Movies like the Phantom of the Opera have been around for several decades so it’s safe to say everyone has either seen or heard about it. But what exactly is this movie about? An innocent young boy with a scarred face who grows up haunting the opera house his parents ran, or a boy who manifests the Oedipus Complex proposed by the infamous psychiatrist, Sigmund Freud? In the article “Freudian Theories Present in Leroux’s The Phantom of the Opera,” Jeremy S. Page explains how these Freudian concepts have been present in novels and movies even before Freud came into existence. After reading this article I realized Page has a point. Freud’s ideas are still considered “crazy” to most people, but the Phantom of the Opera isn’t the only movie with Freudian concepts and it isn’t the last.
Page establishes himself as a credible author by using professional opinions throughout his text as supporting sentences for his statements. He also uses logic, also known as logos, and facts to his advantage from the beginning to make the reader feel he is reliable. This logic is crucial to his main ideas because it makes the ideas credible since professionals attained their reputation after years of hard work. It is also told in a way that makes the information understandable to educated young adults who have never taken a psychology class since it consists of several sentences dedicated to explain Freud’s ideas. A basic knowledge of who Freud is makes Page’s article more enjoyable, so this would be my recommendation to those determined to read it. This subject will then be fully appreciated by the audience it was intended for.
Overall, this article is well written. The thesis is controversial since Freud’s ideas can be interpreted as either outrageous or brilliant. It’s interesting hearing someone’s point of view that supports Freudian concepts and isn’t disgusted by them. It had smooth transitions from one main idea to the next and every sentence supports his thesis. The introduction does a good job of introducing the subject and the conclusion sums up Page’s ideas initiated in the beginning. The tedious 4-6 sentence paragraphs with 2 “concrete details” followed by commentary is usually associated with good pieces of writing; however, this writing method is not applied to this article. Instead the author uses his own pattern to make it flow. This pattern varies and can be flexible when Page needs it to be.
After reading this article I’ve realized a structured format does not always produce a good essay. As long as all the ideas are supported by enough evidence and the words flow then an inflexible structure isn’t needed. It surprises me how much freedom I can have once I abandon the rules I’ve been taught several years ago. There should not be a limit to the amount of commentary I can include and there is no “right” way to write a thesis, all the norms ever did was limit the mind.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree that essays don't need a solid and strict structural form to be well-written essays. I much prefer when they flow naturally under the writer's own methods. These types of essays seem more enjoyable, and they don't feel like rigid and manufactured pieces of writing.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your analysis and agree that the ways we've been told to write in the past allow us less creative freedom in writing.
(Mm, I like your jellybean background)