This was given to our class as a bit of analysis practise and i've tried to plan my analysis by identifying key players, as outlined in some of the guides up here.
Here's what I got for key players:
The wealthy- and how they're given extra/special treatment by everyone
Depp- Depp's recent actions illustrate the entitlement the wealthy have
The common person- and how we yearn for wealth yet despise those who have it out of envy
The air travel business- who allow this disparity to continue by providing special benefits to the wealthy and largely disregarding common people. But also their ineptitude for failing to properly check Depp when he entered the country.
These seem perfectly fine to me!
Remember there are no completely right answers when it comes to key players - it's all about how well you present your case. If you can go through the piece and find these major ideas that
a) are supported by language features and persuasive devices, and
b) contribute to the author's overall argument
... then you're all good!
It's still worth asking these questions though - just so you know you're on the right track. I'd say perhaps your third K.P. might need refining as that's probably the weakest of the four (i.e. I'm not sure the author is portraying commoners as envious, or at least, he's not doing that often enough for it to be a really substantive sub-argument) but just because it's not what I'd personally focus on, that doesn't make it wrong. You could definitely defend this, and provided your analysis was decent, the assessors wouldn't even think twice about which "key players" you'd've chosen. Partially because "key players" is a thing I kind of made up, but also because they're going to be concentrating on the quality of your analysis; not so much on the structure/formatting
I wrote a contention and topic sentences to a prompt. Please let me know if there is anything wrong about it. Because I put in the characters' name in my topic sentences, it sounds like I'm just listing evidence. Please help me if you can!
Jack has no positive role models in his life, adult or otherwise. Discuss
Contention: While many exert power over Jack and stump his path to self-actualisation and emotional growth, it is by some individuals that Jack realises other individuals enable Jack to realise the goodness of people, and the possibility to have a life characterised by fostering love and pursuing dreams.
Par 1: Dwight and Marian stump Jack’s own formation of his identity, by forcing Jack to accept their negative idea of him onto himself as well. --> Wolff shows how negativity and abuse can be transmitted and warp the mindset of an impressionable youth.
Par3: However, Jack learns that those with power do not necessarily abuse their power (Like Dwight and Roy) through Sister James and Mr Howard. --> However, the text reveals that those with power do not necessarily always abuse their power.
Par2: Furthermore, the unconditional love Rosemary showers Jack, despite his frequent rebellious behaviour, teaches Jack the possibility of love, and the need to assume the role of the protector towards the weak. --> Furthermore, the loving relationships in the text provide a more optimistic example for Jack.
^edited these a bit to make them more general and topic sentence-y. Notice how even in the last one where I've used Jack's name, I'm still talking about the text as a whole and am focusing more so on broader points as opposed to specific evidence? The stuff that you've got here is a good indication of where your direction should go after the T.S. but you want to make sure you don't start off by saying: "Sister James and Mr Howard are really nice to Jack!" ...that's obviously an exaggeration and your current examples are nowhere near that bad, but you can see what that sentence would be a bad introduction to a discussion, right? Your job in each paragraph is to discuss a point that aids your contention, but beginning that point and making it too narrow means it's harder for you to then zoom out at the end and think about the bigger picture.
Hope that makes sense
URGENT
I have my English SAC tomorrow and I'm stressed so I'm just casually reading the dictionary in the hopes of relieving some of my stress.
My English teacher's one of those savage VCAA assessors that's been marking probably since dinosaurs were around and he's insanely into contextually correct use of words. *cries*
How do I use the word machinations in a sentence?
More specific: Can I refer to the Medea's plot to kill her sons as a machination? No idea how to use it in a sentence. Would love it if you could provide an example specific to Medea because it's how I'd best be able to understand it.
Machinations:
noun the inner workings or plottings that happen in a person's mind; usually connoting some sinister motives or propensity for calculated schemes
Example:
- Medea's machinations had tragic consequences.
- The machinations of Medea had ramifications for many different characters.
- Euripides shows how Medea's inner machinations brought about damaging consequences for innocent individuals.
- The play revolves around Medea's machination to take revenge (<--though the non-plural usage is less common and sounds a bit weird, so I'd stick with 'machinations' wherever possible. That also opens things up to talk about her motives in a more multifaceted sense, rather than just saying 'yep, she had one machination and that's where her intentions begin and end.')
So, grammatically, you can use it like the word 'thoughts' or 'plans,' but semantically, think of it as referring to the clockwork in her brain that is churning over the situation and helping her decide what to do next.
Home
Help
Search
Login
