Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

December 04, 2025, 09:23:17 pm

Author Topic: [English] "Anna Bligh outperforms Julia Gillard" language analysis  (Read 1219 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ematuro

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 178
  • Respect: 0
0
Texts: Year of Wonders, On The Waterfront
Context: Identity & Belonging (Member of the Wedding, Sometimes Gladness)
SS Aim: 35+

___________________________________________________________________

February essays:
* Week 1: Language analysis
Week 2: Language analysis
Week 3: Language analysis
Week 4: Good copy
« Last Edit: March 31, 2011, 10:48:59 pm by ninwa »

Ematuro

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 178
  • Respect: 0
Re: Ematuro's thread - February Week 1 - Language Analysis
« Reply #1 on: February 08, 2011, 10:05:31 pm »
0
With the recent floods in Queensland, citizens have taken on some great emotional tolls and our leaders have been left to deal with it. One response to this issue has been that of Susan O’Brien, whose article, ‘Anna Bligh outperforms Julia Gillard in the greatest leadership of all’, published on January the 14th 2011 by the Herald Sun, contends in a conservative manner that Anna Bligh has proven herself to be a better leader than Julia Gillard. Accompanying O’Brien’s article is an image of Anna Bligh and Julia Gillard which similarly expresses the idea that Anna Bligh is much more dependable than Julia Gillard in a distressing situation such as this. This article is aimed at the general public, but more specifically, at those who are aware of how Anna Bligh was previously viewed as a leader.

One of the main approaches utilised by O’Brien is an attempt to degrade Julia Gillard in hopes that the audience will view Anna Bligh as the superior, more composed leader. O’Brien begins by praising Anna Bligh, saying she is ‘a true stateswoman’ with ‘calm, composure and compassion’, which is intended to give the audience an idea of Bligh’s great leadership skills. Following this, O’Brien attempts to make Julia Gillard look like she doesn’t know what she’s doing, ‘hitting the wrong notes’, ‘unsure about what her role should be’. As a result, the audience is positioned to view Anna Bligh with more respect, someone who can be depended on, as opposed to Julia Gillard.

Furthermore, O’Brien brings former Victorian premier John Brumby into the picture to help the audience make a comparison between what he did during bushfires and what Anna Bligh is doing now. O’Brien makes it clear to the audience about how John Brumby ‘rarely had a hair out of place during the Black Saturday bushfires’, and that he was ‘by no means inspirational’. This gives the readers someone to compare Anna Bligh to, in which she clearly outmatches him. Backing up O’Brien’s statement about John Brumby, O’Brien talks about the dedication Anna Bligh has put into this situation, answering ‘every question she has been asked’, and sensibly realising ‘her major public role in briefing the media and public’. By doing this, the readers are given a clear image of what other leaders did as opposed to Anna Bligh’s current work.

As the piece draws to a close, O’Brien tries to make Anna Bligh sound like a very inspiring, dependable leader, hopeful that the audience will view her as such. By saying she is ‘so capable we have almost been waiting for the moment when it became too much for her’; the readers are reassured of her capabilities as a premier. Backing this up, O’Brien restores confidence in the audience for Anna Bligh, saying that ‘when Bligh tells the world Queensland will rebuilt, we will believe her’. This also brings out the Queenslander’s spirit out, it makes the people affected feel more secure and relieved that they have such a strong leader on their side to support them.

O’Brien’s article is supported by an image of Anna Bligh with Julia Gillard standing behind her. Being placed in the background, Julia Gillard is portrayed as less significant to Anna Bligh. While Anna Bligh is at the front, appearing as if she knows what she is doing, Julia Gillard stands behind her with a smile that looks artificial. This implies that ‘true stateswoman’ in Anna Bligh while Julia Gillard is just there, without even knowing why she is.

Moreover, this image shows more of a ‘prime minister’ in Anna Bligh than in Julia Gillard herself. The fact that Julia Gillard has been slightly blurred suggests her uncertainty and awkwardness in her role as prime minster, as O’Brien pointed out when she calls Julia Gillard ‘wooden and unconvincing’. On the contrary, Anna Bligh is shown as that person with a ‘remarkable grasp on the situation’. In addition, the fact that Anna Bligh is dressed in white, and Julia Gillard in black suggests the good and bad that’s happening between the two. The reader is invited to see the calm and composed Queensland premier in this photo, as opposed to the Australian prime minister who doesn’t really know what she is doing.

O’Brien’s article, along with the accompanying image, shows how Anna Bligh compares to Julia Gillard and John Brumby as a leader, with the intention of having the readers realise Anna Bligh is clearly more capable. Additionally, O’Brien acknowledges Anna Bligh’s work that has been done in order to ensure her Queenslanders feel secure and rest assured.  
« Last Edit: February 08, 2011, 10:07:35 pm by Ematuro »

jane1234

  • Guest
Re: ** Ematuro's thread - February Week 1 - Language Analysis
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2011, 05:00:36 pm »
0
Overall, it's a pretty good piece, but here's a couple of things:

1. "Backing up O’Brien’s statement about John Brumby, O’Brien talks about..." - you probably just missed this, but O'brien is mentioned twice in this sentence, and it makes it seem like you are talking about two different people. Better to use he/she for second reference to a person.
2. For the most part quotes are used well, but try and incorporate them into the sentence better... "...to make Julia Gillard look like she doesn’t know what she’s doing, ‘hitting the wrong notes’, ‘unsure about what her role should be’." could be rephrased to say ..."look like she doesn't know what she it doing, as she is 'unsure about what her role should be'..." or something like that.
3. You discuss the what pretty well, but always ask yourself, how? The statement "While Anna Bligh is at the front, appearing as if she knows what she is doing..." doesn't follow through with references to facial expression/body language etc... you need to describe why she is "appearing as if she knows what she is doing..." (sorry if that is a bit pedantic but I'm an art student and it was always drummed into my brain why, why, why, how, how, how after EVERY statement... they all need reinforcing by visual/written evidence).
4. Should include more specific references to how the language is making the reader feel/believe etc... you have done this to an extent, but the really good students discuss the why more in-depth than just the what.

Other than that it's good :) I have no idea what kind of grade it would be though :D

Ematuro

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 178
  • Respect: 0
Re: * Ematuro's thread - February Week 1 - Language Analysis
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2011, 08:02:06 am »
0
Awesome, thanks jane.

And also, could someone give me a score out of 10 perhaps? So I know where I'm at :P Thankss