I finished a second read of the article and enjoyed it as much as the first time! I do have a few suggestions, however.
First of all, I am not sure you are using "plot" the way I understand the word, which is as an outline of actions that move a book to its conclusion. In "I. Plot," it seems you are really talking about the genres of the fairy tale and Christian allegory. I recognize that these stories have certain structures, but except for the brief fairy tale at the beginning, the structure is not explicitly discussed, only the character conventions and themes of such stories.
In the first paragraph of "II. Plot and symbolism... ," you do talk about the plot, but it is also mixed up with point of view, which seems to be a narrative technique. In the second paragraph, you say the conflict between Harry and Snape is the plot. Shouldn't it be that the relationship between Harry and Snape has been the conflict?
You might consider putting a sentence to tie together the two paragraphs I mentioned in my earlier post, such as, "He is not at all a sadistic bully," then start a new section C on Snape and sadism, since that is a rather large section and a new direction in the discussion -- just a suggestion, though.
Some things I am too lazy to check, but don't remember seeing before I read them in your essay: Is Lily's patronus a doe? * The sex of a patronus seems to be the same as the caster's, but it's only really known for James (although your conclusion about the sex of Snape's patronus is brilliant). * Hagrid made the comment that, "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." Hmm... double negative? * Severus seems to think Slytherin is the house for brainy people, judging from his comment to James and Sirius on the train. * Are all Unforgivable Curses supposed to damage the soul, or only the AK? I thought they were just illegal. * Ron asked Harry not to say Voldemort's name after their trip to the Ministry of Magic -- he thought it was some kind of jinx. * I wouldn't say "It seems only the trio can destroy the evil objects, and then only if they have the sword," although I see what you are getting at. It was just the only way they knew, but there were other ways, as we saw, so I don't know if that's breaking the rules. * I guess the kidnapping of the wand maker and the reason Dumbledore put on the ring were supposed to be clues to the other two Hallows in HBP -- weak, but there they are. * Bravo, only one misspelling: left him to bleed on the florr of the shack. * Maybe you can put a new header, Other thoughts for the last section on the nature of magic, the apartheid Wizarding World, and future JKR works. (Frankly, I dread the release of the encyclopedia, if she writes it, more than the mystery novel.) At the beginning of B, perhaps a header for 1. Model for Snape's Love?
no subject
First of all, I am not sure you are using "plot" the way I understand the word, which is as an outline of actions that move a book to its conclusion. In "I. Plot," it seems you are really talking about the genres of the fairy tale and Christian allegory. I recognize that these stories have certain structures, but except for the brief fairy tale at the beginning, the structure is not explicitly discussed, only the character conventions and themes of such stories.
In the first paragraph of "II. Plot and symbolism... ," you do talk about the plot, but it is also mixed up with point of view, which seems to be a narrative technique. In the second paragraph, you say the conflict between Harry and Snape is the plot. Shouldn't it be that the relationship between Harry and Snape has been the conflict?
You might consider putting a sentence to tie together the two paragraphs I mentioned in my earlier post, such as, "He is not at all a sadistic bully," then start a new section C on Snape and sadism, since that is a rather large section and a new direction in the discussion -- just a suggestion, though.
Some things I am too lazy to check, but don't remember seeing before I read them in your essay: Is Lily's patronus a doe? * The sex of a patronus seems to be the same as the caster's, but it's only really known for James (although your conclusion about the sex of Snape's patronus is brilliant). * Hagrid made the comment that, "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." Hmm... double negative? * Severus seems to think Slytherin is the house for brainy people, judging from his comment to James and Sirius on the train. * Are all Unforgivable Curses supposed to damage the soul, or only the AK? I thought they were just illegal. * Ron asked Harry not to say Voldemort's name after their trip to the Ministry of Magic -- he thought it was some kind of jinx. * I wouldn't say "It seems only the trio can destroy the evil objects, and then only if they have the sword," although I see what you are getting at. It was just the only way they knew, but there were other ways, as we saw, so I don't know if that's breaking the rules. * I guess the kidnapping of the wand maker and the reason Dumbledore put on the ring were supposed to be clues to the other two Hallows in HBP -- weak, but there they are. * Bravo, only one misspelling: left him to bleed on the florr of the shack. * Maybe you can put a new header, Other thoughts for the last section on the nature of magic, the apartheid Wizarding World, and future JKR works. (Frankly, I dread the release of the encyclopedia, if she writes it, more than the mystery novel.) At the beginning of B, perhaps a header for 1. Model for Snape's Love?