English

[meena.palanikumar]

english essay

[meerae]

Hey, if you could please check my essay below for my texts and human experiences assessment:
The word limit is 1100 words and I am currently at 1144, so if you have any suggestions on areas to cut down, please let me know and also general feedback to improve please!


Question: Texts can invite the responder to see the world differently through deepening our understanding of the impacts of human emotions.
Evaluate this statement with reference to ‘The Crucible’, and ONE related text of your own choosing. (I have chosen The Penelopiad by Margaret Atwood as my related text).

Texts have the propensity to provide a renewed perspective on society through past experiences, demonstrating how complex emotions can impact upon personal views. This is intensified by reflecting upon the social prerogatives which undermine society and evoke a multi-faceted perspective, challenging these values. Arthur Miller’s tragic play “The Crucible” (1963), represents the suppression of humanity and how these personal experiences can offer redemption from the anxieties of the McCarthyist epoch. In contrast, Margaret Atwood’s appropriation, The Penelopiad (2005), explores the impact of male patriarchy and challenges this view. Therefore, whilst both texts evoke the emotional response of individual determination for redemption, it is ultimately dependent on the individual mindset and their interpretation of texts.

The political hypocrisy of the McCarthyist era causes responders to question the conventional social qualms, offering redemption from the injustices of humanity and challenging such experiences based upon our individual mindset. Miller’s representation of the suppression of personal freedom enhances one’s perspective of self-determinism as an emotional response to subvert the status quo. This is apparent in Parris’ anastrophe, “A minister is the Lord’s man … a minister is not… lightly crossed and contradicted” where he reflects the contextual milieu of the composer within a period of climactic anxiety. Through Parris, Miller provides a mimetic perspective, inspiring redemption to free oneself from the social uncertainties. Additionally, Miller’s interpretation of the “Quest for Identity” characterises individuals being in difficult moral choices and conditioned by the prevalent circumstances of socio-political and psychological dependency. This enhances the notion of self-determinism as an emotive appeal in Elizabeth’s rhetorical question “did she not?... God forbid you …”. He challenges societal expectations by imploring truth and subverts the conformism within society to represent subsequent social ramifications. Thus, the drive for self-determinism is an antithesis of societal values, reflecting the psychological dependency and inability to ‘define ones connection between ones inward experiences’ (Heidegger). This is amplified through the dramatic irony of Danforth “We burn a hot fire here; it melts down all concealment”, providing a paradoxical mindset on how individuals are psychologically dependant on society, inspiring redemption from the demeaning social values. Consequently, through the human experience, Miller emotionally appeals to the responder through the subsequent redemption from the injustices of humanity.

Composers like Miller and Atwood dare to question and challenge societal norms through literature that explore the shared notion of redemption. Atwood’s depiction of society through one’s drive for feminist recognition reflects the continuing feminist revisionism of the 21st century. Her literary appropriation of Odysseus’ depiction criticises the consequences of patriarchy and provides responders with an emotional appeal through the narrator’s extended metaphor “What he fool he made…his specialities; getting away”, providing a cynical view on male duplicity. In contrast, Miller enhances the drive for self-determinism through challenging the hypocrisy of the socio-political discourse. Atwood challenges the voicelessness and subverts the “harmonious totality” of great works of culture in “Odysseus’ the prince of deceiving”. The leitmotif modulates between Homeric description and witty parodies as revenants at spiritualist seances, evoking an emotional response. This is further accentuated in the feminist discourse “dead is much too high a price to pay”, whereby the metaphor reveals one’s determination to subverts male audacity and enhances the complexity of the human emotion in fulfilling one’s female presence. Similarly, Miller characterises the paradoxical mindset of Proctor as “a sinner… of the time”, whereby the temporal shift shows the climactic tension within the McCarthyist anxiety. Furthermore, Atwood challenges the responder to gain a renewed perception of the world through portraying Penelope as speaking for the voicelessness in “bonelessness, liplessness, breathlessness.” The persona’s cumulative listing foreshadows a change in perspective through her drive for gender equality, providing an introspected view on society. Thus, both explore redemption from different lenses to emphasise the drive for change and enhance one’s understanding of the human condition in fulfilling humanist values.

Whilst Atwood questions her social fabric, Miller explores the abuse of power within a sterile society, through emotional appeals which is achieved through one’s personal experience to gain personal satisfaction. He encapsulates the unregulated power struggle between politics and the self through the subversion of capitalist supremacy, allowing responders a renewed perspective of society. In Parris’ simile “burn like hell is burning”, the anxiety of one’s dialectical experience between the self and the authority of the church is challenged yet transmogrified by the sterility of one’s values. In contrast, Atwood challenges societal values through deception, catalysing change amongst society. Furthermore, the prolific subjugation of social hierarchy becomes evident throughout the tragic form, which enhances the complexity of the human emotion in causing individuals being unwilling to abandon their dependency upon social certainties. Instead, Miller strives to express the tension between the personal self and society in the metaphor, “An unexpressed, hidden force”, whereby this reflects the conventions of tragedy where the heroic protagonist’s hamartia leads to the ultimate downfall of Proctor. This is further accentuated in the four-act structure in the narrator’s confession “Proctor is a sinner… decent conduct”, interspersed with historical essays which shape the character’s perspective. This allows responders to derive an individual interpretation and understand the complexity of the human emotion when confronted with a power struggle. Therefore, Miller represents the power struggle between the government and the self, deepening our understanding of the emotional response towards it.

Alternatively, one’s injustice of the social prerogative can prompt an emotional response, prompting individuals to question their morality and understand the way we respond to confronting experiences. Atwood exemplifies the need for justice within society, through offering an alternative to the patriarchal narrative in Homer’s edition that stifles the voice of women and makes them passive victims. The metaphor “wash the brains and gore off the floor”,  inciting viscera and how the injustice of the maid’s death deepens our understanding of one’s emotional response to such behaviour. In comparison, Miller depicts the McCarthyist anxiety through the community’s social and government collapse as it becomes crippled by paranoia and tyrannical rule. Atwood transmogrifies this through criticising the inability to receive justice in “We are the maids…failed”. This prose poem, disguised as a love song, represents the complexity of the human emotion and invites responders to see the world differently through the kind of feminist revisionist myth making. This is further accentuated in the manipulation of her emotions “Now that I am dead I know everything”, where this emotional response deepens our understanding of the prolific injustice of male manipulation. Thus, both texts provide conservative views based on the unmediated power which prompt an internal questioning and a greater understanding of the human condition when confronted with power struggle.

Ultimately, through exploring the suppression of humanity and the impact of male patriarchy upon societal values, both Arthur Miller and Margaret Atwood evoke the emotional response of individual determination for redemption. Whilst this may be true, it is dependent on the individual mindset and the interpretation of texts.

Hey, meena.palanikumar!
Had a read through, so sorry it took me so long to get to this. Overall, it is well written and easy to read. Before I begin the feedback, I just thought I'd add that for the common module in the HSC, a related text is not necessary and the essay question will not require us to analyse a related text along with your prescribed. Also, I do believe most schools allow us to go 10% under/over the set word limit, so you are still fine with your current word count.
Whilst reading I found that your essay did have some sentences that could be rephrased, you can easily fix this by reading it out loud and editing your essay as you read. I also saw in some places you started retelling the story of your texts, this is a waste of word count and can be replaced with analysis. Otherwise, it was a nicely written.

Hope this helped!
meerae