VCE Stuff > VCE English Work Submission and Marking

Compilation of Language Analysis Feedback

<< < (7/42) > >>

Patches:
I really need to improve my language analysis, so please don't hold back on the criticism :P The article is attached as an image.

The issue of violence and poor behaviour during the annual schoolies’ week is a perennial problem. In this piece, Shannon McRae suggests that the blame has been cast unfairly on the young school leavers, with the so-called toolies responsible for much of the trouble.


By presenting schoolies week as a unique rite of passage after the trials of the VCE, the author seeks to establish the ‘point’ of schoolies to an audience of which the majority may not have participated themselves. ‘Schoolies’ week’ implies a sense of ownership over the event, and clearly indicates the unspoken rules of who is and isn’t invited. By effectively handing the week over to the schoolies, McRae presents the argument not that the toolies should be better behaved, but that they should not attend at all. The statement of ‘their time to let loose’ reinforces this sense of ownership – the toolies are ‘encroaching’ on an event they have no right to be involved in. The exclusivity that the author assigns to schoolies’ week seems to support his or her view of the week as a unique institution, which for a significant portion of students is a vital reward at the end of their final year. He or she associates schoolies week with ‘freedom from the sometimes stifling classroom’, an image of school which probably appeals to a wide spectrum of the audience. This serves to invite those who didn’t ‘do’ a schoolies week themselves, such as the parents of today’s school leavers, into the spirit of the week. By referring to schoolies’ week having ‘become’ the modern rite of passage, McRae is contributing to a broader social shift, whereby there is now a widely held expectation that all school leavers participate in one way or another. ‘No one should begrudge schoolies their right to a reward’ indicates that schoolies’ week is an extension of other privileges given to school students in their final year. By implication, McRae suggests it would be cruel to deny the school leavers what is apparently such an important part of growing up in contemporary Australia. McRae’s ‘normalisation’ of schoolies week, then, serves to lift the blame for the annual chaos from the schoolies themselves – the week is exclusively their time to ‘let loose’ with predictable consequences. To an extent, the normalisation of schoolie misbehaviour acts to shift the blame from the schoolies to the toolies, supporting the author’s contention that it is the latter who cause the trouble to escalate beyond the schoolies’ ‘celebration of freedom.’


A rite of passage is the symbolic transformation from child to adult, and McRae uses the connotations of this transformation to cast the toolies as ‘predators’. The toolies are ‘adults’ and ‘grown men’, and the schoolies are ‘teens’ and ‘young people’, but, crucially, never ‘young adults.’ This seems to suggest that McRae regards the school leavers children, despite the majority having turned eighteen and finished their formal education. Accordingly, they are still owed the special societal protection afforded for children, which makes the behaviour of the toolies particularly reprehensible. The language McRae uses creates a sense of a power imbalance between teenage schoolies and the toolies. They are ‘shady and opportunistic’ – this reinforces the author’s view of the schoolie-toolie relationship as an invariably exploitative mismatch of power. This imbalance is a product of both the physical disparity between ‘bigger, stronger’ adults and teenagers, as well as the economic fact that most schoolies ‘don’t have cars’, nor can they afford the consequences of ‘thousands of dollars’ of damage. Most vividly, this mismatch is portrayed as the attempts by older men to take advantage of ‘young girls’, ‘luring them into the bushes’ in a depiction that seems tailored to the fears of parents. McRae, then, presents a strange view of the maturity of the schoolies. On one hand, they are given virtually free rein to indulge in the privileges of adulthood; on the other, they are the potential victims of what the author casts as predatory and implicitly paedophilic assault. The spectre of ‘parental consequences’ reinforces this view of the schoolies as being somewhere between children and adults – McRae certainly wouldn’t suggest the toolies are accountable to their parents. The week may be, as McRae styles it, a modern ‘rite of passage’ – but the language used clearly indicates it is not the beginning of adulthood.


McRae’s piece presents the schoolies as hardworking students whose special time to ‘let loose’ is invariably undermined by exploitative older men.  The piece attempts to build support in the audience for schoolies week as a modern institution, inviting those who didn’t experience it themselves to empathise with the ‘gatecrashed’ school leavers. Finally, while acknowledging the often poor behaviour of some schoolies, McRae’s ‘normalisation’ of schoolies misbehaviour seems to excuse them from the bulk of the blame.


Thankyou!

academicbulimia:
Language Analysis I wrote up this morning. So if there's any dodgey writing blame it on lack of sleep/coffee and the fact I haven't written an LA in a like a year! hah also it'd be great if you could rate it out of 10 so I can see where I'm at!
Many thanks. :)
Article: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/challenge-is-to-sustain-outcry-against-horrors-20121227-2bxt0.html
SpoilerThe subject of recent media speculation, the prevailing rape culture in India, ignited after the brutal gang rape of a young girl on public transport, the resultant consequence being her death 5 days later. The Age article written by Waleed Aly “Challenge is to sustain outcry against horrors” published on the 28th December, 2012 aims to encourage readers to look past this one case of rape to wider “horror” rape has posed in society, whilst also instilling his belief that the root of the problem is social attitudes and the lack of action on such issues from the Indian government. The article is characterised by a number of tonal shifts as Aly moves from a measured and serious tone to an optimistic one, appealing to all demographics of the community. 
                      Preceding any formal introduction to the issue, the reader’s attention is immediately taken up by the visual accompanied with the article. The image compromises an enlarged sketch of man, with a woman in his palm, with a gun pointing at her and a fist raised, portraying the situation of women in Delhi who were as the cliché goes ‘in the palm of their [the men’s] hands’. Allowing Aly to imply that their mistreatment resulted because of the power (the raised fist) that was given to the men. Moreover, the author immediately encourages readers to “look past the brutal gang rape” allowing himself to detract from this one incident, to the wider issue that was “positively ghastly”, influencing readers to take notice of this issue by triggering a sense of curiosity to what could be equally significant and terrible than this case. Aly then begins recounting an incident with a two-year old girl who was with “her hands and legs tied” brutally raped in the city of Halol, which too resulted in her death. The author implements this imagery to elicit a sense of disgust in the readers, forcing them to visualize the wider reality of the problem, and it is by using this extreme case of rape with a “two-year-old girl” that he shows that the issue really has reached its full wickedness, encouraging immediate action on the issue. The extent of the issue is further exemplified with the author embedding the statistics that an “Australian woman is killed every week in an act of violence” and that there’s “a sexual assault in the US every two minutes” swaying reader’s agreement on the fact that rape is a prevailing issue in all societies, not just in the Indian one. Hence not only adding weight to the author’s argument but creating a sense of authenticity in the reader’s eyes’ that the issue is real and current one.
                    Furthermore, the author accentuates his belief that a key element of the issue was the social attitudes in India how certain “cases that go unmarked upon” by the government leaving “perpetrators unpunished”. To corroborate this Aly embeds the quote from father of the two-year-old that “No one from the government or even district administration has bothered to pay us a visit even once” implying to readers that the root of the problem was the government. Ultimately convincing reader's to be indignant at the apparent injustice of this, intending to result in readers supporting his stance on the foundation of rape culture. Likewise, Aly incorporates a degree of irony when he includes that the police commissioner of India “argued men were unsafe in Delhi” because “their pockets were picked”. The language that is used by the writer humiliates the Indian authorities, scorning them for creating a ridiculous situation where women complaining of sexual assault were treated with “disdain” while the government was more concerned about men’s pockets being “picked”.  Inciting outrage in the readers, as Aly by brings to light the corrupt and immoral nature of the government. Hence, also appealing to the readers’ humanity, that is, the desire to take care of one another as most readers don’t want themselves or others to be subjected such injustice. Consistent with this, the writer underlines that the “overarching social attitude that stigmatises the victim, rather than the attacker” is also to credit with the creation of this rape culture. He states that this is not uniquely an Indian problem as “Swaziland has just passed a law banning miniskirts on the basis that they ‘encourage rape’”. He positions the readers to share his opinion that this is absurd response to this issue, as it is by including this information about this new law that infuses a sense of indignation in readers, which is directed to the authorities and the unjust social attitudes they retain and are faultily creating.
                  In succession, the author labels that it is a “misogynist flaw” to present rape a primarily sexual. Positioning readers to agree with this notion as the loaded word “misogynist” carries extremely sinister emotional baggage, hence allowing Aly to assume the reader’s agreement as none would aim to support such flawed beings. Moreover, the writer employs the alliteration of “domination and dehumanization” to add emphasis on the violent and evil nature of rape and the crimes involved that he believes to be often disregarded. The language used also creates emotional image of the victims as being feeble in the face of these perpetrators, generating the reader’s support as it urges them to feel a sense of sympathy for the victims.  Furthermore, Aly establishes his belief that sexualised understandings of rape “come overwhelmingly from men with cultural or political authority”, allowing him to imply that this came with “power and privilege”.  Likewise, the author also utilizes this to suggest to readers that those in power were corrupt and selfish as they did what suited them, and anything that avoided any “accountability” in respect to these crimes, thus demeaning these figures in the eyes of the reader.
                  Aly shifts from here on, adopting an optimistic perspective as he believes there is a likelihood of change being brought upon society due to case of this brutal case in Delhi. The author describes that the “the voice of the disempowered” were “challenging the elite”. It is this that aims to inspire the readers to take action, as they too want their voices to be heard, allowing Aly to gain the readers support as everyone wants their freedom and rights to be satisfied. The writer then brings the issue to our doorstep by stating the cases of sexual abuse in regards to the Catholic Church and how they have been “dragged into the centre of a royal commission”. In this the author highlights the relevance to rape in Australian society, appealing to the reader’s sense of patriotism, thus manipulating them into agreeing with Aly as they feel they need to support their country in the tackling of this issue. He also exhibits justice being served to the perpetrators, leaving readers wary that with justice being served the “potential for rapid social change looks very real”. Accordingly, the writer finishes by questioning that “Will the ruling of class of India revisit the way it understands rape, rather than merely talk about tougher changes?” and that “Is this a genuine change in the nature of power, or a series of ephemeral flashpoints soon to be forgotten in an age of supersonic news?”. He implements this to leave readers skeptical that true change will occur rapidly because it requires a those it power to rethink their values and the nature they operate, however he also leaves a sense of hope that this could be the “story of 2013”.
               In “Challenge is to sustain outcry against horrors” Aly Waleed expresses the extent of the issue of rape culture in different societies by including other cases of the rape aside from the Delhi rape case, and bringing it home to the rape and violence against women that occurs in the streets of Australia. He also brings forward, through the use of language devices such as irony and alliteration to exhibit that the crux of the problem was the people in power, who refused accountability for such cases, adding to the detrimental social attitude towards women in India.  In essence, Aly leaves readers hopeful for change but doubtful for a “genuine” one.

aphelleon:
Hey Brenden,

Thanks so much for doing this. You're an absolute legend.

For my article analysis SAC, we've been looking at incorporating 3 articles within a single essay. However, we only know what two of them are - the third is a 'mystery' article that will be presented by our teacher on the day of the SAC.

Which is why I'm a tad concerned, because this essay is 1,017 words amidst a 900 word limit (give or take 10%). And I still have another article to incorporate! Oh dear!

Another thing that bothers me is the fact that my chosen structure doesn't seem to match up with most of the examples I've seen posted up. And yet my teacher has advised to base each paragraph on a 'idea' rather than a 'persuasive device'.


Should the topic sentence cover the overarching issue that is being discussed in the paragraph?

Ie. The query into church sanctioning has sparked fierce debate in the media.

Or should it just mention one author's viewpoint? (Allowing the paragraph to diverge to to the other perspective later).

Ie. Through imagery and appeals to fear, Smith asserts that powerful institutions should not be allowed to operate without sanction.


Also, I'm not entirely sure what a conclusion should look like. I've tried writing what seems to match up with most examples I've seen... But it just seems so... inconclusive. Shouldn't I finish with a general, thought provoking sentence? And yet how do I do that without conveying my own opinion ? (I've been marked down on this issue before)


I've included some of my thoughts throughout the essay, but if you pick out anything else, please don't hesitate to let me know! I'm aiming for a good mark, so criticism is welcome:D

Thank you!

These are the articles I have been using...
Greg Barns: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4370672.html
Simon Smart: http://publicchristianity.org/library/whatever-it-takes-sexual-abuse-and-the-church




Following recent inquisitions into sexual abuse in the Catholic Church (too many ins? How can I rephrase?) public interest has rekindled, sparking debate as to what should be done in light of recent revelations. Whilst some champion the ideals of the Royal Commission, considering it… (should I add something in the middle here?), others hope to find alternative means of victim compensation. Simon Smart, in his article published November 20, 2012 on the Centre for Public Christianity website, endorses a preventative ideal to his Christian demographic, (something sounds a bit off here) contending, in an incredulous and alarmist tone, that the Church must suffer through the Royal Commission if it hopes to “save its soul”(should I mention the immediacy of his demands, or just leave it?). Alternatively, Greg Barns, through his article published on The Drum website on the 14th of November 2012, embraces a didactic and condescending approach, asserting, to a consequentialist audience, that the Royal Commission is a waste of time and money, whilst maintaining that therapeutic justice is a superior means to victim satisfaction. 

Amidst the flurry of national debate, many have questioned whether the state should endeavour upon a preventative or curative approach in pursuit of justice for abuse victims. Through use of emotive language, Smart contends that the government must act promptly to prevent abuse reoccurring in the Church. In harnessing an indignant tone, Smart’s article is strung with poignancy, as he describes the “shocking” “betrayal” and “cruelty”, the “terrible” acts of “abuse”, permitted by an institution supposedly founded on “love” and “protection”.  In this, Smart expresses a sense of profound urgency towards the issue at hand, implying that to accept inactivity would be to approve of the “suffering of countless people” (is the link between urgency and prevention clear enough?). Thus, when Smart refers to his target audience as “good people of faith”, religious readers are driven to seek out moral righteousness, and consequently approve of that which Smart attributes as “good” . (Does this link with the argument well enough?) Conversely, through anecdote, Barns contests that society should focus its resources on aiding current victims of abuse. Near the conclusion of his article, Barns adopts a sentimental tone, describing how he has “found” therapeutic justice to be far more “healing for the participants” than the “cold uncertainty of a criminal trial”. This use of personal anecdote allows utilitarian readers to connect with the issue on an emotional level, predisposing them, therefore, to view therapeutic justice in a warm and welcoming light. Furthermore, the fact that Greg Barns is attributed as “barrister” makes use of an appeal to authority, positioning readers to associate a notion of sapiency and academic grounding to his experiences, therefore encouraging them to accept his ideals as objective truth. (Should I omit this bit about the "appeal to authority"? Does it take up unnecessary space?)

In more recent debates, some have taken a stand against the Catholic Church, seeking to expose the root of the issue at hand (Is ‘at hand’ too colloquial? Should I cut it?).  Through his article, Smart condemns the church for being more concerned with its own “self-preservation” than the lives of people entrusted under its care. Early in the second paragraph, Smart describes the “great” theologian, Dietrich Bonhoeffer “martyred” in his defiance against the “Nazis”. In illustrating Bonhoeffer in this manner, Smart constructs a heroic, saint-like figure, endowing him, therefore, with a sense of Biblical authority.  Thus, when Bonhoeffer demands that the Church “hasten to” the aid of the “suffering”, Christian readers are inspired to adopt his instruction as though it were divine command.(Should I expand on this?) Contrarily, Barns dismisses the importance of the Catholic Church in the face of a widespread issue. Through imagery, Barns denounces the perception of abuse as being localized, rather endorsing a holistic approach, and encouraging readers to consider the affects of abuse in all social circles. The image accompanying the article projects Cardinel Pel’s face, unflatteringly suspended mid-sentence, with eyebrows drawn low with uncertainty. To the left, he raises a sheet of paper clearly labelled ‘Sexual Abuse’.  In presenting Pel in this fashion, Barns attacks the Cardinel’s intelligence, projecting him as being oblivious to the complexity and difficulty involved in tackling the broader issue of sexual abuse. In this, readers are prompted to likewise discredit Pel’s opinion, joining Barns in his assertion that those who focus solely on sexual abuse in the church are ignorant and narrow minded.  (I need feedback on this please :) not quite sure whether it fits with the issue.)

Many have questioned the true value of the Royal Commission amidst the hype and controversy. Through imagery, Smart asserts that the Catholic Church should not be allowed to operate without sanction, but should, rather, have its flaws exposed to the public light (is there a better term for this?) through the Royal Commission. The photograph accompanying the article makes use of a low-angled shot, peering upward at the inside of a cathedral, whilst attendees, small and vulnerable in the foreground, gaze up in reverent fidelity. Harsh, sharp contours and orange tinting create a hot and festering atmosphere, symbolic of the hostility brewing between the Catholic Church and state legislation. (Am I allowed to evaluate the symbolism here?) Here, the low-angled shot projects the Church as a powerful and imposing entity, an unyielding challenger in the face of national constitution. Through this, Smart compels readers to vilify the Catholic Church, prompting them to perceive it as sanctimonious and manipulative, unconcerned with those who appeal to it for guidance. This further makes use of an appeal to fear, encouraging readers to oppose the unbridled power of the Vatican patriarchy, and inviting them, therefore, to attribute value to the Royal Commission as a means of protection from corruption. In contrast, Barns attests that the royal commission is a tedious and gruelling process, disputing that Australians should utilize their resources for more productive endeavours. Throughout his piece, Barns employs use of the motif of time, repeating terms such as “waiting”, “ploughing”, and “drawn out”, presenting therapeutic ideologies as a means to “fast justice”, whilst condemning the “impossibly broad” scope of the Royal Commission. In exposing this temporal factor, Barns appeals to the need for ‘instantaneous gratification’ in human psychology, (this phrase seems a bit ‘off’ here. How can I rephrase this?) provoking audiences to seek the “speedy” solution over the more difficult, strenuous, “multi-year” investigation. 

Through their articles, both Simon Smart and Greg Barns have presented their opinion in regards to sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. Smart maintains that the Catholic Church should accept responsibility for its actions, exploiting dire appeals to emotion and fear in order to persuade readers that powerful institutions should not go unchecked by the constitution. Barns’s article contests, depreciating the Royal Commission through derisive emotional pleas, attacks and repetition. (I am unsure as to the structure of a conclusion. Please help!)

 



1.   What is the conclusion suppose to be look like?
2.   Are my topic sentences appropriate?


 

papertowns:
Oh my goodness, you are a god Brenden! Thank you so much! Yeah I realised how short my paragraphs were but I don't know how to group them if I'm going through the persuasive techniques as they come up in the article :/ Can I talk about a few in one paragraph? I really should read other analysises :p And hahahah you're so right, I like maths more than English because English makes me sad since I'm not great at it. I'm doing maths and science subjects so yeah.... I do do things methodically. Thanks for all your comments on how to improve! I'll keep practising :)

meganrobyn:

--- Quote from: papertowns on April 11, 2013, 01:49:39 pm ---Oh my goodness, you are a god Brenden! Thank you so much! Yeah I realised how short my paragraphs were but I don't know how to group them if I'm going through the persuasive techniques as they come up in the article :/ Can I talk about a few in one paragraph? I really should read other analysises :p And hahahah you're so right, I like maths more than English because English makes me sad since I'm not great at it. I'm doing maths and science subjects so yeah.... I do do things methodically. Thanks for all your comments on how to improve! I'll keep practising :)

--- End quote ---

The solution is to *not* group your paragraphs by technique as they come up in the article. Almost every word should have its own subtle technique: it was chosen for a reason. It's therefore unrealistic to do it (and structurally there are issues). And arbitrarily combining techniques in order to get longer paragraphs? You know in your heart you need to have a coherent point or uniting 'theme' for each paragraph :)

Group your paragraphs by intended effect on the audience; or, if you prefer, by demonstrated attitude of the author towards one particular stakeholder or facet of the argument. For instance, perhaps the author is trying to make the audience indignant over some particular government policy? Do a paragraph on indignation, and include everything from the entire article, headline, image etc that expresses/evokes that indignation. Talk about *how* they each create indignation, being creative with that analysis.

So your method here is to find FOUR different intended effects - or four things/people the author expresses feelings towards (even subtly). Then you allocate one per paragraph, and chuck in everything from across the entire piece that relates to it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page