To be demonized (English writers etc help)

[Judo Thai Boxer]

I'll start by saying this is a weird thread but maybe some of you guys could help me since there's a few writers on here.

I'm an English student and I've just been absolutely slated in an essay I've written.

The title went something along the lines of 'How are (character names) demonized in the texts' etc.

One of my main focuses was their minds being plagued by demons in a similar vein to saying someone can have demons from war or past experiences demonized them etc.

Would any of you agree with what I was arguing here? The actual definition of demonized can be 'to be influenced by demons' (I know this isn't what I wrote, but it's similar and perhaps arguable) among other things. I think I was perhaps too colloquial in part of my argument but I don't think I was too out of the way in what I was trying to say.

Again, sorry for the weird thread but one of the topics in Mayberry is supposed to be 'intelligent discussion'. Mods feel free to delete if this is too boring.

Anyway, I'd like peoples' opinions please. Thanks

 

[minute bull]

It's not exactly the same thing, because to be demonized is synonymous with being made to look bad. It's not so much an affliction of the soul, which would be sympathetic; rather, it is a characterization intended to cast someone in poor light.

I myself ran into this issue when assigned to look at a story from the perspective of one of the more villainous characters. I actually wrote the essay in the first person.

 

[Judo Thai Boxer]

Thanks for the reply. It's annoying because I've based about 60% of the essay on how they're 'plagued by demons'. Only I've made it even worse for myself by saying how they're 'demonized', using the totally wrong word for it.

I thought it was a great essay when I wrote it as well, but by misinterpreting demonized and going off on my own tangent I fucked myself over big time.

 

[random nerd]

you need to define that term in the paper.
you can call it cheerio for all i care, but explain exactly how you intend on using cheerio.

never define terms by a dictionary definition. use your own words, and whatever you do, do not cite a dictionary.

any chance you can do a re-write?
your choice of books may not have helped, unless it was required reading.

 

[minute bull]

you need to define that term in the paper.
you can call it cheerio for all i care, but explain exactly how you intend on using cheerio.

never define terms by a dictionary definition. use your own words, and whatever you do, do not cite a dictionary.

any chance you can do a re-write?
your choice of books may not have helped, unless it was required reading.

Question: What Is the Difference Between Descriptive and Prescriptive Grammar?

Answer:

In our Glossary of Grammatical and Rhetorical Terms, you’ll find two definitions of grammar:

Descriptive grammar: the systematic study and description of a language. Descriptive grammar refers to the structure of a language as it is actually used by speakers and writers.

Prescriptive grammar: a set of rules and examples dealing with the syntax and word structures of a language, usually intended as an aid to the learning of that language. Prescriptive grammar refers to the structure of a language as certain people think it should be used.

Both kinds of grammar are concerned with rules--but in different ways. Specialists in descriptive grammar (called linguists) study the rules or patterns that underlie our use of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences. On the other hand, prescriptive grammarians (such as most editors and teachers) lay out rules about what they believe to be the “correct” or “incorrect” use of language.

http://grammar.about.com/od/basicsentencegrammar/f/descpresgrammar.htm

Still, you kinda wanna stick to the dictionary as close as you can. Makes things easier.

 

[Judo Thai Boxer]

I didn't cite a dictionary and I didn't really define it myself. In my essay I introduced both texts and how they demonize the characters.

The first text I used I actually opened with someone being depicted as a demon, which is what the actual definition can be so I doubt that's what let me down.

But for the second text they're poems written from experiences in the poet's life and I wrote how through blasphemy he demonizes himself, that was just in the introduction though and then I went on to back up points in both and concluded that the readers and audience (one was a play) are demonized through the horrors and blasphemy in the texts. Which was likely what let me down massively since as Three Gun Fish said it usually means depicting them badly or referring to them as actual demons.

As for a re-write, I'm not sure about my next move. I'm going to book a meeting with my tutor who marked it and refute some of the things she's said and ask her to explain some of the things she's written.

If you're interested my texts were Titus Andronicus by Shakespeare, Roman setting, lots of butchery etc.

My other was John Donne poetry, who focuses on love for half of his poems while comparing himself to a saint and being disparaging towards the sun. Which I argued was blasphemic and invited demons into himself. Then for his other poems he becomes far more religious and quakes at the thought of God while thinking about death and judgement. So then I argued that God is depicted as a demonic figure.

 

[minute bull]

Not actual demons! There is no brimstone associated herein.

 

[Judo Thai Boxer]

Not actual demons! There is no brimstone associated herein.

Haha sorry, what I meant was that you said it means depicted badly or evil.

But another definition of it is that they are influenced by demons or that they are shown to be demons or demonic-like.

 

[Higus]

If your essay was anything like the OP, I can see this is going to take a while

 

[Judo Thai Boxer]

If your essay was anything like the OP, I can see this is going to take a while

Meaning I rambled too much in the op? I'd agree with you there, I just felt weird creating a thread like this on Sherdog.

Nevertheless, thank you for your great input. You've helped tremendously with what I was asking.

 

[Jing]

The fact that you came here for help..

Well, I don't wanna get demonized.

 

[DrBdan]

Haha sorry, what I meant was that you said it means depicted badly or evil.

But another definition of it is that they are influenced by demons or that they are shown to be demons or demonic-like.

In my experience demonic is generally used to mean portrayed in a bad light, as evil/wicked/threatening etc even though it can literally mean to become a demon or be possessed by a demon.

I think your best bet is to talk to your tutor and/or professor and explain what you thought the question meant and ask them to either remark the essay with that in mind or give you a chance to rewrite it.

 

[random nerd]

i was always taught to go the prescriptive route, though i had not heard of it till about ten seconds ago.

OP-at this point, i would try for a re-write if you can get it.

another thing to keep in mind, if you get to choose which books to do papers on, going with the classics when you can, is usually a safer bet.

im not sure where we went wrong with your paper. it could be sloppy use of terms or it could be a weak thesis. im guessing the thesis wasnt too strong based on what we have discussed so far.

is it something like - in this paper i will explore how 3 characters are demonized in the works of mark, luke, and john.

it's a thesis but i would want something with a little more jazz.

good talk, friend.
sorry i cant help more.

edit = yeah those are classics. im familiar with both but not enough to get into it.

 

[Uchi Mata]

Haha sorry, what I meant was that you said it means depicted badly or evil.

But another definition of it is that they are influenced by demons or that they are shown to be demons or demonic-like.

But that's not the colloquial usage, or even the formal usage in anything I've ever read. What you describe would be more along the lines of 'plagued by demons' or even 'possessed', depending on the level of torment. To demonize something means to portray it in a demonic manner, or perhaps to blame it for perceived ills it has inflicted upon you. Your essay is in trouble IMO.

 

[Judo Thai Boxer]

Ah well thanks for the help, I'm actually surprised anyone even replied to this thread. I'm going to try for a re-write although I doubt I'll be allowed. Not the end of the world though, I don't need to get a fantastic mark this year. My other assignments I'm doing have had really positive feedback so they'll bump up my overall mark this year anyway hopefully. Better to fuck up now rather than later.

 

[minute bull]

But another definition of it is that they are influenced by demons or that they are shown to be demons or demonic-like.

Regardless, this is not the definition being used in the prompt.

The important thing about english is communicating effectively. While certain terms can mean different things and thus change the interpretation of what's being said -- it's incumbent on you to effectively understand the message as it is intended. That you took a different understanding is not a defense in the myriad meanings of words, but rather a failure in comprehension -- which beyond anything is the most important part of your tutelage. We want to keep misinterpretations to a minimum.

Here's the tough thing: you're dealing with subject matter that veers into demon territory, or at least the supernatural. So there's a large possibility that a character is being demonized by being portrayed as being possessed by demons. However, if you do not stress the DEMONIZED aspect of the literature, and concentrate ONLY on the demonic aspect, people will assume you've comprehended incorrectly and grade accordingly.

DEMONIC is not the same thing as DEMONIZED. Much like CATLIKE is not the same as CATTY.

 

[JuliaB4GSP]

Yo, why not just tell us the text being discussed? "Demonized" in 90% of usages means: to make someone look bad and not to transform someone into a demon.