Will My Pattern Work for This Paper?

Will my pattern work for this paper?

 Larson draws parallels between Burnham and Holmes. {True, but way too broad! If you are going to do something along these lines, you need to pick out a really specific parallel, and then find a purpose to explain why Larson would be making such a comparison.}  Larson points out contrasts between the White City and the Black City {True again, but still way too broad! If you are going to do something along these lines, you need to pick out a really specific contrast, and then find a purpose to explain why Larson would be emphasizing such a contrast.}  Larson uses the color blue to symbolize ______. {Under no circumstances is this sort of pattern acceptable. This example is a literary analysis pattern. Nothing symbolizes anything in The Devil in the White City! It is nonfiction.}  Larson emphasizes that things (or people) are not what they seem. {No. This is another example of a literary analysis approach. Don’t look for a moral or a message about how to live your life. Once again, you are reading nonfiction.}  Larson uses metaphors to paint a picture in the reader’s mind. {You cannot deal with this many examples, and the purpose is useless. If you want to talk about metaphors, you must pick a very narrow subset with a particular purpose. For example, “Larson uses metaphors involving smoke when trying to emphasize the fleetingness of Holmes’s euphoria” or something like that.}  Larson uses long descriptive sentences followed by short ones for emphasis. {True, but will net you too many examples. Try to narrow it down. Find a subpattern. When does he do this? For what purpose? To emphasize what?}  Larson uses cliffhangers at the ends of chapters to create suspense. {True again, but will also net you too many examples. Try to narrow it down. Find a subpattern. And “to create suspense” is not an end goal unto itself. Why does Larson create suspense?}  People are too naïve and don’t suspect Holmes when it is obvious he is doing something shady. {This will not work. You must focus on Larson’s language—not what actually happened.}  Holmes is able to seduce women by seeming sweet and sympathetic. {Again, this will not work because it is not focused on Larson’s use of language or structure. Unless you are saying something specific about HOW Larson is presenting or describing these seductions, you are going down the wrong track.}  Larson uses a lot of diction related to magic when describing the fair. {True, but there is too much diction like this to cover in so short a paper. Narrow it down to a subpattern, and then connect it to a purpose. What is the point of using diction that has to do with magic?}