Your assignment in Essay 3 is similar to the previous two: you are analyzing tex

Your assignment in Essay 3 is similar to the previous two: you are analyzing texts to see what criticisms they are making about U.S. and/ or global culture, what they tell us about how we are living in this historical moment. The difference with this essay is that you are tackling two texts: one being, Bong Joon-Ho’s Parasite , and one text that you’ve encountered outside of class. The second text can be another film, an episode of a television show, a novel, a music video, or whatever. You get to choose the text, but it should be a “work of art,” broadly defined: a creative work (such as the examples just mentioned) rather than a journalistic or critical work.
The trick here is that you are looking for a second text that has resonance with Parasite: do the two texts offer related socio-political critiques or share pertinent themes?
Do these two texts share a similar or contrasting theme? As we’ve seen in class, sometimes comparing one text to another can actually allow us to see, and to analyze, the texts more clearly. This is, of course, another textual analysis paper, so all the established rules apply (using close textual analysis of specific scenes/ lines, quoting and describing specific visuals judiciously, etc). Again, you are looking not to describe or summarize (simply saying what you see as similar is not an argument), but to make an argument here about meaning (an Arguable Assertion you find across the texts). The only difference here this time is that it should be a meaning that incorporates two texts.
You are invited—but not required—to reference Du Bois, Hooks, McDougall Jones, Chomsky, or Alexander in the essay, but your argument (as reflected in thesis and topic sentences) should remain firmly structured around what your two chosen films are saying.
Remember, even though this is about two texts, this is another argument about meaning: what the connections between these two texts say about U.S. and/or Global culture. Avoid general commentary and blanket generalities, and overall, be as specific as possible with your argument.