Difference between amazing and average close analysis?

[thaaanyan]

Hey guys,
Finally garnered the courage to post on this forum haha, mostly just been lurking-ish.

I was wondering in your opinion what do you think to be the defining qualities of an awesome passage analysis?
Like, I get that you need a comprehensive understanding of views and values, and like a solid interpretation: but i just don't get how you write insightfuly? And how you add depth to your response and like manipulate language specifically is what im not 100% with.. any ideas or observations are welcomed and appreciated

[EvangelionZeta]

Originality and "passion".  A good close analysis should be interesting and worthwhile to read, as opposed to just another regurgitated essay.  Honestly, that's the best advice I can give

(another approach - remember what you felt when you first read the text.  Try to convey those *feelings* on paper, with your language)

[thaaanyan]

Thank-you! I never really thought of it that way.

[kandinsky]

Agree with EZ on all he said.

Try to go into the exam with nothing in your mind except the desire to fully engage with and appreciate the passages and its language. You have to have a certain amount of nervous energy and also be fresh and open to the possibility of having to radically alter some of your prepared stuff.

Don't go in aiming to regurgitate the last best thing you wrote - it will never work and besides memorising top quality material for the exam doesn't guarantee a good mark - it's all about how you use it in response to the passage. 

Just remember the key commandment of Lit right through the exam - to always ground your interpretations in language and authorial construction. It is worse to say excellent things/ideas with no substantiation from the passages than it is to say mediocre things/ideas/points with very good substantiation and lang  engagement from the passages. Use small things in the passage's language to illuminate the larger ideas within the text.