<p>I was taught form an early age that cant never could. Often it was the case that my parents presented me with a task that I physically could not perform, but I was made to keep at it. They taught me to never acquiesce and to work hard at whatever I did. In determining success, it is this persistence, rather than ones abilities that has the final say. This has been proven time and time again by myriad examples from history and literature.<br>
Consider the case of the renown ancient Greek orator Demosthenes. In around 450 B.C. he had a speech impediment made him stutter when he spoke. No one believed he could ever be a great speaker, but they didnt take into account how persistent Demosthenes could be. He would walk up and down the beach every day, speaking over the crashing waves with pebbles in his mouth. He did not give up until he was able to communicate clearly, pebbles and all. His persistence bought him a place in history.
His success story is much like that of child polio victim Wilma Rudolph. She was supposed to need leg braces to walk for the rest of her life. She did not let this little disability get in the way of eventually running in the 1968 Olympics. He stubborn will got her places her natural ability never could.
When I was younger, I heard a story about a Jewish man who could not get a job at his local synagogue because he could not read and write. however; he did not let this faze him. He sold needles and thread until he had enough money to sell scissors as well, then worked his way up to having a push-cart and then a store. Finally, he kept buying, selling, and investing until he became one of the wealthiest men in the world. All this, because he could not get a job that requires literacy. He did not let his ability get in the way of his success.
In the end, it pays to be obdurate, to have that stubborn will to succeed. Success is not determined by ones abilities, but rather his or her intransigent refusal to say I cant. The truly successful are often the persistent, not those with natural ability. As the saying goes, hard work beats talent when talent does not work hard.</p>
<p>We need the prompt to properly score it, but this wasn’t bad. It doesn’t provide enough of a viewpoint or indication of complex understanding nor is the syntax interesting enough to merit a 12, but vocabulary is good and the use of examples/classic organization is obvious. 8-9.</p>
<p>I echo SeniorGinge on the need for a prompt to frame the essay as on/off point. </p>
<p>I have several objections to an otherwise comprehensible thesis. </p>
<ol>
<li>The thesis is hard work trumps talent. </li>
<li>The thesis is rephrased or restated almost throughout the entirety of the passage. </li>
<li>The thesis statement is not contrasted with a viable alternative; therefore, it is devoid of synthesis. </li>
<li>The thesis statement is an acknowledged aphorism. </li>
<li>The examples provided in support of the thesis do not adequately distract from its speciousness, on merit. </li>
</ol>
<p>Those are the first thoughts that jump to mind after I’m done reading. </p>
<p>Now, if you want feedback on the writing caliber. As SeniorGinge briefly alluded to, the syntax is passive and unimaginative. There’s a lot of filler. The source of authority for the thesis statement derives its credibility from indoctrination. The author’s thesis vacillates and equivocates to the point of irrelevance. I see misspelled words, improper comma use, and other technical issues, but those are problems that CAN be fixed. </p>
<p>The essay misses the point that, hollow boilerplate rhetoric aside, various sorts of limitations do impose absolute restrictions on what people from all walks of life can do. Their attitudes towards the facts on the ground change nothing. </p>
<p>I would clarify “natural ability.” Aptitude is a more fitting word. One might easily mistake the phrase natural ability as being consistent with “…a task I could not physically perform…” in connotation. </p>
<p>But then, “…what everyone else believes…” (to paraphrase another one of your constructions) is a bewildering contradiction in rhetoric. In fact, it exposes the careworn rhetoric masquerading as sincere and honest reflections as mere cheap chicanery. </p>
<p>The strengths are the putative exemplars and the chance vocabulary word sprinkled in.</p>
<p>I would award half the points allowed for its sheer mediocrity.</p>