Close Analysis Practise/Workshopping Thread! - Exam 2013

[charmanderp]

Believe it or not, Lit is about discovering what it is to be human. The analysis above sounds more like a text response than a Lit essay.

Interesting and pertinent observation. With Lit/close analysis you need to think about what these excerpts mean in the very moment you read them. What's the thought process going on in the author's mind? It's the difference to suppose a text response, where you're writing on the broader picture of the text and only using examples that are relevant to your argument. Here, your argument is centred around the mere existence of your passage.

[Lolly]

This is all very true.

I've told all my friends to talk about humanity in their essays, because that is what all great literature is about.

A Lit essay is like an inverted text response because of the reasons just mentioned. Instead of an argued contention, you're meant to writing an " argued reading" explaining how you are literally reading those three passages and drawing out their meaning. I suppose in a sense you have to look at it in a simple way. Remember those readers you had back in primary school? Remember having to explain back to the parent helper what the story meant and what the words were saying?  The Lit exam is the ultimate reading comprehension task as it allows you to deconstruct your reading and communicate your thinking practices at the highest level of secondary education. This is your chance to prove that you understand texts deeply and you truly know how to 'read' books for all that they are worth. Go to't.

 NB: I also ditched the introduction.

[brightsky]

But be careful not to regurgitate generic lines like 'X unveils the infinite variance of humanity' or 'X captures humanity in its full resplendence', or 'X discloses the imperfection of humanity'. Such readings, whilst they may sound good, are too general, and not text-specific. You eant to say stuff like 'X reveals the very human proclivity to...' and then elaborate as per the text. In short, you want to produce a close reading, not just any random reading that can be used for any random text.

[brightsky]

I have a question for past Lit students mainly...did you guys have a specific structure or formula to which you conformed when you wrote Passage Analysis paragraphs? Or did you just write random stuff that came to mind? Most schools give English students a set formula for lang analysis, and I'm interested to know whether schools take a similar approach with Lit.

Thanks!

[jeanweasley]

Need more language engagement. You need to analyse specific words, and phrases. Note the repetition of words. Note the use of punctuation (except if you're analysing Shakespeare). Note the scene construction. Also, discuss big ideas. Cut the explanations. (Lit examiners don't like being told the obvious.) Think about what the text reveals about humanity and society. Believe it or not, Lit is about discovering what it is to be human. The analysis above sounds more like a text response than a Lit essay.

Thanks. I know it does sound like a text response but how do I fix it?  And I like your observation about the 'being human' part. I never thought of it that way.

But be careful not to regurgitate generic lines like 'X unveils the infinite variance of humanity' or 'X captures humanity in its full resplendence', or 'X discloses the imperfection of humanity'. Such readings, whilst they may sound good, are too general, and not text-specific. You eant to say stuff like 'X reveals the very human proclivity to...' and then elaborate as per the text. In short, you want to produce a close reading, not just any random reading that can be used for any random text.

Thanks. Just a question, how long did it take you to improve to the level that you are now? I mean, last year was my first time doing Lit and I generally scored B+ and this year, thank God, I've managed to scrape As. I really want to improve but it's so hard

[Lolly]

But be careful not to regurgitate generic lines like 'X unveils the infinite variance of humanity' or 'X captures humanity in its full resplendence', or 'X discloses the imperfection of humanity'. Such readings, whilst they may sound good, are too general, and not text-specific. You eant to say stuff like 'X reveals the very human proclivity to...' and then elaborate as per the text. In short, you want to produce a close reading, not just any random reading that can be used for any random text.

 Yeah. Don't use lines like that unless you're connecting your statement directly to the text. I did use similar phrases -  although they were only after I had discussed  and analysed minutiae which naturally built towards some sort of universal statement. So they were assertions informed by textual detail which i often used to round off a paragraph. I think though that you do need a few nice turns of phrase to pull out when applicable. After you've written so many essays it feels as if you're saying the same thing over and over anyway. ( if your interpretation/readings are consistent.)

[charmanderp]

I have a question for past Lit students mainly...did you guys have a specific structure or formula to which you conformed when you wrote Passage Analysis paragraphs? Or did you just write random stuff that came to mind? Most schools give English students a set formula for lang analysis, and I'm interested to know whether schools take a similar approach with Lit.

Thanks!

Mostly random. I'd write maybe 3 paragraphs on each passage and each paragraph would bear some kind of 'argument' but in terms of the structure of the paragraphs themselves I don't think there's any pattern you can apply to it. I'd generally use the opening sentences to foreground the aspect of the text I would be discussing in that paragraph. So giving context to the excerpts I'd use and linking it back to a general thematic identity.

In the exam this more or less fell to pieces.

[charmanderp]

Thanks. I know it does sound like a text response but how do I fix it?  And I like your observation about the 'being human' part. I never thought of it that way.Thanks. Just a question, how long did it take you to improve to the level that you are now? I mean, last year was my first time doing Lit and I generally scored B+ and this year, thank God, I've managed to scrape As. I really want to improve but it's so hard

The way to avoid it sounding like a text response is to extract your arguments from the language itself. So take an excerpt, draw some conclusion out of it, and then go about extending that into a contention/thesis.

In a text response, you're doing the opposite. So you're forming a contention based on the essay question (which provides you with a certain reading of the text) and then you're looking for things within the text to prove your contention. So the prime difference is that with lit, you need to find your own 'argued reading' based upon the selective passages you're given.

I hope this doesn't sound too confusing! I'll try to write up a comparative example soon, when I've got the time.

[zerbe6]

If anyone could have a look please. Wh

Albee’s play Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? responds to the development of popular dissatisfaction in the patriotic institutions of post-second world war America. Albee develops allegorical allusion throughout his absurdist production to convey his view that the noble society envisaged by the signatories of the declaration of independence has faltered.

Albee’s allusion to George and Martha Washington through Martha and George facilitates the development of an allegorical reading in which the illusion of the child is a motif for the progress of American Society. The cycle of “fun and games” and distortion of truth which propels the play’s narrative is established as Martha uses the plot of “that Bette Davis film” to develop a thinly veiled criticism of the “modest” nature of their lifestyle. As Martha contrasts George with the ironic description of “modest Joseph Cotton” a symbol of male sexuality, she bemoans their “modest cottage”. As Martha insists that the ambiguous “she” is “discontent”, she makes it clear that she blames George’s failure to progress within the college for their circumstances. Martha’s claim of dis-contentedness becomes critical as later in the play she reveals that “only one man has ever made [her] happy”. The fact that man is George shatters one of the central precepts of the play (that Martha really is seeking escape) and gives the audience pause to consider what other fundamental truths may simply be illusion. As Martha states that their son was “raised as best I can against… vicious odds, against the corruption of weakness and petty revenges”, Albee develops an implicit link between the “corruption” facing American society, the “vicious odds” that surrounded the birth of a nation and the fate of the son. As George counters that their son is “a son who is deep in his gut sorry to have been born”, Albee contends that rather than triumph over the “vicious odds”, America has instead fallen. In the development of this dialogue Albee contrasts the vision of the founding fathers with the realities of contemporary society. In doing so Albee argues that America’s self image of messianic democracy is itself a grand delusion.

[thecreeker]

So I gave writing an intro a shot. Can anyone have a look at this. Is it too english-y? Am I better off just ditching it all together and working on language analysis from the get go?

For Euripides, the acquisition of power may lead to false perceptions that culminate in an individual's ultimate "humiliation" and destruction. Throughout the context of the passages, the playwright depicts the perverse influence of power on human morality and sanity. Thus, Euripides alludes to the consequences which may befall an individual failing to exercise their power within the framework of "a smooth-tempered self-control". 

[charmanderp]

So I gave writing an intro a shot. Can anyone have a look at this. Is it too english-y? Am I better off just ditching it all together and working on language analysis from the get go?

For Euripides, the acquisition of power may lead to false perceptions that culminate in an individual's ultimate "humiliation" and destruction. Throughout the context of the passages, the playwright depicts the perverse influence of power on human morality and sanity. Thus, Euripides alludes to the consequences which may befall an individual failing to exercise their power within the framework of "a smooth-tempered self-control". 

I like it! But try to be a bit more detailed and specific to the text when you say things like 'false perceptions' or 'perverse influence of power on human morality and sanity'. I do like the idea (and this was what I did) of just jumping straight into your close analysis though.

[AwayBroadcast]

Hi all If someone wouldn't mind, could you guys tell me what you think about this essay i wrote  on Capote's 'In Cold Blood'? I can't remember which passages I used, but hopefully that won't make it difficult to pass on some advice!

Apologies for the following wall of text!!

Truman Capote’s ‘In Cold Blood’ is a journalistic none-fiction literary novel following the story of a Kansas family’s murder. Throughout the work, Capote attempts to explain to the readers who the murderers were, not in defense of their crime, but rather to allow the readers to develop their own opinions. Perry Smith was by far the most explored of the two, and we see one of the most telling explorations of his character in extract two, through a story told by Perry, illustrating who he perceives himself to be. Extract three, at the hangings, again has a description of Perry but this time from Alvin Dewey’s point of view, and extract one talks about Herb Clutter, providing a contrast between a genuinely good man, and one who merely perceives himself to be.

Perry Smith thrives on flattery, and even when he is not actively trying to flatter himself, his beliefs and memories succeed in doing so anyway. We see this in extract two, where Perry tells Dick about a recurring dream he has had since he was a child. The dream begins with Perry in a jungle, attempting to steal diamonds from a tree he knows is protected by a snake. As he begins to take one, the snake falls on him, and he can ‘hear [his] legs cracking.’ At that point, a ‘yellow, “sort of parrot”’, ‘taller than Jesus’ comes down to save him, taking him to ‘paradise’, but not before it has brutally slaughtered those who have wronged him. This dream illustrates the fact that Perry sees himself as a genuinely good person, someone who is always a victim and deserves to be saved, and even avenged. This contrasts with extract one, where we are shown that Herb Clutter, who was a genuine victim, was also a genuinely good man, - in essence, Herb is what Perry believed himself to be. Perry’s dream, however, contains more than just the belief of what he deserved.

In extract two, directly before the introduction of the dream, Perry is discussing his opinion on the inevitability of life. He believes that ‘once a thing is set to happen, all you can do is hope it won’t. or will – depending.’ This translates into his dream, where Perry knows the snake will attack him, and acknowledges ‘Jesus, I don’t know how to fight a snake,’ and yet, he reaches for the diamonds anyway, and then expects to be saved. Perry, throughout Capote’s work, is shown to be incapable of accepting blame – everything is someone else’s fault – and his description of being unable to prevent things from happening embodies this. He removes blame by concluding that what happens cannot be stopped. The parts f his dream in which he discusses the snake and the diamonds could also be applied to the murders. He acknowledges that there is a snake that will attack him, and that he will be unable to fight back, which in this case, is the murder conviction, but decides he ‘wants the diamonds more than he’s afraid of the snake,’ meaning he knows he will be convicted, but he cares less about the Clutter’s lives than his own freedom, and in fact, life. Capote’s use of this dream in his work illustrates Perry’s childish ideas of being saved no matter what he does, and of revenge. His child-like demeanour is again explored in extract three as he is hanged, but this time, from Dewey’s perspective.

Perry’s child-like demeanour is discussed many times throughout Capote’s work, with it even being described by dick as being what scares him most about Perry. Perry still sucks his thumb and wets the bed, and in extract three, though Dewey acknowledges that it was in fact Perry who fired the shots that killed the Clutters, he sees Perry as possessing ‘a quality, the aura of an exiled animal, a creature walking wounded’. Dick on the other hand, ‘seemed to him “a small-time chiseller who got out of his depth, empty and worthless,”’ and his execution did not disturb him. Dewey’s perception of Perry almost confirms Perry’s statement at the beginning of the extract, where he says ‘maybe I had something to contribute.’ Interestingly, Perry’s final words contain what you would not expect from Perry: an apology.

While dick forgave those who were to hang him before he was killed, Perry apologises for the murders, accepting blame for what happened, realising that he is not the victim. Capote’s inclusion of this, as well as Perry expressing that maybe he ‘had something to contribute’ would affect the reader’s point of view on capital punishment, which is what Capote, he himself being against it, may have wanted. Capote could have ended his book at the end of Perry’s execution, with Dewey seeing his ‘childish feet, dangling,’ but though this would have been a strong ending, there would have been little closure. The book was largely about the murders’ effect on the living, and so to end it with death would have been harsh. Capote therefore chose to end the book with life, describing a time the year before when Dewey, while visiting the Clutter’s grave, had run into Nancy Ewalt, who was now happy and studying at university. This softens the ending, allowing the reader to feel a sense of closure knowing that the rest of Holcomb had eventually returned to normal, and were again living happily.

[jeanweasley]

Okay, I took on board the feedback from my last posting, but I've written an analysis on a different text. Can someone give me a general comment as to what my strengths and weaknesses are?

The fall of Antony in these passages depict his inner conflict of balancing his pursuit of love with his Roman honour and duty; ‘ he became her guest’ suggests the immediate establishment of the future relationship of Antony and Cleopatra cementing the tragedy to come. Here, Shakespeare depicts Cleopatra’s femininity through the evocative description of Cleopatra’s barge: ‘burnish’d throne’. Enobarbus’ recollection is significant as this encapsulates the geographical difference between Rome and Egypt, highlighting Cleopatra’s lavishness through the symbol of gold, ‘the poop was beaten gold’ and the perfume, ‘tunes of flutes kept stroke’ and providing a contrast between the rigidity of Rome. Egypt is able to capture the heart of Rome’s strongest generals depicting not only Cleopatra’s power but suggesting Egypt’s mysticism; to the theatregoers this is an imperative scene as it establishes the parallel between the tumultuous transition of rulers in England and the superficial and lavish lifestyle of the new king, James I and his court.

Agrippa’s derogatory remarks to Cleopatra as a ‘rare Egyptian’ and a ‘royal wench’ attests the disapproval of theatregoers who view women as a vehicle of destruction of men. Shakespeare characterises Cleopatra to use her sexuality as a method of power and command; this is evident in Antony being tied by Cleopatra’s ‘strings’ and the powerful men who have laid with Cleopatra: ‘Caesar lay his sword to bed’. This reference to sword attests to Cleopatra’s attraction to the powers of men and her effects on them. Cleopatra is described by Antony as a ‘conqueror’ who has made him ‘weak by affection [and] would obey it on all cause’. Shakespeare however does not focus just on the destruction of great men by women; he explores the contribution of two powerful forces to their inevitable tragedy and questions whether individual action can have disastrous effects. The fall of Antony to the ‘young Roman boy’ depicts the contrast between Antony who has been influenced and consequently compromised by his love for Cleopatra.

‘All is lost’ endorses that Antony’s loss to Caesar has led to his downfall and while he has ‘done all’, his loss of honour is irreversible suggesting that the choice of pursuing actions to support one’s feelings may lead to disaster. ‘How I convey my shame out of thine eyes’ reveals Antony’s testament that his decision to flee the battle was his own choice that has left him ‘stroy’d in dishonour’ which he now has to rid of through his death, however later Antony addresses Cleopatra’s contributions to his downfall as Cleopatra had been his ‘crownd’ and ‘right gipsy’. This reference along with Cleopatra being likened to a ‘witch’ endorses that perhaps it is both Antony and Cleopatra’s faults and their pursuit of passion that caused their destruction.

[mseleanor]

I originally put this up in the close analysis submission thread but then realized everyone was posting theirs here 

I was wondering if anybody could please give me some tips on how to improve this, and (hopefully) get it up to the standard of a 17/20 essay?

I'm just going to mark one of your paragraphs if that's ok with you

2011 passages - Plays: The Bacchae

Passage One demonstrates the beauty of engaging with nature yet as well as?its inherently destructive potential. Descriptions of the “ecstasy” of Dionysian worship on Mount Cithaeron offers paints an image of wild abandonment and hedonism,I would say, put a full stop here. while the man who joins in is said to there “sanctifiessancti[fy]? his life”, concurrently reminding the audience of the need for nature to substantiate humankind for life itself.Woah woah. I've broken it up for you, but no need to cram so much into one sentence. The ideas and analysis are sound, just make sure your sentences don't run away from you. Also re read those last few words, I think your message could be clearer Amidst vivid descriptionsyou could quote an example here, show how it evokes beauty. Then, in your next sentence refer to an example implying destruction. Break up your analysis into small, logical steps. illuminating the beauty of such release lie hints of destruction. Worshippers it's actually spelled with only one 'p'. Don't ask me why, or why I even know that, hahaordered by Dionysus to run and dance “delirious, possessed” suggest a clouded vision of reality. On surface level it may appear that they are possessed by the God himself however the connotations of mental disturbance reflect women frenzied due to having submitted entirely to the primal engagement with nature in their Bacchic worship. Their previous residence in Thebes is emblematic of the converse rigidity of civilization that Dionysus’ goings-on (awkward )on Mount Cithaeron threatened.Rethink the structure of this whole sentence The oppressed (not necessary)image evoked by the phrase “Theban women leaving their spinning and their weaving” indicates a previous life of unfulfilled sexuality and individual self-repression, as required by the stringent rule imposed by the city.coolbeans. Except  you might not need to mention the city. From such an extreme the women left into the “revel and rapture” that had long been denied.this is a descriptive not an analytical sentence. Be careful you don't do this. Thus, from one form of extremity their surfacing needs see them submit to the other, from their “spinning and weaving” to the “maddening trance” of falling to the sexuality and abandonment Dionysus offers and, himself, represents. read this last sentence out loud. You need a summary of your interpretation at the end here

Watch how you execute your expression. Simplify your sentences. One sentence = one idea. Make sure you're analysing the passages at all times, rather than retelling the narrative. Most of the time you do this, but sometimes you lapse into narrative and I think your analysis could be more focused and specific. This will happen naturally if you sort out the logical progression and structure of your prose. Your vocabulary is good, just try not be verbose for the sake of being verbose.

EDIT FROM LOLLYMATRON: woops I accidentally edited your post instead of quoting it ( I DO THIS ALL THE TIME WHYYY) but the marking is still there. Hope it helps

[brightsky]

I'll try my best. :p

Okay, I took on board the feedback from my last posting, but I've written an analysis on a different text. Can someone give me a general comment as to what my strengths and weaknesses are?

The fall of Antony in these passages depict A small grammatical error, but not an unconscionable one.his inner conflict of balancing his pursuit of love with his Roman honour and duty; ‘ he became her guest’ suggests the immediate establishment of the future relationship of Antony and Cleopatra cementing the tragedy to come. Here, Shakespeare depicts Cleopatra’s femininity through the evocative description of Cleopatra’s barge: ‘burnish’d throne’. Enobarbus’ recollection is significant as this encapsulates the geographical differenceNot sure what exactly it is you're trying to say here. I don't think 'geographical difference' is the best term to use. between Rome and Egypt, highlighting Cleopatra’s lavishness through the symbol of gold, ‘the poop was beaten gold’ and the perfume, ‘tunes of flutes kept stroke’ and providing a contrast betweenContrast with not contrast between the rigidity of Rome.Good. Egypt is able to capture the heart of Rome’s strongest generals depicting not only Cleopatra’s power but suggesting Egypt’s mysticism; to the theatregoers this is an imperative Again, not sure what it is you're trying to say here. What makes this an 'imperative' (i.e. indispensable) scene? The adjective is not quite right.scene as it establishes the parallel between the tumultuous transition of rulers in England and the superficial and lavish lifestyle of the new king, James I and his court.Interesting take. I like it.

Agrippa’s derogatory remarks to'Against' is the preposition you're looking for. Cleopatra as a ‘rare Egyptian’ and a ‘royal wench’ attests Attests to, not just attest.the disapproval of theatregoers'Theatregoers' sounds a little informal. who view women as a vehicle of destruction of men. Don't think 'vehicle' is the best noun to use here but okay.Shakespeare characterises Cleopatra to use her sexualityProblem with expression. as a method of power and commandGood.; this is evident in Antony being tied by Cleopatra’s ‘strings’ Yes! The nautical metaphor is essential!and the powerful men who have laid with Cleopatra: ‘Caesar lay his sword to bed’.Okay, I won't use 'Caesar' here. I'd put 'Julius Caesar' instead. I'm not sure which edition you have, but in my edition, Octavius is referred to as Caesar. There is a potential for confusion. This reference to sword attests to Cleopatra’s attraction to the powers of men and her effects on them. Cleopatra is described by Antony as a ‘conqueror’ who has made him ‘weak by affection [and] would obey it on all cause’. Shakespeare however does not focus just on the destruction of great men by women; he explores the contribution of two powerful forces to their inevitable tragedy and questions whether individual action can have disastrous effects. The fall of Antony to the ‘young Roman boy’ depicts the contrast between Antony who has been influenced and consequently compromised by his love for Cleopatra.Food for thought: do you not think that Antony possesses at least some tragic nobility? In Caesar's view, Antony is a fallen hero. But how reliable is Caesar's point of view?

‘All is lost’ endorses that Antony’s loss to Caesar has led to his downfall and while he has ‘done all’, his loss of honour is irreversible suggesting that the choice of pursuing actions to support one’s feelings Does Shakespeare necessarily advocate reason over emotion? Consider Shakespeare's characterisation of Caesar, who is, incontrovertibly, the embodiment of reason. Consider Cleopatra's declaration 'paltry to be Caesar'. may lead to disaster. ‘How I convey my shame out of thine eyes’ reveals Antony’s testament that his decision to flee the battle was his own choice that has left him ‘stroy’d in dishonour’ which he now has to rid of through his death, however later Antony addresses Cleopatra’s contributions to his downfall as Cleopatra had been his ‘crownd’ and ‘right gipsy’. This reference along with Cleopatra being likened to a ‘witch’ endorses that perhaps it is both Antony and Cleopatra’s faults and their pursuit of passionSurely the two are the same thing from the Roman point of view. Antony's greatest flaw, from Caesar's perspective, is his Epicureanism. that caused their destruction.