Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 02:45:12 am

Author Topic: Compilation of Text Response Feedback  (Read 97984 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2593
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #75 on: August 31, 2013, 05:31:16 pm »
0
Hahahaha, I think that is a very probably outcome. You're very welcome :)
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

pi

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 14348
  • Doctor.
  • Respect: +2376
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #76 on: August 31, 2013, 05:31:59 pm »
+3
In year 11 English, my first para of any text response was a summary of the text... So yeah, you guys are MILES ahead of me LOL and I did ok at the end of year 12 :)

chasej

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Respect: +56
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #77 on: August 31, 2013, 10:52:28 pm »
0
I would really like some feedback on my essay about Macbeth just to see how I stack up (my teacher marked this one but I would like a second opinion). Thanks so much :) .


It is the ambition of Lady Macbeth that fully drives Macbeth’s actions. To what extent do you agree?



Throughout the story of Macbeth the theme of ambition of the characters, for the most part Macbeth and his partner Lady Macbeth is at the forefront and is a catalyst for all the happenings of the play that ultimately lead to the demise of Macbeth. Macbeth however is not an ambitious man himself, and it is not until he is given a false sense of security by others he possesses enough motivation to follow through with his desire to become king of Scotland. This motivation comes from Lady Macbeth who is a stronger, more ambitious and spontaneous person and to a lesser extent three witches who meddle with Macbeth’s life.

After hearing about the witches prophecies Macbeth is convinced that he will become kind naturally as the two prior prophecies, that he would become Thane of Glamis and Cawdor happen quite naturally with no effort by Macbeth. An issue arises with the third prophecy, King Duncan has to great disappointment of Macbeth, named is song, Prince of Cumberland, his successor the throne. It is at this time Macbeth realises more decisive action needs to be taken if he wishes to become kind as prophesized by the witches as evidenced by this said by Macbeth himself “The Prince of Cumberland! That is a step…On which I must fall down, or else o’er leap….For in my way it lies.” Macbeth however is uncertain about this and it is not until encouragement from Lady Macbeth where she tells him to “Screw…[his]… courage to the sticking-place” does he choose to go ahead with his plans, it is from this we can see that Lady Macbeth is a catalyst to Macbeth’s desires.

In fact Lady Macbeth makes her desires no secret to the audience of the play and the very first time she is introduced, through reading a note from Macbeth regarding the prophecies, she makes her desires clear to herself and immediately begins plotting ways that Macbeth can become king, ultimately by committing the most evil of evils, murder and not just that, treason at the highest level, murder of their own king. All for Lady Macbeth’s own personal gain and constant desire for power. Lady Macbeth at first introduction is truly portrayed as an evil women who does want to comply with societies views of what a women should be at the time, perhaps further demonstrating that she was evil and actually played more of a part to Macbeth’s fate than the witches did after all Lady Macbeth was the women who Macbeth had to of trusted and confided in the most as his wife. It would make sense that the fact Macbeth had involved himself with such an evil person that eventually some of this evilness would rub of onto him.

It however cannot be ignored that Macbeth had other influences which ultimately led to his demise, such as the witches who spurred him on by giving him false sense of securities and providing him with vague predictions of his future which certainly did give Macbeth a skewed view of his circumstances. However all that can be seen and to some extent evidenced as to having had any influence of Macbeth in a physical sense is the words of Lady Macbeth, as after all the witches only provide Macbeth with vague predictions of his future rather than planning for him exactly what to do in order to make these predictions come true, in fact the person who does this is Lady Macbeth.

In conclusion it is my belief that Macbeth was heavily influenced by Lady Macbeth, much more so than the witches or himself, as although the witches and Macbeth himself had a general idea as to what would happen or should happen to Macbeth, it wasn’t until Lady Macbeth came into the equation that an actual plan was able to be put together and executed which ultimately were able to make the predictions of the witches and ambitions of Macbeth come true.
Graduated with Bachelor of Laws (Honours) / Bachelor of Arts from Monash University in June 2020.

Completing Practical Legal Training (Graduate Diploma of Legal Practice)

Offering 2021 Tutoring in VCE Legal Studies (Awarded as Bialik College's top Legal Studies Student in 2014).

Offered via Zoom or in person across Melbourne.  Message me to discuss. Very limited places available.

silverpixeli

  • ATAR Notes Lecturer
  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 855
  • Respect: +110
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #78 on: September 01, 2013, 10:44:37 pm »
0
Hey guys, see what you think of my first On the Waterfront essay! Didn't manage to get anything about film techniques in but I think the essay question made that a little difficult. Open time, open book (script) and 1010 words all up!

EDIT: SAC is over, I feel I wrote a much better piece than this, I have written a few since and feel I no longer need feedback on this one in particular, but feel free to critique it for the benefit of others

Quote
“It's an unhealthy relationship!” In what ways does this statement suggest the moral problems and conflicts in the film?

   Elia Kazan's On the Waterfront tells the story of the underworld of 1940s Hoboken, New Jersey and the culture of corruption that permeated the city's docks. The film noir centres around Terry Malloy and his ambivalent struggle for freedom from the venal longshoreman's union headed by Johnny Friendly. The mob tries to convince Terry that his relationship with Edie Doyle, an idealistic and innocent young woman, is an 'unhealthy' one, alluding to the dichotomy of perspective that exists between the mobsters and Edie. Initially, Terry and the dockworkers share the point of view held by the mob, but they are challenged to stand up against the corruption by Father Barry and Edie. In the end, Terry chooses his relationship with Edie over his ties to the union and is able to morally redeem himself.

   The moral perspective held by the dock's power brokers presents a stark contrast to that of the idealistic Edie Doyle. Despite being at the head of a major criminal operation, Charley and Friendly are unable to see the wrong in their actions. The mobsters exploit the workers and maintain that '[they're] entitled to it', and Johnny is able to justify his surreptitious actions by explaining how he had to 'work his way up out of [the hole]' as a child. The union members seem to be blind to the immorality of their operation, and are even able to laugh off the death of a worker, Joey Doyle – 'he could sing but he couldn't fly' – just because it put their avaricious scheme at risk. In contrast, Edie is of the firm belief that it can't be okay to just cut people in your way down. She asserts her desire to stay and 'find out who's guilty for Joey', demonstrating that she is unable to see the immoral perspective of the mob. Unlike Edie, the mob's point of view is shared, at least initially, by Terry and the longshoremen.

   The browbeaten and disenfranchised dockworkers share a seemingly unshakeable view, impressed on them by the power brokers, and this perspective causes problems when exposed to Father Barry's just ideology. 'D and D' is the code held strongly by the longshoremen, 'no matter how much we hate the torpedoes, we don't rat'. It is considered dishonourable to even speak to police about the corruption on the docks. This self-destructive paradigm is so entrenched in the workers that Pop Doyle is unwilling to assist an officer immediately after his own son has been cruelly murdered by Friendly's gang. The culture of silence has a similar hold on Terry, who acts disrespectfully to cops, blatantly telling a pair of crime commissioners that he's 'not saying nothing'. Father Barry presents the dockworkers with the seemingly alien idea that they are only hurting themselves by pontificating the aphorism 'what's ratting to them is telling the truth to you!' As a consequence of Father Barry's outspokenness, the church is attacked, evidencing the issues that occur when Terry and the workers are subjected to a new way of thinking that does not favour the mob's culture of subservience.

   The view held by the waterfront is challenged by the arrival and interruption of Father Barry and Edie, leading to further conflict. Father Barry's breaking of the literal silence in the church foreshadows his impact on Kayo Dugan, a dockworker who 'sings to the crime commission', breaking the unspoken code of 'D and D' followed by all the stevedores. This leads to Dugan's murder, clearly demonstrating the consequences of the clash of perspectives between the priest and the mob. In a powerful sermon delivered from the bottom of the cargo hold, Father Barry outlines the importance of standing up and manages to get through to Terry by utilising a boxing metaphor, 'knock em out for good'. Coupled with Terry's nascent feelings for Edie and his desire to help her, this drives Terry to admit his complicity in her brother's murder, leaving Edie distraught and Terry alone on a pile of rubble, symbolising the ruins of his late world of corruption and immorality. The couple's confrontation further evidences the conflict that can arise from differences in moral perspectives.

   Kazan uses the film to demonstrate that through choosing a righteous perspective over one of corruption, one is able to free oneself from guilt. Terry's journey from subservient 'bum' to liberated 'somebody' is galvanised by his change of perspective. Terry was once controlled by Friendly, who 'bought a piece' of him as a child, but ends up  refusing an attractive bribe from his brother, '400 dollars a week ... You don't do nothing and you don't say nothing'. His refusal illustrates his newfound moral strength and desire to help Edie. Terry is also persuaded by Father Barry to 'fight [Johnny Friendly] in the court with the truth' rather than 'like a hoodlum' with his gun, leading to the first step in the unraveling of Friendly's power. Terry's testimony places him in disfavour with the workers, but his declaration that he's 'standing over here now' and his fight with Johnny Friendly are enough to win him back their approval. Terry has gained Edie's forgiveness, Father Barry's approval and the favour of the longshoremen, and has hence redeemed himself from his corrupt past.

   Through On the Waterfront, Kazan demonstrates an extensive disparity of moral perspectives, including that of the mob and that of Edie, but also extending to that of the dockworkers and Father Barry. The dichotomy of morals held by the characters is enough to cause significant conflict, but larger problems arise when perspectives change. Kayo Dugan is killed as a result of Father Barry's breaking of the culture of silence, and Terry's exile from the ranks of the docks occurs when he testifies with the truth. In the end, however, it is only through the adoption of the righteous point of view, the choosing of the “healthy” relationship, that Terry is able to secure his own salvation from guilt and corruption. In doing so, Terry manages to liberate himself and the tainted docks from the now powerless Johnny Friendly.

Edits: Typo and italicised film title
« Last Edit: September 16, 2013, 09:06:34 pm by silverpixeli »
ATAR 99.80 :: Methods [50] | Physics [50+Premier's] | Specialist [47] | Software [48] | English [42] | Legal [39 '12]
+ Australian Student Prize

ATAR Notes Specialist/Methods/Physics Lecturer
ATAR Notes Specialist Maths Webinar Presenter

tcstudent

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
  • Respect: +2
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #79 on: September 15, 2013, 10:49:37 am »
0
sorry to go off topic, but the feedback given on 12AM is amazing, yet also really funny in one of the essays when brencookie hates the word ''We''. i just wish i could find this blokes house and demand some tutoring on 12AM

jeanweasley

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Trust only in yourself
  • Respect: +73
  • School: SHGC
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #80 on: September 16, 2013, 07:48:46 pm »
+1
Hi all. I just got back my SAC response (below) and am interested in reworking it. Any tips/suggestions/criticisms? Post them below (:

In Ransom, Malouf reveals the deeper truths that make us fully human.

Silhouetted against the backdrop of war torn Troy, David Malouf highlights the importance of being human. Malouf suggests that to be human is to face the harshness of life and still persevere. This is exhibited through Somax who, despite his losses is still motivated to live his life. Malouf also indicates that it is the ordinary and simply that truly makes us human; Somax’s fascination with the world around him is endorsed by Malouf as an ideal for humanity – that we as ordinary people are connected through experience and the art of storytelling. Malour also indicates through Priam and Achilles’ transformations, that being human, being ordinary and simple is liberating. As a contrast, Malouf also depicts the futility of war and the human cost attributed to it which he suggests is a product of the darkness of human nature.

Malouf endorses that despite the challenges of reality, that humans should still persevere and accept the ordinariness of life. Here, Somax is utilised to depict Malouf’s intent as Somax represents ordinary people who love their families and works hard to give them the best future. Somax, despite the death of his sons and wife still has the courage to move past his grief and continue to live his life. While he does not forget about them, he advises Priam that despite what he has suffered that ‘we go on for all our losses’ because ‘we are mortal’ and that ‘death is in our nature’. Furthermore, Somax replies that even if he felt like punching Beauty that it would not have done any good as it ‘wouldn’t bring [his son] back’. Moreover, Somax through his stories contributes to the human experience which Malouf believes is important. Somax through his stories is able to give insight into the life of a commoner to a king which enables Priam to experience something different. The symbol of griddlecakes is utilised by Malouf to represent Priam’s isolation from a world that is to be appreciated. Somax’s simple stories, whilst not ‘necessary’ or important is ‘full of interest’. Similarly, Malouf uses beauty and the Scamander River to indicate that it is man’s connection with nature that contribute to the human experience. Somax’s affection for Beauty and of nature is symbolic of man’s institution and human nature because it is these things like eating a griddlecake or ‘dabbl[ing] [your] feet in the water’ that is able to connect us from what Malouf endorses we should appreciate.

Priam’s humanity is established when he decides to ransom his son. Hector not as a king but ‘as a father’. This simple act is utilised to show the transformation Priam makes from being a ‘ceremonial figurehead’ who has ‘good Idaeus…find words for [him]’ to a simple and ordinary man dressed in a ‘plain robe’ and without his riches. This transformation is indicative of Priam being unable to express his dual identity because of his role as king and as ‘the living map’ of Troy. However, through Somax, he is able to understand that his relationship with his sons was not at all paternal but ‘formal and symbolic’. Through Somax, Priam is changed, he is in fact ransomed and redeemed frm the burden of being king; and through claiming Hector’s body, Priam has undergone a journey of transformation as he fulfils his wish to be remembered as a man and especially as a father.

Similarly, Achilles is transformed through the ransom between Priam and himself as he is able to let go of the grief that had ‘consumed him’. While he ‘wept…wept with restraint’ for Patroclus’ death, it is not until he accepts Priam’s fatherly appeal that he realises that he should have been viewing Hector not as an ‘implacable enemy’ but as a noble warrior and a great opponent in battle. Malouf demonstrates humanity through Achilles’ realisation and his redemption from grief. Malouf argues that humans should not hold onto grief but should have the ability to, like Somax, accept the difficulty of life and persevere.

Despite Malouf’s positive portrayals of humanity, the presence of war and its effects is indicative of the human cost of war and the destruction it brings to ordinary citizens. Malouf in his post modern view depicts an anti-war sentiment and describes it as futile and irrational through the landscape of ‘utter devastation’ where women ‘scaven[ge] for relics’ and where children are ‘kidnapped as new recruits’. In his retelling, Malouf is able to appeal to modern audience and help to convince them that war through its destruction and devastating effects serves no purpose and that it is in fact the ‘marauders’ that contribute to the destruction of humanity.

Malouf’s Ransom reveals the importance of humanity through Somax’s perseverance in times of difficulty and appreciation for the simple and ordinary. Moreover, through Priam and Achilles’ transformation, humanity is present as it shows that it is impossible to change and be human despite situations. However, Malouf also condemns the destruction that humans create and argues that it is destructive and futile.
2014: BA @ Monash University
2015: LLB(Hons)/BA @ Monash University

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2593
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #81 on: September 20, 2013, 07:16:49 pm »
+3
This is a Ransom text response responding to the prompt :

"This old fellow, like most storytellers, is a stealer of other men's tales, of other men's lives"
'Malouf uses Ransom to explore the significance of storytelling.


David Malouf explores the power of storytelling through Ransom, a retelling of Homer's Iliad. Malouf proposes that storytelling gives ordinary humans monopoly over their fates and enables them to create their legacy in a world dominated by Gods. It is these simple stories that Malouf suggests fosters the human experience and acts as a way of connecting humanity together. Through the inclusion of Somax, Malouf establishes the importance of ordinary people in literary tradition. Sotires are not told only about heroes of the era and in Ransom, it is the ordinary people like Somax who are real heroes. As a paradigm, Malouf himself is a 'stealer of other men's tales' and he is able to examine the power of storytelling through the inclusion or exclusion of detail. Moreover Malouf acknowledges that sometimes stories can be distorted and identities may be robbed, perhaps alluding to his retelling of Homer's epic. In essence, Malouf is intent on exploring the significance of storytelling not only in literary tradition but in normal human experience.Nice intro, seems pretty sound, (think this might be the first Ransom essay I've marked, though). The first half of the intro has sentences of pretty similar length that creates a stop-start effect, but it isn't really a big deal (just there if you want to get really perfectionist on it)

Humans do not have full control in Ransom, yet Malouf suggests that through storytelling, humans are able to control their fate and choose to live or act in a way that they want to be perceived or remembered. Strong topic sentencePriam's desire to be perceived as an ordinary man instead of a king propels his doing of 'something new' and 'unheard of' by ransoming his son's body from Achilles. Here, Malouf utilises the imagery of the knot to represent Priam's self-consciousness and his longing to feel like a normal person instead of a 'ceremonial' king whose face is Troy's 'living map'. Malouf also alludes to the fact that when Priam was ransomed, he lost his identity as 'Podarces' and became Priam, the 'price paid'. This transformation from a pampered 'lord of pleasures' to an 'indistinguishable' person is a testament that at any time, Priam could lose everything he has and start all over again. This motivates him to engage in the notion of chance that in a awkwardworld where Gods interfere, it is also possible for one to alter their fate. This gives Priam the ability to find himself as a normal person, especially a grieving father whose mission it is is to redeem his son.  Thus, the act of ransoming gives Priam the ability to be remembered not for the destruction of Troy and his death but for his simple act, an act that 'any man might do'. Hm, could potentially have linked back stronger to the significance of story telling toward the end of this paragraph (I could be wrong, perhaps there are implicit links that I'm missing without having read the text). Otherwise, your knowledge and analysis seem to be going nicely.

Similarly, Achilles' knowledge knowledge of his 'fated' and 'inevitable death leads him to resist it. He, like Priamneeds another comma here (I think you left one out above, it should have one after "Moreover" - might be a habit of yours to look into? suffers from the balance of their dual selves as he represses the one in order to fulfil the other. Achilles becomes liberated by the ransom and is able to let go of the rage that had consumed him to be remembered as a father and son in giving Hector'd body back. However, Malouf suggest that living a life worth telling stories about?is only a 'provisional triumph' because the Gods still have full control over humans, yet they are offered a role to play in their own lives.

Malouf emphasises the need to connect with humanity through the power of story. Somax, the 'chatterer' epitomises what man's connection with nature and life should be. Somax takes pleasure in doing simple things, eating griddlecakes, taking a rest or dabbling his feet in the water. It is these things that Malouf suggest that humans should place emphasis on. The symbolism of the cakes is a representation of the simple things in life and also Priam's isolation with the world. His role as king has detached him from what should become instinctual to himdetached him implies that he was once attached to something (obvs), however, then you use "become" instinctual, which implies it is yet to happen, so that needs to be sorted. Moreover, the double use of "him" makes it sound awkward - be conscious of that, yet it takes a common man, a cartera comma here, too (which would be slightly stuttery, consider 'common carter'? to remind him that he is a 'chil[d] or nature...of earth, as well as of the Gods. Achilles' liberation from his grief is successful because of the fatherly appeal between him and Priam. Priam invites Achilles to understand that Achilles should have been thinking of Hector as a worthy competitor and not an 'implacable enemy'. Malouf, as a storyteller invites us to consider the power that stories can have over people as it foster the human connection. Like Achilles who is filled with grief and rage, he is able to feel that 'something in him has feed itself and fallen away'.

Through the inclusion of Somax, Malouf has achieved a new meaning of the Iliad for modern readers. Malouf positions the reader to consider that stories are not told only of about the warriors or kings but also about ordinary people. In Somax, Malouf has given him the courage to face the challenges of life and to go on despite these challenges. For example, Somax does not, unlike Achilles, avenge the death of his son but instead learns to accept it as a fact of life and concludes that 'we go on...[f]or all our losses'. This perception of life and how it functions is epitomised in Somax and as a surrogate of Malouf's authorship, readers are asked to consider the advantages of a simple and ordinary life and how as ordinary people, we can create our own legacy. Here Somax is remembered by readers of Ransom as a herocomma as he had has the power - write in present tensethe power to influence Priam to liberate him from his restrictive life as king. Despite this, Malouf adds thatcould also use comma[/b] though stories can be told time after time, sometimes meanings can be lost and identities can be robbed. Perhaps, Malouf himself is alluding to the fact that he has, in a sense, stolen Homer's identity in retelling the Iliad and discarding the use of epithets and introducing a post modernist view on writing - a focus on psychology and physical and mental challenges and not on the typical protagonist adventure. wow

Furthermore, somax is robbed of his identity when he becamebecomes Idaeus and is reduced to a 'hundred [year] old' man who 'drinks too much'. This, Malouf considers is one?? of the negative aspects of storytelling as sometimes storytellers are discredited for the stories that they tell. This is also present in Priam's recollection of his childhood as his story is ignored because of the reputation he has to uphold as king.

Ransom is a testament to the power of storytelling as a tool of connecting people together, especially in a society overshadowed by restrictions and responsibilities. Malouf also emphasises the control offered by storytelling to create one's legacy as well as storyteller's monopoly over their stories to create meaning for their readers.

---
Phew. Didn't think it was going to be this long. It was only three pages on paper :P
This seems like it would be a pretty high-scoring essay. I think from memory, you also write on Year of Wonders? I think either text would be suitable for the exam. I do have pretty positive memories of your YoW essay(s?), though.
Keep your writing in present tense.
You might choose to ignore my comma advice; I'm a big fan of commas. I do think, however, that you should be wary of using one comma where two might improve your writing. (For example, writing something like "I do think, however that you should"). Might be a 'feel' thing, because I can't say in terms of grammar/punctuation rules why you should be using the comma. Personally, I think that your sentences would have been better with an extra comma where indicated.
Seems like you have good knowledge and analysis, however, that's guesswork on my behalf.
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

jeanweasley

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Trust only in yourself
  • Respect: +73
  • School: SHGC
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #82 on: September 21, 2013, 01:38:44 pm »
0
This seems like it would be a pretty high-scoring essay. I think from memory, you also write on Year of Wonders? I think either text would be suitable for the exam. I do have pretty positive memories of your YoW essay(s?), though.
Keep your writing in present tense.
You might choose to ignore my comma advice; I'm a big fan of commas. I do think, however, that you should be wary of using one comma where two might improve your writing. (For example, writing something like "I do think, however that you should"). Might be a 'feel' thing, because I can't say in terms of grammar/punctuation rules why you should be using the comma. Personally, I think that your sentences would have been better with an extra comma where indicated.
Seems like you have good knowledge and analysis, however, that's guesswork on my behalf.

Thanks Brenden! I can always count on you. About the comma issue, I don't really know how to use them. Haha.
2014: BA @ Monash University
2015: LLB(Hons)/BA @ Monash University

jeanweasley

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Trust only in yourself
  • Respect: +73
  • School: SHGC
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #83 on: September 24, 2013, 09:33:47 am »
+3
I would really like some feedback on my essay about Macbeth just to see how I stack up (my teacher marked this one but I would like a second opinion). Thanks so much :) .


It is the ambition of Lady Macbeth that fully drives Macbeth’s actions. To what extent do you agree?


Sorry, it's going to be short and will skim most things as I'm lacking in time but feel free to message me if you're concerned about my feedback. Thank you (:

Throughout the storyEliminate this pedestrian style of writing. Nothing is ever 'throughout' unless it is in every page and 'story' is like a simple word writers use if they don't know what they're actually talking about. Every text is a story and it's pretty obvious so why bother writing the word story? How about 'play' since it is a play and it's more specific? of Macbeth the theme of ambitionThis is a no-no. Never ever use the word 'theme' because it doesn't add complexity to your writing and immediately detracts the assessor from actually giving your response a high score. of the characters, for the most part Macbeth and his partneras denoted by the name Lady Macbeth is the partner and the use of the word partner is awkward, perhaps just leave it. Lady Macbeth is at the forefront and is a catalyst for all the happenings of the play that ultimately lead to the demise of Macbeth. Macbeth however is not an ambitious man himself, and it is not until he is given a false sense of security by others he possesses enough motivation to follow through with his desire to become king of Scotland. This motivation comes from Lady Macbeth who is a stronger, more ambitious and spontaneous person and to a lesser extent three witches who meddle with Macbeth’s life.Great ideas here but I think they need to be stronger. Whilst you say that Lady Macbeth is the catalyst for most events in the play, you need to link it to the fact that she is also influential to Macbeth. Macbeth himself is also responsible so perhaps put that in. Discussion of fate in the intro as well as the society that is based in honour in ranking might also be helpful. Mention of the playwright is also important. Don't forget that Macbeth was written by Shakespeare!

After hearing about the witches prophecies, Macbeth is convinced that he will become kind gnaturally as the two prior prophecies, 'two prior prophecies sound weird when you read the whole sentencethat he would become Thane of Glamis and Cawdor happen quite naturally don't know what quite naturally meanswith no effort by Macbeth. An issue arises with the third prophecy, King Duncan has to great disappointment of Macbeth, named is song, Prince of Cumberland, his successor the throne. It is at this time Macbeth realises more decisive action needs to be taken if he wishes to become kind as prophesized by the witches as evidenced by this said by Macbeth himself “The Prince of Cumberland! That is a step…On which I must fall down, or else o’er leap….For in my way it lies.” Macbeth however is uncertain about this and it is not until encouragement from Lady Macbeth where she tells him to “Screw…[his]… courage to the sticking-place”good use of quote but structure is somewhat lacking in explaining the significance of this evidence. does he choose to go ahead with his plans, it is from this we can see that Lady Macbeth is a catalyst to Macbeth’s desires. A tinge of retelling of the story here and it is not until the last sentence that the idea for the paragraph is introduced. I think that this paragraph should begin discussing Lady Macbeth being the catalyst to Macbeth's desires and explain the significance of Lady Macbeth's position as the wife of Macbeth. Also, you could mention that there is somewhat a role reversal because Macbeth is completely submissive to his wife's whim as compared to LM who just gives orders.

In fact Lady Macbeth makes her desires no secret to the audience of the play and the very first time she is introduced, through reading a note from Macbeth regarding the prophecies, she makes her desires clear to herself and immediately begins plotting ways that Macbeth can become king, ultimately by committing the most evil of evils, murder and not just that, treason at the highest level, murder of their own king. Massive sentence! Shorten it and make it more concise. This topic sentence doesn't really introduce what you're going to say. In fact it is a retelling and a comment about Lady Macbeth's introduction in the play.All for Lady Macbeth’s own personal gain and constant desire for power. This is a fragment - it's not a complete sentence. Lady Macbeth at first introduction is truly portrayed as an evil women who does want to comply with societies views of what a women should be at the time, perhaps further demonstrating that she was evil and actually played more of a part to Macbeth’s fate than the witches did after all Lady Macbeth was the women who Macbeth had to of trusted and confided in the most as his wife. It would make sense that the fact Macbeth had involved himself with such an evil person that eventually some of this evilness would rub of onto him.

What is it?It however cannot be ignored that Macbeth had other influences Since you're introducing the fact that there are other influences in regards to Macbeth's actions, just jump to that idea and don't provide a back up sentence where you introduce everything to the reader. Assume that whoever is reading your piece knows the text but is reading your piece to gain some in depth understanding about the ideas and intentions of the play.which ultimately led to his demise, such as the witches who spurred him on by giving him false sense of securities and providing him with vague predictions of his future which certainly did give Macbeth a skewed view of his circumstances. However all that can be seen and to some extent evidenced as to having had any influence of Macbeth in a physical sense is the words of Lady Macbeth, as after all the witches only provide Macbeth with vague predictions of his future rather than planning for him exactly what to do in order to make these predictions come true, in fact the person who does this is Lady Macbeth.

In conclusion If it's the last paragraph, it's probably a conclusion. This is a no-no. If your chosen words or phrases don't add anything to your piece then leave it out. It's better to have short and concise paragraphs than long ones. it is myNo-no. Assessors don't care about your opinion. Don't write this in. belief that Macbeth was heavily influenced by Lady Macbeth, much more so than the witches or himself, as although the witches and Macbeth himself had a general idea as to what would happen or should happen to Macbeth, it wasn’t until Lady Macbeth came into the equation that an actual plan was able to be put together and executed which ultimately were able to make the predictions of the witches and ambitions of Macbeth come true. This whole sentence is so long. It's basically a paragraph. Lots of run on sentences that need to be cut down here. Essay supports the topic completely but does not explore other reasons such as fate, society's influence, Macbeth's own greed in regards to the topic. Topic sentences need to be clear and discuss the idea for the paragraph. Some retelling is evident in the piece. Shakespeare's intentions also need some exploration. More textual evidence needs to be included and relevant discussion about its significance needs to be clear.

Suggestions for improvement:
* Have clearer topic sentences
* Cut down on 'back up sentences' - get straight to the point
* Avoid just blatantly agreeing with the topic - offer two sides to the story, either you partially agree or you partially disagree
* Include enough evidence to support your contention and discuss the significance of it
* Perhaps re-read the text to understand Shakespeare's intent as this needs to be discussed
* Language used needs to be more complex and avoid using words that basically spell out everything for your reader

Overall, I think you're on the right track.

2014: BA @ Monash University
2015: LLB(Hons)/BA @ Monash University

jeanweasley

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Trust only in yourself
  • Respect: +73
  • School: SHGC
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #84 on: September 27, 2013, 07:28:56 pm »
0
For those interested, I have reworked it although the changes aren't exhaustive. If there are anymore possible changes for this essay, please comment below. I'd love to hear from you (:

"This old fellow, like most storytellers, is a stealer of other men's tales, of other men's lives"
'Malouf uses Ransom to explore the significance of storytelling.

David Malouf explores the power of storytelling through Ransom, a retelling of Homer's Iliad. Malouf proposes that storytelling gives ordinary humans monopoly over their fates and enables them to create their legacy in a world dominated by Gods. It is these simple stories, which Malouf suggests fosters the human experience and connects humanity together. Through the inclusion of Somax, Malouf establishes the importance of ordinary people in literary tradition as stories are told not only about heroes of the era but also the ordinary people that truly represent heroism. As a paradigm, Malouf himself is a 'stealer of other men's tales' and he is able to examine the power of storytelling through the inclusion or exclusion of detail. Moreover, Malouf acknowledges that sometimes stories can be distorted and identities may be robbed, perhaps alluding to his retelling of Homer's epic. In essence, Malouf is intent on exploring the significance of storytelling not only in literary tradition but in normal human experience.

Humans do not have full control in Ransom, yet Malouf suggests that through storytelling, humans are able to control their fate and choose to live or act in a way that they want to be perceived or remembered. Priam's desire to be perceived as an ordinary man instead of a king propels his doing of 'something new' and 'unheard of' by ransoming his son's body from Achilles. Here, Malouf utilises the imagery of the knot to represent Priam's self-consciousness and his longing to feel like a normal person, instead of a 'ceremonial' king whose face is Troy's 'living map'. Malouf also alludes to the fact that when Priam was ransomed, he lost his identity as 'Podarces' and became Priam, the 'price paid'. This transformation from a pampered 'lord of pleasures' to an 'indistinguishable' person is a testament that, at any time, Priam could lose everything he has and start all over again. Priam, therefore is motivated to engage in the notion of chance despite social customs of allowing one’s fate to be controlled by the Gods. In turn, he is given the ability to discover his humanity through his redemption of Hector’s body. Thus, the act of ransom gives Priam the capacity to be remembered for future generations not for the foreseeable destruction of Troy but for his simple act that, he ‘as a father’, or ‘any man’ might do to demonstrate their paternal love for their sons.

Similarly, Achilles' knowledge of his 'fated' and 'inevitable’ death leads him to resist it. He, like Priam, suffers from the balance of their dual selves as he represses the one in order to fulfil the other. Achilles becomes liberated by the ransom and is able to let go of the rage that had consumed him to be remembered as a father and son in giving Hector's body back. However, Malouf suggests that living a life worth telling stories about is only a 'provisional triumph' because the Gods still have full control over humans, yet they are offered a role to play in their own lives.

Malouf emphasises the need to connect with humanity through the power of story. Somax, the 'chatterer' epitomises what man's connection with nature and life should be. Somax takes pleasure in doing simple things: eating griddlecakes, taking a rest or dabbling his feet in the water. It is these things that Malouf suggest that humans should place emphasis on. The symbolism of the cakes is a representation of the simple things in life and Priam's isolation with the world. His role as king has isolated him from what should be instinctual to him, yet it takes a common carter to remind Priam that he is a 'chil[d] or nature...of earth, as well as of the Gods. In addition, Achilles' liberation from his grief is successful because of the fatherly appeal between him and Priam. Priam invites Achilles to understand that Achilles should have been thinking of Hector as a worthy competitor and not an 'implacable enemy'. Malouf, as a storyteller, invites us to consider the power that stories can have over people as it fosters the human connection. Like Achilles who is filled with grief and rage, he is able to feel that 'something in him has fe[d] itself and fallen away'.

Through the inclusion of Somax, Malouf has achieved a new meaning of the Iliad for modern readers. Malouf positions the reader to consider that stories are not told only about warriors or kings, but also about ordinary people. Malouf gives Somax the courage to face the challenges of life and to preserve despite these challenges.  For example, Somax does not, unlike Achilles, avenge the death of his son but instead learns to accept it as a fact of life and concludes that 'we go on...[f]or all our losses'. This perception of life and how it functions is epitomised in Somax, and as a surrogate of Malouf's authorship, readers are asked to consider the advantages of a simple and ordinary life and how, as ordinary people, we can create our own legacy. Here, Somax is remembered by readers of Ransom as a hero, as he has  the power to influence Priam to liberate him from his restrictive life as king. Despite this, Malouf adds that, though stories can be told time after time, sometimes meanings can be lost and identities can be robbed. Perhaps, Malouf himself is alluding to the fact that he has, in a sense, stolen Homer's identity in retelling the Iliad and discarding the use of epithets and introducing a post modernist view on writing - a focus on psychology and physical and mental challenges and not on the typical protagonist adventure. 
Furthermore, Somax is robbed of his identity when he becomes Idaeus and is reduced to a 'hundred [year] old' man who 'drinks too much'. This, Malouf considers is the negative aspect of storytelling as storytellers are sometimes discredited for the stories they tell. This is also present in Priam's recollection of his childhood, as his story is ignored because of the reputation he has to uphold as king.

Ransom is a testament to the power of storytelling as a tool of connecting people together, especially in a society overshadowed by restrictions and responsibilities. Malouf also emphasises the control offered by storytelling to create one's legacy as well as storyteller's monopoly over their stories to create meaning for their readers.
2014: BA @ Monash University
2015: LLB(Hons)/BA @ Monash University

Smiley_

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
  • Respect: +147
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #85 on: September 28, 2013, 12:14:02 pm »
0
Edited version of my piece

On the waterfront is a story about the battle between good and evil. Do you agree?




In the film “On the Waterfront, the director, Elia Kazan presents the corruption and injustice on the Hoboken docks. The 1954 film portrays the moral and emotional growth of Terry Malloy as well as presenting characters as good and evil. Kazan presents those who fight against injustices as superior as well as those who give protection and those who are cause of these injustices as corrupt and unjust.

The film implies that honourable men are those who stand up to the injustices that are occurring around them. Joey Doyle is presented as powerful and brave at the beginning of the film, while standing on the top of the building using a low shot. This is juxtaposed with the next scene as he is seen tumbling to his death because of what he has previously done, met with the Crime Commissioners to expose the corrupt dealings of the docklands. The struggle between good and evil is presented as “the best kid in the neighbourhood” who is seen to have done something positive for the longshoremen is murdered without a thought. Joey Doyle was not the only person who decided to stand up and fight for what he believed in. K.O the warm-hearted tough longshoremen also spoke out and “did all the talking” all “39 pages” of the corrupt unions operation. This talking was not rewarded as just like Joey, he was murdered by the people he was trying to stop. Showing how the battle between what is right and what is wrong is ever continuing.

Father Barry and Edie Doyle aim to instil values of goodness and moral judgement into Terry as well as them working together to help rid the docks or corruption. Hoboken is dirty, grimy, cold and arid this provides a contrast with Edie Doyle, with her white hair and neat clothes, she is presented as virtuous with high moral values. When she finds out that he brothers death was not an accident she is determined to find out what happened and not to go back to “things that things that are just in books”. She takes on Terry at the “Shape Up” fighting for a token so that her father can earn some money that day showing that she is brave and not afraid to take on men bigger than her, in order to achieve what she wants. Edie has abiding faith in Terry and his capacity to change. She urges him to “care for everybody else” and do what is right. Stand up against the Mob. Father Barry also is there fore Terry when he needs guidance he tells Terry that “what’s ratting for them is telling the truth for you” even though Terry says that if he spills his “life ain’t worth more than a nickel”. Father Barry realises that just fulfilling his liturgical role in the church is not enough for the people of Hoboken and that he needs to fight against the corruption. He does this by holding  the “sermon in the hold” we the mob pelt him with rubbish just like Jesus was pelted on his way to Calvary. Even while being hit in the face he does not give up his fight against injustice.

The dirty, hazy world of the docks is ruled by corrupt bosses and their unions. Tulio and Truck both appealing together in the film, present a vicious fight against anyone who tries to stand up for themselves or others. Truck has the wit the make a joke that Joey was a canary “who could sing, but he couldn't fly” and Tulio has a personality that is wholly submerged in his role as “muscle”. Johnny Friendly is the physically imposing, moody unpredictable man who controls the waterfront and the lives of thousands of people. He is a ruthless and vicious man who fought his way to the top and will not give it up easily. He is a man who is practiced and skilled in humiliation especially of the weak including Terry during the scene where Friendly and Charlie Berate him for not reporting on Dugan’s decision Johhny mocks him saying that “Your brains must be rattling” showing just how much of “a cheap, lousy  dirty stinkin mug” he truly is. Even once Terry has taken down Johhny the corruption on the Waterfront is still there due to the presence of Mr Upstairs. Mr Upstairs, the audience never sees his face, we only see him from the back. He just watches over everything never getting involved in the waterfront incidents. Through these characters Elia Kazan presents the immoral side to the battle.

Charlie and Terry both begin by just carrying out order from the mob but also are caring towards each other and the people they care about. The film begins with Terry luring Joey to the roof and ultimately to his death. Once he discovers that he was the decoy used, even though he cannot put words to how he feels he is distressed but tied between his natural loyalty to his brother and his fear of the mob, he is unable to articulate how he feels. After the death of K.O Dugan with the help of Edie and Father Barry he is given the impetus to act and to think for himself. He knows that his appearance and testimony at the Crime Commission will cut him off from his friends, the mob even Tommy yet he develops a moral conscience showing that certain characters are not definitively on one side of the battle. Charlie Malloy “the butcher in a camel hair coat” and the man who threatens his brother with a gun is a troubled man. Unlike Tulio and Truck, who brush aside Terry’s feelings at the death of Joey Doyle, Charlie makes a halfhearted attempt to comfort his brother. During the taxi scene he praises Terry saying that he was “beautiful” when he was a boxer. When he realises that his time is up he gives Terry the gun hoping to protect him showing that he was caring and affectionate towards his “kid-brother”

Through “On the Watefront” there are kind people who are willing to stand up against and fight for any injustices just like there are those who are corrupt and cold blooded. The film portrays the ever present battle between these two sides as well as those characters who develop from being driven by these evil sources to them standing up by themselves against exploitation. 



Smiley_

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
  • Respect: +147
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #86 on: September 28, 2013, 12:29:06 pm »
+2
Joey and Edie are both catalysts for Terry’s transition.

Preceding corruption on many of the American Docks during the 1950s, Elia Kazan’s film ‘on the waterfront’ created heated propaganda; similar to the attention gained from his testification at the HUAC trials. Silhouetted against the backdrop of New Jersey in 1954, Elia Kazan’s’ film ‘on the waterfront’ depicts the transition of the protagonist, Terry, through the unpopular decision to testify against the oppression of the mob. Terry’s transformative repercussions are encouraged through Edie, who is a true catalyst in the film, her innocence and contradicting perceptions push terry to modify him for the better. Furthermore, Kazan utilises Joey’s death as a starting point to Terry’s transition, however he is only one of the catalysts within the film. Father Barry is influential in altering the longshoremen’s policy to ‘stand up against the mob and do what’s right’. In contrast, Kazan illuminates is this the right word maybe highlights/demonstrates that others can promote change within an individual, but depicts that the need for redemption and revenge can ultimately determine the action. I had to read this a few times to understand what was going onThus, there are many catalysts within on the waterfront which transform Terry, as well as his own emotion towards Friendly’s mob.good

Joey Doyle’s courage to stand up for what is right, has encouraged Terry to stand up against his fellow union members. I think this is a bit to straight forward, it might sound better to get rid of the "has" In the opening scenes of the film the tyranny of the mob is exemplified through Bernstein’s ominous sound track. This threating threatening ‘jungle like’ music explores the unions control over the longshoreman. The soundtrack is juxtaposed against the singular instrument opening, depicting the need for the individual to stay ‘deaf and dumb’. Kazan sees Joeys act as truly heroic; thus, Kazan selects to take a low long shot high angled looking up at Joey, displaying his supremacy over the mob. and that he does have some moralsJoey’s death creates confusion within Terry as he ‘thought they were only going to lean on him a bit’. The mobs betrayal of Terry leaves him obfuscated, which is conveyed through his facial expressions in the close up shot outside Friendly's bar. good Furthermore, in this scene Terry begins to see the ruthless ability of the mob, as they continue to ridicule Joey as a ‘canary that could sing, but not fly’. The mobs betrayal of Terry as well as their unjust actions create confusion and anger which initially comprises his transition, to redeem himself. good

Kazan utilizes Edie as the character who truly drives Terry’s transformation. good but saying the character sounds a bit weird maybe try Terry’s transformation is driven by Edies words and actions Edie’s innocence from the opening scenes makes Terry question ‘why someone would kill Joey’, as he was a ‘good kid’. Kazan symbolises Edie as an angel to modify the world for the better; he exemplifies this through creating an angelic light when she is initially seen in the darkness. Her white gloves depict her purity without a scruple of evil. In contrast, her innocence and questioning of Father Barry drive him to investigate Joey’s unlawful death. Her question asking Father if he ‘[has] ever heard a saint hiding in the church’ triggered his movement. Additionally, Edie’s contradicting views make Terry realise what the world has become. Edie cannot comprehend the ‘D&D’ policy; why Joey’s best friend and her father won’t talk. Their different environments create a colliding philosophy; Edie believes ‘everyone should care for everyone else’, whereas Terry Believes ‘you should do it to them before they do it to you’. Terry grows really, you could just say develops upon Edie’s perception by ultimately confessing to Father Barry, herself and the courts. When confessing Kazan uses techniques to convey further meaning and to add suspense. going a bit of topic When confessing to father Barry, Kazan metaphorically illuminates that Terry is in the clear. This is explored through the use of the Fog and ash clearing when he confesses. When confessing to Edie Kazan successfully subsumes their voices to intensify the pain in their expression. Subsequently, Edie’s colliding view on the world causes Terry to confess to the commission as well as gaining his dignity in the process.good !!!

However these two characters are not the only catalysts in ‘On the Waterfront’, Father Barry is used as a manipulator by Kazan attempting to gain the truth. from?? Terry??Moreover, father Barry is relentless in ordering Terry to ‘do what [his] conscious says’, as he manipulates Terry similarly to the mob. what are you trying to say here?? its a little confusing Kazan depicts that Barry is not scared of the mob, as he heads to the dock ‘to see for [himself]’.showing that Kazan furthers this notion as Barry holds a meeting in the basement of the church. It is clear that Father Barry has successfully altered Terry’s view on ‘what is right and what is wrong’. This is explored in the scene of K.O Dougan’s death.yep nice Where, Terry stands up and displays respect to K.O Dougan during Barry’s eulogy, as he punches one of the mobs ‘goons’. His respect for Father Barry is also evident in one of the final scenes in Friendly’s bar, where Terry listens to Barry so he can ‘really hurt Johnny’. Barry’s perceptions lead Terry in trying to stop the mob, by warning K.O Dougan to ‘watch his back’. Therefore, Father Barry is a catalyst for Terry’s transition as his relentless drive leads terry to stand up, against the tyranny of the mob. this is sounding better !   

Although the initial transition comes from others, Kazan depicts that the true drive for change can emerge through pure emotion. yepWhat truly pushes terry to testify is his realisation that he has ‘been ratting on [himself] the whole time’. He notices all along he has been a ‘bum’, had no dignity and complied when complying withwith Johnny. In an attempt to redeem himself he testifies against Friendly, however he was always driven by revenge. Kazan depicts from the opening scenes that Friendly had fixed a fight, preventing Terry a shot at the title. His evocative conscious and emotions build to form revenge against the mob. He carries his emotion throughout and releases his anger in the taxi scene, as he told Charlie he ‘could have been a contender’. Charlie’s death added to the Terry’s anger ultimately wanting to fight Johnny. good, I was hoping you would talk about thisIn these scenes Kazan symbolises Terry defeating the mob, and truly removing himself from their operation, as he throws the hook back at them. you seemed to jump from these to scenes pretty quickly The hook symbolises the tyranny of the mob over the longshoremen, as they carry them on their back. Thus, Kazan depicts that the true driving force comes within, from pure emotion through past events.

 Joey and Edie are both catalysts of ‘on the waterfront’, however there are others who influence his transformation. Father Barry is extremely influential in pursing his testification, what ?to help him learn ‘what’s wrong, from what’s right’. As well as these influential individuals, Terry’s evocative conscious and emotions build to form revenge against friendly and are pivotal in his transformation. Thus there are many factors that are involved in terry testifying against the powerful Friendly, however Kazan masterfully includes all these techniques to successfully depict; Terry’s transition from a bum to someone with great dignity.nice ending!!

09Ti08

  • Guest
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #87 on: September 28, 2013, 07:53:27 pm »
0
Hello all,
Here is my work for "A Christmas Carol", and please be harsh, I really want to improve. Thank you very much indeed!

Topic: Although Dickens' story is entertaining, even enthralling, it is mainly intended to deliver a moral lesson. Discuss.

Charles Dickens’s novella “A Christmas Carol” is a feel-good narrative which has become the archetypal Christmas tale. In his masterpiece, Dickens’ imagination fires up a dramatic storyline by which the audience is entertained by the mysterious otherworldliness of Scrooge’s encounter and enthralled from beginning to end by the Gothic elements. However, despite their effects, these features act as an essential backdrop against which the moral lessons can be played out. Throughout “A Christmas Carol”, Charles Dickens collates a critical response in regard to the chasm that divides the worlds of the rich and the poor during Victorian era while delivering a message of the true meaning of caring, giving and receiving of the Christmas season.

 “A Christmas Carol” is divided into staves rather than chapters to reflect its musical qualities. In fact, its structure, main events, and the Gothic elements play the key role in entertaining and enthralling the readers. In each stave, by following Scrooge’s journey, we experience many different things. For instance, in stave one, we are horrified by the appearance of Jacob Marley, but at the same time, we are also curious as we know that Scrooge is going to be visited by three spirits. At this stage, we wonder what they are, and we wonder how they are going to transform Scrooge – a mean-spirited, penny-pinching person. Then, in stave two, after being frightened by the Ghost of Christmas Past, we follow him into the past too see a very different Scrooge. We are surprised to learn about his lonely childhood and the fact that he knows what love is by the fact that he has a fiancée. Next, in stave three, we are guided by the Ghost of Christmas Present on a journey where we see many people celebrating Christmas in their own way, regardless of the financial situation. We see Fred’s Christmas party, and the Cratchits’, and the miners of an isolated community. Therefore, we, as readers, also feel the festivities of Christmas as we turn every single page. Lastly, we are taken to the scariest journey into the future. We are afraid for Scrooge as we guess that the dead person is him and feel bitter about how people react to his death. Finally, we are happy to his transformation, we are happy to see how he treats people, and how happy people are when they are treated the way they expect. Thus, by constructing a plot with dramatic events and employing Gothic elements, Dickens is able to attract the readers, and at the same time, entertain and enthral them, with his Christmas tale.

However, as the intricacies of the plot unfold, it is evident that Dickens employed the novella to comment on the vices plaguing Victorian Britain and rally the public into action. As the Industrial Revolution widened the chasm between the rich and the poor, Dickens’ opinion was that those with riches and influence had a duty to take care of those who were less fortunate than themselves, particularly since their wealth was often founded on the labours of a poorly paid workforce. Scrooge is the obvious symbol of the greedy Victorian rich, while the Cratchits represent the working poor. Dickens uses the relationship between the miser and his clerk to draw attention to the enormous gap between the living conditions of masters and their workers. Also through the Cratchits, “A Christmas Carol” exemplifies Dickens's vigorous opposition to those Victorian social reformers and businessmen who believed, like Scrooge, that charity encouraged idleness and that the poor should be left to die and "decrease the surplus population". This Victorian Malthusianism was often accompanied by an individualism that classified all misfortunes as personal failings rather than public problems. However, as we see, all the family members of the Cratchits have jobs, they struggle to make ends meet, and Tiny Tim is a lovely child who does not have a control over the way he was born. Therefore, they do not deserve the ignorance of the rich. Moreover, Dickens uses Ignorance and Want to attack the Utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, most notably his belief in the “greatest happiness of the greatest number”, a position that was used to justify the centralization of Poor Relief in workhouses. The wild, monstrous appearance of the two emaciated figures suggests dangerous scenario which emerges from people’s “want” of food and shelter. Consequently, the comfortable, complacent reader is terrified into taking action to relieve the plight of the poor. Hence, by employing symbolism, Dickens is able to convey deep messages about social reality.

In essence, while it is evident that Charles Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol” is an entertaining and enthralling novella, it would be remiss to neglect his core intentions. Through his careful selection of linguistic features and narrative voice, all strongly linked to the setting of the novel, the author condemns both industrialisation and utilitarianism. Moreover, by making the distinction between the rich and the poor apparent, Dickens extols the virtue of society changing its dismissive and repressive attitudes towards the poor, ultimately enlisting the audience’s sympathies for them.

unfamila

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 142
  • Lad
  • Respect: +1
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #88 on: September 28, 2013, 08:09:54 pm »
0
Thank you fishandchips ;)

chasej

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • Respect: +56
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #89 on: September 30, 2013, 12:59:59 am »
0


Thanks so much, really insightful. Definitely going to take your advice on.
Graduated with Bachelor of Laws (Honours) / Bachelor of Arts from Monash University in June 2020.

Completing Practical Legal Training (Graduate Diploma of Legal Practice)

Offering 2021 Tutoring in VCE Legal Studies (Awarded as Bialik College's top Legal Studies Student in 2014).

Offered via Zoom or in person across Melbourne.  Message me to discuss. Very limited places available.