HSC Stuff > HSC Marking and Feedback

English Advanced: Discovery Essay

(1/2) > >>

shivansh:
I was wondering if anyone could mark my [unfinished] essay on Frank Hurley by Simon Nasht and Two Dreamtimes by Judith Wright.
***I have not done the intro and conclusion yet and the paragraphs are meant to be generic enough to adapt to different types of questions

dancing phalanges:

--- Quote from: shivansh on January 11, 2018, 07:02:38 pm ---I was wondering if anyone could mark my [unifinished] essay on Frank Hurley by Simon Nasht and Two Dreamtimes by Judith Wright.
***I have not done the intro and conclusion yet and the paragraphs are meant to be generic enough to adapt to different types of questions

--- End quote ---

Note: I haven't studied either text so my comments are more stylistic and based on how well you link to discovery. Take more care in looking at OpenGangs fantastic comments for content based feedback as well as other good stylistic and structural comments :)

Hey!
Unfortunately I only have my phone and so it is hard to give in depth comments on your work. The paragraphs on the Indigenous text is well done and the linking to discovery is also great. The Hurley text is a very interesting one and it was refreshing to read a discovery essay which explores really interesting ideas such as the difference between art and history and the complex notion of the truth. I think that in the first paragraph you could add in one or two sentences in the middle which link the challenging of history and evidence to your thesis of renewed perceptions.

Opengangs:
Hi, shivansh.

Sure thing! The essay with comments is inside the spoiler tag.

Essay (marked)Discoveries can challenge initial viewpoints and allow for us to re-evaluate our perception of people, thereby leading to renewed perspectives. In Simon Nasht’s documentary, ‘Frank Hurley; the man who made history,’ the audience engages in a discovery of the rejection of archaic perceptions of people as dichotomously ‘good’ or ‘bad’ and forms renewed perspectives of personality as a spectrum. (this statement is overly long; consider breaking it up into smaller pieces, and focus on one main idea) This notion is broached as we view Hurley returning to Australia after the Papua New Guinea outrage where he stole artefacts with McCulloch (retell) where the dramatic narration states “McCulloch’s career never recovered from the scandal and two years later he committed suicide, but Frank Hurley turned the fiasco into a triumph”, where the contrast of ‘fiasco into a triumph’ exemplifies Hurley’s callous disregard for McCulloch as a friend.  (again, this sentence is wayyy too long. Consider breaking the sentence down; be concise with what you're intending to argue) However, Hurley’s cold actions belies by his ability to alter difficult circumstances into profitable situations proving his resilience and efficiency proving the blurred boundaries between a successful businessman and the conventional notion of a ‘genuinely caring friend.’ (Nice linking back to your argument) The blurred lines between honesty and dishonesty are explored during the World War 1 chapter in Hurley’s creation of composite war images following his inability to capture the ‘real pictures he wants.’ These composite images gave rise to intense debate, where the Australian curator’s viewpoint that ‘Hurley’s manipulations have undermined their historic value’ stands in contrast to the grotesque images shown as well as the narrator’s voice over stating how these composites ‘gave a face to names’ of nearly 40000 wounded Australians. It is through criticism levelled from both sides that responders realise the difficulty associated with judging Hurley’s creation of composites as immoral and disrespectful to actual soldiers or as the best possible historical evidence to commemorate the dead. Thus, Nasht’s representation of Hurley challenge our initial viewpoints and allows for a re-evaluation of the perspective that personal motivations are complex (These are some pretty interesting ways to approach Frank Hurley, but you'll need to dive deeper into its significance)

Similarly, Wright also engages in an exploration of how discoveries can challenge an individual’s viewpoints and trigger a careful reconsideration of the past, ultimately allowing for renewed perspectives of the world around us. (A bit long, but better than paragraph 1) This sentiment is affirmed in Wright’s poem “Two Dreamtimes”, which reveals the persona’s discovery of the oppression experienced by the Indigenous Australians turn leading to her discovery of the tragedy of Australia’s colonial past. The persona being shielded from the knowledge of her ancestors’ history is evident as she bemoans, ‘they hadn't told me the land I loved was taken out of your hands.’ (Avoid talking about the persona's discovery, but rather the significance of this discovery to the audience) The metaphor in ‘taken out of your hands’ reflects her reconsideration of the past and the choice of pronouns ‘they’, and ‘me’, and ‘your’, distances the persona from both White Australians and Indigenous Australians allows her to discover a renewed perspective on her lack of belonging. (Again, what's the significance of it?) Wright’s sense of horror as she unearths the truth of the mistreatment of the Aborigines is depicted in, ‘your eyes were full of dying children, the blank-eyed taken women, where the vivid imagery of ‘dying’ and ‘blank-eyed’ as well as a confronting and poignant historical allusion reveals the persona’s sympathetic perspective on the Stolen Generation. (Way too long; consider rewording the sentence) Furthermore, the violent imagery of ‘raped’ in addition to the cumulative listing in, ‘raped by rum and an alien law, progress and economics’ draws emphasise on the ordeals faced by the Aborigines. The persona’s exploration of the past triggers a renewed realisation of the bleak actions of her ancestors on the wellbeing of the Aborigines It is through Wright’s discovery of the mistreatment of Aborigines ancestry and Australia’s colonial past that responders realise how both Wright and Nasht affirm the capacity of discoveries to confront and imbibe the individual with a renewed realisation of the world around them. (Much like paragraph 1, this is heavily text-focused. By the time your exams roll around, you will need to shift from text to concept)

The legitimacy of intellectual discoveries can be revealed through careful examination and critical thinking. (Interesting.) In ‘Frank Hurley’, this is revealed by exploring the blurred lines between art and archival evidence which is revealed in the conflicting perspectives offered the value of Hurley’s photographs. An opening montage of Hurley’s exotic photos and films forces responders to embark on the process of discovering their worth as valuable archival evidence by providing an abundance of evidence, as his exotic discoveries are shown by the fast cutting shots accompanied by an enthusiastic voiceover, “pioneered the use of colour, helped invented the documentary film,” to stress the importance of his pioneering photojournalism. (Way too long) However, the split screen of Hurley’s original and composite images highlights the extent to which Hurley altered his photos, highlighting how they are no longer valuable to history and instead are pieces of art and how “He has been nearly killed a dozen times and has failed to get the real pictures he wants.” (very runny sentence) This professional judgement allows us to discover Hurley’s alteration of the truth in his photography to create picturesque stories which may hold significance to history, they were ultimately taken to create a story. As the interview of Dr Martyn Jolly highlights the indignant views on the differences between art and history as he states; “It sat between photography, between cinema, and between history painting”, the accumulation of the categories where Hurley’s work could be placed in to emphasises how work cannot be clearly defined as art and archival evidence and is utterly subjective. but despite this Yet, Hurley’s work has an undeniable significance in the portrayal of Australia’s history. The exploration of the contrasting views on the legitimacy of Frank Hurley’s images allow us as an audience to embark on a process of intellectual discovery on the ambiguous differences between art and historic evidence.

Similarly, confronting discoveries are caused by stark considerations of the past. We see how Wright’s careful examination of the past and critical evaluation of the actions of her ancestors triggers her confronting discovery of Australia’s colonial past and its bleak effects. Following her realisation of the land as stolen, the persona’s guilt of the actions of ancestors is apparent as she laments, ‘I born of the conquerors, you of the persecuted,’ where the contrast of ‘conquerors’ and persecuted’ (again, make sure to approach your essays conceptually rather than textually. Place heavier attention on the  audience rather than the persona) draws the blatant unlikeliness between a herself and the Indigenous population creating a confronting re-evaluation of her relationship with the Aborigines. However, her hope for progress is evident as she announces “The knife's between us. I turn it round, the handle to your side” where the symbol of ‘knife’ representing the power that she now gives to the Indigenous people.  This hope is undeniably lost as the melodramatic tone in “But both of die as our dreamtime dies” highlights her apprehension of the irreversible ramifications of the actions of her ancestors.

Both Wright and Nasht project the ideal that a careful consideration cast doubt on what is known and encourage discoveries to which challenge or affirm previous discoveries.

Mark: 11/15
General feedback
Paragraph 1: Frank Hurley
Overall, it's a good attempt. You're clearly well read, but you'll need to be diving deeper into the significant ideas behind the documentary in order to discuss the discovery concept in greater detail. There's no point in touching the surface of discovery if you're not going to present exactly how this is important to the concept of discovery.

Another key mistake that I find throughout the paragraph is the way you break up your sentences. In particular, there are two sentences that are a little bit long. Hell, one of them is 68 words long!! Avoid this as much as possible, because having sentences that are too long creates waffle, rather than concise ideas.

It is also important to distinguish between an Area of Study essay and any other essay in English. Area of Study should be primarily conceptual; it focuses on the discovery ideas within the texts. As a result, the concepts OF discovery should be at the forefront of your essay. Don't make them too textually-based. Rather than what the discovery is made by the persona, think about the significance of said discovery to us and to the composer. How does that make us react? And then through what literary device is this explored? If you're able to shift the level of thinking from text to concept, your points will become stronger as you study the text throughout the year. This also avoids any retelling of the plot that you may encounter because of your way of thinking.

Paragraph 2: Two Dreamtimes
It's definitely a lot better than Frank Hurley in terms of clarity and coherence. However, there needs to be a stronger emphasis on the discovery concept. Think about the significance of your textual examples, and how it suggests a re-examination of the past. You will need stronger textual evidence, and a deeper connection between the text and the ideas behind discovery in order to succeed. But we can work on that throughout the year.

Again, there are problems with sentence structure. It's not clear at all where you're going at times, and it shows through overly complicated sentences. Let's have a look at one specifically:

Wright’s sense of horror as she unearths the truth of the mistreatment of the Aborigines is depicted in, ‘your eyes were full of dying children, the blank-eyed taken women, where the vivid imagery of ‘dying’ and ‘blank-eyed’ as well as a confronting and poignant historical allusion reveals the persona’s sympathetic perspective on the Stolen Generation. (59 words)

Do you see why this is weak? It's not coherent, and as a result, what you're trying to say is not 100% clear. Instead, let's look at how you could rewrite this.

Wright reveals confronting and horrifying imagery of the "eyes full of dying children", revealing the persona's sympathetic perspective on the Stolen Generation. (21 words)

Do you notice how I've just simplified a 59 word sentence into a 21 word sentence? This allows the marker/reader to underline precisely the point you're trying to make.

Paragraph 3: Frank Hurley
Definitely one of your better paragraphs. It shows a complex level of thinking, and it suggests a deeper understanding of the text. However, I still feel like the concept of discovery is not 100% evident throughout the paragraph. It seems to have been mentioned at the start and slapped on at the end. Make sure the linking between discovery and your texts are more explicit. Otherwise, it feels like you haven't considered discovery at all in your paragraph.

Your style of writing is very unique, and your analysis is pretty good. Just make sure you're breaking down your sentences to prevent them from becoming too long. It's not good for the marker if they're constantly struggling to pick up on your main ideas.

Paragraph 4: Two Dreamtimes
Please read the above feedback, as what I'm going to mention has already been said.

What to do next
I believe you've done a fairly good job in terms of your analysis. However, there are definitely some rooms for improvement.

Go back to reading your texts alongside the rubric for Discovery. Your goal now is to go from thinking textually to thinking conceptually. You can do this by thinking about the significance of these textual evidence, and how we as the audience react to this discovery. Is it forced upon the character, and thus, us? Or, is it more subtle with a deeper meaning? You'll begin to notice the flair of your writing elevate.

Redraft your first two paragraphs, and think about how you can structure your sentences. Have a goal of a maximum number of words per sentence. If you're struggling, think about how you could rewrite the sentences without unnecessary words.

Good luck with the HSC!

jamonwindeyer:
Will throw in a few tips that I didn't spot above:

- Make your quotes shorter! Really only grab the bits you absolutely need. For example, your first quote in the first paragraph, just use the "fiasco into a triumph" bit. No need for more - Be efficient :)
- Similarly, try to structure your sentences such that you don't need to state a part of the quote twice.
- Agree with Opengangs in that you should try to shift away from the text, and more towards the conceptual. But I also agree with dancing phalanges I think the ideas themselves are strong, certainly unique, but that you need to work a little better on following these through. Remember, point to the text as evidence for your idea, don't let the text define the idea completely :)
- More commas. Commas are a beautiful piece of punctuation ;) reading your essay aloud and putting commas where you naturally pause will instantly add structure to those longer sentences.

dancing phalanges:
I hadn't studied either text so my comments were more on how it was written so definitely take OpenGangs opinion first. I think if I was to pinpoint two issues I would agree with your comments on some sentences being too lengthy and the emphasis being too much on the persona rather than audience.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page