VCE English Question Thread

[stockstamp]

hi 

I am hoping for some advice on vocab in text response.

In the past, I've found that the most effective way of weaving fancier, less common words into text essays is to read scholarly articles, literary reviews and alike.
But what if there is nothing available? My text is Burial Rites, and as it is so new there is effectively nothing online to read about it, other than just a couple of brief reviews which don't really help much.

I understand that the likely response here is something along the lines of 'thought counts more than vocab', and while I agree that that is unquestionably true, I think you also have to be realistic. The essays approaching the highest end of the mark spectrum always have an impressive collection of phrases and terms fairly cleverly embedded, and to get the high marks that same approach needs to be taken.

I would say that naturally, my use of vocab is strong and expressive; it; it makes sense, but it doesn't have that wow factor unless I have quite a bit of time to 'craft' a piece, as opposed to pumping out 3 in as many hours. I would also like to make the point that I only use words if I am confident with them; I don't build my essays around language in the hope to impress, because I know that doesn't work.

Having said that, the language I use in my text response probably won't get my the marks I'm hoping for at the moment, and I was hoping for some advice on how to work past this.

Is it a good idea to 'craft' some perfect sentences/paragraphs and memorise them, instead of smashing out essays as often as possible?
What sort of stuff should I read to pick up vocab? Literary reviews of other books, extracting relevant ideas where necessary?
If I memorise work, am I at the risk of spending too much time on topics that could be totally different from what happens in the exam (JESUS ITS IN TWO WEEKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)?

sorry for the length of this......
I stress easily

[S33667]

Hey guys I'm kinda stuck- not sure which text response to do for the final exam.

I can do Henry IV, which I'm quite interested in though,but haven't really out much work in it, so will 2odd weeks be alright to study it?

Or the other book we did for unit 3, although I've done a lot of work on it, and don't want to waste it, it just doesn't seem that fun anymore (maybe because it was a long time ago)

Any advice please help?

I made my decision by picking up practice exams and looking at possible prompts for both of my texts - the decision was easy then.   Once decided don't second guess yourself - just start churning out the essays.

[Burt Macklin]

What do you guys think would be the optimal ratio between writing about your text and external examples in an expository essay for Context?

[scottg15]

I have read somewhere on this forum to write on every second line in an essay so that you can have space for editing. Is this for in exams or just for SAC's and practice essays. Like, do the assessors mind???

Also, I have got a problem where in the context section of the exam I always write my piece in 15-20 min. Then I get another idea, which i think 'hey that will be a lot better' and then i write that one for the remaining 30 min. What do you think i should do??? It seems pointless writing two, but I never seem to be able to get the other idea unless i write the first one.

[pi]

I have read somewhere on this forum to write on every second line in an essay so that you can have space for editing. Is this for in exams or just for SAC's and practice essays. Like, do the assessors mind???

I know people who even double spaced in the exam. It's really whatever feels comfortable to you, assessors probably don't mind. I didn't space my lines whatsoever.

[Splash-Tackle-Flail]

Also, I have got a problem where in the context section of the exam I always write my piece in 15-20 min. Then I get another idea, which i think 'hey that will be a lot better' and then i write that one for the remaining 30 min. What do you think i should do??? It seems pointless writing two, but I never seem to be able to get the other idea unless i write the first one.

Hmm, I think this boils down to not being particularly sure of what you want to say (i.e. just writing the first related idea that springs to mind). The thing is, it takes fair amount of brainstorming to develop more complex, insightful ideas to respond to, perhaps like your second "a lot better" ideas. Although I don't really know what form your writing and what not, I would definitely recommend more extensive planning (for now, maybe start untimed, so you can do it well first), by planning, you should be doing similar cognitive thinking of sorts to what you were doing when you were writing on your first idea, but this way, you the idea expressed on paper will be the better one.

tl;dr do lots of planning! make sure you know what you want to say first!

[cosine]

Someone able to read my Medea essay for me please. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

Thank you

[_fruitcake_]

Someone able to read my Medea essay for me please. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

Thank you

In the captivating play, ‘Medea’, Euripides explores the strife that may exist between husband and wife through actions that are primarily lead by passion and ‘fierce emotions’.  You are judging the play, it deviates from your academic tone that you showed throughout your essay. Good embedded quotes in your intro.
The heart of the play lies within Medea’s attempt at seeking her own form of justice in the male-dominated society of 480 BC Greece. The play charts Medea’s emotional transformation, a progression from suicidal despair to sadistic fury;and her devoted love towards Jason, to her unspeakable destruction of him. Medea, feeling obliged to some form of revenge for being dishonored, embarks on a rally of crime in which she believes is the ‘terrible but necessary’ thing to do; to redeem herself and bring justice and honor to the female sex. Nonetheless, the central characters of the play; the Nurse, Jason and the Chorus immensely condemn Medea’s expenditure (expenditure sounds like she went shopping, which is something a woman would do.. ouch pls dont kill me.. but a different word such as 'actions' or 'exertions' or 'efforts' would satisfy better in this context) and do not believe that it brought injustice to not only Jason, but also the innocent victims of Medea’s witchcraft. 

Some things from the intro. Try to not show a biased view of the text; such as mentioning it was captivating, for me i didn't connect with the novel, which is why i wont be talking about it on the exam. I changed a few of your commas to a semicolon. There is just a few words that dont apply in the context. However you do show a good knowledge of text and you use embedded quotes well

Jason’s abandonment and dishonoring of Medea serves to assist in her desires for justice and revenge. Euripides opens the play with the Nurse foreshadowing, and hence informing the audience, of the recent events that have lead led to the current conflict between Medea and Jason, which proves to encircle the majority of the play’s plot. Medea, ‘utterly destroyed’, has nothing to live for; hence she ‘surrenders her body to her sorrows, pining away in her tears’. Jason’s abandonment has struck Medea so unexpectedly and because she had sacrificed all, ‘her heart unhinged in her love for Jason’, Medea now has nothing, ‘no mother, no brother, no fatherland’, and at the beginning scenes of the play, Medea is at the outset of her vulnerability. Through the Nurse and the Chorus’ continuous downplay of Jason, the audience is encouraged to sympathize with Medea and understand her need for justice, because she is rightfully obliged to ‘exact revenge from Jason’. Ultimately, Medea’s unfortunate circumstances grant her the right to seek justice, for she was ‘wronged unprovoked’. 
Good paragraph just a few things i picked up. Its best to analyze what Medea did for Jason. From what i observe, is why should i sympathize with Medea? True Jason acted like she was his little bitch but what did she do? Maybe its best to mention how she helped Jason, and then got back stabbed. Such as helping him to get the Golden Fleece, and receiving no recognition. This would increase the level of sympathy that Medea receives from the reader. I also like the manipulation of your words, that Medea has nothing..'no brother'. Thats cos she killed him :'), I wouldn't include that she doesn't have a brother, because it sets her up as a murderer, cos there is no justification why she killed him.

Although Medea is entitled to some form of revenge, the audience, Jason, Chorus and the Nurse all condemn Medea’s sense and intentions of justice. Its either sense of justice, or intentions for justice. Intentions of justice doesnt sound the best Medea’s perception of revenge is far off from justice. The targeting of innocent characters (would most likely) evoke a sense of outrage in the audience of the play as well as the Nurse and Chorus, and upon discovering that Medea is planning to murder Glauce, King Creon and her two children stop here. The sympathy that Euripides initially creates for Medea fades into an underlying sense of disgust and shame. The Chorus and the Nurse initially sympathize with Medea and understand the fact that she had been cursed with a ‘sea of woes’ and miseries, and hence acknowledge the normal human nature of revenge. This sentences does not fit with the flow of the paragraph. Something like 'The Chorus and Nurse initially acknowledge Medea's 'seas of woes' and then continue with 'However, when Medea.. However, when Medea reveals her true intentions, the Corinthian women and the Nurse retaliate and censure her ‘lioness’ morality, as the princess, King Creon and the two children had ‘no role in their father’s (Jason) wrongdoing’, and did not deserve to pay the price of Medea’s violent and immoral nature.

Surprisingly, though, Medea seems to be completely satisfied and fulfilled at committing the most ‘unholiest of deeds’. Despite her actions being heavily censured, Medea’s ameliorated witchcraft and manipulation allowed allows her to fulfill the deed, and successfully murders the Princess, Creon and her two children. Medea now acknowledges that what she has done will haunt her for the rest of her life, but she dismisses this at the thought of ‘stinging’ Jason’s heart, as all her ‘sorrows are well repaid if you (Jason) cannot laugh at me’. Fucking good points Medea has officially proved a tragic hero, she herself feels accomplished and justified at her crimes, because her ‘fury against Jason is stronger than her counsels of softness’ and she brought ‘honor to the name of women’, that is, only in her eyes, as she flees the murder scene in a chariot handed down by her grandfather, the Sun-god, leaving Jason to vividly regret his abandonment. This is a deus ex machina. It would be best to include why Euripides allows her to escape. Something like 'Euripides use of Deus ex machina, as Medea escapes unpunished in a chariot drawn by dragons, supports Medea's cause and leaves Jason to vividly regret his abandonment

Good essay u should be fine for the exam. I would give this an 8.5/10

[cosine]

In the captivating play, ‘Medea’, Euripides explores the strife that may exist between husband and wife through actions that are primarily lead by passion and ‘fierce emotions’.  You are judging the play, it deviates from your academic tone that you showed throughout your essay. Good embedded quotes in your intro.
The heart of the play lies within Medea’s attempt at seeking her own form of justice in the male-dominated society of 480 BC Greece. The play charts Medea’s emotional transformation, a progression from suicidal despair to sadistic fury;and her devoted love towards Jason, to her unspeakable destruction of him. Medea, feeling obliged to some form of revenge for being dishonored, embarks on a rally of crime in which she believes is the ‘terrible but necessary’ thing to do; to redeem herself and bring justice and honor to the female sex. Nonetheless, the central characters of the play; the Nurse, Jason and the Chorus immensely condemn Medea’s expenditure (expenditure sounds like she went shopping, which is something a woman would do.. ouch pls dont kill me.. but a different word such as 'actions' or 'exertions' or 'efforts' would satisfy better in this context) and do not believe that it brought injustice to not only Jason, but also the innocent victims of Medea’s witchcraft. 

Some things from the intro. Try to not show a biased view of the text; such as mentioning it was captivating, for me i didn't connect with the novel, which is why i wont be talking about it on the exam. I changed a few of your commas to a semicolon. There is just a few words that dont apply in the context. However you do show a good knowledge of text and you use embedded quotes well

Jason’s abandonment and dishonoring of Medea serves to assist in her desires for justice and revenge. Euripides opens the play with the Nurse foreshadowing, and hence informing the audience, of the recent events that have lead led to the current conflict between Medea and Jason, which proves to encircle the majority of the play’s plot. Medea, ‘utterly destroyed’, has nothing to live for; hence she ‘surrenders her body to her sorrows, pining away in her tears’. Jason’s abandonment has struck Medea so unexpectedly and because she had sacrificed all, ‘her heart unhinged in her love for Jason’, Medea now has nothing, ‘no mother, no brother, no fatherland’, and at the beginning scenes of the play, Medea is at the outset of her vulnerability. Through the Nurse and the Chorus’ continuous downplay of Jason, the audience is encouraged to sympathize with Medea and understand her need for justice, because she is rightfully obliged to ‘exact revenge from Jason’. Ultimately, Medea’s unfortunate circumstances grant her the right to seek justice, for she was ‘wronged unprovoked’. 
Good paragraph just a few things i picked up. Its best to analyze what Medea did for Jason. From what i observe, is why should i sympathize with Medea? True Jason acted like she was his little bitch but what did she do? Maybe its best to mention how she helped Jason, and then got back stabbed. Such as helping him to get the Golden Fleece, and receiving no recognition. This would increase the level of sympathy that Medea receives from the reader. I also like the manipulation of your words, that Medea has nothing..'no brother'. Thats cos she killed him :'), I wouldn't include that she doesn't have a brother, because it sets her up as a murderer, cos there is no justification why she killed him.

Although Medea is entitled to some form of revenge, the audience, Jason, Chorus and the Nurse all condemn Medea’s sense and intentions of justice. Its either sense of justice, or intentions for justice. Intentions of justice doesnt sound the best Medea’s perception of revenge is far off from justice. The targeting of innocent characters (would most likely) evoke a sense of outrage in the audience of the play as well as the Nurse and Chorus, and upon discovering that Medea is planning to murder Glauce, King Creon and her two children stop here. The sympathy that Euripides initially creates for Medea fades into an underlying sense of disgust and shame. The Chorus and the Nurse initially sympathize with Medea and understand the fact that she had been cursed with a ‘sea of woes’ and miseries, and hence acknowledge the normal human nature of revenge. This sentences does not fit with the flow of the paragraph. Something like 'The Chorus and Nurse initially acknowledge Medea's 'seas of woes' and then continue with 'However, when Medea.. However, when Medea reveals her true intentions, the Corinthian women and the Nurse retaliate and censure her ‘lioness’ morality, as the princess, King Creon and the two children had ‘no role in their father’s (Jason) wrongdoing’, and did not deserve to pay the price of Medea’s violent and immoral nature.

Surprisingly, though, Medea seems to be completely satisfied and fulfilled at committing the most ‘unholiest of deeds’. Despite her actions being heavily censured, Medea’s ameliorated witchcraft and manipulation allowed allows her to fulfill the deed, and successfully murders the Princess, Creon and her two children. Medea now acknowledges that what she has done will haunt her for the rest of her life, but she dismisses this at the thought of ‘stinging’ Jason’s heart, as all her ‘sorrows are well repaid if you (Jason) cannot laugh at me’. Fucking good points Medea has officially proved a tragic hero, she herself feels accomplished and justified at her crimes, because her ‘fury against Jason is stronger than her counsels of softness’ and she brought ‘honor to the name of women’, that is, only in her eyes, as she flees the murder scene in a chariot handed down by her grandfather, the Sun-god, leaving Jason to vividly regret his abandonment. This is a deus ex machina. It would be best to include why Euripides allows her to escape. Something like 'Euripides use of Deus ex machina, as Medea escapes unpunished in a chariot drawn by dragons, supports Medea's cause and leaves Jason to vividly regret his abandonment

Good essay u should be fine for the exam. I would give this an 8.5/10

Well wow.. This is good, very good. Thank you for the feedback I really loved how some parts you got enthusiastic about haha xD
About the 'captivating' part in the intro, I always start off the intro in the same way and decided to change things around, so no opinions, right? Obviously examiners will be reading heaps of these intros, and good ways to spice the first sentence a bit?

Thanks heaps fruitcake, really do appreciate your help and will definitely work to utilise your inputs! Which book are you writing about instead?

[thaaanyan]

Someone able to read my Medea essay for me please. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

Thank you

Hey,
I just finished marking this, so I figured I'd put it up! Guess you get double feedback! Hope this helps cosine

Thaaanyan

[_fruitcake_]

Well wow.. This is good, very good. Thank you for the feedback I really loved how some parts you got enthusiastic about haha xD
About the 'captivating' part in the intro, I always start off the intro in the same way and decided to change things around, so no opinions, right? Obviously examiners will be reading heaps of these intros, and good ways to spice the first sentence a bit?

Thanks heaps fruitcake, really do appreciate your help and will definitely work to utilise your inputs! Which book are you writing about instead?

No problem mate. I wanted to do Medea but i am already doing a book on women's rights and feminism in lit, so i wanted a different thing to talk about in English, so im doing This Boy's Life

[cosine]

Hey,
I just finished marking this, so I figured I'd put it up! Guess you get double feedback! Hope this helps cosine

Thaaanyan

Cheers for that, although you destroyed me xD I see that you say I go off topic a lot, I know this is the case, but how do I fix this?

Like for that prompt, there really was not much to talk about, so I had to fill in some spaces otherwise it would be very short. What are your tips to do when the prompt given is not your best friend? Is it a matter of mastering the text more or is it luck, depending on the prompt?

Cheers. Also anyone got some good introduction starters, besides 'In Euripides'...'

Also when we quote on the real essay, do we use " - " or ' - ' ? I am assuming " - " because someone is saying the quote in the play?

What about in LA essays, which one do we use?

Also also in LA essays, if we use the argument per paragraph approach, is it better to incorporate the visuals in the paragraph that supports the argument in the visual or should visuals ALWAYS be a paragraph of their own?

And for conclusions of LA essays, what needs to be stated? Is it necessary to restate the publication of the article etc ?

[Cristiano]

Cheers. Also anyone got some good introduction starters, besides 'In Euripides'...'

Also when we quote on the real essay, do we use " - " or ' - ' ? I am assuming " - " because someone is saying the quote in the play?

What about in LA essays, which one do we use?

Also also in LA essays, if we use the argument per paragraph approach, is it better to incorporate the visuals in the paragraph that supports the argument in the visual or should visuals ALWAYS be a paragraph of their own?

And for conclusions of LA essays, what needs to be stated? Is it necessary to restate the publication of the article etc ?

For the Medea intros - try use something like 'Euripides' Greek tragedy epitomizes.. or Silhoutted against the backdrops of Ancient Greece.. etc"

When you are quoting what somebody has said i believe it is "..." but for the title of the book it would be '..' - also the name of a newspaper or article so . John Abc from 'The Age' or the 'Herald Sun'. Also in LA it's ".." when you are quoting their use of language.

In LA essays, it is best to incorporate the visual inside a body paragraph and not to have it on its own as they are a method of persuasion and is not separate to the contention and does not need to be analysed separately.

In the conclusion you do not need to state where it has been published as we already know that if you have said that in the introduction.
You just need to sum up their overall use of language and how it has been used to validate their contention, while discussing the overall issue (not giving your opinion).

Hope this somewhat helps

[thaaanyan]

Cheers for that, although you destroyed me xD I see that you say I go off topic a lot, I know this is the case, but how do I fix this?

Like for that prompt, there really was not much to talk about, so I had to fill in some spaces otherwise it would be very short. What are your tips to do when the prompt given is not your best friend? Is it a matter of mastering the text more or is it luck, depending on the prompt?

Cheers. Also anyone got some good introduction starters, besides 'In Euripides'...'

Also when we quote on the real essay, do we use " - " or ' - ' ? I am assuming " - " because someone is saying the quote in the play?

What about in LA essays, which one do we use?

Also also in LA essays, if we use the argument per paragraph approach, is it better to incorporate the visuals in the paragraph that supports the argument in the visual or should visuals ALWAYS be a paragraph of their own?

And for conclusions of LA essays, what needs to be stated? Is it necessary to restate the publication of the article etc ?

No problem,
Glad I helped!
There was actually a lot to discuss with this prompt, the trick is reading in between the lines.
For example, if we map out your para 1 real quick:
BODY PARA 1: Medea is justified in believing her actions to be 'just' against Jason because Jason has broken his oath and committed a crime against her.
- you can discuss everything Medea has sacrificed for him
- you can discuss the nature of Medea's pain
- you can discuss that "the thing is common" (Chorus), and is a reflection of the way men use deceit to string women along
- you can talk about the greater social degradation of women and link that to Jason's crimes
- you can discuss the self interested nature of Jason's actions.

BOOM! Massive paragraph haha, as long as you link each of your ideas it's all good. Your main topic sentence is "Jason's crime against Medea" but all these other things connect to the crime of perjury: the consequences felt by Medea both as an exile and as a woman, the nature of Jason's betrayal highlighting his douchebag nature etc.

I believe it's a matter of understanding the text. I have been given some dodgy ass prompts but i know if you study hard enough and argue laterally enough it all works out haha...nah i just spend longer picking it apart at the start

But yeah I think Cristiano's advice pulls together a lot of my thoughts, but generally i have a rule of thumb for intros and that's don't put in any unnecessary bs. 
like if my essay prompt is on women only then will i write in my intro "Composed in a highly dichotomous society where the degradation of women was......." if my essay prompt is on revenge, i will start by talking about revenge. Anybody, and I mean anybody can shove in a pre-written intro with socio-historical context for the prompt. But i'm betting that not a lot of kids can make it relevant.
ultimately it's what makes you feel comfortable at the end of the day, if you feel like having a couple of back up stock phrases are going to make sure you feel confident and you can fluently mold the rest of your essay to the prompt then go for it. it's not a massive thing it won't hurt you, and people have written great essays with pre-written first lines so don't feel like you're obliged to do anything you're not cool with, but generally that's just my stance on 'em.

also for conclusion i was taught differently; to conclude by analysing how the author concludes their piece. i'm guessing there's no set way, just do what you've been taught or what sounds good.

[cosine]

No problem,
Glad I helped!
There was actually a lot to discuss with this prompt, the trick is reading in between the lines.
For example, if we map out your para 1 real quick:
BODY PARA 1: Medea is justified in believing her actions to be 'just' against Jason because Jason has broken his oath and committed a crime against her.
- you can discuss everything Medea has sacrificed for him
- you can discuss the nature of Medea's pain
- you can discuss that "the thing is common" (Chorus), and is a reflection of the way men use deceit to string women along
- you can talk about the greater social degradation of women and link that to Jason's crimes
- you can discuss the self interested nature of Jason's actions.

BOOM! Massive paragraph haha, as long as you link each of your ideas it's all good. Your main topic sentence is "Jason's crime against Medea" but all these other things connect to the crime of perjury: the consequences felt by Medea both as an exile and as a woman, the nature of Jason's betrayal highlighting his douchebag nature etc.

I believe it's a matter of understanding the text. I have been given some dodgy ass prompts but i know if you study hard enough and argue laterally enough it all works out haha...nah i just spend longer picking it apart at the start

But yeah I think Cristiano's advice pulls together a lot of my thoughts, but generally i have a rule of thumb for intros and that's don't put in any unnecessary bs. 
like if my essay prompt is on women only then will i write in my intro "Composed in a highly dichotomous society where the degradation of women was......." if my essay prompt is on revenge, i will start by talking about revenge. Anybody, and I mean anybody can shove in a pre-written intro with socio-historical context for the prompt. But i'm betting that not a lot of kids can make it relevant.
ultimately it's what makes you feel comfortable at the end of the day, if you feel like having a couple of back up stock phrases are going to make sure you feel confident and you can fluently mold the rest of your essay to the prompt then go for it. it's not a massive thing it won't hurt you, and people have written great essays with pre-written first lines so don't feel like you're obliged to do anything you're not cool with, but generally that's just my stance on 'em.

also for conclusion i was taught differently; to conclude by analysing how the author concludes their piece. i'm guessing there's no set way, just do what you've been taught or what sounds good.

What I meant about the prompt is the whole idea of it not just those paragraphs. I think this might be my main issue, ideas to discuss? I mean I have a pretty good knowledge of the play but I think linking things is my issue. How can I improve this, you seem very knowledgable about it, what did you do to be able to think outside the box to interlink the ideas together and manipulate it?

About the introduction sentence, what about just a quick historic background to provide some context for the assessor? Like just mentioning the era of Medea's production etc? And then getting straight into the prompt?

Cheers.