Harpagon is one of the most recognizable comic figures in French literature, and students usually find him easy to write about at first. His fear of burglars, his suspicion of his own servants, and his refusal to spend money on food or candles give them plenty of vivid material. The challenge for the grader is distinguishing essays that merely catalog these behaviors from essays that say something about what they mean. That distinction is where most of the scoring decisions in a Harpagon essay are made.

Before you grade, write down what a strong response would argue so you have a reference point. A strong essay might claim that Harpagon's greed is less about wealth than about control, since he treats his children as assets to be traded in marriages. Another might argue that he is funny precisely because his obsession makes him blind to obvious facts, including that his son is the borrower he has been dealing with. You do not need a single correct answer, but you should know what good reasoning sounds like.

Pay attention to how students handle the comic nature of the character. Molière wrote Tvrdica as a comedy, so an essay that treats Harpagon as a realistic psychological portrait without acknowledging the exaggeration is missing part of the picture. The best papers recognize that the humor and the criticism work together. Reward students who explain how an absurd moment still carries a serious point about greed and family.

Scoring Evidence and Interpretation

Evidence in a Harpagon essay should be specific enough that a reader who has not seen the play could picture the moment. Students who write that Harpagon is stingy and move on have not provided evidence, while those who describe his instruction to keep the lamps dim or his obsession with the casket have. Check that each quotation or reference is followed by at least one sentence of interpretation. A pattern of quotes with no commentary is a reliable sign that the writer is padding.

• Does the thesis say something beyond "Harpagon is greedy"
• Are at least two different scenes used as evidence
• Does the essay connect Harpagon's behavior to his effect on Cléante and Élise
• Is the comic tone acknowledged rather than ignored
• Does the conclusion add an idea instead of repeating the introduction

Pitfalls to Watch For

Some students confuse Harpagon with the stereotype of a miser and import ideas that the play does not support. They may describe him as evil or cruel in ways that overlook how Molière makes him ridiculous. When this happens, the issue is not a lack of effort but an inaccurate reading, and your feedback should send them back to specific scenes. A short note asking them to reread the casket speech can reset the entire argument.

Another pitfall is the overreliance on a single scene. Many students build their entire essay around the famous scene in which Harpagon discovers the theft, since it is dramatic and easy to quote. That scene is worth discussing, but an essay that never mentions how he treats his children or the suitors is incomplete. A rubric line requiring evidence from more than one act pushes writers to look across the play.

Giving Feedback That Improves the Next Essay

The most useful feedback on these essays identifies one habit to change rather than listing every flaw. If a student consistently describes without interpreting, say so and show them how to turn one sentence into an interpretive one. If their claims are strong but their evidence is thin, point them to scenes they skipped. Limiting yourself to one or two priorities keeps comments readable and actionable.

When you have a full class set, AI-assisted grading can help you apply the same expectations to every paper and flag patterns across the class. You might discover that most students ignore Act IV entirely or never mention the servants. That information shapes what you teach next, which is often more valuable than any individual score. It turns a stack of essays into a picture of where the whole class stands.