Language in VCE Literature

[kandinsky]

I'm only doing 1/2 Literature, but we've got to do CPA as well (you guys sound so professional though, it's scary how you redefine 'close'. I don't think I could've picked up on half the things you do). Anyways, it's on the Great Gatsby, which isn't too much of a hard read as the author really just spells out all of his techniques for you.

It took me around 4 hours to write, but I write very quickly when under pressure (now that I can recall all the phrases I've used here). I was thinking of maybe doing one under timed circumstances just to see how I'd go. [c

- Don't write under timed conditions until you have your ideas so well formed that they are basically memorised, in the sense that when you see a passage phrases and paragraphs you have already written will come to your mind - and you will (hopefully) write them! I didn't write under timed conditions until 3 weeks before the exam (i.e when your school starts doing prac exams).


The Great Gatsby, F.Scott Fitzgerald's magnum opus (this is irrelevant and debatable), repudiates the idea of the "American Dream"- a romantic (this should either be capitalised or not be included. It's only the first sentence and you have already put off the marker twice by making bold statements - be careful! YOu need to draw ideas out of the passages, not superimpose ideas without substantiating them ) idealism characterised by the pursuit of material wealth and hedonistic desires, which was exceedingly prevalent in the societal paradigm of 1920s New York, the setting of the novel. As The Great Gatsby progresses through critiques of duplicity, as seen in Passage One and Two ( you need a quote - this looks to pre-prepared. You also need to discuss some language in Pragraph One), to the unraveling of its protagonists sanguine vision, as seen in Passage Three, Fitzgerald's equanimous tone - established through 'soft' sounds such as in "sedative" and "velvet" in Passage One which lend a 'smooth' quality to the extract, to the use of "muffled" and "suffocating" in Passage Three - words which convey abnegation and repressed friction, caresses and guides the novel with its objective, detached hand (good to see discussion of language - but unfortunately you don't go further to show it's significance or how the author is using it to accentuate meaning within the novel form I know it is hard but please try to show how the language evokes, for example, duplicity). Fitzgerald's objectivity ( please don't call Fitzgerald objective again - the novel is social satire and Fitzgerald is making a direct point about the upper classes of Amerique. Also consider the literary notion of the 'death of the author' - surely you aren't calling the narrator objective?) is significant herein - it functions as a paragon by which the reader can measure the accuracy of not only his/her own perceptions of the novel's reality, but the perceptions of Fitzgerald's characters, whose autonomous notions of what truly is are "worn so threadbare" that, like the narrator, one cannot help but feel the "basic insincerity" that permeates them. this paragraph is too general - you need more quotes from the passages - at least 5- and some discussion of language. Then and only then will I allow you to make a bold statement - you jsut need more evidence ! Everything you have said COULD be great - if you substantiate it This paragaph also looks far too pre-prepared

The notion that one can "self-determine one's character" is critiqued in Passages One and Two. Daisy's comment "that's the best thing a girl can be...a beautiful little fool" demonstrates that although she is aware of the balance of power between the masculine and the feminine within the social context of The Great Gatsby (what? - it is surely about vanity and the lack of inner substance within her society - read the book again and think about why Gatsby is so depressed, and how sad the ending is - because they come to him for his wealth etc, not for himself - somehow I think you have been influenced too much by movies of the novel which emphasise glamour) , she prefers to erect a façade of nescience with which she can transcend into carelessness, into an abode where she cannot be measured against the same moral standards as if she was aware . This falseness, this elaborate 'trick'  (she is definitely not trying to trick people but is acting in accordance with the de rigueur mode of beign demanded by her society) her character is exposed to the reader when her masquerade is compared to a 'membership in a rather distinguished secret society.... to which she and Tom belonged' (don't quote for content - talk about language. also this quote is too long without enough being said abut it). Herein lies Fitzgerald's challenge to hedonism and the accumulation of material wealth - in spite of the Buchanans' privileged status as residents of East Egg, in itself a 'distinguished secret society', even they must resort to pretense - they are not, regardless of what their wealth or demeanor suggests, truly happy. ( sorry to say this but you have offered a circular argument - they KNOW they are not happy - perhaps you should look at the subtleties of imagery/description in the novel again. also you assume wealth=happiness)

Indeed, time and time again in The Great Gatsby the ability of one to be defined merely on social stature is questioned. Consider, for example, the 'incredulity' that Carraway expresses at Gatsby's post hoc explanation of how he came into his wealth in Passage Two - 'My family all died and I came into a great deal of money' (please don't re-write for the examiner the words on the exam paper) . Evocative images are established through 'rajah', 'jewels' and 'turbaned' - words which lend an exotic undertone to Gatsby's narrative but juxtapose sharply with Carraway's, and a western reader's, realism, causing a dissonance which ultimately renders the explanation absurd (much better - more of this needed). The reader thus agrees (always avoid saying this) with Carraway who, with 'effort', 'restrains his laughter' and the author subsequently capitalises on this newfound scepticism by following it with a recital of Gatsby's experiences during the war, with the intent that the reader will henceforth be predisposed to dismiss Gatsby's tale as fabrication. Indeed, this passage alludes to Fitzgerald's concern that Gatsby's belief that he can create himself, his self-prescribed status as a 'son of God', is essentially fallacious as it contradicts the basic human position of being subject to fate, the constraints of one's social class and ultimately the transience of time. (slightly off the point- Gatsby is the American dream, but think more about the cost of such a dream to him personally)

Fitzgerald's minimifidianism lol please don't ever use this word again towards Gatsby's delusional image of himself is developed further in Passage Three. The notion that one can change the past, a notion (don't repeat words in the same sentence) that Gatsby expresses when he states "it's all wiped out forever" (don't quote for content) is reminiscent of the broken clock earlier in the text, a metaphor which echoed the author's stance that time remains fundamentally outside the domain of human control (more of this insight needed - fill your essays with this kind of stuff, avoid all other fluff/storytelling/unsubstantiated claims) . Gatsby's reverie - of being able to mould time with a divine dexterity (no, just no), is revealed as quixotic by the use of phrases such as 'perceptible reluctance' and 'She hesitated", which demonstrate that it is only Gatsby, who, being so trapped in his crucible of narcissism and self-bestowed omnipotence, is not able to perceive the Utopian and unrealistic nature of his dream, while the other characters are easily able to do so. It is of great significance herein that Gatsby's dream is ultimately shattered by the falling of a cigarette - "she threw the cigarette and the burning match on the carpet". A symbol associated with ash, the cigarette alludes to the 'Valley of Ashes', itself a greater metaphor for the ultimately barren consequences, and unsustainable nature, of the American Dream. Fitzgerald, through the use of the cigarette, seems to remind the reader that, like the American Dream which he represents, Gatsby's vision is flawed - it fails on a basic level to comprehend the limitations of it's bearer, which, primarily, are the limitations of humanity itself - time, place and circumstance. ( You spend too much time in this essay talking about Gatsby and the American Dream - the examiner will think you lack imagination - come up with some other ideas about the text. Remember - in your essays in year 12 never repeat a. words and b. ideas)

In this regard, Passage Three's ideas (don't use this word) are merely extensions of the ones presented in Passage One and Two, but nonetheless remain an important progression in the context of The Great Gatsby - they show how the ability to masquerade one's personality as another can slowly metamorphose into a chimera, a false sense of divinity. This, Fitzgerald suggests, is what leads to Gatsby's downfall - the phrase '(the) words seemed to physically bite into him' bluntly revealing the fact that Gatsby's vision is not grounded in rationality or experience but in a construct of 'words', of fantasy. Gatsby's death, therefore, came not from the hands of George Wilson - that was only the physical manifestation, a mechanism used by Fitzgerald to resolve, give closure to the text, but rather from Daisy's 'reluctance' and eventual rejection, from 'words', the only means that could 'physically bite into him'. His death symbolises the death of the American Dream itself, TOO MUCH LIKE AN ENGLISH ESSAY - what does the novel tell us about our lives and humanity in general? Lit doesn't ask for what the text means. It looks too much like you have got this idea from a critic, too - not original enough and as the reader draws parallels between the fundamentally meretricious nature of both Gatsby's vision and the 'Dream', Fitzgerald reveals that the underlying paradigm of selfish optimism in both is an opium from which not only Gatsby, but civilisation as a whole, draws the justification for it's immorality. In summation, The Great Gatsby's critique of The American Dream stems from a deep understanding of how such a notion can be exploited to rationalise heinous and amoral activities - and this tendency to exploit, the author seems to suggest, comes so instinctively to the human position that it warrants the death of the Dream altogether.

So basically, a lot to improve. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh in my comments - but this is what you need to be able to improve. Lit isn't an easy subject and you make mistakes which are very common. This would get a good mark in English. But for Literature you need to use more language analysis and come up with more original ideas. You need to end your essay with a big statement about what the text is saying about human beings/the personal cost of civilisation/the loneliness of the soul. NEVER quote to tell the narrative again. You also need to use the passages more, show links between them, and show how small details within the narrative illuminate larger, perhaps more disturbing, meanings. Good luck for this year! and feel free to PM if you have any questions.

p.s there is nothing wrong with using big words - the examiners love it.

[charmanderp]

p.s there is nothing wrong with using big words - the examiners love it.

In moderation. It also depends on how you use them - occasionally the sesquipadalian verbosity of your prose can obfuscate your semantic discourse.

[kandinsky]

In moderation. It also depends on how you use them - occasionally the sesquipadalian verbosity of your prose can obfuscate your semantic discourse.

But if you know what they mean, know how to use them in context, and don't use them all in a single sentence, but rather 2 or so a paragraph, it is more impressive. Also, I make a distinction between 'big words' and 'interesting big words'. Take words with French, Old English and Ancient Greek roots - something like oneiric. Avoid words of latin origin as they are usually less interesting.

charmanderp is right though - start using big words only after you have conquered the essay style and your ideas. You will find it hard to express things beautifully if you don't know what you are saying!

[charmanderp]

But if you know what they mean, know how to use them in context, and don't use them all in a single sentence, but rather 2 or so a paragraph, it is more impressive. Also, I make a distinction between 'big words' and 'interesting big words'. Take words with French, Old English and Ancient Greek roots - something like oneiric. Avoid words of latin origin as they are usually less interesting.

charmanderp is right though - start using big words only after you have conquered the essay style and your ideas. You will find it hard to express things beautifully if you don't know what you are saying!

Mmm but it's a slippery slope I feel - VCE students tend to feel that 'big words' are the be all and end all of doing well in written subjects, which is certainly not the case. Clarity of (high-level ideas) and vivid expression should be the focus - that is, to use language that clearly conveys your ideas to the reader, to give them the best chance of understanding them, whilst writing in such a way that evokes interest in what you're saying. Being detailed and descriptive is more than just using words that are 'big' - it's using the best words for saying what you want to say! And sometimes a simpler word is the best one.

[kandinsky]

Mmm but it's a slippery slope I feel - VCE students tend to feel that 'big words' are the be all and end all of doing well in written subjects, which is certainly not the case. Clarity of (high-level ideas) and vivid expression should be the focus - that is, to use language that clearly conveys your ideas to the reader, to give them the best chance of understanding them, whilst writing in such a way that evokes interest in what you're saying. Being detailed and descriptive is more than just using words that are 'big' - it's using the best words for saying what you want to say! And sometimes a simpler word is the best one.

N.B I am only talking about Literature - it is a special subject because it is one in which basically your whole mark comes from how well you write. For the examiners in Literature, how you write is just as important as what you are writing - they love what is called 'belles lettres' (basically, beautiful prose). Students often forget this. Certainly for English etc be much more restrained - ENg is more concerned with ideas. I'm not saying that big words are the be all and end all. I'm saying that if you are already a really good student using one or two amazing words per essay will certainly make your essay stand out. Of course this is in addition to being able to phrase sentences very well.

'Big words' (this sounds funny after a while haha) exist because often they have a very specific meaning which can perfectly articulate an idea. So using one correctly in this manner may in fact lessen the verbosity of your sentence. That is how any student ought to use big words - not as fillers but as clarifiers. It is wrong to automatically equate 'big words' with verbosity, because people who use them to be verbose are using them incorrectly. There are also certain philosophical/literary ideas that come in the form of large words - weltansschauung (worldview), eclaircissement (enlightenment/clarification), liebestod (love-death). In VCE Literature, you are permitted to take a particular philosophical stance, and it is perfectly acceptable to use such ideas and vocabulary AS LONG AS ( I can't stress this enough) you are using them correctly and substantiate all your ideas with conclusive evidence from the given passages.

 This is of course not advised for students who are struggling to put a sentence together. I suggest that these students practice alternating between short and long sentences, map out their ideas before putting them to paper, and practice creating a logical flow within the argument. The biggest problem I see in Lit essays is that students struggle to logically draw out ideas from the passages in a clear and cohesive manner. The only real way to work on this is to do lots of essays prior to the exam, and to ensure that you are adequately equipped with language analysis skills so that you don't sit stunned in the exam looking at the passages.

[charmanderp]

Mmm to each their own - the best literature essays I've read at university and high school level use simple language.

There is a case to be made though that says the VCE Lit examiners place an arbitrarily high value on fancy sounding vocabulary and mark essays with 8/10 or 9/10 level ideas up to a 10 as a result.

You're completely right in saying that the kind of 'big words' anyone should use are ones that have a very specific and vivid meaning, and express ideas in more developed way. I just wouldn't want any VCE Lit student to read this and think they can't do as well as anyone else just because their vocab isn't as broad as someone else's - at the end of the day quality of complex analysis is the primary feature examiners are looking for.

[kandinsky]

Maybe we could leave it as

Students won't be marked down for using simple vocabulary, as long as they don't repeat words, but using some fancy vocab might impress the examiner a little more IF they use it correctly. Students shouldn't be afraid of showing how well they can use the English language, at least.

However I'm not sure what you call 'simple language'. There is a fine line between 'simple' and 'monotonous / unimaginative'. I like clear and fluid prose - as long as the ideas have a certain firepower and originality. Students should make sure that when they write 'complex' ideas their language doesn't also become muddled and disorganised. This is the key to Literature.

Unfortunately this is just one of those areas that will remain a bit of a mystery in VCE Literature, mainly because different markers have slightly different views on what constitutes an excellent prose style.

I personally believe that at the upper end of the scale they look for originality, but that's another, wholly different, aspect of the subject.

[charmanderp]

I personally believe that at the upper end of the scale they look for originality, but that's another, wholly different, aspect of the subject.

This is certainly true to an extent, but at the same time I've known students to rehash study guides in essay form and score top marks Aaah VCE Literature, what an enigma you are.

What I mean by simple language is words that clearly explain ideas in such a way that someone - anyone - can comprehend them without having to reread any sentences. As you've said though it's a very imperfect science! My crucial bit of advice is just for anyone studying Lit to not go out of their way to use fancy sounding language because they think that's what this subject requires - it's not.

I ought to split this conversation off this thread too...

[achre]

Damn, everything I wanted to say has already been said.
I'll just leave this here.

[kandinsky]

I've known students to rehash study guides in essay form and score top marks

haha #madlitexaminers

Maybe in the pre-marking meeting they just sit around with tea and scones sewing blankets...

"So how did you mark your exams last year"
"I threw them down the staircase and gave 50 to the one that landed nearest to my cat"
"I should try that next year..."

[90+FTW]

THANK YOU! This is something I am constantly stressing to my students, some of them don't seem to understand that language analysis is VITAL in literature. If you want anywhere NEAR a 40+ in Literature your essay needs to focus on the complexity of language.

[brenden]

What makes an interesting word?

I can't speak for Literature in VCE, but I feel as if the goal for any type of essay or short-response type subject should be clarity and efficiency. "Use the most suitable word to convey what you need to as clearly as possible". I like that principle, and I think it can occasionally lead to some 'big words', should they be the most suitable. Anything else, for me, seems to lack a bit academic integrity. "Ah, I'll slip some in here!" or "Nah, better refrain from that one, I'll find a shorter word!" seem odd. Perhaps I've just been moulded by my Phil tutors/lecturers.

[90+FTW]

I feel as if the goal for any type of essay or short-response type subject should be clarity and efficiency.

I completely agree with this, writing shouldn't be too elaborate. It should be clear, concise and effective. Fancy shmancy writing draws attention away from the main focus.

[kandinsky]

"Ah, I'll slip some in here!" or "Nah, better refrain from that one, I'll find a shorter word!" seem odd. Perhaps I've just been moulded by my Phil tutors/lecturers.

Yep that's the worst thing students can do - using 'big words' just for the sake of using 'big words' is pointless. They have to have a necessary meaning and relevance to what you are saying. They have to be used in order to clarify and 'enhance' the main focus of the argument. Usually if students don't have a reason for using a fancy word, they are using it incorrectly.

What makes an interesting word?

All Literature students should aim for a clear and concise style. And because Literature is actually examining a student's knowledge of the English language, I don't think people should be afraid of using one or two words slightly left of field. For example, if you are studying Shakespeare and he uses the word 'limned', and you are writing about that play, I see nothing wrong with employing such a word (as long as students use it correctly). See how this is not a 'big word' but is interesting, is in the english language, and is perfectly acceptable (it means illuminate/portray with words/outline/describe). Students need a varied vocabulary, but this should not come at the cost of clarity. The important thing in Lit is to avoid repetition of similar words and ideas - that is probably where it differs from English, where a whole essay might be focused on a single idea in a play.

[drmockingbird]

So basically, a lot to improve. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh in my comments - but this is what you need to be able to improve. Lit isn't an easy subject and you make mistakes which are very common. This would get a good mark in English. But for Literature you need to use more language analysis and come up with more original ideas. You need to end your essay with a big statement about what the text is saying about human beings/the personal cost of civilisation/the loneliness of the soul. NEVER quote to tell the narrative again. You also need to use the passages more, show links between them, and show how small details within the narrative illuminate larger, perhaps more disturbing, meanings. Good luck for this year! and feel free to PM if you have any questions.

p.s there is nothing wrong with using big words - the examiners love it.

Wow! I only just saw this now. Thanks so much for all the pointers - Looking back I can fully understand what you're trying to say. Just a question, when you're talking about 'explaining the significance of the language', how do you go about doing that without doing the old 'this positions the reader to X'?