1 Pager Guidelines
Simply put, a one pager is a one page critique of a literary work. For the 2nd quarter of your 10th
grade year, you will attempt to critique several short stories in the one pager format. The critique of
a literary work should be precise and focus on a single aspect of the story. NO PART OF A ONE
PAGER IS SUMMARY!!!
The single aspect the one pager will focus on will be determined by the criticism model you choose
to follow. Some examples (from “To Build a Fire”)are as follows:
Model
Aspect written about
Feminist criticism:
Formalist:
Psychoanalytical:
Genre:
Biographical:
The meaning behind the total absence of women characters in the story.
The slow, repetitive nature of London’s wording – how the story could be
1 page!
How ‘snow man’ was a disturbed loner, so possibly London was too.
How this story is a boring drama compared to _______ and the literary
stages it
Lacks or elements needed to increase its story value.
How parts of London’s life and times contributed to the tone, theme, or
overall story.
FORMAT:
1 Page, single spaced (loss of points for more than one page or less than 3/4)
Times New Roman / 1” margins
Red – yellow – green with thesis statement and good topic sentences that are fully
supported
Use of quotes, summaries, or paraphrasing from the story to support your opinion
Valid, original ideas beneath the tip of the iceberg!
Notice in the example one pager that follows how it is singularly focused on the idea that London
must have believed in the old saying “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” This is an example of
biographical criticism, with a little historical criticism used to support the idea. The paper uses
quotes in paragraphs 2,3, and 4. The paper uses the quotes to show that the man was conceited,
ignorant, and London obviously was trying to get a ‘moral-to-the-story’ across, which is “when in
Rome…” While it mentions several parts of the story, it is in no way a summary or book report of
what happened.
MODEL:
Jeff Carver
English 10
14 November, 2007
When in Rome…
“To Build a Fire” is a classic Man vs. Nature tale. However, the major conflict in this story
is really Man vs. Self, because the major theme in it is to listen to advice from experienced people.
Jack London was well traveled in his life and, as his story suggests, probably believed in the old
adage “When in Rome, do as the Romans.” While this saying usually implies following customs of
the locals to “fit in,” London takes it to a new extreme and shows that sometimes “doing as the
Romans” can mean surviving. This understanding prompted him to write “To Build a Fire” when,
in 1897, the Alaskan gold rush seduced over 140,000 people to flock to Alaska in search of fortune
and only 40,000 actually lived to tell about it.
In the story, a man who was new to the area travels alone in abhorrent conditions through
the Alaskan Klondike against earlier advice. “He was a newcomer in the land, a chechaquo, and
this was his first winter” (London 2). The story emphasizes this fact to show that the man should
take caution regarding things he knows nothing about. London shows, through the man’s own
thoughts, that it wasn’t that the man was ignorant about the conditions. In fact, he had received
advice on traveling in the Klondike. “He remembered the advice of the old-timer on Sulphur Creek.
The old-timer had been very serious in laying down the law that no man must travel alone in the
Klondike after fifty below” (London 16). The problem for the man wasn’t that he didn’t know
about what a person should or shouldn’t do in these conditions, it was that he was so pretentious he
didn’t listen.
Actually, the man didn’t heed the advice from the old timer because he thought that the
advice meant for the light of heart. “Those old timers were rather womanish, some of them, he
thought” (London 16). He felt that the old-timers were being overly cautious and that anyone could
survive in these conditions if they were smart about it. “All a man had to do was to keep his head,
and he was all right. Any man who was a man could travel alone” (London 17). Obviously, this
man felt that he was a “real man.” His matter-of-fact attitude, while calculating and sharp, left no
room for the imagination necessary to fear the danger he was in the entire time. Respecting the
power of nature was only a matter of cold, hard facts to him.
The man’s preoccupation with his own self worth is very short-lived. Very shortly after he
scoffs at the old-timer’s advice, he realizes his danger because his fire is extinguished. “Perhaps the
old-timer on Sulphur creek was right. If he had only had a trail mate he would have been in no
danger now” (London 18). While the man is upset about the situation, he still doesn’t realize his
true danger. He believes this accident might result in a touch of frostbite or losing a finger or two.
It isn’t until much later that he realizes that he could die in the Klondike. Not until he realizes his
imminent death does the man finally understand the advice from the old-timer. ““You were right,
old hoss; you were right,” the man mumbled to the old-timer of Sulphur creek” (London 30).
Although he realized that the advice of the old-timer was right, it was too late for the man.
The progression of the man’s realization about the old-timer’s advice is a significant section
of the text. The man receives advice, doesn’t follow it, scoffs at it, respects it, and finally realizes
that the old-timer’s advice was about survival, not just getting hurt. The fact that the man doesn’t
listen to the old-timer reveals a lot about his character. The man is self-absorbed and believes that
he is smarter than others, even though this is his first winter in the Klondike. In other words, he
didn’t feel like “doing as the Romans” was anything he had to bother with.