<p>Is it just me, or did you spell Fahrenheit 451's author's name, "Rod Burbery"?</p>
<p>LOL! Sorry, but if you did, you deserve an eight. It's Ray Bradbury, one of the most esteemed "contemporary" authors; I've yet to read that particular book, and I knew that.</p>
<p>I'm afraid my baser instincts have gripped me, for here comes a detailed, line by line analysis.</p>
<p>"Rules are not permanent."
-This does not seem to be what you are actually arguing. Mind, I don't know the prompt, but it is incongruous with the rest of the essay, which is about the ability to bend or break rules under certain circumstances. What this says is that rules don't last forever, as permanence speaks specifically of enduring over time. It's a nuance of the word, but it changes the meaning of the sentence more than enough to raise alarm bells.</p>
<p>"Different situations can call for different actions at certain places and times."
-Wishy-washy with the "can" where you needn't have been.
-"Different...different...certain." Bad word choice, and redundant.</p>
<p>"Though rules contain a society, the society or individual should not strictly follow them."
-"Though rules contain a society..." What in the world was this supposed to mean? Societies are "contained" in rules?
-"...the society or individual should..." Doesn't that sound awkward? Also, that brought in the individual where it was uncalled for; that should have been addressed in a separate sentence.</p>
<p>"...must be broken is seen..."
-Passive voice.</p>
<p>"...flexible to all situations."
-Again, read this aloud, and tell me that it is not awkward. I assume you meant something along the lines of, "flexible in order to accomodate for all situations."</p>
<p>"Theme of...is told..."
-Passive voice.</p>
<p>"...supposedly only cause harm..."
-"Only" is superfluous.</p>
<p>"...change must be taken place..."
-Since I'm not about to go into terminology behind grammar rules, see if these sound better: "change must take place," "changes must be undertaken," "change is necessary."</p>
<p>"...bringing back outlawed books...and he helped bring books back to the city."
-Redundant.</p>
<p>"Rules must be broken if they are to bring benefit to humans."
-So, you're saying that breaking the rules is how we benefit from having them? Generalization gone wrong. Also, to wrap up a topic paragraph, keep it related to the topic, and make the sweeping generalizations, if need be, in the conclusion.</p>
<p>"In William Shakespeare's renown play, rules are disobeyed in order to succeed."
-"Renown" is a noun. "Renowned" is the adjective.
-Passive voice.
-"To succeed"? At what? As it is, it, grammatically speaking, most likely modifies "play". So, he broke rules in his play to make his play successful? Perhaps that is what you meant, but it sounds odd and ambiguous.</p>
<p>"...his uncle who assumed the throne after killing his father."
-Missing comma between "uncle" and "assumed", the latter of which is a dependent clause.
-"His" refers back to the closest noun/pronoun. Grammatically speaking, you've said that Hamlet's uncle killed his own father to ascend to the throne.</p>
<p>"Though the norms of society did not allow for the murder of the king...avenging his father's death and until then would not rest."
-Do they ever? I assume you meant for investigations concerning the king's affairs.
-The latter half is awkwardly phrased.</p>
<p>"...but Hamlet succeeded in what he desired most."
-A verb is needed between "in" and "what", since otherwise, "what he desired most" becomes a prepositional phrase. This sentence means that Hamlet succeeded in his desires, not in attaining them.</p>
<p>"Whether as...rules were broken..."
-You never stated by whom. The sentence assigns the personas to the reader, but they don't function as the subject.
-Passive voice.</p>
<p>General thoughts:
The word choice was far from impressive. Using a number of words multiple times in one sentence is very detrimental to quality. Passive voice abounded in the essay - something that they are cracking down on. The examples weren't discussed in enough depth, and I sincerely hope that "Rod Burbery" was the result of scanner trouble, for otherwise it would be quite a travesty. Hamlet, the way it was expounded on (or lack of expounding on), made for a poor example - how many would define a massacre of a family and the death of the very character being used to illustrate breaking rules for the better as a positive outcome? Hamlet was a tragic story, in both senses of the word, and to pull off using it in this way, one has to delve deeply into interpretation, which I didn't feel you did. The conclusion had no impact; at the level of writing that a 12 entails, the conclusion should not simply restate the thesis - why write it twice? Instead, it should expand upon it by summarizing why each example, each piece of the puzzle, fits where it does.</p>
<p>BUT! I am merely a lowly high school student myself, so take it as you will!</p>
<p>Did this mostly to hone my own skills. I hope I did not offend.</p>
