andave's place

That's it? Two paragraphs of a few sentences each? I would think you need a middle section here. As far as I can see you wrote an openning introduction and a conclusion. As was once said in a political campaign, "where's the beef?"

Good point. What would you suggest for a middle section? Literary examples? The point I wanted to make was that no one can judge the importance of other people's contributions unless one knows both sides and some context. Though as I'm typing I'm remembering my thoughts on Wilde (I blogged on him) and how I thought he was an eerie, beautiful writer that I probably wouldn't read again. Now though as I read Countess' blog my ideas are changing. I didn't know his context. On another note, I gotta tell you that my dad ALWAYS asks "where's the beef?" when my mom cooks a vegetarian meal. And BTW, I recently finished Hemingway's short stories and thought of you. Enjoyed him, though I didn't expect that . Thank you so much for commenting!!

Andave, I think what you have is well-written. My suggestion is to remember the magical 5 point essay--- 1 paragraph: thesis, 2-4 paragraph: topic sentences, 5th paragraph: conclusion. One way you can expand upon it is to break down the one question into two and answer each. Do we put too much emphasis on the ideas of people? Do we put too much emphasis on the actions of people? Next, you want to think not in terms of individual people (not yet anyhow) but rather, branches: mathmatics, music, literature, art, philosophy - the key is to chose areas with which you are very familiar. Third, you want to frame your thesis where you have some mobility. What you are basically saying is importance is a subjective experience entirely up to the observer. From there, break it down into those catagories or branches: philosophy has traditionally played an important role in the works or writers but physicists rarely refer to it while working out their formulas. Talk about Stephen Hawkings or something......................You have all the right ideas, but you haven't left yourself any moving room. Ensure your thesis leaves you mobility and you can support it with just about anything.
Sorry so long-winded. HOpe that helps...

PS: Ideas and actions are quite different. With actions you could include the branch of history, then discuss George Washington, Napoleon, Hitler in general ways.

As usual Virgil nailed it. Too short. I did not see you give an answer to the question asked. If I understand it correctly you were to say yay/nay to the supposition one person good/bad vs many persons good/bad. I found your answer evading taking a position by contrasting the straw man (the opposer) view of what they think is important. I also felt the question has too large a boundary to explore so I figured you were attempting to rein it in a bit. My personal bias is purely Biblical in nature God takes a person and does mighty works thru them, Moses, David, Paul, Elijah, etc. Hope this helps and this is about as harsh as I can bring myself to be. I too hope this helps. For the record I strongly disagree with the quote in and of itself. Yes you fill a job slot with just about anyone but you cannot replace the specialness of that individual doing the work. Imagine Merry carrying the ring instead of Frodo if I may.

Thank you very very much, Countess and Rich, you've no idea how much that helped!! I'll be doing another one, a different one, either today or Monday; I'll post it as well, keeping in mind what you said. Thank you, again, I really appreciate it!

Sorry I never got back to you. I think both Countess and Rich answered it. This sentence from Countess is the key:

One way you can expand upon it is to break down the one question into two and answer each.