criticism. Further Criteria: Choose the short story you’d like to discuss and write an argument about the story using one of the critical approaches listed below (and on Canvas). Below are some examples to help you understand what a “literary criticism” is (and can be used for your essay). Ensure you indicate which criticism you are discussing in your intro/thesis. **Feel free to look up the approaches for more info on them (as the details below are condensed). DO NOT use Deconstruction, New Historicism, or Reader Response criticisms. Possible arguments (or CHOOSE your own):1. Using historical criticism, discuss how the time period may have influenced the story and its topic(s).2. Using Archetypal (Myth) criticism, discuss the concept of good vs. evil in one story.3. Apply Marxist theory to one author’s work, noting the social class and how it is treated in this work.4. Discuss how the author’s biographical information suggests why they chose to write the story or the meaning behind it (theme).5. Discuss how the gender roles in the story are important to the understanding and outcome of the work’s main idea (theme).Critical Approaches: The Nature of Criticism FORMALIST (OR THE NEW) CRITICISM This criticism is an independent creation, a self-contained unit, study of itself, not as part of some larger context. It is an approach to literature that focuses on the elements of a work, such as the language, structure, and tone. It looks at the form of the work and the relationship between the parts, for example, the construction of the plot, the contrasts between characters, the functions of rhymes, and the point of view. It is a more intrinsic criticism, than extrinsic—concentrates on the work itself, independent of its writers. Two forms: explications, which is the unfolding of meaning, line by line or even word by word and analysis, an examination of the relations of parts. New Critics treat a work of literature as if it were a self-contained, self-referential object. Rather than basing their interpretations of a text on the reader’s response, the author’s stated intentions, or parallels between the text and historical contexts (such as the author’s life), New Critics perform a close reading, concentrating on the relationships within the text that give it its own distinctive character or form. New Critics especially appreciate the use of literary devices, such as irony, to achieve a balance or reconciliation between dissimilar or even conflicting elements in a text. ARCHETYPAL (OR MYTH) CRITICISM The term archetype is sometimes broadly and misleadingly used to refer to a prototype, a stereotype, or an epitome. It may thus indicate a type of person, e.g. a mother, a father, a hero, a warrior, or a martyr. More of an assumption is that the writer and reader share memories. The plot often deals with death and rebirth or any part of life that is “shared” by all. It is the existence of a “collective unconscious,” our brains consisting of “countless typical experiences of our ancestors,” such as things we grew up knowing, believing through stories, and learning from our ancestors. Plot is the quest, which usually involves the testing or initiation of a hero, which represents the movement from innocence to experience. If it sometimes feels far-fetched, it is nevertheless true that one of its strengths is that it invites us to use comparisons and comparing is often an excellent way to see not only what a work shares with others, but what is distinctive in the work. HISTORICAL SCHOLARSHIP Historical criticism studies a work within its historical context, looking at the work and the time period when the work was written. The historical critic assumes (and one can hardly dispute the assumption) that writers, however individualistic, are shaped by the particular social context in which they live. MARXIST CRITICISM Marxist criticism is a type of criticism in which literary works are viewed as the product of work and whose practitioners emphasize the role of class and ideology as they reflect, propagate, and even challenge the prevailing social order. Rather than viewing texts as repositories for hidden meanings, Marxist critics view texts as material products to be understood in broadly historical terms. It sees history as a struggle between socioeconomic classes, and it sees literature and everything else as the product of economic forces of the period. It rests as a super culture of law, politics, philosophy, etc. that is reflecting the interest of the dominant class, meaning the social structure of the piece, the way society is. KARL MARX- criticized the traditional conception of "human nature" as a "species" that incarnates itself in each individual on behalf of a conception of human nature as formed by the totality of "social relations." Thus, human nature is not understood, as in classical idealist philosophy, as permanent and universal: the species-being is always determinate in a specific social and historical formation. BIOGRAPHICAL CRITICISM Biographical criticism is an approach to literature that suggests the knowledge of the author’s life experiences can aid in the understanding of his or her work. While biographical information can sometimes complicate one’s interpretation of a work, and some formalist critics (such as the New Critics) disparage the use of the author’s biography as a tool for textual interpretation, learning about the life of the author can often enrich a reader’s appreciation for that author’s work. These critics use information about an author's life and background to better understand and analyze the author’s work. It can reflect autobiographies, diaries, journals, and letters. GENDER (FEMINIST, AND LESBIAN, AND GAY) CRITICISM Gender criticism is an approach to literature that explores how ideas about men and women—what is masculine and feminine—can be regarded as socially constructed by particular cultures. Gender criticism expands categories and definitions of what is masculine or feminine and tends to regard sexuality as more complex than merely masculine or feminine, heterosexual or homosexual. Feminist Criticism- it is in conjunction with sociopolitical feminism, using language and literature by exposing how these reflect masculine ideology. It was first intended to hold that women are pretty much the same as men and therefore should be treated the same. It explores the differences between women and men. It also reflects on male dominating roles and society and how females experience it by doing what they want to do. Lesbian and gay criticism: have roots in feminist criticism; introduced many of the question these other, newer developments are now exploring. It looks at what role sexual identity may have upon the text; others have begun to question, instead, the concept of sexual identity itself. PSYCHOLOGICAL (OR PSYCHOANALYTICAL) CRITICISM It examines the author and the author’s writing in the framework of Freudian psychology. Not having a father figure in the character’s life and or looking for a father figure is one example. This criticism looks at Freudian theories only, not any psychological idea. DECONSTRUCTION (do not use for this essay)Deconstruction involves the close reading of texts in order to demonstrate that any given text has irreconcilably contradictory meanings, rather than being a unified, logical whole. Deconstructive or poststructuralist criticism can be characterized as the opposite of everything formalist criticism stands for. Deconstruction begins with the assumptions that the world is unknowable and that language is unstable, elusive, unreliable, and unfaithful. It is not the direct meaning of a word. It is tearing apart things, digging for the meaning that isn’t obvious, a meaning of a word or phrase that you think it is but someone else wouldn’t think it was unless under your scope of mind. Having a surface but going underneath it. READER-RESPONSE CRITICISM (do not use for this essay)Reader-response theorists fall into three groups: those who focus on the individual reader's experience; those who conduct psychological experiments on a defined set of readers; and those who assume a fairly uniform response by all readers. Any literary theory that talks about how we feel as we read a literary work, what literature aims to do, how literature affects us morally, or how we perceive the world described by the writer is saying something about the literary experience of the reader(s). Reader-response criticism is a group of approaches to understanding literature that explicitly emphasizes the reader's role in creating the meaning and experience of a literary work. More specifically, reader-response criticism refers to a group of critics who study, not a literary work, but readers or audiences responding to a literary work. It focuses on finding meaning in the act of reading itself and examining the ways individual readers or  communities of readers experience texts. They also may examine the significance of the series of interpretations the reader undergoes in the reading process. The reader goes beyond the text, drawing inferences, and evaluating the text in terms of their own experiences. THE NEW HISTORICISM (do not use for this essay)New historicists, like formalists and their critics, acknowledge the importance of the literary text, but they also analyze the text with an eye to history. It focuses on a work’s historical content and bases its interpretations on the interplay between the text and historical contexts (such as the author’s life or intentions in writing the work). New Historians view history as a social science like anthropology and sociology, whereas older historicists intended to view history as literature's "background" and the social sciences as being properly historical. With this criticism, there is no “history” in the sense of a narrative of indisputable past events. It is your own personal version, your narrative, your representation of the past. What we believe happened, with the knowledge of what we learned ourselves about the event or past. READER-RESPONSE CRITICISM (do not use for this essay)Reader-response theorists fall into three groups: those who focus on the individual reader's experience; those who conduct psychological experiments on a defined set of readers; and those who assume a fairly uniform response by all readers. Any literary theory that talks about how we feel as we read a literary work, what literature aims to do, how literature affects us morally, or how we perceive the world described by the writer is saying something about the literary experience of the reader(s). Reader-response criticism is a group of approaches to understanding literature that explicitly emphasizes the reader's role in creating the meaning and experience of a literary work. More specifically, reader-response criticism refers to a group of critics who study, not a literary work, but readers or audiences responding to a literary work. It focuses on finding meaning in the act of reading itself and examining the ways individual readers or communities of readers experience texts. They also may examine the significance of the series of interpretations the reader undergoes in the reading process. The reader goes beyond the text, drawing inferences, and evaluating the text in terms of their own experiences. THE NEW HISTORICISM (do not use for this essay)New historicists, like formalists and their critics, acknowledge the importance of the literary text, but they also analyze the text with an eye to history. It focuses on a work’s historical content and bases its interpretations on the interplay between the text and historical contexts (such as the author’s life or intentions in writing the work). New Historians view history as a social science like anthropology and sociology, whereas older historicists intended to view history as literature's "background" and the social sciences as being properly historical. With this criticism, there is no “history” in the sense of a narrative of indisputable past events. It is your own personal version, your narrative, your representation of the past.