After reading and analyzing “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow” by Kurt Vonnegut,
Brainstorm what you believe is the central argument or conflict/problem of the fictional short story. Make sure to explain the HOW/WHY/WHAT of your argument that should present an interpretation that argues how the story should be understood.
After you have brainstormed, read the following essays:
1) https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/humans-could-live-up-to-150-years-new-research-suggests/
2) https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/10/what-happens-when-we-all-live-to-100/379338/
3) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2652797/
After you’ve deduced what you think the central argument/conflict/problem is and read these articles, devise an interpretive literary argumentative thesis about Vonnegut’s story that takes into account some or all of these research/critical thinking questions:
What idea/s is/are the story satirizing? How? Why? What is the overall message of the story? Tone? Purpose? How do these nonfiction articles shed light on some of the complexities of the issues addressed in the fiction? What is the irony the exists around the plot of the story concerning utopian and dystopian literature? What do you want to prove about the story?
Cite all the articles and put them in your Works Cited and then choose quotes from the pieces to help support claims made about the short story and as examples/proof. As you read, write, and think about your approach, formulate a unique thesis that interprets the story.
Consider Multiple Angles
Think about, and possibly shape your paper around, the following aspects:
– What issues does the story satirize?
– In doing so, what does it reveal about these societal problems?
– How does understanding these societal issues provide an added depth of understanding to the text?
– How does the story compare/contrast to the societal issue?
– What argument could be inferred from Vonnegut’s story? Is this legitimate? Not legitimate? Or both to certain extents?
– What is the story saying about human nature?
In other words, HOW does your perspective alter the understanding of the story? WHY is this important? HOW can you prove this? WHAT support is there? WHAT problems are left unsolved? WHAT does the story prove or not take into consideration?
Dig deeply and think intellectually about the story and its implications—how have these supplemental articles altered your understanding of the story and how has your understanding of the story altered your view of the current societal issue in the supplemental articles?
