In regard to our study of Mota’s article and the film, Loving Vincent, please respond to the following prompts in their entirety. I am not asking you to conduct any research. I want you to simply respond to the best of your ability to the prompts found below using what you’ve learned from the author’s work and the film as applicable. Your response should be thorough in that you should provide specific and relevant examples to support your claims. Use the labels provided to identify each of your responses. (1, 2, 3 etc.) You should always try to limit direct quotes because quotes do not demonstrate understanding. Try to paraphrase and cite the page number from the article. You should only quote those statements that you are unable to effectively paraphrase. When you use quotes, you should always explain them. They are not self explanatory. If you do not cite the source that I provided, you will lose points. Do not use Google. Read the article. The information you need to construct your responses is found in article and lecture videos provided. Cite properly and according to MLA. You earn points for each prompt you respond to and so you should respond to as many as you can. Do the best that you can. I will see your effort.
1. Concept: Mota’s says there are two different reasons people use to explain why van Gogh’s was a successful
painter. Define the two reasons/two of the debate . Cite the article.
2. Claim: Which side of the debate do the filmmakers fall on? Which reason do you think that they try to represent
in the film? Cite the article.
3. Evidence: How can you know what you know: Name and describe one scene from the film that best supports
this position. Describe the film scene using film terms. Be specific. Cite the film.
4. Logic: Specifically explain how your conclusions about the film scene support your claim.
5. Citations: Works Cited Entries are actually necessary. Please get in the habit of including them.
6. Optional: Why is it important how we interpret mental health struggles?