Whose Reality piece

[vce01]

it's different, but apparently an okay form to pursue, according to my english teacher. so here it is,

Form: Imaginative, persuasive transcript.

Imaginary situation: Mark and Lee are in the classroom, discussing ideas on the prompt given to them in advance for their English context SAC. The ever lazy Ken decides to record the conversation and plans on using the following transcript to write his ‘own’ piece.
Prompt: ‘To some extent we all make our own realities’    

-- Start transcript ---

Mark: So what do you think?

Lee: Well, firstly, we know reality can be influenced by various elements of life. Primarily it is our memory, which incorporates our experiences, our morals and beliefs. But while that’s something we draw upon when faced with a certain situation, they are after all initially defined by external factors, aren’t they?

Mark: What do you mean? Are you saying that we’ve got no part in constructing our own reality?

Lee: Yes, think about it. Any memory worth recalling is one that almost always involves people or objects, the ones with sentimental values of course. Let’s go through a hypothetical: you’re going overseas and leaving behind your friends, you don’t take pictures of them with you because you reckon you’ll still be in touch with them anyway. But after a while outside the country, you realise you miss them and start to regret the decision of not taking those pictures with you. That’s one mistake you won’t be making again, are you?

Mark: Yeah, but what’s that got to do with making our own reality?

Lee: Well, like I said, a past experience is defined by external factors. In this case, they’re pictures and your best mates as well. You realise you have made a mistake, and it’s been influenced, albeit indirectly, by those people. That’s the point where you have constructed your own reality.

Mark: Oh, well that makes much more sense. I’ve got another example, you know I was born in Iraq and lived there until I was 12?

Lee: Yes, what about it?

Mark: Well, I’ve come to realise that living here in Melbourne, I feel so much more secure. I had to go through some pretty horrific experiences like, you know, the bomb blast I talked about a few days ago. I’ve seen people get killed right before my eyes; it’s not a pretty sight. I guess it’s made me realise though that it was wrong, and that there’d be no reason to cause the pain I saw on the faces of those people who were affected by those crimes.

Lee: Yeah, we all know it’s wrong. But what you’re saying is that you only came to that realisation after witnessing those events, right? You were able to develop your own understanding of morals and values, as well as developing the ability to decipher the right from wrong. I suppose it would’ve been hard to gain a proper understanding through any other viable outlet given who was in charge of the country.

Mark: Exactly. It’s those memories that have led me to create that reality for myself, so to speak.

Lee: Alright, so we’ve deduced that it’s ultimately the people and/or objects around us that influence the way we view the world. There’s heaps of other stuff we could throw in to support it too, the media for example influences a lot of the thought processes in society these days.

Mark: Yep. Smoking is harmful; staying fit; violent games lead people to kill. Just a few things that they’ve been trying to ingrain into our heads.

Lee: That’s it. You’d be hard pressed to argue that smoking wasn’t bad for you though. Not that it seems to bother some people. Apparently it relieves them of stress.

Mark: Yeah, the whole ‘smoking is bad’ mentality is a conclusion we arrived on based on media propaganda. But to them, like you said, it relieves stress. That’s their reality, influenced by the effect that cigarettes supposedly have.

Lee: True. Enough with the real life examples though, we’ve got to relate it back to Enduring Love by, what’s-his-name?

Mark: Ian McEwan.

Lee: That’s right. OK then, I’ve got an example. Jed Parry is convinced God had created the ballooning accident to act as a catalyst for the growth of his and Joe Rose’s relationship. What do you think?

Mark: You’re right, the case notes at the end of the novel reveals that it’s his faith that led him to be in the vicinity of the accident because he was convinced that, and I quote, God was preparing him for a challenge that he must not fail. 

Lee: And it’s on this strong faith that he obsessively follows Joe for the course of the narrated story. We are informed though, that he was delusional and affected by de Clerembault’s syndrome.

Mark: That’s your external factor right there. It’s a bit of a unique case. That illness has affected his ability to construct his own reality and in a sense, it’s doing it for him. In a distorted manner of course. He does have some control over it though. He’s affected by de Clerambault’s syndrome but he is able to attribute the reasoning for his obsession to his religious beliefs.

Lee: And those beliefs would’ve most likely been developed during his childhood years.

Mark: Exactly. There’s another, similar point we could write about. The book itself, it’s a recollection of memories isn’t it? We know it’s written by Joe, a rational and scientific person. How do we know then that he’s accurately illustrated the events that occurred around him?

Lee: We don’t. He writes scientific articles, so it’s possible that he could be following the same thought process that he employs in writing his articles, in his narrated story.

Mark: And that’s his constructed reality, influenced by those scientific ideas that inhabit his head.

-- Bell rings ---

Lee: There’s the bell. I think we’ve got a fair few ideas for the SAC tomorrow. See you then.

-- End transcript --

opinions please thanks

[costargh]

Sorry, the first 3 paragraphs are way over the top. I'm not buying it. The language is way too formal; this is my opinion. No one speaks like this. You can't write an expository essay in the same way you speak and therefore you can't write a conversation in the same way you'd write an essay.

Either your form doesn't match your piece or your piece doesn't match your form.

Two VCE students do not talk like that. It may score well with examiners but I think a good examiner would automatically mark someone down for not being able to apply their form well.

Eg. I wrote an imaginative piece about an Aboriginal piece but I was critisized for not taking on a more Aboriginal voice in my writing.

I personally would have liked to seen the persona of teenagers in a classroom coming through because I like your idea. I think the execution is a bit left of centre. You have tried to sound too formal in an attempt to seem knowledgeable on the context, but in the process the personas have got lost.

[costargh]

By the way; sorry if I seem so to the point.

IMO, this sort of context writing is really hard if your characters seem fake (unless your characters are supposed to be supernatural or something).

I think that the content is pretty good from first glance, without knowing much about your context, but the way you deliver that content has to be modified a little so that it represents a believable scenario for the characters you have formed.

I also notice that in some places you have used some colloquial language, or loose 'slang expression' but I think you have to go further. They also seem a bit too sure of themselves. I think shorter sharper chunks of speech would represent a more believable conversation rather than having numerous sentences in big chunks.

[jsimmo]

Although I don't study this context, it was actually enjoyable to read. Good job!

@Costa; you've got to remember this essay is for an exam that potentially dictates your future (in terms of university).. hence, I think it's a must to write with sophisticated language.. yes, it's an overly-intelligent conversation between school mates - but it still allows the reader to understand the true ideas and concepts underlying the main prompt (and it's a pretty good way of doing it as well).. I would prefer reading a sophisticated piece of writing that demonstrates good conceptual thinking rather than an informal essay that attempts to colloquially discuss main ideas. I went to a Ross Huggard lecture recently and one of his main points was that you shouldn't try and immerse yourself within an imaginative essay and make it an 'informal-like' discussion - one that is not necessarily suitable for a year 12 english exam.

[vce01]

Sorry, the first 3 paragraphs are way over the top. I'm not buying it. The language is way too formal; this is my opinion. No one speaks like this. You can't write an expository essay in the same way you speak and therefore you can't write a conversation in the same way you'd write an essay.

Either your form doesn't match your piece or your piece doesn't match your form.

Two VCE students do not talk like that. It may score well with examiners but I think a good examiner would automatically mark someone down for not being able to apply their form well.

Eg. I wrote an imaginative piece about an Aboriginal piece but I was critisized for not taking on a more Aboriginal voice in my writing.

I personally would have liked to seen the persona of teenagers in a classroom coming through because I like your idea. I think the execution is a bit left of centre. You have tried to sound too formal in an attempt to seem knowledgeable on the context, but in the process the personas have got lost.

hmm, well it'd be heaps more easier to write it informally, that's for sure. i just didn't want it to become too informal though, because im not sure if examiners would look upon that too kindly. i mean, when it comes to a discussion between two VCE students, there could be a whole host of words i could use that probably wouldn't be appropriate for an english exam

it is pretty formal though, and i was cringing a bit while writing it because i knew i'd never talk like that haha. i guess im just gonna have to work on finding an in-between level or something

is the length good enough?

[bucket]

yeah, add a bit of "lets make a pact to get laid" and it'll be perfect.

just kidding...I agree with costa though.

@jsimmo: he stated that it's a classroom discussion, yet he did not adopt the persona of a school kid. there are other opportunities in the exam to display sophisticated use of language :S, furthermore, language doesn't need to be sophisticated to demonstrate conceptual thinking.

from my knowledge, not adopting your persona effectively loses you marks, especially in persuasive pieces...think back to when you did it in year 10/11 or even for your sac this year.

[costargh]

just some examples of making your writing more "teenage-ised":

change "came to that realisation" to "realised"

change "external factors" to something more 17-18ish OR within your conversation say somethign like... "we are affected by things that are out of our own control" ..."You mean like external factors or something like that? Wasn't Ms Jacobs talking about those last period?" "Yeh that's right!"

In the intro "elements of life?" what is an element of life? Why is it assumed that the person you're speaking to knows what these "elements of life" are?

[vce01]

Although I don't study this context, it was actually enjoyable to read. Good job!

@Costa; you've got to remember this essay is for an exam that potentially dictates your future (in terms of university).. hence, I think it's a must to write with sophisticated language.. yes, it's an overly-intelligent conversation between school mates - but it still allows the reader to understand the true ideas and concepts underlying the main prompt (and it's a pretty good way of doing it as well).. I would prefer reading a sophisticated piece of writing that demonstrates good conceptual thinking rather than an informal essay that attempts to colloquially discuss main ideas. I went to a Ross Huggard lecture recently and one of his main points was that you shouldn't try and immerse yourself within an imaginative essay and make it an 'informal-like' discussion - one that is not necessarily suitable for a year 12 english exam.

yeah that last point was something my friend talked about as well.

& thanks

[costargh]

Finding the balance is right. I'm not condoning writing "Fuck, Ms Jacobs got a hot piece of arseee" "Yeh I'd give it 2 her doggy style while nibbling on her ear"

It's just very important that you understand that if you take on a persona, you would be required to present your view from that persons view point.

Eg. If I was writing as a WWII veteran I wouldn't be displaying a lack of understanding of the war, it's history and real life accounts of what happened.
or If I was a weed smoking hippy I wouldn't be speaking like I'm about to go have a meeting with Donald Trump.

Like I've shown in my above post. Simple changes to expression can make the persona much more believable while not seeming informal.

[costargh]

Furthermore here is one of the criteria for Context:

•   development in the writing of a coherent and effective structure in response to the task, showing an understanding of the relationship between purpose, form, language and audience

My interpretation of this would be that you writing should reflect the style of language that is appropriate for that piece of writing (as perhaps dictated by the audience and purpose).

Just in relation to the comment by Russ Huggard. What I think he means is that he wants people to steer clear of becoming to relaxed in their writing and trying to pass anything off as "writing as a year 12 student".

[vce01]

yeah, fair enough. im gonna have much more fun writing this piece than i thought

got another question though, if im going to write informally, there's gonna be chunks of writing that is kinda irrelevant to the topic. in the process of making stuff 'teenage-ised' my sentences are going to get longer and that's going to take up time. that means im probably not going to have enough time to discuss all the ideas id like to under the time frame.
so basically my question is, would examiners overlook the deficiency in ideas if ive successfully implemented my chosen form of writing? if that makes sense...

[shinny]

I'd say if you're able to write formally, then why not use it? Writing in a piece which forces you to write colloquially will be unlikely to get you marks and make you stand out, even if you ace it, whereas writing a formal piece with sophistication makes you stand out and nets you marks while you're at it.

I've never favoured writing stuff like this because I'd say its too subjective and I wouldn't really risk my English score on whether the examiner thought the persona was believable...

[Glockmeister]

Probably not... you still need to present a piece with an exploration of the ideas related to your context.

Which is why we got told to avoid the creative/imaginative type of writing altogether.

[costargh]

Just because I say it should be more informal doesn't mean I think you should write informally.
I'm saying.

Too formal, write more informally OR
Not informal enough, write less formally

There is more than 2 options. It's not just a question of writing formally or informally. Find the balance, like I said before!

Find the equilbibrium point. If you think of it as a production possibility frontier, think of the place on the curve that will maximise your output from the limited inputs you have!

[Mikey123]

I am doing whore reality too so if you want to can pm your msn and we can  throw ideas at each other.

Comments.
- BRILLIANT IDEA
- I don't like the story because if you remove the names and paste the dialogue together you get an expository essay. You don't want the people to say your contetion. You are too explicit for my liking. You want to say I hate smoking. with imaginative writing youdon't say I hate smoking. You show the reader than you hate smoking. Does that make any sense
- Too short too

My advice build the thing up. Don't attack the topic from the start first lines don't read like something a person would say unless they are so fkn nerdy or something.