English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)

[elysepopplewell]

I really appreciate the feedback however I am trying to wrap my head around how to introduce a quote the way you suggest, I've just fallen into a pattern after years of doing it this way, would you be able to give me a short example by any chance?

I'll try take a look at this based on what I think Jamon means at a glance. An example would be:

"The bus is a metaphor for the banality of routine in her life, thus describing the situation that has stimulated her consequent discovery. " So I've identified the technique and the analysis in the one sentence, rather than dividing them into two.

Similarly seen here: "The mise-en-scene of the beach background supports Adam’s claims to being a “shire boy” before stating that all boat people are “criminals.”"

It definitely doesn't hurt to introduce the quote and the technique in one sentence, and then the analysis of the quote in the next sentence. But, varying that structure is very beneficial. One of my strongest pieces of advice for making your essay more punchy is to use less sentences without cutting any important analysis. Think of it like cordial, you've got all of this water mixed in with the straight cordial: the good stuff. You've got to go through and pull out of the water until you are left with seriously concentrated cordial: super sweet, strong, and colourful. When you have two sentences, when you could in fact suffice with one that is far stronger, you leave a lot of room for the water to be sitting around the strong cordial.

To reiterate, it doesn't hurt to use the two sentence structure. BUT, an essay will be stronger if you can use the two sentence structure sometimes, and sometimes combine those two sentences into one really succinct and powerful sentence.

Jamon might come along to confirm whether or not this is what he intended when he said this, but this is my advice

[jamonwindeyer]

I'll try take a look at this based on what I think Jamon means at a glance. An example would be:

"The bus is a metaphor for the banality of routine in her life, thus describing the situation that has stimulated her consequent discovery. " So I've identified the technique and the analysis in the one sentence, rather than dividing them into two.

Similarly seen here: "The mise-en-scene of the beach background supports Adam’s claims to being a “shire boy” before stating that all boat people are “criminals.”"

It definitely doesn't hurt to introduce the quote and the technique in one sentence, and then the analysis of the quote in the next sentence. But, varying that structure is very beneficial. One of my strongest pieces of advice for making your essay more punchy is to use less sentences without cutting any important analysis. Think of it like cordial, you've got all of this water mixed in with the straight cordial: the good stuff. You've got to go through and pull out of the water until you are left with seriously concentrated cordial: super sweet, strong, and colourful. When you have two sentences, when you could in fact suffice with one that is far stronger, you leave a lot of room for the water to be sitting around the strong cordial.

To reiterate, it doesn't hurt to use the two sentence structure. BUT, an essay will be stronger if you can use the two sentence structure sometimes, and sometimes combine those two sentences into one really succinct and powerful sentence.

Jamon might come along to confirm whether or not this is what he intended when he said this, but this is my advice

Agree on all counts! It's all about sentence variety (important) and being succinct with your analysis (even more important).

The use of demand complements the composers use of powerful figurative language in the conclusive mantra; "Ideas are bulletproof," effectively communicates the importance of political activism to a modern audience.

This sentence hits technique, example, and audience impact, and a little bit of explanation too. I would vary my structure, including order and length, to include different things at different times in different ways. I really like Elyse's cordial analogy here; you don't need to take out all the water, but strong cordial is better than weak cordial, especially if you fill the cup back up with more cordial 

I understand how hard it is to break patterns, but keep working on it! With practice your writing style will continue to develop 

[jamonwindeyer]

HULLOOOOOOOOOO. This is just a practice essay question for Mod C: People in Politics.

Also, I was thinking of using this as a basis for a memorised essay...would you have any tips concerning this?
Thanks- Wes

Spoiler

Explore how the relationship between the individual and society is explored in Brave New World and ONE other related text of your choosing:

The longing to acquire an unequivocal control over oneself and one’s environment is an intrinsic desire within every individual. Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World (1932) reveals this desire through exploring the mixed actions of individuals in response to the totalitarian oppression of the World State; Huxley’s dystopian reinforced through the animated film Metropolis (2001), directed by Rintaro. Great start! Slightly messy wording in this sentence though, had to do a double take. Metropolis’ explores the dangerous society has degraded how truth and individuality are valued. This conflict is further political activities between the plutocratic industrialist Duke Red, and an insurgent rebel organisation, as well as the unstable relationship between robots and their human masters. Again, this sentence doesn't quite read smoothly. Also, is detailing the forms of conflict absolutely necessary? Both texts effectively demonstrate how a relentless pursuit for political control makes the harmonious unity of values between an individual and their society practically impossible. GOod intro! I really like this conclusive sentence  I would like to see you list your paragraph arguments to properly set up your essay!

Humankind’s individual struggle to maintain supremacy in an ever-changing world is amplified through technological and industrial advancement of the societies in both texts. Excellent! Try to introduce the text in a little more detail, but less technique based way (linking to this theme) before you go into analysis. Just gives your paragraph a bit more motivation. Citizens in Huxley’s World State are the result of incredible technological progress, as seen through the frequent use of scientific jargon. For example, exclamations of the Director of Hatcheries and conditioning (DHC) boasting about how “Bokanovsky’s process is one of the major instruments of social stability!” coupled with numerical language such as the conveyor belt “travelling at the rate of thirty-three and a third centimeters an hour. Two hundred and sixty-seven days at eight metres a day”. The mechanised style of linguistic detail exposes a society in which individuals advantageously utilise the power of technology to exploit and dehumanise man through practices such as the World State’s mass production and conditioning of human individuals. Excellent explanation of text! The individual’s struggle for hegemonic power is also represented through Metropolis’ introduction of the ‘Ziggurat’: a technologically advanced weapon disguised as a building. Technique? Don't slip into just using plot elements. The film’s opening features vectors of rolling clouds that cast the Ziggurat as the salient image with its apex penetrating high above the clouds. This dominating stature establishes it as symbol for mankind’s technological achievements and power. Good. During a coup d’état orchestrated by Duke Red, a still frame of the president’s dead body positioned in the foreground is contrasted with the imposing background presence of the Ziggurat. This signals the shift of authority to selfish individuals who have harnessed available technological advancement, rendering the value of truth and collective unity to be meaningless. It is therefore evident that individuals will try and use the circumstances of their society to grow capable of exercising political control over others. Excellent paragraph!! I'd normally like to see a little more audience impact in your analysis, but this question doesn't demand it to a high level, so I think this is great!! Be sure to only give the most relevant details, and never give plot elements as examples; techniques!

The constant oppression of political ideologies inflicted by society is capable of corrupting an individual’s moral code and eventually, their core identity. John the Savage is a character used as a model for the degradation of one’s hope and idealistic political values. When John is first introduced he is described “to fashion [pots of clay], to give form, to feel his fingers gaining in skill and power- this gave him extraordinary pleasure”. This alliterative depiction brings attention to his uniqueness, developing his passions through free choice in favour over accepting a false happiness instilled by preconditioning. Excellent. However, John’s sinful acts in the World State such as an “orgy porgy” lead him to take his own life, portrayed in the simile as “like two unhurried compass needles…north, north-east, east, south-east, south”. Similar to a compass needle, every vestige of John’s hope and humanity is rendered obsolete by the comforts of dystopian society. Excellent character analysis here and well linked to your concept! Again though, be careful about just retelling the plot (you are borderline, try to shift your language to focus instead on techniques! In Metropolis, Tima is an android used as a symbol for humanity’s purity. When first discovering the outside world, chiaroscuro is utilised to contrast her bright luminescence with the surrounding robots and environment. Her stunning depiction accompanied with the peacefulness of slow jazz music portrays how she is an individual untainted by Duke Red’s political agenda. At the film’s climax however, a vertical panning shot of her body reveals the entire extent of being forced to submit to the society created by the Duke. Vivid, red colours mixed with the emptiness of black consume half her face and starkly juxtaposes her pure, unblemished skin. Like John the Savage, Tima is used to signify the corruption of individuals caused by being a slave to society. I think you are slipping a little too far into just retelling the text to explain the themes. Try to take a step back, and instead of using a recount style, just say "This technique used for characterising this character achieves this effect in this way." It will just raise the sophistication ever so slightly.

The distribution of power amongst social echelons evidently leads many individuals to feel a sense of unfulfillment or confusion with their society. As above, I'm looking for you to introduce both texts in terms of this theme before delving into one or the other. Huxley communicates the oppressive nature of the World State’s totalitarian control on individuals by the character pair of Bernard and Helmholtz, both of whom are dissatisfied with their social status in the Alpha caste. Bernard’s frustration stems from his physique- described as “hardly better than the average Gamma”, demonstrating his society’s facile perception that physical stature determines social status. Helmholtz, on the other hand, longs for a creative power he likens to “all the water that goes down the falls instead of down the turbines”. No techniques in this analysis; this hinders the power of your ideas (even though you use one next). The dichotomy between water imagery and the built environment represents the suppression of natural, human creativity by the industrialised control of the World State’s human conditioning. Likewise, the citizens of Rintaro’s Metropolis have formed a powerful stigma arising from concerns of robots threatening the human-regulated government. When the young protagonist Kenichi enters a robot storage facility, dark lighting is utilised to hide the robots’ physical appearances, contrasting with the brightly illuminated serial numbers above them. This is textual retell, be careful! The use of chiaroscuro in this manner diminishes their significance as ‘members’ of society to being the mere results of mass production and belonging in the lowest caste, created by humans to conform to society but never intended to live as equals.  This displeasure is further seen when an anti-robot political party interrogates the android Tima. A rotating camera circles around Tima’s dumbfounded countenance; the dynamic motion reflecting her confused state of identity caused by the society’s distinct division in social structure, since she is both human and robot. You are relying heavily on recounting the text to explain your ideas. As above, take a step back  Both societies’ capitalist attitudes have caused these characters to be displeasingly aware of their eliminated individualism and desire change.

Both Huxley and Rintaro explore the individual’s struggle for purpose amidst their respective societies’ intense fixation on the ownership of power. Individuals will try and utilise numerous political circumstances and unique tools to supremely differentiate themselves from the majority of society, for example technological advancement. However, the resulting perpetual conflict with society evidently deteriorates the integrity of one’s identity and individualism. Nice, succinct conclusion, well done!!

This is a really great essay!! I love your conceptual focus, excellently established and very well maintained throughout the response. Lots of great examples from the text, a really nice and distinct structure, and the question is answered effectively. Well done!!

The only major comment I'd make concerns textual retell. Particularly in your latter two paragraphs, you rely heavily on retelling parts of the text to convey meaning; textual retell. Try to take a step back! You don't need to explain the plot in order to show how the technique creates meaning. Focus on the techniques, the choices made by the composer, which have created meaning related to your themes. This takes you out of the text and into a more conceptual focus, which is a massive plus.

I've never been a fan of memorised essays (read this article I wrote if you want to know why), however if you do want to go down this route, I think this essay is a great start!! Elyse wrote a great article on memorising essays which might of some help for you, check it out!

Hope this helps, excellent work!! 

[Jimmy Barnes]

Thank you for the information about shifting my two sentence structure to a single sentence in certain circumstances, it has helped a tonne already as I am trimming 50 words off of most my essays.

This is an essay on module A that I plan on memorising at some point and adapting to different themes, I feel like this isn't one of my best but I can't pinpoint why, would you be able to tell me what is good/bad/can be trimmed down/cut out/expanded on?

[elysepopplewell]

Thank you for the information about shifting my two sentence structure to a single sentence in certain circumstances, it has helped a tonne already as I am trimming 50 words off of most my essays.

This is an essay on module A that I plan on memorising at some point and adapting to different themes, I feel like this isn't one of my best but I can't pinpoint why, would you be able to tell me what is good/bad/can be trimmed down/cut out/expanded on?

Hey Jimmy! Really glad to see that you've taken on board the feedback and are already seeing great results!

There isn't an essay attached..was that a mistake?

[Jimmy Barnes]

Yes it was, every damn time I swear I forget to attach them

[jamonwindeyer]

Attention! The essay marking rules have now changed  Due to increasing popularity, and to make sure essay marking services remain accessible for active members of the ATAR Notes community, a new post exchange policy is in effect for all essays below this line. Every 5 ATAR Notes posts qualifies you for one essay to be marked. 50 posts qualifies you for 10 essays, etc. Details can be found at this link! Thanks! 

[imnotdani]

Heya! So this is a Mod C: Representing People and Politics essay. I plan on writing this in 50 minutes for an in-class task...and I was wondering if you guys know any ways to wittle this down a bit. The question was "How do composers construct texts that reveal both the reasons for and impact of people’s particular motivation?" Also, I haven't done a conclusion as of yet. I usually wing that, haha. My texts are W.H Auden poetry and the final speech in The Great Dictator directed by Charlie Chaplin

Composers construct texts in a deliberate way to characterise a society’s ideologies, expressing an evident disjunction between the people and its leaders. Such is true in W.H Auden’s poetry, as specific word choice and structure portray a Modernist’s opinions on political events and personalities. By rejecting orthodox poetry, Auden employs a range of literary devices and constructs texts such as The Unknown Citizen, September 1, 1939 and In Memory of W.B Yeats (I.M.W.B.Y) that acts as vehicles for expounding political opinion. Similarly, Charlie Chaplin directs the satirical film The Great Dictator to explore the negative repercussions of political personalities in society. More specifically, the theatrical elements employed in the final speech in the film not only encompasses responses to politics in the 1930s, but also supports Auden’s poetry in respect of examining the texts’ impact on people’s particular motivation.

W.H. Auden criticises the absence of individuality in society, disappointed with their natural habit to conform to ‘public opinion’ and their preference of anonymity. He addresses the lack of social cohesion because he lamented the rise of materialism and gradual loss of human character. First published in a magazine, The Unknown Citizen by Auden uses an intermittent rhyming scheme favourable in Modernist poetry, seen in couplets like “Yet he wasn’t a scab or odd in his views//For his Union reports that he paid his dues”. This pattern increases the dry, satirical humour of the poem as Auden forces the realisation that people are near duplicates of each other. This is furthered by the use of the subtitle consisting of numbers and letters as a citizen’s identification in statistics. This implies a cold and impersonal government who only care if “all the reports on his conduct agree”. Auden describes a modern ‘saint’ through the use of selective word choice such as “normal”, “sensible” and “popular”. Through this, he portrays a depersonalised citizen, which resulting in evoking anger as people refused to be generalised with the majority and be considered materialistic.

Similarly, Charlie Chaplin highlights the loss of humanity in the 1940 satirical film, The Great Dictator, claiming that “we think too much and feel too little”. He uses the medium of film and speech to mock America for being appalled by the policies of Hitler, and yet supports a country stance on appeasement to avoid any participation in the war. Chaplin takes on the dual-role of director and actor, mimicking Hitler’s mannerism in addresses. He intrigues viewers through evocative delivery, using rising volume levels, eye contact and wide gestures. He also juxtaposes humanity with machinery, implying that men had no emotions, leaving them “cynical and unkind”. Chaplin encouraged the audience to revolt against those who “regiment your lives” and “fight for liberty”. This could also relate to one of Auden’s poems, Spain, where it states “To-day the makeshift consolations” which shows that should society stand up together, they also work to build bridges of comradery. Movie critic Bosley Crowther said that since Chaplin exposed his heart to the audience, “the effect was bewildering” and “strangely overpowering”. Albeit the impacts of his delivery were not as evident, Chaplin birthed a more engaged society as they rise against anti-Semitism and thus influence millions of people worldwide through “inventions for universal brotherhood”.

Auden is well-aware of a poet’s influence on society, leading him to use specific terminology in his poetry to represent his opinions. He chose to use his voice to highlight the rise of totalitarianism and address issues within the American society as WWII commences. September 1, 1939 confronts the outbreak of World War II through irregular rhymed stanza forms, again another characteristic of Modernist poetry. By reiterating the asymmetry, Auden comments on the repeating dictatorships in history, claiming that it is “the habit-forming pain”, suggesting that it is in men’s nature to mismanage and “do evil” to “those to whom evil is done”. Auden also employs pessimistic word choices and negative allusions, electing to use the phrase “obsessing our private lives”, which could relate to The Unknown Citizen where bureaucrats insists on knowing statistical data. He uses the condemning phrase “low dishonest decade” to depict his disappointment regarding WWII, allowing his audience to agonise “as the clever hopes expire” and realise their contribution to the conflict. Critic Christopher Pollnitz states that Auden “studies, not the political animal as such, but the nervous life of its interior”. This implies that Auden focuses on the reality, where the sense of threat and terror is heightened, resulting in absolute panic and mass slaughter.

In contrast, a politician’s voice is more formidable than a poet’s as they are trained to convince or threaten those that oppose them. Charlie Chaplin explores the power of politicians and their impact on society as they use high modality arguments to persuade others into their favour. Although music is a common film technique used to build intensity in a scene, he chooses to exclude this aspect and opted with absolute silence. As a result, the atmosphere feels authentic and the audience are able to properly hear the devotion and passion behind his words as he talks about unity and freedom. This also works in a negative manner as seen in Auden’s poem, Epitaph on a Tyrant, where he states “When he laughed, respectable senators burst with laughter”. This goes to show that a powerful politician’s voice can be toxic and enslave the intelligent due to fear. In The Great Dictator, Chaplin uses short phrases in quick succession–”men who despise you, enslave you, who regiment your lives” to further increase the tempo of the scene. By combining with direct contact, these techniques forces the audience to pay close attention and consider their persuasive arguments in respect to their political positions.

**For the Spain inclusion, idk why i put that there...i just felt like including more of auden's poetry to show that i know them in some kind of form. Again, thank you!

[elysepopplewell]

Yes it was, every damn time I swear I forget to attach them

It happens! Fear not

I'll take a look now! Sorry about the delay

Original:

Spoiler

Adaptable Metropolis/1984 Essay

The study of texts with alternate social, cultural and historical contexts, such as Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and George Orwell’s 1984, often reveal the ways in which changes in context lead to changed values being expressed in texts. This assertion is exemplified through an analytical comparison of both Metropolis and 1984, as both texts portray alternate perspectives on the themes of control and revolution through divergent textual forms and features stemming from their vastly alternate contexts. Fritz Lang, in his 1927 silent film Metropolis, foretells the ruin that may result from the aspiration for a capitalistic world while condemning the social mechanics behind the class divide. Lang’s condemnation of contextual social mechanics is ratified in George Orwell’s 1949 cautionary tale, 1984, in which Orwell provides a scathing critique of totalitarian regimes under the guise of a novel. Ultimately, both texts reflect the issues of control engendering revolution despite alternate contexts, thus allowing for an analytical comparison of both to provide an insight into the perpetuity of these concerns.

In the 1927 film Metropolis, Fritz Lang extrapolates from his current context of Weimar Germany to provide a social commentary on the future if capitalistic industrialists continue to exercise control over the working class. Lang reveals the aspect of control through Maria’s description of the construction of the Tower of Babel. When Maria talks of the workers, a direct translation says, “but the hands that built the tower of Babel, knew nothing of the dream”. The control exercised over the lower class is demonstrated through Lang’s application of synecdoche, as “hands” is used as a dehumanising diminution of the workers, framing them strictly as a means to an end, regarding the construction of the tower of Babel. Through this extended metaphor of the construction of the Tower of Babel, Lang directly attacks the totalitarian capitalists who subject workers to inhumane treatment as a means of creating capital and extracting revenue in 1920’s Weimar Germany. 

Comparably to Lang’s Metropolis, Orwell’s 1984 is imbued with the timeless concept of control to criticise totalitarian regimes present during his own specific context. Orwell presents this concept of control to the responder when Winston says, “The thought police moved always amongst them … eliminating the few individuals who were judged capable of becoming dangerous”. Orwell meticulously incorporates the allusion of the thought police throughout the novel and characterises them as such to be perceived by the responder as a malevolent force fixated on the control of thought criminals through methods such as silencing and ‘vaporising’ them.  Orwell’s allusion of the thought police stems from the totalitarian regimes such as the Nazis and Stalinist Russia who had employments such as the Gestapo and KBG that were akin to the thought police as they silenced and killed anyone deemed ‘dangerous’, meaning anyone that they could not control or anyone who dissent. Despite the evident discrepancies between both the context of Lang and Orwell, both utilises an array of literary forms and features to portray timeless concern of control, which has affected them in their divergent contexts.

Control in Metropolis and in 1984 operates divergently from one another. In Metropolis, control of the workers is engendered by Frederson’s capitalist utopia through the subjugation of workers, who become reliant on employment to survive, much like the workers in 1920’s Weimar Germany. Dissimilarly in 1984, control takes a more sinister tone as it seeps into all facets of life, being idiosyncrasies such as whispers and ‘a look in the eye. These minute details are the causes of numerous ‘vaporisations’, reminiscent of Nazi Germany’s Night of the Long Knives and Stalinist Russia’s Great purges.  Both these alternate portrayals of control are prerequisites for the two different versions of revolution presented.









Akin to Orwell’s 1984, Fritz Lang’s Metropolis is presented as a literary embodiment of Lang’s contextual fears, specifically of capitalism acting as a nexus for economic control to foster and eventually catalyse an uprising. This concept of engendering revolution due to control is exhibited during the Moloch scene where Freder witnesses the working class being swallowed by the machine. As the superimposition of Moloch is a subjective hallucination on behalf of Freder, Lang suggests that Freder has a repressed internal guilt towards the lower class as he resists the traditional 1920’s totalitarian capitalists modus operandi and sees the workers as more than an avenue for revenue. Lang couples this with Freder’s sporadic, melodramatic actions in response to the deaths of the workers, again implying emotions of guilt and resistance towards capitalist industrialists who run Metropolis and who ran 1920’s Weimar Germany, catalysing Metropolis’ initial revolution. Consequently, when analysed comparatively, Lang mirrors Orwell’s criticism of their respective contextual concerns that allow revolution to foster under tyrannical control.

Like Lang’s Metropolis, Orwell’s 1984 explores the timeless truth of the cultivation of revolution within a general society that is controlled in every facet of life, stemming from Orwell’s post WWII contextual concerns of the rise of totalitarianism. Orwell purposefully incorporates the timeless truth of control engendering revolution when Syme says, “The proles are not human beings”. Orwell’s zoomorphic characterisation of the proles is utilised as they symbolise the unadulterated and primordial side of human nature. Extrapolating from this logic, it is assumed that the proles pose a resistance to the party as they represent a literary foil to the party, a totalitarian regime hell bent on bureaucratising all forms of human expression. Portrayed as a dormant form of revolution, O’Brien ratifies the idea of this revolution in the ministry of love when he says, “Your old idea that the proles will arrive and overthrow us”.  Winston’s ‘old idea’ of galvanising the proles contextually harmonises with the attitudes during WWII where German civilians became content under totalitarian leadership. Almost identically to Lang, Orwell uses control to catalyse a revolution, regardless that said revolution doesn’t come to fruition; both composers reify the timeless truth that control and revolution are inextricably linked and are engendered from one another.

It is in the denouement of the two texts that the distinct divergence between contexts occurs regarding control and revolution. Metropolis’ revolution under economic control ends with a sense of hope with a liberated Maria who unites Grot and Frederson through the empathic Freder, whereas in 1984’s final line, Winston’s proclamation of love for big brother is seen as a final, crushing defeat that suggests no hope for revolution exists under overwhelmingly powerful totalitarian regimes.

An analytical comparison of both Lang’s film Metropolis and Orwell’s novel 1984 reveals that the composers’s respective contexts influences their choice of language forms and features along with the ideas and values being conveyed in each text. Both Lang’ Metropolis and Orwell’s 1984 demonstrate the idea that comparing texts through time allows for an enlightened understanding of the relationship between them, despite context, content and form. Ultimately, the texts display the timeless truth of oppressive, tyrannical control engendering revolution, no matter how futile, through both composers’ idiosyncratic, yet somewhat similar construction of dystopic worlds.

With my own comments in bold:

Spoiler

Adaptable Metropolis/1984 Essay

The study of texts with alternate social, cultural and historical contexts, such as Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and George Orwell’s 1984, often reveal the ways in which changes in context lead to changed values being expressed in texts. I'm being really picky to suggest this - I think that this first sentence would benefit from being split in half. By this I mean, remove the textual introduction, and give them their own sentence. "An outstanding testament to this, is the comparison of the texts..." This is just a small suggestion for the reason that the initial sentence is a bit overwhelming. You've pretty well done this in your second sentence anyway - so no need to have them in your first sentence :0This assertion is exemplified through an analytical comparison of both Metropolis and 1984, as both texts portray alternate perspectives on the themes of control and revolution through divergent textual forms and features stemming from their vastly alternate contexts. Fritz Lang, in his 1927 silent film Metropolis, foretells the ruin that may result from the aspiration for a capitalistic world while condemning the social mechanics behind the class divide. Lang’s condemnation of contextual social mechanics is ratified in George Orwell’s 1949 cautionary tale, 1984, in which Orwell provides a scathing critique of totalitarian regimes under the guise of a novel. Ultimately, both texts reflect the issues of control engendering revolution despite alternate contexts, thus allowing for an analytical comparison of both to provide an insight into the perpetuity of these concerns. Awesome - can't fault that!!

In an essay based on a question, I suggest discussing a topic sentence here In the 1927 film Metropolis, Fritz Lang extrapolates from his current context of Weimar Germany to provide a social commentary on the future if capitalistic industrialists continue to exercise control over the working class. Lang reveals the aspect of control through Maria’s description of the construction of the Tower of Babel. When Maria talks of the workers, a direct translation says, “but the hands that built the tower of Babel, knew nothing of the dream”. The control exercised over the lower class is demonstrated through Lang’s application of synecdoche, as “hands” is used as a dehumanising diminution of the workers, framing them strictly as a means to an end, regarding the construction of the tower of Babel. Through this extended metaphor of the construction of the Tower of Babel, Lang directly attacks the totalitarian capitalists who subject workers to inhumane treatment as a means of creating capital and extracting revenue in 1920’s Weimar Germany.  Amazing work! Really well organised sentences. In an actual exam/assignment essay, bring it back to the question in this last part.

Comparably Comparable to Lang’s Metropolis, Orwell’s 1984 is imbued with the timeless concept of control to criticise totalitarian regimes present during his own specific context. Orwell presents this concept of control to the responder when Winston says, “The thought police moved always amongst them … eliminating the few individuals who were judged capable of becoming dangerous”. Orwell meticulously incorporates the allusion of the thought police throughout the novel and characterises them as such to be perceived by the responder as a malevolent force fixated on the control of thought criminals through methods such as silencing and ‘vaporising’ them.  Orwell’s allusion of the thought police stems from the totalitarian regimes such as the Nazis and Stalinist Russia Just a small thing here - I think you either need to say "Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia" for the purpose of being uniform, OR, Nazis and NKVD (Forigve me, I think these are the Nazi equivalent in Russia at the time but I can't be sure. Sorry for my ignorance!) The point being - you're currently comparing a country to a political body, rather than political body to political body, or country to country. Small thing - just a tiny tweak who had employments such as the Gestapo and KBG that were akin to the thought police as they silenced and killed anyone deemed ‘dangerous’, meaning anyone that they could not control or anyone who dissent. Despite the evident discrepancies I don't think discrepancies is the right word. I've thought about it in context and then googled the word to see how it is used, and its usually used in a context of something being dissimilar in a surprising manner, as though they were expected to be the same by logic. Try, differences, dissimilarities, etc. between both the context of Lang and Orwell, both utilises an array of literary forms and features to portray timeless concern of control, which has affected them in their divergent contexts.

Control in Metropolis and in 1984 operates divergently from one another. In Metropolis, control of the workers is engendered by Frederson’s capitalist utopia through the subjugation of workers, who become reliant on employment to survive, much like the workers in 1920’s Weimar Germany. Dissimilarly in 1984, control takes a more sinister tone as it seeps into all facets of life, being idiosyncrasies such as whispers and ‘a look in the eye. These minute details are the causes of numerous ‘vaporisations’, reminiscent of Nazi Germany’s Night of the Long Knives and Stalinist Russia’s Great purges.  Both these alternate portrayals of control are prerequisites for the two different versions of revolution presented. You deal with some great ideas here, but the paragraph is very short. To make it worth while, I'd give one more piece of textual evidence from each text, even if small, just to really make this paragraph small but mighty.

Akin to Orwell’s 1984, Fritz Lang’s Metropolis is presented as a literary embodiment of Lang’s contextual fears, specifically of capitalism acting as a nexus for economic control to foster and eventually catalyse an uprising. This concept of engendering revolution due to control is exhibited during the Moloch scene where Freder witnesses the working class being swallowed by the machine. As the superimposition of Moloch is a subjective hallucination on behalf of Freder, Lang suggests that Freder has a repressed internal guilt towards the lower class as he resists the traditional 1920’s totalitarian capitalists modus operandi and sees the workers as more than an avenue for revenue. Lang couples this with Freder’s sporadic, melodramatic actions in response to the deaths of the workers, again implying emotions of guilt and resistance towards capitalist industrialists who run Metropolis and who ran 1920’s Weimar Germany, catalysing Metropolis’ initial revolution. Consequently, when analysed comparatively, Lang mirrors Orwell’s criticism of their respective contextual concerns that allow revolution to foster under tyrannical control. This paragraph is revived at the end with great analysis, but in the meantime it does a fair bit of story narration and not a lot of evidence or analysis.
 
Like Lang’s Metropolis, Orwell’s 1984 explores the timeless truth of the cultivation of revolution within a general society that is controlled in every facet of life, stemming from Orwell’s post WWII contextual concerns of the rise of totalitarianism. Orwell purposefully incorporates the timeless truth of control engendering revolution when Syme says, “The proles are not human beings”. Orwell’s zoomorphic characterisation of the proles is utilised as they symbolise the unadulterated and primordial side of human nature. Extrapolating from this logic, it is assumed that the proles pose a resistance to the party as they represent a literary foil to the party, a totalitarian regime hell bent on bureaucratising all forms of human expression. Portrayed as a dormant form of revolution, O’Brien ratifies the idea of this revolution in the ministry of love when he says, “Your old idea that the proles will arrive and overthrow us”.  Winston’s ‘old idea’ of galvanising the proles contextually harmonises with the attitudes during WWII where German civilians became content under totalitarian leadership. Almost identically to Lang, Orwell uses control to catalyse a revolution, regardless that said revolution doesn’t come to fruition; both composers reify the timeless truth that control and revolution are inextricably linked and are engendered from one another.

It is in the denouement of the two texts that the distinct divergence between contexts occurs regarding control and revolution. Metropolis’ revolution under economic control ends with a sense of hope with a liberated Maria who unites Grot and Frederson through the empathic Freder, whereas in 1984’s final line, Winston’s proclamation of love for big brother is seen as a final, crushing defeat that suggests no hope for revolution exists under overwhelmingly powerful totalitarian regimes. This doesn't stand alone - I suggest either beefing it up, or connecting it to the following paragraph.

An analytical comparison of both Lang’s film Metropolis and Orwell’s novel 1984 reveals that the composers’s respective contexts influences their choice of language forms and features along with the ideas and values being conveyed in each text. I think you've dealt with the context really well! Both Lang’ Metropolis and Orwell’s 1984 demonstrate the idea that comparing texts through time allows for an enlightened understanding of the relationship between them, despite context, content and form. Ultimately, the texts display the timeless truth of oppressive, tyrannical control engendering revolution, no matter how futile, through both composers’ idiosyncratic, yet somewhat similar construction of dystopic worlds.

Really good job here! I'm never unimpressed with your work, of course This is going really well for you! You've got a great adaptable essay here. You deal really well with context. I also think you deal well with control and revolution - I'm curious about what your plan is, if they don't ask you about control or revolution? Perhaps - they in fact present you with a different theme? I'm confident that you'll be able to work some magic. Based on past Module A papers, this looks very adaptable. Is there anything that BOSTES could ask you, that you would think you aren't prepared for with this essay? I'm curious!

Always a pleasure to look at your work

[Jimmy Barnes]

Really good job here! I'm never unimpressed with your work, of course This is going really well for you! You've got a great adaptable essay here. You deal really well with context. I also think you deal well with control and revolution - I'm curious about what your plan is, if they don't ask you about control or revolution? Perhaps - they in fact present you with a different theme? I'm confident that you'll be able to work some magic. Based on past Module A papers, this looks very adaptable. Is there anything that BOSTES could ask you, that you would think you aren't prepared for with this essay? I'm curious!

Always a pleasure to look at your work

Thanks heaps for the feedback i'll get on to editing the essay and changing bits up immediately

Just for everyone else that may be doing 1984/Metropolis in Module A, these are the past questions i've managed to muster up
- In a comparative study of two texts, our understanding of intertextual perspectives is enhanced by a consideration of each composer's use of textual form - Barker 2015 Trial Q
- After comparing Metropolis and 1984 what conclusions have you drawn about their intertextual perspective relating to authority and revolution? - Hurlstone 2015 Trial
- What does your study of intertextual perspectives reveal about representations of oppression in Nineteen Eighty-Four and Metropolis? - Knox 2015 Trial
- Does the treatment of social manipulation in Nineteen Eighty-Four and Metropolis reveal the texts’ similarities or reinforce their distinctive qualities? - HSC Q 2015

So far the two themes of revolution and control seem feasible as they are generally different and can encapsulate other themes if given, such as oppression (control), social manipulation (control & revolution {maybe}), authority (control),resistance (revolution) - However if one of themes is something along the lines of technology that may be an issue for the exam yes -> Do you by any chance know of any other themes that could stump me that I should prepare for if it is a theme based essay?

Yet again, thank you heaps for the help Elyse and don't underestimate the amount of kudos you and Jamon (among others) deserve for hosting this site for FREE, which is a godsend for me and a lot of other people in similar situations.

[elysepopplewell]

Heya! So this is a Mod C: Representing People and Politics essay. I plan on writing this in 50 minutes for an in-class task...and I was wondering if you guys know any ways to wittle this down a bit. The question was "How do composers construct texts that reveal both the reasons for and impact of people’s particular motivation?" Also, I haven't done a conclusion as of yet. I usually wing that, haha. My texts are W.H Auden poetry and the final speech in The Great Dictator directed by Charlie Chaplin

Heya!! I'll take a look at this now Winging a conclusion is totally fine, but make sure you have some key terms and phrases you want to use to save yourself from falling into the trap of "In conclusion..."

Here we go
Without comments:

Spoiler

Composers construct texts in a deliberate way to characterise a society’s ideologies, expressing an evident disjunction between the people and its leaders. Such is true in W.H Auden’s poetry, as specific word choice and structure portray a Modernist’s opinions on political events and personalities. By rejecting orthodox poetry, Auden employs a range of literary devices and constructs texts such as The Unknown Citizen, September 1, 1939 and In Memory of W.B Yeats (I.M.W.B.Y) that acts as vehicles for expounding political opinion. Similarly, Charlie Chaplin directs the satirical film The Great Dictator to explore the negative repercussions of political personalities in society. More specifically, the theatrical elements employed in the final speech in the film not only encompasses responses to politics in the 1930s, but also supports Auden’s poetry in respect of examining the texts’ impact on people’s particular motivation.

W.H. Auden criticises the absence of individuality in society, disappointed with their natural habit to conform to ‘public opinion’ and their preference of anonymity. He addresses the lack of social cohesion because he lamented the rise of materialism and gradual loss of human character. First published in a magazine, The Unknown Citizen by Auden uses an intermittent rhyming scheme favourable in Modernist poetry, seen in couplets like “Yet he wasn’t a scab or odd in his views//For his Union reports that he paid his dues”. This pattern increases the dry, satirical humour of the poem as Auden forces the realisation that people are near duplicates of each other. This is furthered by the use of the subtitle consisting of numbers and letters as a citizen’s identification in statistics. This implies a cold and impersonal government who only care if “all the reports on his conduct agree”. Auden describes a modern ‘saint’ through the use of selective word choice such as “normal”, “sensible” and “popular”. Through this, he portrays a depersonalised citizen, which resulting in evoking anger as people refused to be generalised with the majority and be considered materialistic.

Similarly, Charlie Chaplin highlights the loss of humanity in the 1940 satirical film, The Great Dictator, claiming that “we think too much and feel too little”. He uses the medium of film and speech to mock America for being appalled by the policies of Hitler, and yet supports a country stance on appeasement to avoid any participation in the war. Chaplin takes on the dual-role of director and actor, mimicking Hitler’s mannerism in addresses. He intrigues viewers through evocative delivery, using rising volume levels, eye contact and wide gestures. He also juxtaposes humanity with machinery, implying that men had no emotions, leaving them “cynical and unkind”. Chaplin encouraged the audience to revolt against those who “regiment your lives” and “fight for liberty”. This could also relate to one of Auden’s poems, Spain, where it states “To-day the makeshift consolations” which shows that should society stand up together, they also work to build bridges of comradery. Movie critic Bosley Crowther said that since Chaplin exposed his heart to the audience, “the effect was bewildering” and “strangely overpowering”. Albeit the impacts of his delivery were not as evident, Chaplin birthed a more engaged society as they rise against anti-Semitism and thus influence millions of people worldwide through “inventions for universal brotherhood”.

Auden is well-aware of a poet’s influence on society, leading him to use specific terminology in his poetry to represent his opinions. He chose to use his voice to highlight the rise of totalitarianism and address issues within the American society as WWII commences. September 1, 1939 confronts the outbreak of World War II through irregular rhymed stanza forms, again another characteristic of Modernist poetry. By reiterating the asymmetry, Auden comments on the repeating dictatorships in history, claiming that it is “the habit-forming pain”, suggesting that it is in men’s nature to mismanage and “do evil” to “those to whom evil is done”. Auden also employs pessimistic word choices and negative allusions, electing to use the phrase “obsessing our private lives”, which could relate to The Unknown Citizen where bureaucrats insists on knowing statistical data. He uses the condemning phrase “low dishonest decade” to depict his disappointment regarding WWII, allowing his audience to agonise “as the clever hopes expire” and realise their contribution to the conflict. Critic Christopher Pollnitz states that Auden “studies, not the political animal as such, but the nervous life of its interior”. This implies that Auden focuses on the reality, where the sense of threat and terror is heightened, resulting in absolute panic and mass slaughter.

In contrast, a politician’s voice is more formidable than a poet’s as they are trained to convince or threaten those that oppose them. Charlie Chaplin explores the power of politicians and their impact on society as they use high modality arguments to persuade others into their favour. Although music is a common film technique used to build intensity in a scene, he chooses to exclude this aspect and opted with absolute silence. As a result, the atmosphere feels authentic and the audience are able to properly hear the devotion and passion behind his words as he talks about unity and freedom. This also works in a negative manner as seen in Auden’s poem, Epitaph on a Tyrant, where he states “When he laughed, respectable senators burst with laughter”. This goes to show that a powerful politician’s voice can be toxic and enslave the intelligent due to fear. In The Great Dictator, Chaplin uses short phrases in quick succession–”men who despise you, enslave you, who regiment your lives” to further increase the tempo of the scene. By combining with direct contact, these techniques forces the audience to pay close attention and consider their persuasive arguments in respect to their political positions.

**For the Spain inclusion, idk why i put that there...i just felt like including more of auden's poetry to show that i know them in some kind of form. Again, thank you!

Now your essay, with comments of mine written in bold font

Spoiler

Composers construct texts in a deliberate way to characterise a society’s ideologies, expressing an evident disjunction between the people and its leaders. Such is true in W.H Auden’s poetry, as specific word choice and structure portray a Modernist’s opinions on political events and personalities. By rejecting orthodox poetry, Auden employs a range of literary devices and constructs texts such as The Unknown Citizen, September 1, 1939 and In Memory of W.B Yeats (I.M.W.B.Y) that acts as vehicles for expounding political opinion. Similarly, Charlie Chaplin directs the satirical film The Great Dictator to explore the negative repercussions of political personalities in society. More specifically, the theatrical elements employed in the final speech in the film not only encompasses responses to politics in the 1930s, but also supports Auden’s poetry in respect of examining the texts’ impact on people’s particular motivation. Awesome work!

W.H. Auden criticises the absence of individuality in society, disappointed with their natural habit to conform to ‘public opinion’ and their preference of anonymity. He addresses the lack of social cohesion because he lamented the rise of materialism and gradual loss of human character. First published in a magazine, The Unknown Citizen by Auden uses an intermittent rhyming scheme favourable in Modernist poetry, seen in couplets like “Yet he wasn’t a scab or odd in his views//For his Union reports that he paid his dues”. This pattern increases the dry, satirical humour of the poem as Auden forces the realisation that people are near duplicates of each other. This is furthered by the use of the subtitle consisting of numbers and letters as a citizen’s identification in statistics. This implies a cold and impersonal government who only care if “all the reports on his conduct agree”. Auden describes a modern ‘saint’ through the use of selective word choice such as “normal”, “sensible” and “popular”. Through this, he portrays a depersonalised citizen, which resulting results in evoking anger as people refused to be generalised with the majority and be considered materialistic.

Similarly, Charlie Chaplin highlights the loss of humanity in the 1940 satirical film, The Great Dictator, claiming that “we think too much and feel too little”. He uses the medium of film and speech to mock America for being appalled by the policies of Hitler, and yet supports a country stance on appeasement to avoid any participation in the war. Chaplin takes on the dual-role of director and actor, mimicking Hitler’s mannerism in addresses. He intrigues viewers through evocative delivery, using rising volume levels, eye contact and wide gestures. You do a really good job of discussing techniques and their purpose!!He also juxtaposes humanity with machinery, implying that men had no emotions, leaving them “cynical and unkind”. Chaplin encouraged the audience to revolt against those who “regiment your lives” and “fight for liberty”. This could also relate to one of Auden’s poems, Spain, where it states “To-day the makeshift consolations” which shows that should society stand up together, they also work to build bridges of comradery camaraderie. . Movie critic Bosley Crowther said that since Chaplin exposed his heart to the audience, “the effect was bewildering” and “strangely overpowering”. Albeit the impacts of his delivery were not as evident, Chaplin birthed a more engaged society as they rise against anti-Semitism and thus influence millions of people worldwide through “inventions for universal brotherhood”.

Auden is well-aware of a poet’s influence on society, leading him to use specific terminology in his poetry to represent his opinions. He chose to use his voice to highlight the rise of totalitarianism and address issues within the American society as WWII commences. September 1, 1939 confronts the outbreak of World War II through irregular rhymed stanza forms, again another characteristic of Modernist poetry. By reiterating the asymmetry, Auden comments on the repeating dictatorships in history, claiming that it is “the habit-forming pain”, suggesting that it is in men’s nature to mismanage and “do evil” to “those to whom evil is done”. Auden also employs pessimistic word choices and negative allusions, electing to use the phrase “obsessing our private lives”, which could relate to The Unknown Citizen where bureaucrats insists on knowing statistical data. This last sentence is an excellent example of how eloquent you are when describing the text and its purpose. He uses the condemning phrase “low dishonest decade” to depict his disappointment regarding WWII, allowing his audience to agonise “as the clever hopes expire” and realise their contribution to the conflict. Critic Christopher Pollnitz states that Auden “studies, not the political animal as such, but the nervous life of its interior”. This implies that Auden focuses on the reality, where the sense of threat and terror is heightened, resulting in absolute panic and mass slaughter.

In contrast, a politician’s voice is more formidable than a poet’s as they are trained to convince or threaten those that oppose them. A very interesting analysis! I'm intrigued by this Charlie Chaplin explores the power of politicians and their impact on society as they use high modality arguments to persuade others into their favour. Although music is a common film technique used to build intensity in a scene, he chooses to exclude this aspect and opted with absolute silence. As a result, the atmosphere feels authentic and the audience are able to properly hear the devotion and passion behind his words as he talks about unity and freedom. This also works in a negative manner as seen in Auden’s poem, Epitaph on a Tyrant, where he states “When he laughed, respectable senators burst with laughter”. This goes to show that a powerful politician’s voice can be toxic and enslave the intelligent due to fear. In The Great Dictator, Chaplin uses short phrases in quick succession–”men who despise you, enslave you, who regiment your lives” to further increase the tempo of the scene. By combining with direct contact, these techniques forces force the audience to pay close attention and consider their persuasive arguments in respect to their political positions.

**For the Spain inclusion, idk why i put that there...i just felt like including more of auden's poetry to show that i know them in some kind of form. Again, thank you!

Okay! Amazing work - your analysis and textual engagement is so eloquent and quite honestly a pleasure to read. I haven't commented a lot throughout because I noticed a persistent point of critique.

The first step is to top and tail every paragraph by bringing it back to the module: people and politics. Each paragraph needs to be directed by your purpose to engage with the module. Of course, top and tailing is not enough, but it is the place to start. If it helps, begin the paragraph without actually discussing the text, simply discuss the ideas about people and politics you wish to flesh out. Then, go through your paragraph and work on the language. By this I mean, you mention dictatorship, tyranny, governments, and a bunch of other terms for politics - which is awesome! But, to show the marker that you haven't lost site of the module, you should occasionally switch these up for the question term: politics. And the same for people. By this I mean, you can say "blah blah blah, the dictatorship at the time saw a bleak political circumstance..." This reference back to politic(al)s brings your absolutely wonderful arguments back into the line of the marker. The same goes for people.

So,
1. Top and tail each paragraph.
2. Go through and colour in the paragraphs. You've done an amazing work with the texts at hand, we just need a tiny bit more of a push to tie it to the module in a really strong way.

If you're looking for ways to strengthen the essay just by trimming down a few things here and there, have a look at this article I wrote. I'm interested to know your opinion. It's something I used in my own studies, so hopefully it has something to offer for your own essays
Best of luck! Let me know what you're thinking

[jamonwindeyer]

Thanks heaps for the feedback i'll get on to editing the essay and changing bits up immediately

Just for everyone else that may be doing 1984/Metropolis in Module A, these are the past questions i've managed to muster up
- In a comparative study of two texts, our understanding of intertextual perspectives is enhanced by a consideration of each composer's use of textual form - Barker 2015 Trial Q
- After comparing Metropolis and 1984 what conclusions have you drawn about their intertextual perspective relating to authority and revolution? - Hurlstone 2015 Trial
- What does your study of intertextual perspectives reveal about representations of oppression in Nineteen Eighty-Four and Metropolis? - Knox 2015 Trial
- Does the treatment of social manipulation in Nineteen Eighty-Four and Metropolis reveal the texts’ similarities or reinforce their distinctive qualities? - HSC Q 2015

So far the two themes of revolution and control seem feasible as they are generally different and can encapsulate other themes if given, such as oppression (control), social manipulation (control & revolution {maybe}), authority (control),resistance (revolution) - However if one of themes is something along the lines of technology that may be an issue for the exam yes -> Do you by any chance know of any other themes that could stump me that I should prepare for if it is a theme based essay?

Yet again, thank you heaps for the help Elyse and don't underestimate the amount of kudos you and Jamon (among others) deserve for hosting this site for FREE, which is a godsend for me and a lot of other people in similar situations.

Thanks for posting those questions Jimmy, awesome!! A collaborative past question database might not be a bad idea, wonder how we could do that 

It sounds like you've got your themes pretty well covered, just keep finding questions and if something happens to stump you then make a change, no gaps spring out at me 

Thanks for the kudos Jimmy! We are so super happy to be of assistance and love hearing that it is helping you guys out 

[elysepopplewell]

Thanks heaps for the feedback i'll get on to editing the essay and changing bits up immediately

Just for everyone else that may be doing 1984/Metropolis in Module A, these are the past questions i've managed to muster up
- In a comparative study of two texts, our understanding of intertextual perspectives is enhanced by a consideration of each composer's use of textual form - Barker 2015 Trial Q
- After comparing Metropolis and 1984 what conclusions have you drawn about their intertextual perspective relating to authority and revolution? - Hurlstone 2015 Trial
- What does your study of intertextual perspectives reveal about representations of oppression in Nineteen Eighty-Four and Metropolis? - Knox 2015 Trial
- Does the treatment of social manipulation in Nineteen Eighty-Four and Metropolis reveal the texts’ similarities or reinforce their distinctive qualities? - HSC Q 2015

So far the two themes of revolution and control seem feasible as they are generally different and can encapsulate other themes if given, such as oppression (control), social manipulation (control & revolution {maybe}), authority (control),resistance (revolution) - However if one of themes is something along the lines of technology that may be an issue for the exam yes -> Do you by any chance know of any other themes that could stump me that I should prepare for if it is a theme based essay?

Yet again, thank you heaps for the help Elyse and don't underestimate the amount of kudos you and Jamon (among others) deserve for hosting this site for FREE, which is a godsend for me and a lot of other people in similar situations.

Previously in Module A they have asked for a context driven essay. I can't remember off the top of my head, but something like "The comparative study of blah and blah is contingent to understanding context." You'll be fine with this - you've got context down pat. I think you're totally right, context and revolution work well with so many things!

Thank you for your kind words!!! It means a lot to us

[imnotdani]

Heya!! I'll take a look at this now Winging a conclusion is totally fine, but make sure you have some key terms and phrases you want to use to save yourself from falling into the trap of "In conclusion..."

If you're looking for ways to strengthen the essay just by trimming down a few things here and there, have a look at this article I wrote. I'm interested to know your opinion. It's something I used in my own studies, so hopefully it has something to offer for your own essays
Best of luck! Let me know what you're thinking

Hey! I realised I totally forgot to say thank you. I saw your advice the morning of the exam and used them, so I appreciate everything I see what you mean by connecting back to the module question. Hope to see you during my studies for trials!

[Noorijaz]

Hi in have a speech due tommrow
Please can u read it and provide some feedback thanks
- What can I cut?
- Is it persuasive enough?
- Is it sophisticated enough?
- Have I addressed qs-Convince teachers that two texts studied are effective choices for a parried contextual study for today’s preliminary English students                                                                                                               
-have I related and showed relevance to modern context, teenagers,



It is human nature to exploit; to take advantage of one another; and it is through these inherently human actions man will never understand. This is exactly what the novella Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad and the film Avatar directed by James Cameron is all about. EXPLOITATION
Welcome to my perspective of why these texts are commendable, comparative, contextual study material as they are abounding with interweaving elements. Furthermore an in-depth study will allow modern audience and teenagers to mull over their role in life, how nations are exerting their force internationally and their context- the world around them.
A comparative study is placing the texts in juxtaposition and reconnoitering them in relation to their contexts, characters and themes. This cogitation cultivates student’s competency to discern the effects of context and questions of value. These two texts are clearly focused on the evilness of imperialism as a result of colonialism and how they were relevant at the time, today and to a modern audience of us, students.
Ultimately imperialism and colonialism are complementary with colonialism being labeled the practice of a powerful nation exerting influence over poor or weak countries and imperialism driving this practice. Heart of Darkness conveys this theme with the whites, the Europeans manipulating the natives utilising brutishness to acquire what they want. A stupendous façade is displayed through the actual title ‘Heart of Darkness’ being the most obvious metaphor. The title in layman’s terms delines the evil and the darkness in people’s hearts, more specifically the Europeans who are enforcing their imperialistic techniques and bringing out the dark capabilities of themselves. Furthermore the colour symbolism of black and white have the usual connotations of evil and good. The dichotomy in “It looked startling round his black neck, this bit of white thread from beyond the sea” sculpts the meaning of The white souls of the black people are contrasted with the black souled whites who exploit them with their heart of darkness-thus insinuating an imperialistic nature. The whites aren’t good as you would stereotypically believe-they are black on the inside just painted white on their skin. The dominance the non-coloured race is corroborated when the context is studied as when this book was made in the late 19th century Joseph Conrad had an experience as a pilot on a steamship in the Congo-hence being the basis of Heart of Darkness. Furthermore in the last two decades of the 19 century the Europeans were scrambling for wealth and power hence grasping what they required from Africa in order to gain wealth and power through use of brutalist treatment.
Interconnecting with Heart of Darkness is Avatars take on imperialism ,based on seaming principles, outcomes and means to extract resources by treating natives savagely, destroying regions with superior transport and all leading up to making money and reaping the rewards. The militaristic style of imperialism is displayed throughout the whole film clearly shown in the Destruction of the Home Tree scene where three views are established. The Omniscient view which is the complete view of the destruction, the military perspective and the Na’vi point of view. The relationship of who’s got the power is illustrated in a low angle shot from the native’s perspective who are looking up to the Americans whilst getting out of the killing field. This depicts the power that Americans have as they look down on the ‘blue monkeys’ who are an inferior species. Selfridge classifying the natives as ‘blue monkeys’ represents that they are just animals and menial species compared to the advanced humans. These extracts of the film signify the transcendent force the Resources Development Agency have over the natives, blatantly manifesting the imperialism of the invaders to Pandora.
 
Avatars reflection with reality’s context in the 21st century can be explicitly coherent. The Amazon Rainforest struggle between petroleum giants and the natives is a very accurate portrayal of the struggle shown in Avatar. Furthermore the invading of US in Afghanistan , Iraq and the killing of people and control of oil – thus imperialistic and money making – and then the Afghans and Iraqis forming their own clans to fight back on US soil in terms of terrorism clearly shown in 9/11 attacks on Twin Towers. Avatar conveys that the USA is a very administrative nation and is Americanising the world gradually and the fact that this nature perseveres in the future. Supplementary to this is the purpose of this film, addressing modern contexts, audiences and striplings as a form of propaganda exposing how America is a paramount state across many borders, inspired by the past to exert force now, and will be anticipated to be a superpower in the future.
The matter of the truth is preliminary English students who study these two texts will seize knowledge of what is actually happening in the world, not just on a global scale but within their own school. Youngsters will understand some aspects of life which obtaining a glimpse of the history and heartless nature that occurred in the past, occurring today and most likely tommrow. These texts are effective to study not only bemuse we can draw many links between them, but we connect them to our lives today in our own world and most importantly we can learn life lessons allowing us judge what is actually happening on a daily basis and what our role is as an individual. To a modern audience HOD and avatar display that man will always do what’s best for their own interests having no care in the world for anyone else. It is shown in the Congo, today in the Middle East, with Aboriginals and natives of the Amazon being displaced and in the future on Pandora. Man will never understand what they are doing is wrong and inhumane. Why? Well it’s in our nature as shown over the decades and in the future. It will always be part of being human.