I must re-write my paper according to his critiques without scrapping it. PLEASE FOLLOW PROFESSORS CRITIQUES, WITHOUT SCRAPPING PAPER. I WOULD LIKE IT TO LOOK LIKE MY OWN ORIGINAL WORK SO MY PROFESSOR DOESN’T THINK I USED THIS SERVICE.

Lurking within this paper are some good points about the way that the environment reflects EH’s mental state, but overall, this paper is a mess. There is no structure to speak of, and so the paper meanders just as EH does in the wilderness of expression. The short staccato paragraphs are either complete conjecture or jammed with quotations that you don’t interpolate effectively. The thesis is muddled and confused, and there are a lot of words at the beginning that have little bearing on what you are arguing. Moreover, the language is faulty, the mechanics tortured, and the overall effect is one of rushed, jumbled thinking. To make this paper better, you needed to clearly articulate your argument—what we discussed in office hours—and then to use three short interventions, with support from the text, to illustrate the way that no matter what the environment is—nature, Indians, white civilization—that this environment reflects the way that the world is against you. This seems to me to be what you are arguing, but it is lost in the language you use to express it. My advice would be to scrap this paper, and then work on outlining your argument, and using evidence effectively. This is too bad, because when you left office hours, I felt like we had a plan for your execution of this essay. That plan, however, was completely rejected here, and the result is a mismatched essay with no clear thesis, faulty evidence, and frankly, unproductive style.