English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)

[sidzeman]

Hey guys, I'd love some feedback on my Mod A essay - this is my weakest module by far - I never know how to balance textual evidence, context and also include what new conclusions we can gain from a comparative study. Basically, any help would be appreciated!
Edit: My elective is intertextual perspectives if that wasn't clear

Q. After comparing Metropolis and 1984 what conclusions have you drawn about their intertextual perspective regarding to technology and revolution?

A comparative study of Fritz Lang’s German Expressionist film “Metropolis” and George Orwell’s dystopian novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four” (1984) both reveals the extent to which context shapes the perspectives inherent in both texts, and also elucidates new insights regarding technological oppression and the viability of revolutions. Both texts explore the contextual fear of technology used as a mechanism by governments to exploit the masses, due to the contextual issues of class struggle in the Weimar Republic and the rise of totalitarian regimes such as the Soviet Union. However, the texts have clashing intertextual perspectives regarding the viability of revolutions in addressing societal inequalities, as the bleakness of the WW2 era leads Orwell to represent revolutions as being ultimately futile. Thus, the comparison of the texts context and thus values allows for an in-depth understanding of the similarities and differences in their intertextual perspectives regarding technology and rebellions.

Both Lang and Orwell explore in their respective texts the use of technology to exploit the lower classes, and so enhances the audiences understanding of the double-edged nature of technology. In “Metropolis”, Fredersen applies technology in his industry to dehumanise the proletariats, as demonstrated through the low angle shot of the Moloch Machine, highlighting its power over the exhausted workers.   However, the juxtaposition of these scenes to the above ground cities surreal scale reveals how Fredersen’s creation of an immense and futuristic city has stemmed from his use of technology as an enforcer of oppression of the workers. This dichotomous perspective of technology is a result of Lang’s context, where technology had both been used for destruction in WW1, and yet also was causative of the golden age of the Weimar Republic. The sharp contrast between Maria and her Robot counterpart also strengthens our understanding of technology as the pinnacle of human achievement, which yet can be a serious threat to societal rights if misused. While Maria is presented as pure and virginal, the religious allusion of the Whore of Babylon is used in reference to Robot Maria, an example of how technology can be used to corrupt. Thus, Lang demonstrates how technology can be utilised to oppress the masses to ensure the wealthy retain control.

However, Orwell presents a far deeper mistrust of technology and its ability to be manipulated by the state to maintain dictatorial rule, as demonstrated through his portrayal of the Party which removes individual liberty through constant surveillance. In his novel, the extensive use of the technology of the “telescreen” means citizens “can be seen as well as heard” at all times, leading them to be divorced from their own individuality as they must “live in the assumption that…every movement was scrutinised”. Furthermore, the telescreens are also constantly used for propaganda such as the “Two Minutes Hate”, similar to the anti-Semitic rallies by the Nazi Party, which are “impossible to avoid joining in”. The inability to resist such propaganda indicates the forced abandonment of independent thought in favour of the Party’s dogmas as a result of technological manipulation. Orwell’s much darker perspective on technology is a direct result of his witnessing of the nuclear bomb, the ultimate perversion of technology and its ability to be used to benefit society. Thus, Orwell expresses a much more serious concern for the advancement of technology, due to his recognition of its potential to subdue individual thought.

Lang portrays in his film the potential of an oppressed populous to resolve their exploitation through a rebellion. The mis-en-scene of Maria preaching to the workers reveals the ray of sunlight bathing Maria, contrasted to the otherwise darkened underground cavern, which symbolises her importance and thus grants her presentation of an egalitarian society greater credibility. Her message of class unity was reflective of the rising popularity of Marxist ideas in Germany at the time.  The final shot of Freder clasping the hands of Grot and Fredersen, after the revolution is finished, completes the extended metaphor of “the mediator between the head and the hands must be the heart”, and is a visual representation of the formation of the Golden Age of the democratic Weimar Republic. Thus, Lang’s attests to the ability of revolutions to resolve societal issues in his film.

Contrastingly, Orwell presents an entirely different perspective on revolutions, portraying them as an unsuccessful answer in addressing the injustices of governments. He utilises the didactic device of Goldstein’s book, which states revolutionary’s simply “thrust the Low back into their old position of servitude” after their revolution is complete, as they only “pretend…that they are fighting for liberty and justice”. Through this, Orwell condemns revolutions as being hypocritical and impractical, as no meaningful change is created in society. This perspective of Orwell is drawn from the atrocities of the Soviet Union after coming to power, such as Stalin’s Great Purge. The verbatim repetition of “I betrayed you” and “All you care about is yourself” between Winston and Julia further consolidates the inevitable failure of revolutionaries, as does the final line of “He (Winston) loved Big Brother”, ending the novel on a bleak and hopeless tone. The stark differences in the texts resolutions is a result of their differing contexts and purpose. While Lang intended “Metropolis” to be a symbol of hope for society untainted by the greed of capitalists, Orwell’s purpose was to create a didactic dystopian novel which would serve as a warning of the insidious nature of socialism and the dangers of accepting such ideologies, after seeing a rise in cooperation with Stalin with the Tehran Conference. Thus, Orwell’s contrary portrayal of revolutions as being futile serves his intention of warning against the absolute control and corruption of totalitarian states.

A comparative analysis of Lang’s “Metropolis” and Orwell’s “1984” assists us on understanding the effect of their contexts on shaping the values of a text, and also illuminates both the unique qualities and similarities of the two texts. Both composers share similar perspectives on technology being utilised as a means by authoritarian regimes to enable their dictatorship, due to the parallels of technology modernisation allowing exploitation within their contexts. The disparities in the outcome of key revolutions in “Metropolis” and “1984”, with the rise of the Golden Age of the Weimar Republic and the hypocritical actions of the Soviet Union, thus leads the texts to portray differing perspectives on the viability of revolutions in addressing inequalities present in society. 

[armtistic]

Hey, I have a bunch of questions about my Mod B essay so here goes nothing.
How do I use an integrated structure without being too shallow in analysis or linking whilst also fitting two texts into a single paragraph, given that I want to keep them under 300 words. Should I cut down on the number of textual evidences I use for each poem?
At the moment I'm struggling to fit just the topic sentence, link and analysis of quotes let alone critic input or my personal response to critics or the poem. Should I try and weave my personal response into linking sections or should I just leave it to the conclusion?
And would you recommend I replace a quote from the poem or something with a quote from a critic just to add a sense of broader reading?


Could someone define and give specific examples of the difference between structure and form and how I would insert them in my essay for Mod B Eliot, because I don't see how to provide textual evidence for a specific type of structure or form.

Also, is it weird to have this many poems in the essay? Does it detract from the depth of analysis?


Here's my generic essay, it isn't in response to any question.


T.S Eliot, a luminary of the Modernist era, captures, through his poetry, the zeitgeist of Western society plagued by existential uncertainty and loss of spiritualism in wake of industrialisation and the Great War. Throughout his oeuvre, Eliot experiments with abstract surrealism, fragmentation of textual form, stream-of-consciousness and subversion of traditional mediums to encapsulate the unprecedented changes brought about by rapid industrialisation, secularism and technological warfare on society’s outlook on purpose, existentialism, and human connection. Through “Preludes”, “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”, “The Hollow Men” and “The Journey of the Magi”, Eliot presents a cohesive and integrated portrait of the decay and alienation of humanity, the fear of nonconformity, and the quest for purpose in a world where the ‘modern man’ is merely a cesspool of lost agency and defunct spirituality/connection.


With accelerating industrialisation came the rise of urbanism and the suffocation of city life. The subsequent proximity, paradoxically, led to emotional detachment and a degrading loss of substance and human connection. In “Preludes”, Eliot presents four vignettes of the emotional sterility that urban society imparts upon the individual, mirroring our own societal fragmentation in the segregated structure. He assaults the senses through the cumulative imagery of dirt and decay in “sawdust-trampled street … muddy feet … dingy shades” to reflect the degradation of our own humanity and subsequently reinforces this barrage through enjambment of the entire stanza from “faint stale smells of beer […] to early coffee stands” to replicate, through the feverish meter, the rush from intoxicant to stimulant that encapsulates the desire to seek release from our lonely modern existences. The “conscience of a blackened street” allegorises the modern soul, symbolically “trampled” and “blackened” by our “muddy feet” as we ignore it and each other. Similarly, “Prufrock” explores the hollow niceties of the bourgeoisie; most evident in the recurring motif of tea which becomes an objective correlative for bourgeois vacuity as he contrasts the pleasantries of “tea and cakes and ices” against the imperative connotations of “crisis” to reinforce the modern preoccupation with meaningless rituals. Through the diacope “That is not what I meant at all;/ That is not it, at all.” Eliot captures the breakdown of communication in a vacuous, detached modern society and uses reverse zoomorphism in the harshly sibilant “I should have been a ragged pair of claws/ Scuttling across the floors of silent seas.” to illustrate the psychological deterioration and emotional detachment that results from prolonged alienation, leaving the victim crabby, hard-shelled and evasive. Hence, through a synthesis of structure and language forms across both poems, Eliot constructs a single, poignant voice decrying the loss of humanity in an increasingly mechanised society, allowing his works to resonate even today.


Drawing on personal fears of being left behind, with the radical evolution of liberalism and secularism, Eliot constructs a universal human narrative of the fear of independent action and nonconformity, giving his works their lasting impact. Prufrock’s titular character serves to embody the flailing psychological decline of those too occupied by their shortcomings. Eliot opens by describing the evening sky through the simile “Like a patient etherized upon a table” which, through oxymoronic imagery, acts as an objective correlative, triggering feelings of unconsciousness, vulnerability and confusion which reflects the emasculation of Western society during WWI. Eliot addresses this in Prufrock’s expulsion of angst through the stream-of-consciousness narrative - “How his hair is growing thin!”- culminating in the bathetic “Do I dare/Disturb the universe?” in a mockery of the modern man’s overemphasis on social customs, inflating it, in their hubris, to universal proportions. He reinforces these ideas through irregular line length in “Though I have seen my head (grown slightly bald) brought in upon a platter,” which complements the tumultuous rhythm and comically pathetic tone of the stanza to emphasise the self-doubt and subsequent delirium that characterises those left metaphorically “pinned and wriggling” by indecision in light of social scrutiny. Likewise, Eliot’s “Hollow Men” represents a generation of young men that felt they had failed God and government and now “grope together/ And avoid speech”, unable to die as ‘heroes’ but too traumatised to reintegrate with society, “behaving as the wind behaves” as, unsupported, they submit to the whims of fate.  Eliot furthers this through biblical allusion in the apostrophe “those who have crossed […] to death’s other Kingdom” in which he indicates that the ‘hollow men’ are trapped in a societal purgatory, forced to wear “such deliberate disguises” of psychological wellbeing to fit into society. They are represented symbolically by “the Shadow” which falls “Between the idea/ And the reality” as, likewise trapped between two extremities, they exist in a grey state of moral and social paralysis. Hence, Eliot’s encapsulation of the disorientation and abandonment of compassion and empathy in light of urbanism and warfare acts as a template for mankind’s response to change in any era, lending to the textual integrity of his oeuvre.


The gruesome realities of the Great War left the world disillusioned yet dulled. As Nietzsche’s “God is dead!” seemed to ring truer than ever, the world groped desperately for some sliver of meaning. Eliot begins with a paradox “We are the hollow men/ We are the stuffed men” employing the disembodied inclusive pronoun “we” as a collective condemnation of the “modern man” who has meekly succumbed to living a death-in-life role.  The metrical pattern of the passage is the rhythmic equivalent of “paralysed force, gesture without motion”; evidenced in the contrast of the spiritual languor developed by the despondent tone of “quiet and meaningless” against the terseness of the lines which imply some conservation of energy or spirit. This remnant spirit is insufficient to prevent the spiritual collapse of society - mirrored in the truncation of the Lord’s Prayer “For Thine is/ Life is/ For Thine is the” - as all meaning is then dashed in the metaphorical depiction of faith as “prayers to broken stone”. The anthropomorphic “eyes”, a metonym for God, “are not here […] In this valley of dying stars”, a terrifying confirmation of God’s desertion of man, a belief prevalent in modern (and post-modern) society. In Magi, however, Eliot argues that purpose can be found, but only with great commitment. Eliot employs the mask of a Magus on an arduous pilgrimage, through the pathetic fallacy of “cities hostile and the towns unfriendly”, and our peers symbolised as “voices singing in our ears, saying/ That this was all folly”, to compile the universal obstacles one must overcome to find meaning in faith. Through Biblical allusion “this Birth was/Hard and bitter agony for us, like Death,” Eliot presents a paradox in that the Birth of Christ represents religious salvation, yet precipitates the Magi’s ostracism from their people, a living death. The enjambment of the lines depicts this structurally, as the end-stop following “our death.” embodies the Magi’s lives cut short.   He encapsulates all this in the last stanza, a turbulent stream-of-consciousness of irregular line length and unorthodox syntax “but set down/This set down/ This:” to project the personal and spiritual chaos that religious transformation causes in a modern world where status is the new God. Thus, through a synergy of structure and tone, Eliot delivers a concentrated atmosphere of desperation as he captures the timeless clash of faith against nihilism.


Eliot, through deliberate choice of language, is able to convey to responders the population’s feelings of incompetence within a decaying Modernist setting, a society mired in decay, inaction and aimlessness. What he creates is an intimate and evocative journey for purpose when compassion and humanity are lost.

[lizzygrech]

--> It is probably really shit because I struggle alot with Mod C, hoping for some feedback x!

2016 Section III Module C People and Politics
(20 marks)
Politics illustrates the ultimate powerlessness of ordinary people.
To what extent is this view represented in your prescribed text and ONE other related text of your own choosing?

Politics, to a great extent, illustrates an ultimate loss of power of ordinary people. This perspective however, is reflected in the Revisionist novel, Why Weren’t We Told by Henry Reynolds but as well in the film, In The Name of the Father directed by Jim Sheridan. Both texts represent how in the face of politics, ordinary people can become powerless if there is lack of education. Through both texts, the composers aim to inform individuals of the manipulation used by governance and how political situations can restrict the freedom of ordinary people.
Politics dictates how a nation conducts themselves and influences what ordinary people see as just and right. As a result of such power, political ignorance is developed by individuals, usually as a result of little education and lack of public knowledge. This perspective is criticised in Reynold’s memoir Why Weren’t We Told. Reynold’s makes clear his purpose of enlightening Australia in the history of their settlement, with the aim of growth and reconciliation as a nation. Such powerlessness and ignorance is correlated to the absence of education and documentation of Australia’s past resulting in the subjection of the Aboriginal community and the rest of the country. Reynold’s makes this view evidently clear when he states “While Aborigines and Islanders kept alive their bitter history of loss and oppression, white North Queenslanders wished it buried and forgotten”. He uses a juxtaposition to bring attention to the White Australian lack of recognition of Indigenous oppression, further represented through the metaphor of ‘buried’. He implies that there is an unresolved problem as well as the guilt on behalf of ordinary Australian people who didn’t know better. Reynold’s also represents this helplessness when he states “The influence of the new historical writing on the High Court remains a contentious issue. But there can be no doubt that the Mabo judgement has changed the way the story of Australian colonisation must in future be told.”. His use of primary evidence plays an important role in enlightening the public to the impact of Australian politics. Henry Reynold’s illustrates through his revisionist novel the control that politics holds over the capacity and ability of the ordinary people, restricting access to public knowledge and growth.

Ordinary individuals are often caught in the midst of political acts and situations, often resulting in either shared or competing political perspectives. Within this, people are held powerless as knowledge is restricted to the public or manipulated in ways to benefit the government. This is evidently conveyed through Jim Sheridan’s film, In The Name of the Father. Sheridan represents the political situation of Catholic and Irish discrimination and the impact of the Terrorism act as corrupted. In the commencement of the film, Sheridan shows a mid-shot of Gerry and his father Gessapi. Gessapi states “go and live son, that’s the best advice I can give you”. However, this later becomes ironic as both men are placed in jail as a result of living their lives, unsuspecting of how powerless they’d really become. The powerless of the Irish and British public is represented in the torture scene. Sheridan uses a camera angle through the peephole of the integration room to communicate that the political situation was closed minded and hidden from public knowledge. Sheridan suggests that politics confine the power and freedom of individuals, this is communicated in the scene where they receive the truth and confession of the IRA bomber McAndrew’s. However, even with the truth resonating within the political system is was denied access to public with fear there would be consequences. He represents Gerry and his father as ordinary individuals caught in the middle of this political act. However, throughout the protesting scene, Sheridan communicates how powerful and significant individuals in the fight for change. As the fight intensifies through echoing diegetic sound of yelling and screaming, so is the liberation of Gerry as an ordinary and innocent man. Jim Sheridan suggests that mundane society is denied the whole truth due to the agenda of the ruling government, and as a result regular people are impacted.

Politicians often override the controversial voices of individuals with the intention of appeasing to the majority of individuals, aligning their shared political perspective to theirs. Reynold’s memoir is used as a voice for the voiceless, a source of power which aimed to highlight the oppression against Indigenous Australians and ultimately expose the deliberate white washing and assimilation of Aboriginals. Reynold’s explains himself that he basked once basked in everyday ignorance unware of the dark Australian past and made it his aim to restore power and liberation to the silenced Australians. In the beginning of his novel, Reynold’s makes clear his personal liberation and purpose, “It is a book of opinions. Many also find it opinionated. In my own defence I can say that my views are based on things I have seen and heard, as much as they are on reading and research...”. He uses the medium of print to defend himself through his control and power over his writing. In this case, he justifies and openly states his methods of persuasion and subjectivity. Ultimately expressing that he is being truthful and is not spurred by ulterior political motives beyond exposing the hidden truths of Australian history. “‘Called protector of Aborigines and arrangements for purchasing the lands of the Natives.’...it was like discovering a nugget of gold.” Reynolds finds evidence that goes against terra nullius. The simile indicates the importance and significance of this. He is able to demonstrate that Australian politics that disregards Indigenous is based off flaws and ignorance and thus doomed to fail. This juxtaposition highlights how restricting politics can be, removing power and liberation of individuals if not challenged.

With political perspectives being able to condescends the different values and beliefs ordinary people, individuals find themselves loosing power or actively attempting to regain it. Jim Sheridan expresses this viewpoint through his representation of Gerry the assumed terrorist. In the opening scenes of the film, the audience establishes a true sense of Gerry as he is represented as young, immature but harmless man with the soundtrack of Bob Dylan, an artist who appealed to the younger generations, plays throughout the scene. Gerry’s innocence is also amplified when he and Paul Hill meet the homeless man. They give the very last of the money without a second thought when the bomb goes off, once again Sheridan is expressing the absence of terrorism in Gerry. Suggesting that individuals are sometimes unfortunately caught between political agendas, thus taking away all power and control. This is seen in the trial scene of the film. The scene begins with a high shot of the Chief Judge lazily laying his feet on the desk with coffee in his hand, a smug and superior mannerism establishes how corrupted and manipulated politics can be for ordinary people. The long shot of the many people other than Gerry walking into the court room, represents just how impacting a superior political agenda can be for ordinary people with little to no power. Sheridan represents in the God father movie scene, just how ordinary individuals who have become powerless may carry out violent acts for their political mean. This is expressed through the low suspenseful music and diegetic intense slamming of the jail gates. However, the fight individuals partake in for the restoration of power, can often not be enough. Sheridan uses the symbolism of the fire raining down each side of the dark jail to illustrate that sometimes the world is really just unfair. It is clear to see that often these political acts have severe consequences and sometimes irreversible for the ordinary people of society, evidently represented through the death of Gessapi an innocent man.

Politics illustrates the ultimate powerlessness of ordinary and unsuspecting individuals. Both composers communicate the importance of public knowledge and further education in combating this helplessness. Without reflection or revising the known, change cannot occur. However, both composers also suggest that when facing seemingly impossible challenges, self liberation and empowerment can arise.

[katie,rinos]

Hey,
Would you please be able to give me some feedback on a module C essay that I wrote?
It's probably one of my worst modules so all feedback is really appreciated.
Thanks so much!

Spoiler

2015 HSC-Module C               
Experiences of landscape may be diverse, but the influence on identity is always profound.’            
Evaluate this statement with detailed reference to your prescribed text and ONE other related text of your own choosing.
            
Although, individuals may have differing experiences with a landscape, this will always have an enduring impact on their beliefs and values. Alain de Botton’s multi-modal philosophical text The Art of Travel focusses on the impact of travel on individuals in real, anticipated and remembered landscapes. In his chapter On Travelling Places, de Botton questions what makes a landscape such a valuable travel destination. Similarly, the chapter On Eye-Opening Art, conveys the differing representations of landscapes by Van Gogh, and how artworks have been able to impact future generations in engaging their imagination and motivating them to see a landscape. The poem, 10 Mary Street by Peter Skrzynecki expresses the real landscape of a migrant families home and how it has lasting childhood memories for the persona. Therefore, throughout both texts while experiences of the landscape are widely different, they have long lasting effects on an individual's identity.

Landscapes that we may perceive as insignificant and mundane may profoundly influence our identity. In the chapter, On travelling Places, de Botton questions the different value of landscapes while travelling. The stereotypical description of the landscape conveyed by ‘lush palmed fringed island that Baudelaire had dreamed of’ conveys the idealised initial perspective towards the landscape. The use of the inclusive pronoun ‘we’ expressed through “If we find poetry in the service station and motel… implicitly feel that these isolated places offer us a material setting for an alternative to selfish ease”, further portray how landscapes that may ordinarily be viewed as unimportant can have a significant impact on an individual. This is similarly conveyed through the emphasis on seemingly insignificant everyday objects in ‘coffee machine and magazines, tokens of small human desires and vanities’. The aphorism of ‘not necessarily at home that we best encounter our true selves’, reiterates how landscapes can have an impact on our identity and values. Hence, landscapes both anticipated and real can have a large impact on an individual's identity, values and beliefs.

Landscapes can have a large impact on our identity through the memories that we can associate with them. The poem, 10 Mary Street conveys the landscape of a migrant family in their home and their close connection to the house. The persona reflects on his childhood memories of the house and garden, inviting the audience to share his thoughts and emphasise with their position as migrants. The simile ‘like a well oiled lock’, reinforces the daily routine of the family. The symbolism in ‘still too-narrow bridge’ expresses the difficulties faced by the family in transitioning into their community. The parent’s strong connection to the garden is conveyed through the cumulative listing of ‘watered plants-grew potatoes/And rows of sweet corn’. This is similarly conveyed through the use of sibilance and continuation of garden imagery in ‘became citizens of the soil’. The simile ‘like a hungry bird’ and further hyperbole ‘bursting at the seams’ is contrasted to it’s prior listing. This emphasises how the persona initially gave little thought to the garden and doesn’t reciprocate his parent’s care for the landscape. The strong family connection and self-identity throughout the poem is very different to the experiences portrayed in de Botton’s text however still has an enduring impact on the beliefs and values of the personas.

Artworks and their representation of a landscape can influence individuals to travel which can further impact their identity. The representation of a landscape through the use of artworks is conveyed through de Botton's chapter On Eye-Opening Art. De Botton’s use of intertextuality contrasts the post-impressionist paintings of Van Gogh with their real landscapes to reinforce his ideas and convey how they were perceived differently. During de Botton’s travels, an Australian man exclaims ‘Well, it doesn’t look much like that’, when comparing the painting and landscapes of Gogh. This reinforces that there may be several different subjective interpretations of a landscape. This is similarly seen through the aphorism ‘world is complex enough for two realistic pictures of the same place to look very different’. The statement ‘tend to seek our corners of the world only once .. painted and written about by artists’, shows how artists can be influential in inspiring others to travel to a landscape. While interpretations of an environment may vary, they can have a significant impact on an individual’s values and beliefs. 

Therefore, landscapes will always have an enduring impact on an individual's beliefs and values despite their diverse experiences. The chapter, On Travelling Places questions the value of landscapes while also reflecting on those we may find insignificant. The poem, 10 Mary Street conveys a man’s reflection of the strong connection he had with his childhood home and garden. Further, the chapter On Eye-Opening Art expresses how the representation of landscapes through artworks can inspire others to travel. Thus while we may have differing experiences of a landscape, it can invoke profound longlasting responses in an individual.

[winstondarmawan]

Hello! Would appreciate feedback on my generic Mod A Essay plan.

Spoiler

An examination of the intertextual connections between texts facilitates a deepened understanding of a composer’s values, which are represented different due to the dynamic nature of context.  In particular focus, the reshaping of values such as integrity and humility in Shakespeare’s KRIII and Al Pacino’s LFR reveals the influence of religion and the Tudor myth in the representation of themes such as duplicity and the pursuit of power. 
Topic Sentence 1 (Integrity):
General: Through a study of intertextual connections, a deepened understanding of the dehumanising effects of relinquishing one’s integrity in order to fulfil the insatiable lust for power is attained – despite the dynamic perspectives of the importance of integrity as context shifts.
Grounding (S): The value of integrity is intrinsic to the theocentric society of Shakespeare’s milieu as it enforces the Christian mindset of staying true to oneself in their thoughts and actions. Hence, Shakespeare’s characterises Richard as the perfect Machiavellian villain, abandoning any notion of traditional Christian morality to maximise personal gain.
Grounding (P):  Conversely, the 20th century notion secularism has allowed Pacino to portray Richard in LFR as the result of the desire of the self-made man, who in a world filled with corruption must concede their integrity to fulfil selfish motivations.
Evidence:
1.     Richard’s absence of integrity in his pursuit to achieve the crown of England is established through Shakespeare's use of soliloquy. The opening soliloquy, in particular, reveals to the audience Richard’s “determination to prove a villain”, thus revealing his “subtle, false and treacherous” nature. Note: Relate to Edward if ‘relationships’
·      Pacino re-enacts the opening soliloquy, utilising chiaroscuro lighting - a constrast of shadow and light - to emphasise the transgression of duplicitous nature through time, applicable to the 20th century “politicians, complete with their innuendos and lies”. The parallelism allows modern audiences to relate the motives of Richard to the self-made man.
2.     Shakespeare further elucidates Richard’s innate lack of integrity through the Lady Anne scene, with Richard admitting “[he] will not keep her long”. The dramatic irony enables the audience to first hand witness Richard’s ease of manipulation and abuse of the Christian sacrament of marriage; his soul is so damaged and lacking in integrity that he does not stop to question his morals.
·      The docudrama form allows for explanatory intermissions in Pacino’s reconstruction of Richard’s wooing of Anne. The sardonic intercut of “HA!” after Anne’s submission reflects the cunning nature of the tragic hero in his attempt to fulfil his political potential. Through this, modern audiences are alerted to the transcendence  of manipulative individuals through time.
3.     Shakespeare exaggerates Richard’s failure to maintain his shattered identity. In the climax, Richard’s deteriorated conscience is personified to “[have] a thousand separate tongues”. The “tongues”, a religious allusion to the Holy Spirit, perpetuate the degradation of Richard’s conscience under divine retribution – a core theocentric belief at the time.
·      Pacino adopts the dual role of both director and actor, emulating the potential for duplicity in the “everyday” man, and ultimately assumes the identity of Richard himself. The pastiche of alternating cuts and shots blends the identity of actor and character – evoking empathy from modern audiences regarding the absence of integrity in the self-made man, as Pacino is very much so.

Topic sentence 2 (Humility): In disregarding a sense of humility, human nature prompts individuals to challenge authoritative figures and ideologies through foul tactics with intentions of asserting their own authority, this resulting in an immoral, condemnable identity.
Grounding (S): The zeitgeist of Shakespeare’s theocentric Elizabethan Era was greatly defined by the notion of providentialism, a belief that one’s fate is tied to the will of God. Thus, Shakespeare characterises Richard to oppose it, warning audiences of the dangers of dismissing one’s sense of humility and thus their preordained destinies.
Grounding (P): Conversely, Pacino re-contextualises Richard’s motives as the product of postmodern emphasis on the self-made man, urging audiences to empathise with Richard’s relinquishing of humility in his quest for domination.
Evidence:
1.     Due to the Great Chain of Being - a religious hierarchy imposed upon Shakespeare’s theocentric society – Richard is physically characterised as ‘deformed, unfinished and half-made’. Through natural cause one is ordained their place in society, and despite being of regal blood, Richard is despised by the Elizabethan audience and granted minimal natural authority.
·       Further affirming the importance of humility in a postmodern context, Pacino employs academic Emry Jones, who intertextually alludes to Pacino’s role in The Godfather, referring to Richard as a “gangster”. Rather than undermining divine authority, Pacino challenges the authority of the government, allowing modern audiences to understand that despite changing times, that the corruption elicited by an absence of humility is still existent.
2.     The theatrical medium of Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre prompted the use of dramatics, particularly Richard’s double-crossing of Buckingham. The Elizabethan audience is well are of the totalitarianism Richard exhibits, refusing to provide Buckingham with ‘Th’earldom of Hereford’. Yet, due to his illegitimacy in achieving this rule, Shakespeare’s audience is positioned to recognise Richard’s utmost absence of humility – willing to absolve ties with his closest allies to ensure the dominance of his authority.
·      Rather, a 20th century focus on psychoanalysis introduced through the works of Sigmund Freud saw Pacino utilise the docudrama form, layering the voiceover “The emptiness of it…” to echo the dehumanising effects of the manipulation of authority and power on one’s conscience. However, contemporary audiences are positioned to find this ironic as Pacino himself frequently asserts his authority over other production and cast members, with Kimball remarking ‘You thinking you know more than any scholar in England is f*cking ridiculous!’.
3.     Shakespeare introduces the virtuous foil character of Richmond to exemplify that the dismissal of one’s humility will lead to defeat. Richmond is aligned with the goodness of God, praying “that we may praise thee (God) in thy victory”, representative of the theocentric ideology of the triumph of God against evil. Thus, Shakespeare exemplifies the importance of adhering to the Elizabethan ideologies of his time.
·      Conversely, Richmond’s role in the defeat of Richard is minimised in Looking For Richard, his screen presence diminished to a couple of seconds.  Rather, a postmodern cinematic focus on action-packed and battle is evident through the panning shots and the blood-stained filter. Through this, Pacino plays on the modern adage ‘All is fair in love and war’, reflecting of the postmodern understanding necessity to omit one’s humility in order to gain power. Yet, it is clear through Richard’s gruelling defeat that perhaps a sense of humility is necessary in facilitating a holistic human experience.
 

Thanks in advance!

EDIT: Just making sure I have enough posts to post another essay soon. Thank you!

[jamonwindeyer]

Pretty generic essay, think it'll suit being moulded to other questions. Left it short so I have room to adapt. Concerns:

Hey! Happy to give you some comments on this

Spoiler

Shakespeare’s Hamlet continues to engage audiences through its dramatic treatment of struggle and disillusionment.
In the light of your critical study, does this statement resonate with your own interpretation of Hamlet?
In your response, make detailed reference to the play.

Shakespeare’s Hamlet portrays the struggle between chivalric duty and Renaissance-era morality. Good concept, I'd like you to explain it a little futher.Therein, feudalistic concerns for honour pressure Hamlet to enact revenge, eventually leading to a genuine delusion. Be careful you don't rely on the plot to portray your concepts too much. The prince is characterised as a philosophical humanist, reflecting disillusionment with the medieval social fabric of the Danish state. Ideological conflict accentuates Claudius’ regicide, his manipulative tendencies emphasising Hamlet’s morality and the corruption of the state in which the prince finds himself trapped. Through Hamlet’s perceptive characterisation in attempting to resolve the injustice and understand our mortality we are positioned to empathise with his struggle, Shakespeare’s portrayal of his quest enabling the drama to engage audiences through intricate characterisation, integral to the tragedy’s textual integrity. Perhaps delving a little too far into the characters and such for the introduction - But works well on the whole

From the first act Hamlet is positioned as utterly disillusioned with Claudius’ corruption and life in general through portrayal of a putrid, rotting society. A character focused Thesis, not the most sophisticated approach possible but it does respond to the question nicely. Provided you analyse effectively, no dramas. The prince labels Denmark an “unweeded garden,” imagery emphasising Hamlet’s malcontent with the “speed[y]” marriage of his mother and his father’s death, disillusionment with Claudius’ control of Danish power structures elucidated through metaphor of Denmark as a “prison.” Remember to attribute techniques to Shakespeare - These characters are his puppets. Moreover, Hamlet compares his father to “Hyperion,” saying he is “like the herald Mercury” while describing Claudius as a “satyr,” juxtaposition through mythological allusion highlighting the injustice of the king’s regicide. Retell. Indeed, Hamlet’s uncle is characterised as a repugnant villain, diction in labelling Hamlet’s grief “unmanly” illustrating the villain’s egotism. The prince labels him a “…treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain,” cumulative listing emphasising his malevolence and the prince’s discontent. How do these ideas relate to discontent? The motif of decay continues as Claudius admits his offence “is rank” and “smells to heaven,” reinforcing the pervasive corruption of the king’s reign. Retell. Thus, Shakespeare explores a fundamental disillusionment with the powers-that-be, Hamlet’s grief engaging the audience as we are encouraged to empathise with his struggle. Great textual evidence, but a lot of textual retell. Shakespeare represents his characters in these ways - He deserves more attention!

While coming to terms with Claudius’ guilt, Hamlet finds himself forced to resolve the injustice as the son of the victim. Don't retell the plot - Marker has read it! No proper Thesis set up here either. The prince’s disillusionment with chivalric duty is reflected from the first meeting with the ghost, after which he laments “O cursed spite / That ever I was born to set it right.” Rhyming couplet expounds Hamlet’s humanist philosophy, as he curses the medieval customs which pressure him to enact revenge. As an easy way to improve flow, ensure quote and technique are always in the same sentence. Indeed, the ghost symbolises external pressures, demonstrating the conflicting forces the prince must reconcile. As the prince finds Claudius in prayer, he remarks “A villain kills my father, and, for that / I, his sole son, do this same villain send / To Heaven.” Parallelism of “father” and “son” emphasises the significance of filial duty in the Elizabethan era. Is this the idea of this paragraph? I'm not getting a clear concept, primarily because the introduction didn't give me one. However, Hamlet resists, ambivalent tone in “Now might I do it pat” denoting resistance to external expectations to avenge his father. We can trace the prince’s fall into genuine madness from this point forward, as he is overcome by the emotional anguish precipitated by his dilemma. Retell. Metaphoric comparison of a human being to “a rat” conveys the abandonment of Hamlet’s moral codes, as he kills Polonius in an errant display of irrationality. The plot element is irrelevant here - The metaphoric comparison (the TECHNIQUE) is the important bit. He later tries to excuse the murder to the victim’s son: “Was’t Hamlet wronged Laertes? Never Hamlet.” Illeism contrasts starkly with prior usage of first person pronoun “I”, subversion denoting the tragic hero’s ultimate failure to reconcile humanist ideals with filial duty and his resulting downfall into genuine madness. Polysyndeton in “Sith I have cause and strength and will and means / To do’t” further reinforces Hamlet’s madness, as he is under armed guard and has no “means” of acting on his words.  Hence, Shakespeare encourages the audience to empathise with the prince’s struggle, his tragic fall into delusion and untimely death continuing to resonate even with contemporary responders. Why does it resonate? Is it a universally relevant theme or is it the techniques? Again, fantastic paragraph for evidence/quotes but not the best for the quality of your arguments!!

Moreover, Shakespeare encourages the audience to engage with Hamlet’s struggle through the prince’s insightful metaphysical analysis of our mortality, reflecting the Renaissance-era rejection of the traditional understanding of death. This sentence highlights the issue of perspective - The prince is not offering a metaphysical analysis, Shakespear is doing that using the characters as puppets!  Indeed, metaphor of an “undiscovered country” delineates Hamlet’s willingness to question fundamental Christian notions of Heaven, Hell and Purgatory. How would this have impacted the predominantly Christian audience? The tragic hero asks whether it would be better “To die, to sleep / To sleep, perchance to dream,” infinitive verb highlighting disillusionment with the corruption of the state and Claudius’ malevolence. Retell. Hamlet notes “Alexander died, Alexander was buried, Alexander returneth to dust,” allusion demonstrating a realisation that death is the ultimate leveller of all humans, rejecting the idea of an afterlife. What is it alluding to? Indeed, Hamlet’s epiphany foreshadows the violent catharsis, repetition of “dies” in stage direction conveying the blunt finality of death as Claudius faces the consequences of his regicide. Therefore, Hamlet’s insightfulness in the struggle to understand our mortality encourages the responder to side with the enigmatic prince, engaging the audience in Shakespeare’s exploration of regicidal greed. Fantastic examples/quotes, but again, not really doing enough with them yet!

In Hamlet, Shakespeare portrays a humanist misfit struggling for justice in a decaying Denmark. The prince’s perceptiveness expounds his disillusionment with the state and with flawed Christian notions of our mortality. Furthermore, Hamlet struggles to reconcile internal concerns for the morality of taking a human life with chivalric filial pressure to avenge his father, catalysing a genuine delusion which engages the audience to empathise with his fall from grace.

In response to your questions:

1. Should I be so obvious in responding to the question in English? Should I use some other way of saying "engage the audience" or is it fine to keep repeating this so they know I'm considering the question?

It is okay to be blatant - But mixing it up is good too. Try and use a few different words instead of "engage" perhaps, if you are worried about it?

2. I don't know why but it seemed appropriate to use verbs in the introduction for module B like "emphasising" as if I were talking about techniques. Should this be avoided?

Nah that's okay - If you feel it works better roll with it, gut instinct is good instinct

3. Only one mention of textual integrity, does pointing out that it resonates with contemporary responders count or should I say textual integrity specifically?

I actually didn't mention the idea literally in my essays and I always did fine - It's that the ideas are there that really counts

Overall a solid essay, especially in terms of analysis, but analysis and concept are lacking! Ensure each paragraph gets a fully formed, standalone motherhood statement and conclusion, and remember for analysis:

TECHNIQUE
EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS COMMUNICATING
AUDIENCE RECEPTION/IMPACT


If you take a quote, identify the technique, link it to an idea then explain how that affects our perceptions - You've got all the pieces. Also remember that all techniques are attributed to Shakespeare and not the characters!!

[_____]

Hey! Happy to give you some comments on this

Spoiler

Shakespeare’s Hamlet continues to engage audiences through its dramatic treatment of struggle and disillusionment.
In the light of your critical study, does this statement resonate with your own interpretation of Hamlet?
In your response, make detailed reference to the play.

Shakespeare’s Hamlet portrays the struggle between chivalric duty and Renaissance-era morality. Good concept, I'd like you to explain it a little futher.Therein, feudalistic concerns for honour pressure Hamlet to enact revenge, eventually leading to a genuine delusion. Be careful you don't rely on the plot to portray your concepts too much. The prince is characterised as a philosophical humanist, reflecting disillusionment with the medieval social fabric of the Danish state. Ideological conflict accentuates Claudius’ regicide, his manipulative tendencies emphasising Hamlet’s morality and the corruption of the state in which the prince finds himself trapped. Through Hamlet’s perceptive characterisation in attempting to resolve the injustice and understand our mortality we are positioned to empathise with his struggle, Shakespeare’s portrayal of his quest enabling the drama to engage audiences through intricate characterisation, integral to the tragedy’s textual integrity. Perhaps delving a little too far into the characters and such for the introduction - But works well on the whole

From the first act Hamlet is positioned as utterly disillusioned with Claudius’ corruption and life in general through portrayal of a putrid, rotting society. A character focused Thesis, not the most sophisticated approach possible but it does respond to the question nicely. Provided you analyse effectively, no dramas. The prince labels Denmark an “unweeded garden,” imagery emphasising Hamlet’s malcontent with the “speed[y]” marriage of his mother and his father’s death, disillusionment with Claudius’ control of Danish power structures elucidated through metaphor of Denmark as a “prison.” Remember to attribute techniques to Shakespeare - These characters are his puppets. Moreover, Hamlet compares his father to “Hyperion,” saying he is “like the herald Mercury” while describing Claudius as a “satyr,” juxtaposition through mythological allusion highlighting the injustice of the king’s regicide. Retell. Indeed, Hamlet’s uncle is characterised as a repugnant villain, diction in labelling Hamlet’s grief “unmanly” illustrating the villain’s egotism. The prince labels him a “…treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain,” cumulative listing emphasising his malevolence and the prince’s discontent. How do these ideas relate to discontent? The motif of decay continues as Claudius admits his offence “is rank” and “smells to heaven,” reinforcing the pervasive corruption of the king’s reign. Retell. Thus, Shakespeare explores a fundamental disillusionment with the powers-that-be, Hamlet’s grief engaging the audience as we are encouraged to empathise with his struggle. Great textual evidence, but a lot of textual retell. Shakespeare represents his characters in these ways - He deserves more attention!

While coming to terms with Claudius’ guilt, Hamlet finds himself forced to resolve the injustice as the son of the victim. Don't retell the plot - Marker has read it! No proper Thesis set up here either. The prince’s disillusionment with chivalric duty is reflected from the first meeting with the ghost, after which he laments “O cursed spite / That ever I was born to set it right.” Rhyming couplet expounds Hamlet’s humanist philosophy, as he curses the medieval customs which pressure him to enact revenge. As an easy way to improve flow, ensure quote and technique are always in the same sentence. Indeed, the ghost symbolises external pressures, demonstrating the conflicting forces the prince must reconcile. As the prince finds Claudius in prayer, he remarks “A villain kills my father, and, for that / I, his sole son, do this same villain send / To Heaven.” Parallelism of “father” and “son” emphasises the significance of filial duty in the Elizabethan era. Is this the idea of this paragraph? I'm not getting a clear concept, primarily because the introduction didn't give me one. However, Hamlet resists, ambivalent tone in “Now might I do it pat” denoting resistance to external expectations to avenge his father. We can trace the prince’s fall into genuine madness from this point forward, as he is overcome by the emotional anguish precipitated by his dilemma. Retell. Metaphoric comparison of a human being to “a rat” conveys the abandonment of Hamlet’s moral codes, as he kills Polonius in an errant display of irrationality. The plot element is irrelevant here - The metaphoric comparison (the TECHNIQUE) is the important bit. He later tries to excuse the murder to the victim’s son: “Was’t Hamlet wronged Laertes? Never Hamlet.” Illeism contrasts starkly with prior usage of first person pronoun “I”, subversion denoting the tragic hero’s ultimate failure to reconcile humanist ideals with filial duty and his resulting downfall into genuine madness. Polysyndeton in “Sith I have cause and strength and will and means / To do’t” further reinforces Hamlet’s madness, as he is under armed guard and has no “means” of acting on his words.  Hence, Shakespeare encourages the audience to empathise with the prince’s struggle, his tragic fall into delusion and untimely death continuing to resonate even with contemporary responders. Why does it resonate? Is it a universally relevant theme or is it the techniques? Again, fantastic paragraph for evidence/quotes but not the best for the quality of your arguments!!

Moreover, Shakespeare encourages the audience to engage with Hamlet’s struggle through the prince’s insightful metaphysical analysis of our mortality, reflecting the Renaissance-era rejection of the traditional understanding of death. This sentence highlights the issue of perspective - The prince is not offering a metaphysical analysis, Shakespear is doing that using the characters as puppets!  Indeed, metaphor of an “undiscovered country” delineates Hamlet’s willingness to question fundamental Christian notions of Heaven, Hell and Purgatory. How would this have impacted the predominantly Christian audience? The tragic hero asks whether it would be better “To die, to sleep / To sleep, perchance to dream,” infinitive verb highlighting disillusionment with the corruption of the state and Claudius’ malevolence. Retell. Hamlet notes “Alexander died, Alexander was buried, Alexander returneth to dust,” allusion demonstrating a realisation that death is the ultimate leveller of all humans, rejecting the idea of an afterlife. What is it alluding to? Indeed, Hamlet’s epiphany foreshadows the violent catharsis, repetition of “dies” in stage direction conveying the blunt finality of death as Claudius faces the consequences of his regicide. Therefore, Hamlet’s insightfulness in the struggle to understand our mortality encourages the responder to side with the enigmatic prince, engaging the audience in Shakespeare’s exploration of regicidal greed. Fantastic examples/quotes, but again, not really doing enough with them yet!

In Hamlet, Shakespeare portrays a humanist misfit struggling for justice in a decaying Denmark. The prince’s perceptiveness expounds his disillusionment with the state and with flawed Christian notions of our mortality. Furthermore, Hamlet struggles to reconcile internal concerns for the morality of taking a human life with chivalric filial pressure to avenge his father, catalysing a genuine delusion which engages the audience to empathise with his fall from grace.

In response to your questions:

It is okay to be blatant - But mixing it up is good too. Try and use a few different words instead of "engage" perhaps, if you are worried about it?

Nah that's okay - If you feel it works better roll with it, gut instinct is good instinct

I actually didn't mention the idea literally in my essays and I always did fine - It's that the ideas are there that really counts

Overall a solid essay, especially in terms of analysis, but analysis and concept are lacking! Ensure each paragraph gets a fully formed, standalone motherhood statement and conclusion, and remember for analysis:

TECHNIQUE
EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS COMMUNICATING
AUDIENCE RECEPTION/IMPACT


If you take a quote, identify the technique, link it to an idea then explain how that affects our perceptions - You've got all the pieces. Also remember that all techniques are attributed to Shakespeare and not the characters!!

Thanks a lot for the help!

Am I missing the point of module B? I was under the impression that a heap of textual detail and judgement of the characters was essential to demonstrate "an informed personal understanding of the text" from the prescriptions. So here:

We can trace the prince’s fall into genuine madness from this point forward, as he is overcome by the emotional anguish precipitated by his dilemma. Retell. Metaphoric comparison of a human being to “a rat” conveys the abandonment of Hamlet’s moral codes, as he kills Polonius in an errant display of irrationality. The plot element is irrelevant here - The metaphoric comparison (the TECHNIQUE) is the important bit

Do I need to qualify this fall into delusion before mentioning it, like saying Shakespeare discusses the fundamental tension between morality and duty or something? Or should I abandon it? I'm struggling to come up with better overarching themes without turning it into a module C essay (authorial intent) or a module A essay (context) 

[sarahhamilton]

Hey, I know it's a bit late to be asking for some essay marking or revising, but I could definitely use the help! This is my Discovery essay: The Awakening by Kate Chopin and To Room Nineteen by Doris Lessing. Thanks!

This was my Trial question, so any feedback would be great!
Q: The value of a discovery is measured by its ability to challenge and shape views of ourselves. To what extent do you agree?

Spoiler

All individuals live in worlds that are impacted by their perspectives, beliefs, and discoveries. Each person’s view of themselves is shaped by discovery, and it can be extremely challenging in a society with restrictions. Feminist writers, Kate Chopin and Doris Lessing, wrote of the reality of women within a ruling patriarchy, and the challenging discoveries of self-identity and the value of their livelihood within strictly defined roles. The Awakening (1899) is a prose fiction piece by Chopin, which explores the cultural imprisonment and contextual domestic roles of women in the 19th Century. Lessing’s short story To Room Nineteen (1978) addresses traditional and redundant maternal roles, and questions their place in society. Both texts create a clear view of the unequal reality of housewives with a lack of independence, who crave their husband’s agency.

TA is representative of a fin de siècle woman’s search for her own identity. “If it wasn’t a mother’s place to look after children, whose, is it?” Edna’s rhetorical question emphasises domestic roles within her society. Edna’s awakenings are first triggered by crying after Léonce’s returns from Klein’s hotel. “The tears came so fast to Mrs. Pontellier, the damp sleeve of her peignoir no longer served to dry them… She could not have told why she was crying.” The allusion of ‘Mrs. Pontellier’, refers to the maternal role she plays. This trigger opens her mind to possibilities beyond motherhood; her housewife persona developing into one of an independent woman. While Léonce only see her as insane, Edna knows that she must discover who she is without restrictions. “I’m going to pull myself together for a while and think – try to determine what character of a woman I am”. This foreshadowing narrative displays Edna’s understanding of the condemnation she will face, and acts anyway. Edna transforms from a subservient Creole housewife, expected in historical context, into a woman that is not restricted by societal boundaries. Chopin herself questioned her identity during her "pursuit of independence apart from her children." She has acknowledged her writing was autobiographical.

In contrast, Lessing’s TRN, a representation of 1970’s women in the ongoing patriarchy, Susan is an independent, and intelligent woman, not obliged to conform to gender roles. This is illustrated in the couple’s equality: “both had well paid jobs … both, before they married had pleasant flats”. This differs from the traditional maternal role Susan coincides with once married, causing her discovery process to be delayed. Susan is unable to express her emotions due to her dominant intellectual ability and beliefs of the patriarchy. She is triggered by constant childbearing, and her decline as a mother, as her children grow up “…because she knew what happened to a woman of fifty, with grown-up children who no longer needed their full devotion”. This allegory is representative of woman in patriarchy, in which mothers becomes redundant. Susan discovers that her ideas, thoughts, and identity were stultified by the contextual expectations of society. The discovery of her identity emerges from her curiosity of what lives beyond motherhood, traditional gender roles and male dominance.  Susan takes a room of her own to gain what little control she can. Her contentment is revealed in simple sentences: “she was free, she sat in the armchair, she simply sat. She closed her eyes and let herself be alone”. Through basic diction, and sibilant repetition followed by active verbs, it becomes apparent that Susan has evolved. Susan’s self-discovery, emerged from her deliberation, emphasises her struggle with the oppressive patriarchy, and her previously over valuing intellectual aspects of her identity.

Gender roles were an integral part of the society’s functioning, where woman were expected to be devoted housewives. Edna has allowed herself to gain power and allow her to uncover repressed desires and awaken her self-discovery. The ultimate meaningful fragment of Edna’s awakening was whilst swimming on her own for the first time. This revealing moment is demonstrated as a form of baptism: “she was like the little tottering, clutching child, who of a sudden realises its powers and walks for the first time alone.” The strong imagery of her as a child highlights how substantial this act is as a part of her awakening as an independent woman. This displays Edna’s relationship to the sea as a catalyst in her discovery. This romantic sensuality to the sea contrasts Edna’s sensual affair with Arobin. Despite the pleasure, Edna realises she is still just an object: it is after this sexual liberation that the sombre atmosphere of Edna’s death is set. The anaphora “He did not know; he did not understand; he would never understand” illustrates the process of her realisation of Léonce’s lack of empathy, and the finality of her decision; the reasoning for her suicide. Although Edna had found segments of her identity, she came to the final realisation that she would never be free from patriarchy, ending in her final act of emancipation.

In the 1970s, attitudes of sex began to change as society became more liberated due to advances in contraception. Yet, Susan chooses to abandon her sexual desires. This heavily contrasts Edna’s embrace of her desires. Susan’s decision is displayed in the collection of truncated sentences and rhetorical questions: “The idea made her want to cry from the sheer effort of the thing … Good lord, why make love at all?” The caesura and exclamatory ‘Good lord’ reveals Susan’s thoughts as she uncovers a revelation. She can avoid the effort of physical union by just withdrawing from it totally. This emphasises her realisation that to find herself, she must disassociate herself. Susan chooses suicide as she realises she will never escape oppression. Susan’s fate is depicted through the ominous: “because she did not want, today, to be surprised a knock at five o’clock.” The sentence structure of the violation of the word ‘today’ through the employment of caesuras, highlights that she will not awaken. Her death is symbolised in: “she was quite content lying there listening to the soft kiss of the gas that poured into the room, into her lungs, into her brain, as she drifted off.” The personified ‘gas’ becomes Susan’s final lover, macabrely setting her free. Comparably to Edna, Susan experiences the connection to water within her death, triggering a spiritual discovery. The drowning represents her suffering and it emphasises connotations of freedom and solitude, and escaping from society.

All individuals shape their views of their worlds and themselves through discoveries. The ability to challenge creates a more intense value to the discovery. The Awakening and To Room Nineteen present two women who wish to escape, and their challenging discoveries lead to consequences which negatively impacted their worlds, but gave them true freedom from their oppression.

[armtistic]

Hey, I know it's a bit late to be asking for some essay marking or revising, but I could definitely use the help! This is my Discovery essay: The Awakening by Kate Chopin and To Room Nineteen by Doris Lessing. Thanks!

This was my Trial question, so any feedback would be great!
Q: The value of a discovery is measured by its ability to challenge and shape views of ourselves. To what extent do you agree?

Spoiler

All individuals live in worlds that are impacted by their perspectives, beliefs, and discoveries. Each person’s view of themselves is shaped by discovery, and it can be extremely challenging in a society with restrictions. Feminist writers, Kate Chopin and Doris Lessing, wrote of the reality of women within a ruling patriarchy, and the challenging discoveries of self-identity and the value of their livelihood within strictly defined roles. The Awakening (1899) is a prose fiction piece by Chopin, which explores the cultural imprisonment and contextual domestic roles of women in the 19th Century. Lessing’s short story To Room Nineteen (1978) addresses traditional and redundant maternal roles, and questions their place in society. Both texts create a clear view of the unequal reality of housewives with a lack of independence, who crave their husband’s agency.

TA is representative of a fin de siècle woman’s search for her own identity. “If it wasn’t a mother’s place to look after children, whose, is it?” Edna’s rhetorical question emphasises domestic roles within her society. Edna’s awakenings are first triggered by crying after Léonce’s returns from Klein’s hotel. “The tears came so fast to Mrs. Pontellier, the damp sleeve of her peignoir no longer served to dry them… She could not have told why she was crying.” The allusion of ‘Mrs. Pontellier’, refers to the maternal role she plays. This trigger opens her mind to possibilities beyond motherhood; her housewife persona developing into one of an independent woman. While Léonce only see her as insane, Edna knows that she must discover who she is without restrictions. “I’m going to pull myself together for a while and think – try to determine what character of a woman I am”. This foreshadowing narrative displays Edna’s understanding of the condemnation she will face, and acts anyway. Edna transforms from a subservient Creole housewife, expected in historical context, into a woman that is not restricted by societal boundaries. Chopin herself questioned her identity during her "pursuit of independence apart from her children." She has acknowledged her writing was autobiographical.

In contrast, Lessing’s TRN, a representation of 1970’s women in the ongoing patriarchy, Susan is an independent, and intelligent woman, not obliged to conform to gender roles. This is illustrated in the couple’s equality: “both had well paid jobs … both, before they married had pleasant flats”. This differs from the traditional maternal role Susan coincides with once married, causing her discovery process to be delayed. Susan is unable to express her emotions due to her dominant intellectual ability and beliefs of the patriarchy. She is triggered by constant childbearing, and her decline as a mother, as her children grow up “…because she knew what happened to a woman of fifty, with grown-up children who no longer needed their full devotion”. This allegory is representative of woman in patriarchy, in which mothers becomes redundant. Susan discovers that her ideas, thoughts, and identity were stultified by the contextual expectations of society. The discovery of her identity emerges from her curiosity of what lives beyond motherhood, traditional gender roles and male dominance.  Susan takes a room of her own to gain what little control she can. Her contentment is revealed in simple sentences: “she was free, she sat in the armchair, she simply sat. She closed her eyes and let herself be alone”. Through basic diction, and sibilant repetition followed by active verbs, it becomes apparent that Susan has evolved. Susan’s self-discovery, emerged from her deliberation, emphasises her struggle with the oppressive patriarchy, and her previously over valuing intellectual aspects of her identity.

Gender roles were an integral part of the society’s functioning, where woman were expected to be devoted housewives. Edna has allowed herself to gain power and allow her to uncover repressed desires and awaken her self-discovery. The ultimate meaningful fragment of Edna’s awakening was whilst swimming on her own for the first time. This revealing moment is demonstrated as a form of baptism: “she was like the little tottering, clutching child, who of a sudden realises its powers and walks for the first time alone.” The strong imagery of her as a child highlights how substantial this act is as a part of her awakening as an independent woman. This displays Edna’s relationship to the sea as a catalyst in her discovery. This romantic sensuality to the sea contrasts Edna’s sensual affair with Arobin. Despite the pleasure, Edna realises she is still just an object: it is after this sexual liberation that the sombre atmosphere of Edna’s death is set. The anaphora “He did not know; he did not understand; he would never understand” illustrates the process of her realisation of Léonce’s lack of empathy, and the finality of her decision; the reasoning for her suicide. Although Edna had found segments of her identity, she came to the final realisation that she would never be free from patriarchy, ending in her final act of emancipation.

In the 1970s, attitudes of sex began to change as society became more liberated due to advances in contraception. Yet, Susan chooses to abandon her sexual desires. This heavily contrasts Edna’s embrace of her desires. Susan’s decision is displayed in the collection of truncated sentences and rhetorical questions: “The idea made her want to cry from the sheer effort of the thing … Good lord, why make love at all?” The caesura and exclamatory ‘Good lord’ reveals Susan’s thoughts as she uncovers a revelation. She can avoid the effort of physical union by just withdrawing from it totally. This emphasises her realisation that to find herself, she must disassociate herself. Susan chooses suicide as she realises she will never escape oppression. Susan’s fate is depicted through the ominous: “because she did not want, today, to be surprised a knock at five o’clock.” The sentence structure of the violation of the word ‘today’ through the employment of caesuras, highlights that she will not awaken. Her death is symbolised in: “she was quite content lying there listening to the soft kiss of the gas that poured into the room, into her lungs, into her brain, as she drifted off.” The personified ‘gas’ becomes Susan’s final lover, macabrely setting her free. Comparably to Edna, Susan experiences the connection to water within her death, triggering a spiritual discovery. The drowning represents her suffering and it emphasises connotations of freedom and solitude, and escaping from society.

All individuals shape their views of their worlds and themselves through discoveries. The ability to challenge creates a more intense value to the discovery. The Awakening and To Room Nineteen present two women who wish to escape, and their challenging discoveries lead to consequences which negatively impacted their worlds, but gave them true freedom from their oppression.

Not to be a bummer but you have to have 50 posts to get an essay marked atm

[monicahiga]

Hi! Could you please give me some feedback on some of my Mod C essays. We're studying King Henry IV Part 1 and my chosen related in a Dr Seuss book called The Butter Battle Book.

[ben.roberts13]

Hey
Just wondering if it would be possible to get some feedback and comments on my introduction and first body paragraph for a Module A Practice Essay Question. The question is:
Q) The text’s context has a profound impact on the values presented. Evaluate the accuracy of this statement by referencing your two texts (Looking for Richard by Al Pacino and King Richard III by William Shakespeare).
This is the intro and first body paragraph including both Looking for Richard and Richard III

A)
Composers, and their appreciation of both their context and their textual media are able to better present relevant values of deceit and evil that their characters represent. Richard III, written by William Shakespeare, uses his understanding of the audience’s contextual knowledge of deformity and family to further promote his representation of the ideas of manipulation and evil that Richard’s rise to power showcases. This representation aids in his expression of personal messages of politically relevant concepts, like Machiavelli politics and the Divine Right of Kings. Looking for Richard, a Mockumentary about Richard III by Al Pacino, re-embodies these particular themes by developing a text that appreciates its own audiences alternate contextual understandings, which allows them to better appreciate and connect with values of deceit and evil. While reinforcing Shakespeare’s messages about Elizabethan concepts, Pacino also creates his own, revealing his view on modern-day politics and its manipulation and contempt of the people they govern.

The textual value of evil used to attain power in Richard III is reimagined in Looking for Richard, with their respective contexts having an insightful effect on its representation. Shakespeare represents King Richard as an evil figure to an Elizabethan audience by highlighting the negative impact his actions have on other characters. This is shown by Queen Elizabeth in Act 4 Scene 1, when she says ““Pity, you ancient stones, those tender babes whom envy hath immured within your walls” Personification of stones and tower reveals her mental struggles and shortcomings, caused by Richard’s unchecked pursuit of power fuelled by his evil nature. Juxtaposition between hardness of stones and soft babies further heightens his evil against the innocence of the people he rules. Shakespeare couples this with the implementation of contextual values of deformity to further present the concept of evil in Richard III. This is shown during his opening soliloquy in Act 1 Scene 1, when he says in reference to himself “Deformed, unfinished, sent before my time”. Shakespeare manipulates audience’s knowledge of Elizabethan values of deformity and its close relation to evil to magnify and promote Richard’s immorality. Shakespeare chooses to represent Richard as an malevolent character to reveal his messages about Machiavelli politics, outlined in the contextually relevant novel “The Prince”. By developing a character that represents themes of Machiavelli leadership, his evilness and eventual downfall allude to audiences of his personal awareness and more importantly his rejection of Machiavellian politics and its concepts.
Pacino re-represents this evilness of King Richard by using modern-day contextual film techniques that better resonate with the audience. This allows a greater connection from a very alternate audience to that of Elizabethan Shakespeare, and a more effective presentation of values such as evil. The use of dark costuming and lighting toward King Richard develops audiences view of his malevolent and wicked nature. The use of high camera angles on Richard throughout many of the play performances symbolise his power and authority, attained through evil, sinful actions. Pacino reinforces Shakespeare’s messages of Machiavelli politics, but also develops his own about the corruption and evil manipulation of modern-day politics, alluding to how malevolent personalities causes “those in power to have total contempt for everything they promise, everything they pledge” as Redgrave describes during the Mockumentary. By appreciating their respective contexts and the knowledge they present, Pacino and Shakespeare have a more profound effect on exposing the value of evil through Richard’s rise to power.

[jamonwindeyer]

Hey, I have a bunch of questions about my Mod B essay so here goes nothing.
Here's my generic essay, it isn't in response to any question.

Hey! Comments in bold throughout, and I'll answer your questions below:

Spoiler

T.S Eliot, a luminary of the Modernist era, captures, through his poetry, the zeitgeist of Western society plagued by existential uncertainty and loss of spiritualism in wake of industrialisation and the Great War. Throughout his oeuvre, Eliot experiments with abstract surrealism, fragmentation of textual form, stream-of-consciousness and subversion of traditional mediums to encapsulate the unprecedented changes brought about by rapid industrialisation, secularism and technological warfare on society’s outlook on purpose, existentialism, and human connection. Through “Preludes”, “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”, “The Hollow Men” and “The Journey of the Magi”, Eliot presents a cohesive and integrated portrait of the decay and alienation of humanity, the fear of nonconformity, and the quest for purpose in a world where the ‘modern man’ is merely a cesspool of lost agency and defunct spirituality/connection. Good introduction! Expresses its point well - Hard to comment on its effectiveness on any real level without a question but it seems well prepared to be adapted to any question.

With accelerating industrialisation came the rise of urbanism and the suffocation of city life. The subsequent proximity, paradoxically, led to emotional detachment and a degrading loss of substance and human connection. Try to frame your topic sentences as things that Eliot is trying to show to the audience, rather than just saying "This is what happened," without sort of linking it to what the composer is trying to do. In “Preludes”, Eliot presents four vignettes of the emotional sterility that urban society imparts upon the individual, mirroring our own societal fragmentation in the segregated structure. He assaults the senses through the cumulative imagery of dirt and decay in “sawdust-trampled street … muddy feet … dingy shades” to reflect the degradation of our own humanity and subsequently reinforces this barrage through enjambment of the entire stanza from “faint stale smells of beer […] to early coffee stands” to replicate, through the feverish meter, the rush from intoxicant to stimulant that encapsulates the desire to seek release from our lonely modern existences. Fantastic analysis in there, but that sentence was way too long. Break it up for clarity. The “conscience of a blackened street” allegorises the modern soul, symbolically “trampled” and “blackened” by our “muddy feet” as we ignore it and each other. Similarly, “Prufrock” explores the hollow niceties of the bourgeoisie; most evident in the recurring motif of tea which becomes an objective correlative for bourgeois vacuity as he contrasts the pleasantries of “tea and cakes and ices” against the imperative connotations of “crisis” to reinforce the modern preoccupation with meaningless rituals. Ditto here, you are presenting some really great ideas but the expression isn't quite doing it justice, you are trying to cram too much in at once. Through the diacope “That is not what I meant at all;/ That is not it, at all.” Eliot captures the breakdown of communication in a vacuous, detached modern society and uses reverse zoomorphism in the harshly sibilant “I should have been a ragged pair of claws/ Scuttling across the floors of silent seas.” to illustrate the psychological deterioration and emotional detachment that results from prolonged alienation, leaving the victim crabby, hard-shelled and evasive. I love that you are able to cram so many quotes and techniques into such a short space though, excellent work on the amount of textual evidence you are including. Hence, through a synthesis of structure and language forms across both poems, Eliot constructs a single, poignant voice decrying the loss of humanity in an increasingly mechanised society, allowing his works to resonate even today. This conclusion doesn't quite match with your introduction, have you made the point you set out to make?

Drawing on personal fears of being left behind, with the radical evolution of liberalism and secularism, Eliot constructs a universal human narrative of the fear of independent action and nonconformity, giving his works their lasting impact. Great intro. Prufrock’s titular character serves to embody the flailing psychological decline of those too occupied by their shortcomings. Eliot opens by describing the evening sky through the simile “Like a patient etherized upon a table” which, through oxymoronic imagery, acts as an objective correlative, triggering feelings of unconsciousness, vulnerability and confusion which reflects the emasculation of Western society during WWI. Great nod to contextual aspects here. Eliot addresses this in Prufrock’s expulsion of angst through the stream-of-consciousness narrative - “How his hair is growing thin!”- culminating in the bathetic “Do I dare/Disturb the universe?” in a mockery of the modern man’s overemphasis on social customs, inflating it, in their hubris, to universal proportions. He reinforces these ideas through irregular line length in “Though I have seen my head (grown slightly bald) brought in upon a platter,” which complements the tumultuous rhythm and comically pathetic tone of the stanza to emphasise the self-doubt and subsequent delirium that characterises those left metaphorically “pinned and wriggling” by indecision in light of social scrutiny. Brilliant - The expression in this paragraph is better, stops at just the right spot. Likewise, Eliot’s “Hollow Men” represents a generation of young men that felt they had failed God and government and now “grope together/ And avoid speech”, unable to die as ‘heroes’ but too traumatised to reintegrate with society, “behaving as the wind behaves” as, unsupported, they submit to the whims of fate.  Eliot furthers this through biblical allusion in the apostrophe “those who have crossed […] to death’s other Kingdom” in which he indicates that the ‘hollow men’ are trapped in a societal purgatory, forced to wear “such deliberate disguises” of psychological wellbeing to fit into society. What would the impact of this biblical allusion be on, particularly, a religious reader? They are represented symbolically by “the Shadow” which falls “Between the idea/ And the reality” as, likewise trapped between two extremities, they exist in a grey state of moral and social paralysis. Hence, Eliot’s encapsulation of the disorientation and abandonment of compassion and empathy in light of urbanism and warfare acts as a template for mankind’s response to change in any era, lending to the textual integrity of his oeuvre. Really fantastic paragraph here - I think the concepts could be a little clearer at times, really hone in on this idea of disconnection and don't stray too far from it, but on the whole really fantastic stuff.

The gruesome realities of the Great War left the world disillusioned yet dulled. As Nietzsche’s “God is dead!” seemed to ring truer than ever, the world groped desperately for some sliver of meaning. Not really a Thesis and not really an academic tone here - Reads more like a creative writing personal essay/opinion piece, keep things academic and give your concept immediately and in a straightforward way. Eliot begins with a paradox “We are the hollow men/ We are the stuffed men” employing the disembodied inclusive pronoun “we” as a collective condemnation of the “modern man” who has meekly succumbed to living a death-in-life role.  The metrical pattern of the passage is the rhythmic equivalent of “paralysed force, gesture without motion”; evidenced in the contrast of the spiritual languor developed by the despondent tone of “quiet and meaningless” against the terseness of the lines which imply some conservation of energy or spirit. Need a few commas there to break that thought up a bit. This remnant spirit is insufficient to prevent the spiritual collapse of society - mirrored in the truncation of the Lord’s Prayer “For Thine is/ Life is/ For Thine is the” - as all meaning is then dashed in the metaphorical depiction of faith as “prayers to broken stone”. The anthropomorphic “eyes”, a metonym for God, “are not here […] In this valley of dying stars”, a terrifying confirmation of God’s desertion of man, a belief prevalent in modern (and post-modern) society. Good. In Magi, however, Eliot argues that purpose can be found, but only with great commitment. Eliot employs the mask of a Magus on an arduous pilgrimage, through the pathetic fallacy of “cities hostile and the towns unfriendly”, and our peers symbolised as “voices singing in our ears, saying/ That this was all folly”, to compile the universal obstacles one must overcome to find meaning in faith. Through Biblical allusion “this Birth was/Hard and bitter agony for us, like Death,” Eliot presents a paradox in that the Birth of Christ represents religious salvation, yet precipitates the Magi’s ostracism from their people, a living death. Really interesting ideas being proposed in this paragraph. The enjambment of the lines depicts this structurally, as the end-stop following “our death.” embodies the Magi’s lives cut short.   He encapsulates all this in the last stanza, a turbulent stream-of-consciousness of irregular line length and unorthodox syntax “but set down/This set down/ This:” to project the personal and spiritual chaos that religious transformation causes in a modern world where status is the new God. Thus, through a synergy of structure and tone, Eliot delivers a concentrated atmosphere of desperation as he captures the timeless clash of faith against nihilism. Really brilliant paragraph analytically and conceptually, it is purely the introduction that fails to establish a conceptual direction to tie everything together.

Eliot, through deliberate choice of language, is able to convey to responders the population’s feelings of incompetence within a decaying Modernist setting, a society mired in decay, inaction and aimlessness. What he creates is an intimate and evocative journey for purpose when compassion and humanity are lost. Great, punchy conclusion - Does the job nicely. You could add a bit on textual integrity to better address the module.

How do I use an integrated structure without being too shallow in analysis or linking whilst also fitting two texts into a single paragraph, given that I want to keep them under 300 words. Should I cut down on the number of textual evidences I use for each poem?

You definitely have the room to trim quotes if you so choose! You have a wealth of textual evidence, so trimming quotes and simplifying your presentation could free up the room you are after. Your analysis right now is fantastic, I don't think cutting a quote or two per paragraph would affect that greatly

At the moment I'm struggling to fit just the topic sentence, link and analysis of quotes let alone critic input or my personal response to critics or the poem. Should I try and weave my personal response into linking sections or should I just leave it to the conclusion?

Your personal response is established by your unique conceptual ideas, it doesn't need a standalone sentence, and critics are optional anyway! I always got into the 18-20 range without ever using a critic

And would you recommend I replace a quote from the poem or something with a quote from a critic just to add a sense of broader reading?

If you want to! It's just another form of evidence really, if you feel like a bit of breadth is good then go for it - You do reuse a few techniques so could be a way to avoid that

Could someone define and give specific examples of the difference between structure and form and how I would insert them in my essay for Mod B Eliot, because I don't see how to provide textual evidence for a specific type of structure or form.

Structure and form are really the same thing for all intents and purposes - You've done it already, talking about things like line length. Someone who studied Eliot might have suggestions of other things you can add

Also, is it weird to have this many poems in the essay? Does it detract from the depth of analysis?

Not at all - I do think trimming to three could be good for you to simplify a bit, get the length down, and really enhance your contextual clarity to make sure it responds to whatever question is in front of you. Just pick whichever three poems work best on the day

Really great work armtistic, definitely Band 6 level stuff

[jamonwindeyer]

Hi! Could you please give me some feedback on some of my Mod C essays. We're studying King Henry IV Part 1 and my chosen related in a Dr Seuss book called The Butter Battle Book.

Hey
Just wondering if it would be possible to get some feedback and comments on my introduction and first body paragraph for a Module A Practice Essay Question

Hey guys! As mentioned above, we're swamped with marking at the moment so you'll need to reach 50 posts to qualify for feedback from a marker

[elysepopplewell]

Hey guys, I'd love some feedback on my Mod A essay - this is my weakest module by far - I never know how to balance textual evidence, context and also include what new conclusions we can gain from a comparative study. Basically, any help would be appreciated!
Edit: My elective is intertextual perspectives if that wasn't clear

Q. After comparing Metropolis and 1984 what conclusions have you drawn about their intertextual perspective regarding to technology and revolution?

 

Hey there Apologies for the delay - with the head start lectures over the weekend we're just getting back on our feet now. Your concerns about module A aren't only felt by you, don't worry I'll have a look at it and see what we can find

Spoiler

A comparative study of Fritz Lang’s German Expressionist film “Metropolis” and George Orwell’s dystopian novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four” (1984) both reveals the extent to which context shapes the perspectives inherent in both Small thing - but the second time you've said "both" in this sentence so delete this one. texts, and also elucidates new insights regarding technological oppression and the viability of revolutions. Both texts explore the contextual fear of technology used as a mechanism by governments to exploit the masses, due to the contextual second use of contextual, delete one
  issues of class struggle in the Weimar Republic and the rise of totalitarian regimes such as the Soviet Union. However, the texts have there are * No need to say the texts when you're about to say intertextual clashing intertextual perspectives regarding the viability of revolutions in addressing societal inequalities, as the bleakness of the WW2 era leads Orwell to represent revolutions as being ultimately futile. Thus, the comparison of the texts context and thus values allows for an in-depth understanding of the similarities and differences in their intertextual perspectives regarding technology and rebellions. I think this introduction would benefit from being raked back and then re-written with more clarity. Some areas are somewhat tautologous and others just don't flow well. It seems you haven't shown you know what an intertextual perspective is, but rather you've said it exists and that's why Orwell has shaped his text the way he did.

Both Lang and Orwell explore in their respective texts the use of technology to exploit the lower classes, and so enhances the audiences understanding of the double-edged nature of technology. In “Metropolis”, Fredersen applies technology in his industry to dehumanise the proletariats, as demonstrated through the low angle shot of the Moloch Machine, highlighting its power over the exhausted workers.   However, the juxtaposition of these scenes to the above ground cities surreal scale reveals how Fredersen’s creation of an immense and futuristic city has stemmed from his use of technology as an enforcer of oppression of the workers. The link isn't clear here. Juxtaposition shows how someone is inspired by technology as an oppressor - it doesn't really click. Perhaps you mean that the juxtaposition mirrors Lang's own understanding of two paralleling realities? I don't know the text well enough to work out exactly what you should say, but we need a little more work on this bit here This dichotomous perspective of technology is a result of Lang’s context, where technology had both been used for destruction in WW1, and yet also was causative of the golden age of the Weimar Republic. Ok it makes a bit more sense here, but it still needs some work to get to the point quicker than two sentences later The sharp contrast between Maria and her Robot counterpart also strengthens our understanding of technology as the pinnacle of human achievement, which yet can be a serious threat to societal rights if misused. While Maria is presented as pure and virginal how?, the religious allusion of the Whore of Babylon is used in reference to Robot Maria, an example of how technology can be used to corrupt. Thus, Lang demonstrates how technology can be utilised to oppress the masses to ensure the wealthy retain control.

However, Orwell presents a far deeper mistrust of technology and its ability to be manipulated by the state to maintain dictatorial rule, as demonstrated through his portrayal of the Party which removes individual liberty through constant surveillance. In his novel, the extensive use of the technology of the “telescreen” means citizens “can be seen as well as heard” at all times, leading them to be divorced from their own individuality as they must “live in the assumption that…every movement was scrutinised”. Furthermore, the telescreens are also constantly used for propaganda such as the “Two Minutes Hate”, similar to the anti-Semitic rallies by the Nazi Party, which are “impossible to avoid joining in”. The inability to resist such propaganda indicates the forced abandonment of independent thought in favour of the Party’s dogmas as a result of technological manipulation. Orwell’s much darker perspective on technology is a direct result of his witnessing of the nuclear bomb, the ultimate perversion of technology and its ability to be used to benefit society. Thus, Orwell expresses a much more serious concern for the advancement of technology, due to his recognition of its potential to subdue individual thought. There's analysis here in that you are analysing the plot, but you have not analysed the textual features at all. As a rule of thumb (and yes, rules are meant to be broken sometimes), I'd be making sure every time there is a quote there is a TECHNIQUE and then and analysis to ensue afterwards. You've said what Orwell has done, but not HOW he has done it

Lang portrays in his film the potential of an oppressed populous to resolve their exploitation through a rebellion. The mis-en-scene of Maria preaching to the workers reveals the ray of sunlight bathing Maria, contrasted to the otherwise darkened underground cavern, which symbolises her importance and thus grants her presentation of an egalitarian society greater credibility. Her message of class unity was reflective of the rising popularity of Marxist ideas in Germany at the time.  The final shot of Freder clasping the hands of Grot and Fredersen, after the revolution is finished, completes the extended metaphor of “the mediator between the head and the hands must be the heart”, and is a visual representation of the formation of the Golden Age of the democratic Weimar Republic. Thus, Lang’s attests to the ability of revolutions to resolve societal issues in his film. Much better in terms of analysis! You've also answered the question really well.

Contrastingly, Orwell presents an entirely different perspective on revolutions, portraying them as an unsuccessful answer in addressing the injustices of governments. Great link between the texts! He utilises the didactic device of Goldstein’s book, which states revolutionary’s  revolutionaries*
 simply “thrust the Low back into their old position of servitude” after their revolution is complete, as they only “pretend…that they are fighting for liberty and justice”. Through this, Orwell condemns revolutions as being hypocritical and impractical, as no meaningful change is created in society. This perspective of Orwell is drawn from the atrocities of the Soviet Union after coming to power, such as Stalin’s Great Purge. The verbatim repetition of “I betrayed you” and “All you care about is yourself” between Winston and Julia further consolidates the inevitable failure of revolutionaries, as does the final line of “He (Winston) loved Big Brother”, ending the novel on a bleak and hopeless tone. The stark differences in the texts possessive apostrophe needed here <<< resolutions is a result of their differing contexts and purpose. While Lang intended “Metropolis” to be a symbol of hope for society untainted by the greed of capitalists, Orwell’s purpose was to create a didactic dystopian novel which would serve as a warning of the insidious nature of socialism and the dangers of accepting such ideologies, after seeing a rise in cooperation with Stalin with the Tehran Conference. Thus, Orwell’s contrary portrayal of revolutions as being futile serves his intention of warning against the absolute control and corruption of totalitarian states.
Just note that the italicised bit here is three sentences without textual analysis, but instead discussion. Simply because your analysis isn't super strong at this point, I'd do my best to cull this to two sentences to make sure you're not washing out the analysis you do have.
A comparative analysis of Lang’s “Metropolis” and Orwell’s “1984” assists us on understanding the effect of their contexts on shaping the values of a text, and also illuminates both the unique qualities and similarities of the two texts. Both composers share similar perspectives on technology being utilised as a means by authoritarian regimes to enable their dictatorship, due to the parallels of technology modernisation allowing exploitation within their contexts. The disparities in the outcome of key revolutions in “Metropolis” and “1984”, with the rise of the Golden Age of the Weimar Republic and the hypocritical actions of the Soviet Union, thus leads the texts to portray differing perspectives on the viability of revolutions in addressing inequalities present in society.

I don't doubt for a second that you know these texts well, so when I say your analysis needs a bit of work it isn't going to be devastating for you. You know the texts well, it's just about how you're writing it. And we can do something about this! When I'm editing my own work I look at every sentence and ask "does this either provide textual analysis, or directly answer the question?" If it does neither, it's gone. If it only answers the question, I check that the sentence either side of it is on topic and analytical. If not, then I know I've gone on a little non-analytical tangent. There are times when this is appropriate, like if the rest of your essay was super analytically dense, but in this situation we need to look closely at places like your second body paragraph and decide where to insert the textual analysis. You are drawing excellent connections between the texts, I'm not even a tiny bit concerned by the way you're approaching the module! For me, it is purely in the analysis.

[jamonwindeyer]

Hey,
Would you please be able to give me some feedback on a module C essay that I wrote?
It's probably one of my worst modules so all feedback is really appreciated.
Thanks so much!

Always happy to help Katie

Spoiler

2015 HSC-Module C               
Experiences of landscape may be diverse, but the influence on identity is always profound.’            
Evaluate this statement with detailed reference to your prescribed text and ONE other related text of your own choosing.
            
Although, individuals may have differing experiences with a landscape, this will always have an enduring impact on their beliefs and values. Nice Thesis! Direct and clear - But simple, I'd expect elaboration in your paragraph topics and to delve into this further. Alain de Botton’s multi-modal philosophical text The Art of Travel focusses on the impact of travel on individuals in real, anticipated and remembered landscapes. In his chapter On Travelling Places, de Botton questions what makes a landscape such a valuable travel destination. Similarly, the chapter On Eye-Opening Art, conveys the differing representations of landscapes by Van Gogh, and how artworks have been able to impact future generations in engaging their imagination and motivating them to see a landscape. The poem, 10 Mary Street by Peter Skrzynecki expresses the real landscape of a migrant families home and how it has lasting childhood memories for the persona. I'd introduce this text for the first time (or at least the composer) in the same sentence as you did the Prescribed, then do the detail here as you've done. Doing it here feels like an afterthought. Therefore, throughout both texts while experiences of the landscape are widely different, they have long lasting effects on an individual's identity. Solid introductory paragraph - I'd love a bit more elaboration on exactly what the sort of impacts you think landscapes have on individuals.

Landscapes that we may perceive as insignificant and mundane may profoundly influence our identity. Cool - Try a higher modality phrasing, "Landscapes perceived as insignificant and mundane still ultimately influence our identity." Be more sure of yourself! In the chapter, On travelling Places, de Botton questions the different value of landscapes while travelling. The stereotypical description of the landscape conveyed by ‘lush palmed fringed island that Baudelaire had dreamed of’ conveys the idealised initial perspective towards the landscape. The use of the inclusive pronoun ‘we’ expressed through “If we find poetry in the service station and motel… implicitly feel that these isolated places offer us a material setting for an alternative to selfish ease”, further portray how landscapes that may ordinarily be viewed as unimportant can have a significant impact on an individual. All about efficiency - Do you need the whole quote to show the use of inclusive language? Also try and link the technique to effect - Inclusive language garners audience empathy and draws them in, for example - More sophisticated than generic "this displays this."  This is similarly conveyed through the emphasis on seemingly insignificant everyday objects in ‘coffee machine and magazines, tokens of small human desires and vanities’. You've got rhyme as a technique in the first part of that quote! The aphorism of ‘not necessarily at home that we best encounter our true selves’, reiterates how landscapes can have an impact on our identity and values. What sort of impact? Hence, landscapes both anticipated and real can have a large impact on an individual's identity, values and beliefs. Solid paragraph! Looking for more conceptual development, what sorts of impacts does it have?

Landscapes can have a large impact on our identity through the memories that we can associate with them. Good. The poem, 10 Mary Street conveys the landscape of a migrant family in their home and their close connection to the house. The persona reflects on his childhood memories of the house and garden, inviting the audience to share his thoughts and emphasise with their position as migrants. Condense those two sentences into one setting up the plot and the concept. The simile ‘like a well oiled lock’, reinforces the daily routine of the family. What does it re-enforce about the impact on our identity? Perhaps how memories are enhanced by routine or something similar? The symbolism in ‘still too-narrow bridge’ expresses the difficulties faced by the family in transitioning into their community. The parent’s strong connection to the garden is conveyed through the cumulative listing of ‘watered plants-grew potatoes/And rows of sweet corn’. We've got very plot/character focused analysis here, try and extrapolate further - What does the audience learn in general, about their own landscapes/memories? This is similarly conveyed through the use of sibilance and continuation of garden imagery in ‘became citizens of the soil’. The simile ‘like a hungry bird’ and further hyperbole ‘bursting at the seams’ is contrasted to it’s prior listing. This emphasises how the persona initially gave little thought to the garden and doesn’t reciprocate his parent’s care for the landscape. The strong family connection and self-identity throughout the poem is very different to the experiences portrayed in de Botton’s text however still has an enduring impact on the beliefs and values of the personas. Fantastic textual analysis here, great selection of techniques, but we need to extend it conceptually to the audience. Not what we learn about characters, but about the ideas more generally!

Artworks and their representation of a landscape can influence individuals to travel which can further impact their identity. I'd say "experience new landscapes," to avoid a plot focused Thesis, of sorts. The representation of a landscape through the use of artworks is conveyed through de Botton's chapter On Eye-Opening Art. De Botton’s use of intertextuality contrasts the post-impressionist paintings of Van Gogh with their real landscapes to reinforce his ideas and convey how they were perceived differently. What were these ideas, how WERE they perceived differently? During de Botton’s travels, an Australian man exclaims ‘Well, it doesn’t look much like that’, when comparing the painting and landscapes of Gogh. Retell. This reinforces that there may be several different subjective interpretations of a landscape. Good - This is what I mean by something the audience learns/realises without relating to a character. This is similarly seen through the aphorism ‘world is complex enough for two realistic pictures of the same place to look very different’. The statement ‘tend to seek our corners of the world only once .. painted and written about by artists’, shows how artists can be influential in inspiring others to travel to a landscape. While interpretations of an environment may vary, they can have a significant impact on an individual’s values and beliefs. This conclusion doesn't quite match your introduction - Ensure you have stayed on track!

Therefore, landscapes will always have an enduring impact on an individual's beliefs and values despite their diverse experiences. The chapter, On Travelling Places questions the value of landscapes while also reflecting on those we may find insignificant. The poem, 10 Mary Street conveys a man’s reflection of the strong connection he had with his childhood home and garden. Further, the chapter On Eye-Opening Art expresses how the representation of landscapes through artworks can inspire others to travel. Thus while we may have differing experiences of a landscape, it can invoke profound longlasting responses in an individual.

I think you've done two things incredibly well in this essay:

1 - Selected a great variety of textual evidence, with techniques, to link to your concepts.

2 - A clear structure to your argument - It was always clear where we were at and why, and each paragraph was distinct but still related to your core idea and the question.

Some things to improve:

- Each paragraph needs something a little different actually. Paragraph 1 needs more conceptual development. Paragraph 2 needs more links to the audience and less character description. Paragraph 3 needs less retell!
- A slightly better balance between ORT and Prescribed would be great.
- In general, conceptual interpretation is a tad simplistic - Not necessarily a bad thing, but as you practice, think of ways you can extend your ideas. What ARE the impacts? WHY do landscapes have these impacts? Little bits of sparkle to make you stand out. Slightly more deliberate reference to IDENTITY would be good too!

In general, finding areas to trim retell and make things more concise will give you room to analyse the techniques in more complex and deliberate ways, which is really what this essay needs - But you are making an extremely clear argument and it is supported by a clear understanding of the text, don't give that up!