Cody, 

  Your essay on "the curious incident" is not all that polished (see specific 
  comments below) and it might have been better to focus more on the book and 
  cut back on the "digressions."  But you have a lot of interesting ideas and
  I want to encourage you again to keep developing your writing in your own
  voice.  
  
  Christopher's behaviors can seem mysterious at times, but I think we agree 
  it's still possible to try to understand them and to realize that he 
  and all people in his situation have more similarities than differences 
  with the rest of us.  I'm glad you think you have experienced a new form 
  of human interaction even if you did not ultimately feel you understood 
  him completely.  We had the idea that crossing a "border of empathy" was 
  one of the things we hoped everyone in CHQ would experience by reading this 
  book.  
   
  Your idea that "sharing stories" is not enough to allow people to understand
  others is probably true in part.  For instance, the point you make that Siobhan
  is effective with Christopher and the other kids in his school because she
  has direct experience of their individual "quirks," not just abstract knowledge
  about their conditions, is a good one.  I'm not sure the situation is quite as 
  black and white as you make it, though.  The stories we tell about ourselves
  sometimes reflect who we really are and I would say other people can learn by
  hearing them.  For instance, the digression you put into your paper on page 2 
  (about your mom's past and the way that has influenced you) has to mean something 
  important to you.  While that doesn't let a reader understand you completely,
  it does communicate something.  

  Your argument that we should not use the words "psychologically normal" to 
  describe people because we are all different is a strong one.  I do think 
  there are times, though, when identifying a range of "normal" *behaviors* can
  be useful in identifying a mental illness.    

  I can sort of see where you are coming from when you say that you 
  think Christopher's father behaved appropriately in telling Christopher 
  that his mother had died and in hiding the letters.  However, and maybe
  this was what you were thinking, if he had known Christopher better
  (how Christopher defines what love is, for instance), he would realize that his
  actions were going to push Christopher away.  He seems to handle a lot of
  situations with Christopher better than the mother does, but he still 
  gets that disastrously wrong.  

  Specific comments:  

  (1) page 1: " ... broadened my perspectives with the chance to fully delve 
      deeper ... "  I don't think you need the "chance" or "fully" there.  
      " ... broadened my perspective by delving deeper ... 

  (2) a bit further into your first paragraph:  "Haddon’s attempt at this, 
      though very well done, ... " seems to call for something like "However"
      at the start because you're saying that even though Haddon's presentation
      was good it was not really enough for you to feel as though you had
      understood Christopher

  (3) "Fellow author, Jay McInerney’s review ... " You don't need to emphasize
      that McInerney is another author -- that sort of comes with the territory
      if he is writing reviews of books.  Also, the comma after "Fellow author"
      is not correct.  You could just say "Jay McInerney's opinion that "the
      gulf ... mysterious" sits better with me because ... "

  (4) page 2:  "bias opinion" should be "biased opinion"

  (5) page 2:  You don't want the comma after "communist"  

  (6) I'm not quite sure what you meant by: "This slight digression has
      the same effect when it comes to understanding people through their past."
      It seems that you are saying your mom's past does explain how she developed
      her political views.  But the overall point was that sharing stories was
      not enough.  

  (7) Your last paragraph is very good, but some of the paragraphs before
      that seem to be almost "stream of consciousness" -- you're saying 
      interesting things, but the overall structure and the connections are 
      not always clear.

  Content: 95 (A)

  Mechanics: 88 (B+)