18 01 2014 textfield Datum 8 V Brně dne textfield jmeno_studenta Martina Chramosilová textfield Author 4 nazev_prace Beyond the Suicidal Despair: An Analysis of Sarah Kane's 4.48 Psychosis textfield Thesis Title 1 oponent Mgr. Alexandra Stachurová textfield Reviewer 6 pracoviste Department of English and American Studies textfield Department 3 studium 534798 textfield Field of Study 2 vedouci Mgr. Tomáš Kačer, Ph.D. textfield Supervisor 5 central_idea A textfield 1. Evaluation of central idea, thesis, focus and purpose 3 language C textfield 4. Evaluation of language, style, standard usage, citation and bibliographic standards 6 navrhovane_hodnoceni A textfield Reviewer’s recommendation for overall mark 1 organization A textfield 2. Evaluation of organization, logic and arrangement 4 topic_devel A textfield 3. Evaluation of topic development, support and evidence 5 tralala textfield 2 oponentka textfield Hodnotil kat_an_am_ved_bc Faculty of Arts, Bachelor’s Thesis comments <p>Martina Chramosilová's Bachelor's thesis analyses <em>4.48 Psychosis</em> by Sarah Kane. At the beginning, the author states the play is usually analysed only in connection with Kane's suicide. She therefore sets herself the task of analysing the play from other points of view to prove <em>4.48 Psychosis</em> is more than a piece of suicide art. Chramosilová fulfils the task outstandingly. She demonstrates her proficiency in combining criticism and a variety of sources. The thesis is immaculately organised and its clearly outlined chapters follow a thematic throughline. The analysis itself is deep and precise and presents Chramosilová as an indipendent researcher. Nevertheless, there are some problematic points which need to be addressed.</p> <p>1) Grammar: The thesis contains some grammatical mistakes. A big problem is Chramosilová's use of articles. In many cases, an article is either missing or an incorrect one is chosen.</p> <p>2) Punctuation: Chramosilová uses an incorrect symbol of a dash which is not in accordance with the MLA style.</p> <p>3) Inconsistency: The formal features of the thesis are highly inconsistent. Chramosilová uses spelling with both "s" and "z". Different symbols of quotation marks and apostrophes are used.</p> <p>4) Citations: There is a serious problem with the citations in the thesis. Too often, Chramosilová cites incorrectly (mainly in case of providing a year instead of a page). Indirect sources as well as works by the same authors are never cited correctly.</p> <p>Despite these imperfections, the thesis does Martina Chramosilová credit. I suggest an overall A for the thesis.</p> textarea Comments and/or topics and questions for the thesis defence 7 diskuse textarea 8 B