Im Not Scared part 2 (2007)

[maxleng]

intrested on who wrote on this and what they wrote about,

12. I?m Not Scared
?I?m Not Scared shows that there can be no winners when physical strength and moral strength are in conflict.?
Discuss.

was a difficult question to answer, i focused on the moral strength of Michele in contrast to the lack of morals of the adults. Also how the kidnappers abuse physical strength as a result they loose everything, and Filippo suffers as a result.

i dont even think i answered the question, i dont even know what the question is really asking  :?  i was staring at it for a good 5 mins thinking wtf.

reason i didnt do the part 1 question was that i did a Hamlet part 1 question practically identical to the exam a few days ago, so it was too good to pass up.

[Nick]

I was going to answer that question, but I thought I'd fall into the trap of not adequately answering the question. I chose part 1 instead.

You sound like you definately tackled the part of the question.. I'm assuming that you contended that moral strength DID win the battle against the cruelty and inhumanity of the adults?

[bilgia]

it was difficult, so i didnt bother doing it ..went for part 1 INS and part 2 hamlet.

[bilgia]

reason i didnt do the part 1 question was that i did a Hamlet part 1 question practically identical to the exam a few days ago, so it was too good to pass up.

what if it coulda cost u marks
ins part 1 was definitely an appealing question so i was able to work with 2 essay topics which were well within my ability to write on

[maxleng]

bilgia: I never really did a part  2 on hamlet so i was abit woried on how id go, but furthermore the hamlet part 2 q was not a good one for me, i never really wrote or studied guilt in the play and didnt want to start in the exam.

Nick: yeah i intended that, but then i didnt know how well i made it come across that it was my contention..

[Pencil]

it was difficult, so i didnt bother doing it ..went for part 1 INS and part 2 hamlet.

I did part 2 Hamlet, it was shocking, what did you write on?

[Nick]

bilgia: I never really did a part  2 on hamlet so i was abit woried on how id go, but furthermore the hamlet part 2 q was not a good one for me, i never really wrote or studied guilt in the play and didnt want to start in the exam.

Nick: yeah i intended that, but then i didnt know how well i made it come across that it was my contention..

Put it this way: If you emphasised the negativity and barbarity associated with the aduls' actions, and then contrasted with with Michele's strength, sense of morality and integrity, I'm sure you would have done it justice.

[bilgia]

it was difficult, so i didnt bother doing it ..went for part 1 INS and part 2 hamlet.

I did part 2 Hamlet, it was shocking, what did you write on?

i went with Hamlet's "moral guilt" in not being able to avenge his father justly and just as he wanted. I then discussed Claudius and how guilt affects his actions....he regrets what he did, and this only causes him to panic and focus on disposing hamlet immediately...then lastly i just discussed laertes, who is in a similar position to hamlet, yet  does not want to be guilty as a son not avenging his father, so he sides with Claudius, who manipulates Laertes to 'prove himself indeed his father's son.'
Overall, it is Hamlet's own sense of guilt that causes a chain reaction in other characters...
i tried to argue that guilt was closely related to the need for action and was an instigator for it ultimately...if that makes any sense..

[iloveart]

Omg I found that question difficult to answer as well, so did my peers.
Anyway, I structured my essay like this (I had 30 minutes haha)

For my body I wrote
- how Pino is oblivious to the fact that his son is morally strong, and Michele's failure to satisfy his father for being physically strong = lose lose situation + nothing is resolved.

- Felice's violent beating towards Michele, which offends Teresa's moral obligations hence they fight etc etc nothing is solved. and how Teresa contradicts her moral strength as a parent by being involved with the kidnapping.

- Michele is energized morally in contrast to Filippo being immobalized. also his lack of physical strength causes them to inevitably lead to a downfall = the clashing of both strengths do not effectively work as a collaboration.

I think I rambled on about shit and didn't even address the question properly. That was a hard one. And the part one question for Curious Incident was structured as a part two essay as well, and all that time I was just staring at the "2006" at the top of the 2007 exam.

Stupid VCAA.