Writing sample

[S B]

Hey everyone...I was wondering if anyone could look over the essay that I wrote on the following prompt:

In the recording of history it is impossible to be objective.

Also, I was wondering would it be a problem to mention historical examples for nations other than N.America as I am not very well aware of North American history?

Following is the essay:

 

Objective view of something refers to the ability of the person to describe a situation as it is without mixing it with ones personal opinions or biases. History could be penned down based on the direct evidences from the past situation one is dealing with or it could be inferences one makes from the vaguely present evidences from the past. The vagueness of the items and the feelings of patriotism on part of the author, leads to the mingling of personal opinions with accounts of a situation. In situations where the evidences are concrete there is no refuting them. In case of the accounts of history on the division of India and Pakistan, the history books for both the nations contradict each other. Indian books support the views of Indian National Congress at the time and condemned Mohammed Ali Jinnah who was thought to be primarily responsible for the drift between the nations; where as Pakistan's history books praise Jinnah for the liberty they received from the clutches of the Indian Congress that bounded their freedoms. The biases are clearly seen in the case. The books from each nation contains quotes and references from supporters of the ideas that authors wanted to pen down, despite the fact that the presence of both the ideas at the time indicates a very grey situation.

 

On the other hand, when one is not dealing with something that the authors could relate to or something that is backed up by solid evidence the accounts are fairly objective in nature. For instance, based on the accounts majority of the historians, like Jai Chand, Ahmed Ali and the British historian Ryan Buckley etc. agree to the fact that the First War of Independence in India started in 1857 when a man named Mangal Pandey attacked some of the British soldiers upon being forced to peel of the rifle covers with their mouths. Despite the fact that the reasons given for the attack by the authors are debatable, the event occurred for sure and its consequences are the same.

 

Whether or not the historical accounts are objective or not is based on the how concrete is the evidence that the author has and whether the event is likely to arise certain patriotic feelings in the author. If the historian is penning something down that in itself is vague the authors tend to take sides based on their opinions and present the account as they think is right. On the contrary when dealing with some fact that occurred in the past and is supported by some set of discrete evidences the authors don't tend refute over them and present them objectively.

 

 

 

If anyone could please look over this, it would be great! Thanks so much:)

[supafield]

Looks really good if you ask me....

I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter where your examples are geographically located as long as you explain them well...

 

If I had one thing I would change, it's just a nitpickish little grammar issue... I would change the word "something" in the first sentence. ex: An objective view of (an issue/a topic) refers to.....

 

It probably wouldn't even matter... just sounds a little bit better... Either way I would imagine that response would get a very good grade.

[S B]

Thanks for looking it over!

Now that you mentioned, I looked over my past couple of essays and realized I have a tendancy to used generalizations like "something" etc. I will certainly keep this in mind now

[thatonekid]

It's good, but I think that most of your sentences are a bit long. I counted, and you only had 2 short sentences. Some of your sentences extended to be 3 typed lines! I think that you could have made some of these single sentences into 2 sentences. By varying your sentence structure, the essay can flow better and becomes more sophisticated.

 

Of course, that's just my opinion.

[future_doc]

In the recording of history it is impossible to be objective.

 

You are free to give historical examples that reinforce your point. Taking into account the other valued comments, you have done a good job. I would define my terms, what is "history", how do we know history and verify our sources that may not be entirely factual or have a slant, and what gets in the way of objectivity. I made minor adjustments/suggestions for what they are worth below.

 

 

Objectivity is the ability to accurately describe a situation without mixing in one’s personal opinions or biases. History is based upon direct evidence of the past or it could be inferences one makes from the vaguely present evidences from the past. The vagueness of the items and the feelings of patriotism on part of the author, leads to the mingling of personal opinions with accurate factual accounts of a situation. In situations where the evidences are concrete, there is no refuting them. In case of the accounts of history on the division of India and Pakistan, the history books for both the nations contradict each other. Indian books support the views of Indian National Congress at the time and condemned Mohammed Ali Jinnah who was thought to be primarily responsible for the drift between the nations; whereas Pakistan's history books praise Jinnah for the liberty they received from the clutches of the Indian Congress that bounded their freedoms. The biases are clearly seen. The books from each nation contains quotes and references from supporters of the ideas that authors wanted to pen down, despite the fact that the presence of both the ideas at the time indicates a very grey situation.

 

On the other hand, when the authors do not have an emotional stake or hidden agenda in the facts or are backed up by solid evidence, the accounts are fairly objective in nature. For instance, based on the accounts majority of the historians, like Jai Chand, Ahmed Ali and the British historian Ryan Buckley etc. agree to the fact that the First War of Independence in India started in 1857 when a man named Mangal Pandey attacked some of the British soldiers upon being forced to peel off the rifle covers with their mouths. Despite the fact that the reasons given for the attack by the authors are debatable, the event occurred for sure and its consequences are the same.

 

Whether or not the historical accounts are objective or not is based on the how concrete is the evidence and whether the event is likely to arise certain patriotic feelings in the author. If the historian is dealing with vague facts, the authors tend to take sides based on their opinions and present the account as they think is right. On the contrary, when dealing with some fact that occurred in the past and is supported by some set of discrete evidences the authors don't tend refute over them and present them objectively.

[S B]

thatonekid: Thanks for the feedback...I indeed have some very long sentences. I will try to keep this in mind for future essays!

 

future_doc: Thanks for evaluating the WS! In terms of the defining issue, I was told not to define terms if they are obvious, as it consumes time and might not prove to be worthwhile. But, your feedback certainly made the sample look better. I guess the defination in this case has to be limited to the scope of the points we plan on outlaying in the essay. Taking into account the extra time I had on my hands defining certainly is not a bad idea.

 

Thanks again everyone:) The feedbacks were much appreciated!!

[future_doc]

S B, your comments are also most illuminating to me!

 

When you do your own critique of you writings, (and obviously, this suggestion you need to take with a grain of salt), see if you are able to make any of your sentences more concisely, reducing the word content, yet maintaining the same thought. The purpose of this exercise would be to seek 'precision', using words like you were at target practice or a surgeon. This is a necessary skill to develop, for example, if you are doing the ABS, 5 Answers, for the Mac application (although there is no time limitation) where there is a 700 character limit. You need to keep the clarity of thought with a limitation of words. Keep up the good work and practices, it will all pay off.