<p>Wow. You are amazing. I never thought about it like that. I looked at it as a black and white topic. It's cool how you saw a disaster as a good thing, which will definitely get you a 12 FOR SURE. </p>
<p>Because I cannot think out-of-the-box like you can, how should I appraoch the essay. Given the 25min, I apathetically chose one side, come up with basic examples, and vuala an essay that's 3-4ish. How should I approach the topic, and is there even a formula to think "out-of-the-box?" Thanks Cuong for your help.</p>
<p>OK, I shall try to delineate what is good in a sharp essay:
1/ Always read the prompt with sceptism, don't conclude anything yet (1 minute)
2/ Try to logically approach by first supporting the prompt, and then to see, with all your abilities whether this support sounds plausible (1m)
3/ Most of the time the best answer is the middle-ground. So don't let your essay being skewed too much upon one side or the other. If you totally support one side, it should be much better to spend more spaces to recognises what the other sides might argue, and then counter-attack it by your own reason
4/ Choosing example: Most of us choose 2 examples but only support the only one prompt. I have tried this method but it proves inadequate in many cases. So I formulate for myself the two examples must have strong correlation not only to the prompt, but to one another. In the prompt above, you can see how the quote and the example come to intertwine one another.</p>
<p>5/ Analysis: You should spend most of the time to enhance the raw materials. You have to drill upon the fact rather spend too much time on talking outside the examples you threw to. Just concentrate upon what you create, and things shall be OK</p>
<p>6/ The end of the body MUST gives clues to the CONCLUSION. The fruitful analysis in the BODY ought to prove your conclusion. Don't let things astray. Very dangerous!</p>