Literary Analysis 101
AP Literature
Ms. Stormont
Summary vs. Literary Analysis
• Summary: A condensed version of a piece of
literature; a brief retelling of the story.
– Example: In Kate Chopin’s short story, “The Story
of an Hour,” the main character learns that her
husband died in a train accident. Mrs. Mallard
cries at first, but when she is left alone in her
room, she begins to realize that her husband’s
death will ultimately free her to live her own life.
After she bravely comes back downstairs, she is
surprised when her husband walks through the
door. He had not been anywhere near the
accident. Mrs. Mallard then drops dead of a heart
attack.
Summary vs. Literary Analysis
• Literary Analysis: An argument based on a text.
– Provides an explanation of how or why a work of
literature does something.
– Focuses on one or more elements/techniques in
order to look for a deeper meaning and uses
passages from the text to support it.
• EXAMPLE:
Literary technique
– Kate Chopin uses the element of irony in her short
story, “The Story of an Hour,” in order to
emphasize her feminist position that women
experience greater freedom outside the bonds of
marriage.
Meaning (i.e.
theme)
Literary Analysis: Example
• Perhaps the most important characters in adding irony
to “The Story of an Hour” is Richards. Richards is a
friend of Brently Mallard and the one who makes sure
Mrs. Mallard hears the news about Brently’s death
from someone sensitive to her “heart trouble” (28).
After receiving a second telegram that Brently was
dead, Richards “hastened to forestall any less careful,
less tender friend in bearing the sad message” (28).
Richards is also the one who attempts to shield Mrs.
Mallard from seeing her husband when he arrives
home quite alive, but this time he is too late.
Ultimately, Richards’ sense of timing is at the core of
Mrs. Mallard’s heart failure. If he had waited to bring
the news of her husband’s supposed death, she would
not have realized that without him she would be free,
and she would not have “died of heart disease – of a
joy that kills” (29).
Debatable
claim
Gives
examples
(i.e. text
evidence)
of how
Richards
adds irony
Commentary
tying the
examples
(text
evidence)
back to the
claim
So… How do I come up with an analytical claim?
• You can do this inductively or deductively.
Inductive
What it means: You gather lots of text evidence and literary
techniques and come to a conclusion about what the author is
trying to say.
For example: I noticed that Chopin uses lots of diction and
imagery related to imprisonment. This leads me to believe that
Louise feels trapped – like many women at the time – in an
unfulfilling marriage. Thus, I think that through her diction and
imagery of imprisonment, Chopin comments that marriage –
though joyful for some – can hinder an individual’s sense of
personal agency in the world.
What a beautiful claim! Notice how the writer ties literary technique to meaning (theme).
So… How do I come up with an analytical claim?
• You can do this inductively or deductively.
Deductive
What it means: You come to a conclusion or general idea, and
then search for text evidence to support your conclusion.
For example: I think Chopin is saying that internal
transformations – no matter how extreme – can happen quicker
than one might expect. The title suggests the story unfolds
within the span of an hour, yet Louise goes from being shocked
and weeping “with sudden, wild abandonment” about her
husband’s death to finding a certain “joy” and “possession of
self-assertion” that she had not previously had.
Nice theme statement 
How do I write this thing?
• The three basic parts: claim, evidence, warrant. (AKA
claim, support, explanation.)
– Start with your claim: what is the major point you are
trying to prove?
• If you’re writing an essay, your main claim will be your thesis; subclaims will be topic sentences.
• If you’re writing a paragraph or an explication, your main claim will
probably be your first sentence.
– Introduce pieces of evidence/support.
• In the form of: summary, paraphrase, quotation.
• Skilled writers will use all three.
– Explain how the evidence proves your claim.
• This is, perhaps, the most forgotten or misunderstood part. You
cannot let evidence “speak for itself.” You must show your thinking
on the page of how the evidence ties back to your claim. Without
this, your “analysis” becomes just a laundry list of pieces of
evidence.
Integrating evidence into your analysis
• Summary
– retelling the events of a story
• Paraphrase
– putting the author’s words into your own
(rephrasing)
• Quotation
– using the author’s exact words in your own text
Example
In “The Story of an Hour,” Kate Chopin uses funereal
diction to suggest that, for 19th century women
trapped in unfulfilling marriages, death was a form of
freedom. Richards, Brently Mallard’s friend, comes to
Louise “bearing the sad message” of her husband’s
death. This weighty word – “bearing” – connotes a
sense of burden, almost as if Richards is the
metaphorical pallbearer for his friend. Then, as
Louise reflects on the shocking news in her room, she
imagines the “long procession” of years ahead of her.
“Procession” heightens the emotional and
psychological load of her husband’s death, implying
the slow, dirge-like passing of future time. Ultimately,
though, it is Louise’s death (not her husband’s,
ironically) that grants her the freedom that she
hungers for.
Debatable claim
Evidence
integrated in
the form of a
summary with
a quotation
Explanation
connecting the
evidence to the
claim
Another Example
Kate Chopin uses the element of irony in her short story, “The
Story of an Hour,” in order to emphasize her feminist position
that women experience greater freedom outside the bonds of
marriage. In a short sixty minutes, Louise Mallard goes from
weeping with “sudden, wild abandonment” to self-realization:
that she, now that her husband is dead, has “possession of selfassertion.” This profound yet startlingly swift internal
transformation remains unknown to the other characters in the
story, including her sister and her husband’s friend, Richards. As
Louise walks downstairs with this newfound sense of personal
agency, she sees that, in fact, her husband has not died, and falls
over dead. To her husband, sister, and Richards, Louise
apparently died from “the joy that kills” – the overwhelming
happiness of having her husband return home alive and well.
The reader, instead, finds this line remarkably ironic; Louise has
not died from joy, but rather from grief. By carefully building
tension and unfolding the personal transformation of Louise, the
last line of the story provides a biting commentary on the
constricting, burdensome nature of patriarchal societies – that
even the thought of continuing on in a tepid marriage can be
cause for death.
Debatable claim
Integrating
evidence
through
quotations and
analytical
summary to
build the
argument
Explanation of
how the irony
contributes to
the claim