ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE English Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE Literature => Topic started by: Spreadbury on October 16, 2009, 06:14:19 pm
-
I wrote these in an hour each (50 minutes for Hedda Gabler) any advice is greatly appreciated
REGENERATION
Regeneration by Pat Barker is a novel about the real horrors of WWI. Through Barker’s style the grotesque horrors endured by the men are witnessed and the almost impossible task of truly regenerating these men is shown to be possible. Through the extraordinary efforts of Rivers the men are brought back from the brink of insanity and begin to understand the vile experiences they faced.
Rivers is a centre-focus throughout the novel, ustilizing a range of techniques such as hypnosis (as seen with Prior) but most importantly; talking. By talking to his patients both Rivers and the patient share a learning process about the war. Rivers challenges the traditional ideas of manliness, those that broke down weren’t just “weaklings, sissies, [or] failures” (Rivers). By opening up to rivers the patients establish a deeper connection with Rivers, something that often resembles a father or a son, or, in the case of some, Rivers becomes a “mother”. If Rivers takes this role in his patients healing process he can better understand and empathise with his patients.
Rivers motherly qualities can be seen through his rescue of Burns during the storm, holding him while rescuing him from near-certain death. This connection (Parent/Child) is noted by both Rivers and his patients. While Prior is head-butting Rivers in the chest, Rivers gets the distinct image of a nanny goat and its young. Prior too, notes the connection when he remarks “now I know why I never wanted to make you ‘daddy’. I had got you lined up for a far worse fate.” This connection runs deep through all Rivers patients, it allows for a shared healing experience where they let Rivers heal them. The mutual effort to heal them (the patient) is contrasted with other doctors in the novel, such as Yealland and Henry Head.
Passage 2 shows a clear contrast between Rivers and many other doctors of the day. Rivers response to Head’s “We’ve got a lot of interesting material” shows his displeasure at those who classify these men as anything else “He’d seen Head too often on the wards to believe him capable of that particular kind of research-orientated callousness.” In this passage (Passage 2) Head’s statement can be compared to Yealland, a cold, clinical MO who, unlike Rivers, shares no regard for the patient.
Yealland’s methods of shock therapy, while more widely accepted, are not necessarily better. The contrast between Yealland and Rivers is that Yealland, unlike Rivers, does not try to balance his duty with (if he has any) his personal conviction. Rivers knows he must send the men back “I wear the uniform, I take the pay, I do the job.” (Rivers to Ruth) but the treatment Rivers uses shows his desire to help the men avoid future emotional distress. He tries to create them anew, regenerate them and if they manage to survive the war, live a life not buried under repressed war experiences. Rivers shares the pain of these men, during their treatment they develop a close bond (Parent/Child) and Rivers become more than an “empathic piece of wallpaper.” (Prior).
Passage 3 also helps to convey Rivers empathy. Even to Callan, who isn’t his own patient, while witnessing his healing he had to force himself not to say the words for him. The image of Callan remains vivid in Rivers’ mind in passage 3 “Again and again he saw Callan’s face, heard his voice repeating simple words, a grotesque parody of Adam naming created things.” During Callan’s treatment, Yealland’s ignorance is shown. Rivers knows, as Yealland does not, that there is no one in the army that could become “A hero” (Yealland) as society believes.
In Regeneration Barker’s style creates realism and imagery through a use of not only her own work, but the work of others. Barker interweaves fact and fiction into her novel through characters such as Sassoon and Rivers and uses Sassoon’s poetry (as seen in Passage 1) to help the reader – even the characters within her own novel better understand the vile conditions of WWI. Much like the poetry in passage 1, Barker, like Sassoon, sometimes lists objects - “Tins, Boxes, bottles, shapes too vague to know” (Sassoon, Passage 1) – or even animals (when Burns begins to untie the animals from the tree) to give the reader a sharper image of the situation. Barker’s novel creates realism, not only through imagery, but also through the conversations between the characters. As can be seen in Passage 2, the words between the characters are exchanged fast and the language is in-keeping with that of WWI England.
Barker’s novel Regeneration is an anti-war novel that intertwines both fact and fiction to show the need of these men to be regenerated. It challenges not on the war, but the accepted healing practices of the era to legitimately challenge societies views on the war. Regeneration captures the needs of the men a what they truly require from their healer.
HEDDA GABLER
Hedda Gabler by Henrik Ibsen is a play about the plight of one woman; Hedda Gabler and the difficulties faced by social boundaries and restriction while trying to live vicariously through another. The play chronicles her attemps at power and the constant struggles she must overcome if she truly wishes to have power over another.
Hedda, throughout the play is shown with many different traits, the most deeply rooted and prominent in her personality is power. Hedda desires this power so that “she may have a glimpse of a world [one isn’t to know about]” (Hedda to Lovborg) and so that she may triumph over the social restrictions imposed on her due to gender. Hedda is a revolutionary of sorts in the play, shown in her constant attempts to understand and be a part of the masculine way of life. In Hedda Gabler there are two men portrayed who Hedda thinks are worthy of her control and may offer her some form of release from her dull life with Tesman; Ejlert Lovborg and Judge Brack.
Through Hedda’s intimate and often inform conversations with these characters the reader is shown the true motives behind the characters actions. Passage 2 shows clearly the motive behind Judge Brack’s push for power over Hedda. Here the two discuss the possible threat Lovborg proposes to Brack’s desires ‘triangle’. “If he were to force his way in, superfluous and an intruder, into -. Into the triangle?” This triangle poses a problem for Hedda. Does she give in to Judge Brack’s proposal of the triangle and face the imminent risk of scandal or remain bored and isolated in her marriage with Tesman, preserving her precious reputation?
Brack’s proposal, while tempting for Hedda, is rejected by her. Hedda’s deathly fear of scandal keeps her ‘in-check’ with societies rules. Edda’s wish to preserve her reputation is seen through her marriage to Jorgen Tesman, a marriage not done out of love but in an effort to preserve as much of her previous reputation as possible. Hedda’s previous life is at the root of the distance between herself and the Tesman family. Her desire to remain her fathers daughter rather than become Tesman’s wife is seen through actions of Hedda (such as the portrait in the inner-room, which acts as a sanctuary for Hedda) and even how she is addressed by other characters in the play. Passage 1 mark the only times that Hedda is referred to as ‘Mrs Tesman’. “But my dear Mrs Tesman” – “But there isn’t anything more Mrs Tesman!”
Passage 3 shows perhaps what is the most important scene of the play. By this point Hedda has effectively lost her long-running battle with Judge Brack. She is under his power, Hedda is left with no control and Brack commands the easy-chair alone. Brack’s being “the only cock in the yard” leaves Hedda with power over herself alone. This is demonstrated when Hedda rejects Judge Brack by shooting herself in the temple, finally breakign free of the restrictive bonds of society and embracing the beautiful death she had hoped to witness in Ejlert. “People don’t do that type of thing”.
Through Ibsen’s stage directions the characters ‘come alive’ as their hidden goals and motives are revealed, adding dimension to the characters. The glances between Hedda and Brack are knowing glances and shows that the two have an understanding between eachother and that they alone understand eachother. These passages demonstrate the power and dominance of the easy-chair. Hedda pushing Mrs Elvsted into the easy-chairgives Mrs Elvsted a spotlight of sorts and permits her to direct conversation. Passage 3 symbolizes the absolute control of the easy-chair. As Brack now sits in the chair alone. He, and only he controls and dominates he and Hedda’s interactions.
Henrik Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler is a play that realisticly captures the struggles of Hedda. The play utilizes dramatic realism and the setting Ibsen creates is that of a contemporary Norwegian society. This play challenges the defined roles imposed from birth by an unfair and unjust society and presents a progressive, non-contemporary view of society.
-
Hedda: Really good demonstration of how language creates meaning, good insight and good textual knowledge. Only a few suggestions to make as it's pretty good work. I'd advise you to directly quote the passage more, extend your comment on stage directions (if you're going to include it at all) and explore the "views and values" more. You mentioned the contemporary Norwegian society but I think that you could comment more on what Ibsen is trying to say about that society.
-
I think in both your essays the opening sentences are weak.
"Regeneration by Pat Barker is a novel about the real horrors of WWI" - I have said many times, and I will say it again, the examiners know the book better than you, this generic review almost is not what they are after. They want an interpretation of the text based upon the passages, not blurb. The same can be said for your second essay. I cannot comment on the actual essay because I haven't read the texts.
Also, in your first essay when you say things like " Passage 2 shows a clear contrast between Rivers and many other doctors of the day" it seems clunky, I believe and an examiner from the VATE lectures also thinks this. Perhaps a more sophisticated way of saying this is "The disparity between Rivers and other doctors is explicated throughout passage 2 as......". It is seemlessing highlight the importance of the passages without using a 'sledge hammer' as my teacher calls it.
The same goes for "Passage 3 shows perhaps what is the most important scene of the play". It is clunky and simplistic to me. You need to find a more sophisticated way of fulfilling the criteria.
Just some food for thought.