Literary Critics, I need your opinion

Just wrote this for my honors English Class, the assignment was to write a descriptive paragraph which:

description of a place so that it conveys the tone -- whether you like/dislike the place.
or a person...satirizing them

1. begin with a generalization (ie. topic sentence)
2. arrange supporting details in emphatic and spatial order.
3. appeal to several sense
4. use precise vocabulary use exact verbs
5. conclude with a re=cap of opening statement.

This is what i shall be turning in, keep in mind, my teacher is a nun of the Order of Notre Dame, and I am currently ranked #1 in my English class.


At first glance the structure appeared to have fallen victim to a storm. The small
church built during the last century now but a mere shadow of its former self. One could
argue that the church had indeed fallen victim to a storm, however not in the traditional
sense of the word. For four years, this house of God had endured a storm with a ferocity
that only man could harness. A hail of bullets, a torrential rain of shells, a flood of young
men streaming across the fields surrounding the small church in a vain attempt to
dislodge those who sought to desecrate it’s sanctity. For four years, this holy monument
had been a silent sentinel over the surrounding countryside, much as it had done so in a
happier time. During that happier time, the fields around the church were a lush emerald
green, a green now replaced by the grays and browns of a burned, charred landscape. A
passing visitor would have caught a sweet hint of incense on the cool breeze, a smell now
replaced by the stench of rotting and burnt human flesh. One could have heard the
sounds of bells tolling as the faithful moved in and out of this holy place, sounds which
had since been replaced with a stark, dead silence. On certain days, one could have heard
the sounds of children laughing as they played in the churchyard, their laughter now
replaced with only the sound of a harsh wind moving over the foreboding crater-scape
which was once that peaceful churchyard. The most dominant feature of this church in
that earlier, peaceful time had been it’s large monument of a cross bearing our savior
Jesus Christ, his head raised as he gasped his last breath on this world. This monument to
Christ’s sacrifice had fallen victim to the same storm of blood and iron which had
engulfed it’s parish for four years, and was now nowhere to be found. That once
monolithic cross had now been replaced by thousands of smaller white crosses lined row
after row beneath the crumbling spires of the church, a new monument to the sacrifices
made by men so that others may not live in darkness. However this time there would be
no resurrection for those beneath the white crosses, no reprieve from the jaws of death for
those which had sacrificed themselves for the benefit of God’s kingdom on earth. Just
like the holy place under who’s silent sentinel they had fallen, these men too had fallen
victim to a storm, a storm unlike anything seen before.


The ruined Church of Ablaire St-Nazaire in Artois

What do you guys think?

 

Here go a few notes at random:

I fail to see any satire in this, quite the opposite, the text is tragic.

The text is too dense, one single paragraph. Might look ok on a sheet of paper, but it is hard to read on screen.

"desecrate it’s sanctity" should be "desecrate its sanctity".

Repetition of the word "replaced", use synonims.

Where's the recap at the end?

Cheers!
Za

 

And what's an "Ablaire"? The word for Abbey in French is Abbaye...

 

THanks for the feedback Za,

however i need not include satire, as i am describing a place, not a person

 

The text is fine.

I had already told you something about your writing once you showed me an orwellian tale, Patrick. I still think it's good.

Hope I'd know more about English composition since I can only give you a literary insight, generally speaking, not too technical.

For such a small text it had a lot of feeling. The construction is nice, descriptive and it does tell what you wanted to tell the way you wanted. The end is very good since you get to know it's about a real thing. Very good, indeed.

I'd just may ask something: the mystical Christian touch was added because you really wanted to, because you desired it piously and sicerelly or was it made to please a specific reader (i. e. the nun who was going to give you your note)? Because I think, despite my beliefs or anything else, that this text, which talks about history and the misery of war in a very nice way, might lose its power on a more general people. A Jewish, Muslim or atheist person just might not feel the misery you wanted to portray because you wrote a tale that attacks on a too-narrow front. It it was on purpose, then it's alright because it's the way it was supposed to be.

The language is elegant, though I'd suggest you lower the metaphoric tone next time or you'd fall into an excess of too-much-used old frases like this: "the sounds of children laughing as they played in the churchyard". The idea doesn't cease to be beautiful but it's exactly the kind of thing you expect from a memory about better past days.

Congratulations. Please keep up with the writing and share your creations more often.

 

It was intentional, as the bulk of soldiers which fought on the western front were christian. In an earlier version of this paragraph, i had included a line about stars of david as well, but it interupted the flow a little much.

Another reason I gave Christianity that much detail was because thats my target audience, I go to a Jesuit Highschool, and have a teacher who is a none, so i figure I would try to have my work resignate with the reader.

Thanks Fried

 

Fried is a poet and I'm an engineer, and it shows

 

The only thing that struck me as not fitting was the line about white crosses, the tombstones used by the French and British in France are not white crosses IIRC, the French use black crosses with a brass plaque and the British a traditional tombstone shape. But lets call that artistic lisence, it works much better with white crosses.

But yeah, overall it's very good, I pretty much had that picture in my mind before I saw the photograph.

Oooooh, one more thing, when you are talking about reprieve from the jaws of death, should it not be 'those whom' rather than 'those which'? 'Those that' would work too technically speaking but it would sound wrong.

 

During both wars field graves were marked with white or plain wood crosses. Only after both wars, when field graves were consolidated into war cemeteries, were the Portland Stone markers erected.

 

I appreciate the good words guys, I'm not 100% sure about what color the crosses were, i used the color for both poetic reasons and the fact that most images you see of the masses of dead during the world wars contain fields of white crosses.

Thank you Martin for adding your expertise to the subject

 

Yeah, I thought as much Martin, but from the tone of the work I got the impression it was looking back on it from a post war perspective (e.g. with the line 'for four years, this house of god had' the past tense implying that the entire war was in the past).

But yeah, I guessed it was for poetic reason because in that context it makes much more sense. Though the image of white crosses in cemeterys post war is pretty much wrong for anyone except US troops is it not?

 

At the risk of 'splitting hairs' - the work of the CWGC commenced in 1919 and took until 1938 to 'complete' - just in time for the next lot !

500,000 Portland headstones had to be made by one firm, an enormous undertaking which took years. Photos of the Somme cemeteries taken in the 1920's show rows of wooden crosses. So, if the church looks like the one in the picture, crosses could have been there for some time post-war.

You're absolutely right about today, Stefan - US cemeteries are the only ones to use bright white crosses.

 

Another reason I gave Christianity that much detail was because thats my target audience, I go to a Jesuit Highschool, and have a teacher who is a none, so i figure I would try to have my work resignate with the reader.

Thanks Fried [/QUOTE]

OOOH, way to many faux paux to pass up! So, your teacher is celebate (eg none vs a nun ) and your work will cause her early retirement (probably due to death by laughter...eg resignate v. resonate....)!

 

Whatever this picky lot say, I liked it. Even if I am a bit late in saying so. I loved the symbolism used and thought the buildings history was captured well. If it had been my piece I would have emphasised the stark contrast between a place of peace and holiness and the place of battle, but then Id only be after getting a rise out of the nuns with more blood and guts.
Seriously though, it was simply a good read that made an interesting point in a thought provoking way.

 

I think it is a well written piece except for the few minor technical problems already pointed out. As far as the religious tones, I feel that regardless of ones religion the piece is powerful enough to convey the feelings that the author is trying to bring across. Nice job.

Later

 

Right, but stating "However this time there would be no resurrection for those beneath the white crosses, no reprieve from the jaws of death for those which had sacrificed themselves for the benefit of God’s kingdom on earth. " is not a good concept in a Christian school. You may be asked whether you are rejecting resurrection.

 

Hey guys, just for the record, i received 97 points out of 100 for this paper, the highest in the class

 

Cheers for letting us know and well done!

 

Not a bad mark for us, backseat drivers

 

Dude, can you get me an essay on self discovery by thursday?