Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 07:47:20 pm

Author Topic: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)  (Read 600363 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

literally lauren

  • Administrator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1699
  • Resident English/Lit Nerd
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #75 on: February 07, 2016, 01:34:34 pm »
Feedback for MemeKing
Discovering the duplicity of truth in art allows for the appreciation of previously lost value and ultimately rekindles this seems like a bit of an odd word choice since if you're saying it is rekindled, then you're kind of implying that it's something that has been lost (e.g. 'to rekindle the passion in a 20 year marriage' or something) but I'm not sure you'd want to argue that our ability to appreciate art is something that has been lost the ability to appreciate art through time.  Simon Nasht in Frank Hurley examines that Expression. You can 'examine a thing,' but you can't 'examine that a thing is blue.' instead, you could use 'argues' or 'affirms' which can both take 'that' after them in this context the mutability of art can only appreciated once we discover and accept its dualistic nature.  Similarly, Nasht atones word check - 'atone' means 'make amends' or 'seek redemption' (e.g. I want to atone for the sins I committed in my teenage years) to conveying the human condition that provokes the need to preserve oneself through the catalyst this makes grammatical sense, but the meaning doesn't really fit. A catalyst is a spark or a starting point that brings about later results; here you just seem to be talking about the medium of art, rather than its catalytic properties of art.

The questioning of truth leads to an appreciation of value once we discover and accept its dualistic nature starting to repeat this phrase a bit now; it's very similar to some of the lines in your intro. Nasht attempts to convince a now pluralist society that only by accepting the duplicity be careful with this word; duplicity doesn't really mean 'double-ness;' it implies deception and trickery. At times, this fits, but I'm not sure it's accurate in sentences like this of Hurley’s artworks can these “elaborate concoctions” be valued more than “outright fakes”.  Nasht initially portrays Hurley as a “conjurer” with a camera need a comma here and through cinema verite establishes how Hurley “undermined their what are 'they?' historical value”.  Nasht does this to critic 'critique' is the verb, 'critic' is a noun for a person who criticises the epoch word check - epoch only refers to a time period; you can't really say 'the epoch of someone's work.' of Hurley’s work through their inability to see value in the duplicity of his “manipulations”.  However, Nasht demonstrates the mutability of Hurley’s work through the juxtaposition between Hurley’s photos and their modern recreations once he turned “the battlefield into a canvas of his own making”.  Hurley’s artworks are split-screened by Nasht in order to contrast their similarities in the hopes that their ephemeral existence may be immortalised. The commemoration of Hurley’s artworks in a now pluralist be more specific here - what aspects of pluralism are important; you've used this word without properly clarifying what you're talking about society is now seen through the close-up commentary shot that “today composites would seem commonplace”.  Furthermore, Nasht’s embellishment of Hurley now coincides with the postmodern pluralist disposition of “a world searching for heroes” and furnishes a now accepting society the ability to question historical truth.  Ultimately, Nasht demonstrates that only through the questioning truth and accepting its dualistic nature can a more heightened discovery be formed. Good, but be careful not to throw around words like 'pluralist' or 'dualistic' at the expense of discussion. There's some great vocab here, but I feel like you could amp up the close analysis a bit more.

The transcendence of art attempts to immortalize the otherwise ephemeral existence of one's legacy upon discovering their limitations.  In ‘Frank Hurley’ restating the text's name is usually unnecessary after the introduction, Hurley discovers he cannot perpetuate himself as a myth as he then attempts to immortalize synonyms? Just because you used this in the previous sentence, and it seems like the kind of concept that you're going to have to talk about a lot, so having a few alternatives would be useful himself through his work.  Hurley “saw a market for exciting adventure films”, and through leaving himself as being a “mere observer,” he attempts to promote himself as a “fearless photographer”.  Nasht’s diegetic sound of Hurley holding spears and skulls attempt to portray Hurley’s “glorious” existence that he attempts to preserve through his photographs. V good - more of this kind of discussion! Nasht furthermore highlights his ambition as although “New York was unimpressed”, the “showman hit upon a new angle”.  Hurley then juxtaposes his earlier work in Papua New Guinea with “the lost tribes of Israel” that “flamed up front page headlines” that ultimately brought attention to Hurley, albeit controversial. this isn't really grammatical - are you trying to say Hurley was controversial, or that the attention was?  Hurley used this fame and his discovery for “his love for drama” to create films that were intended to immortalize his work.  Although Hurley “made up quite a few stories”, Nasht ultimately edits the shot of the auction house in what way? Describe this visual as though the person reading your piece can't see it - what is important about the editing of this shot? in order to commemorate Hurley’s transcendence past a “mere photographer”.  Ultimately, Nasht portrays what does he do with this portrayal? Do you think Nasht is celebrating Hurley, or vilifying him? 'Portray' is a perfectly accurate word, but it's kind of like saying 'The author says...' or 'The director shows...' in that it's a missed opportunity for a more descriptive word Hurley’s attempts towards preserving his legacy through the continual pursuit of his artworks.

Awesome job! Apologies for my confusion with the intro + body paragraphs + conclusion thing before, but this structure makes a lot more sense now :) The starts and ends of your paragraphs were both good, and you've done a decent amount of exploring the notion of discovery. It might help if you start to consider this on multiple levels (e.g. self-discovery, discoveries about other people, discovering new ideas, discovering things that were once lost, discovering some never-before-seen concept, etc.) just to broaden this explanation, though obviously the prompt will dictate your focus in that regard.

I like that you're not getting too caught up in the narrative and that you're talking more about Nasht's portrayal of Hurley than the specifics of his life, but as hard as it is to analyse documentaries, I think your piece would benefit from a bit more close analysis. The moments where you were picking up on specific filmic and visual techniques were excellent - there just need to be more of those moments!

The only other major issue was with some of your word choices, but again, those are mistakes you want to make, especially at this point of the year, so that you can correct yourself prior to assessment. Unfortunately it's a case of needing to make hundreds of little clarifications and improvements rather than one or two huge, overarching fixes, but hopefully some of the explanations above might help. If you're ever in doubt, look up the definitions, synonyms, and examples of words used in sentences. The definitions will tell you if it means what you think it means, and might alert you to any potential secondary or alternate meanings. Synonyms will help expand your vocabulary, but they also function as good 'replacement markers,' so you'll know when you can substitute in a certain word, and when you can't for grammatical reasons. And if you can find good sample sentences where these words are being used, it'll be much easier for your brain to identify any potential errors.

Really great discussion overall; just make sure you're conducting sufficient exploration of the prompt, and keep an eye on your word choices :)

Feedback for polpark
“Discoveries are often evoked by curiosity and wonder, offering up new understanding of ourselves and the world we live in.” Discuss this statement in relation to your prescribed and one other text of your choice.

Regardless of their motivation, discoveries shape and redefine an individual’s identity, successively do yoy mean 'successfully?' 'Successfully' means 'in a way that is successful/effective,' whereas 'successively' means 'one after another, in order' - like 'I've lost six successive staring contests with my cat' shifting their previous perspectives of the world and it’s controversial issues. Ivan O’mahoneys’s 'Go Back To Where You Came From,' Suzzane Buffam’s 'The New Experience' and J.K Rowling’s 'The Fringe Benefits of Failure, and the Importance of Imagination' awesome choices!! just be careful with your punctuation for the titles; try to put them all in single quotation marks like this^ to be consistent exemplifies should be 'exemplify' because you've got a plural list of things here (i.e. Thing A exemplifies this idea, but Things A, B, and C exemplify it.) the process of attaining awareness of what was once misunderstood or concealed. Through utilising techniques unique to their textual medium, the three texts explore various concepts of discovery, facilitating the close analysis of the results of discoveries evoked from varying catalysts. I have no idea what this means :P Are you trying to say that closely analysing the texts is like a catalyst for discovering things?? I'm not sure if it's the sentence structure or a word choice issue but this bit is a tad confusing. Other than that, v good intro.

'Go Back To Where You Came From' illustrates the transformation of individuals resulting from tangible experiences instigated through extraneous motives. it feels like your choice of vocabulary is distracting from your message, rather than enhancing it and making it clearer. All this sentence is really saying is that the people in 'Go Back' discover things as a result of their experiences. Also, 'tangible' might not be the right word here - that tends to apply more to objects or evidence (e.g. 'I have tangible proof that my wife has been cheating on me.') In the introduction, the utilisation of cross-cutting between archival footage of a refugee boat crashing into the shore and the interview of politicians stating “we must stop the boats,” engender sympathy towards the refugees and thereby evokes antagonism toward the hostility of the politicians. The biased editing indicates that the catalyst of the refugee process the six participants embark on was the producers’ external motives to persuade the public’s opinion on the refugee issue be specific here; what are they trying to persuade them of? What message is being conveyed here? As the six participants proceed through their journey, the development of their physical discovery is portrayed through the scene in which Adam, Glenny and Darren travel through the red-zone. The U.S soldiers assurance of having a “SOP(standard operating procedure) in place to make sure they when modifying quotes from a text, the convention is to just use square brackets and replace any unnecessary information, so this would be 'to make sure [bombers] don't get too close. '(bombers) don't get too close,” is capitalised on expressions is a bit clunky; try 'emphasised' or 'magnified' through the employment of close up shots of nearby vehicles. The close up shots of the vehicles conveys These convey the anxiety and fear of the scene through raising suspicion of a possible bomber. This trepidation is further enhanced by the voiceover of the narrator who states that “only an hour earlier a bomb exploded nearby, killing two civilians” good, but make sure you integrate these quotes properly. The participants’ response to this physical confrontation is captured through reaction shots that reveal the apprehension and fear brought by their tangible firsthand experience of the dangers the refugees flee from. Adam Hartup expresses the resultant change he has undergone due to the discovery as he states “I won’t say it’s illegal (entering Australia by boat) [to enter Australia by boat; it's too harsh of a title,” contrasting from his past accusation of refugees to be “criminals.” expression; you don't accuse of someone to be something' - this should be more like 'his past belief that refugees were "criminals" ' or 'his previous accusation that refugees were "criminals".' Adam’s quotes portray his realisation that categorising people who are simply attempting to escape death as murderers and thieves is not appropriate. The portrayal of Adam’s transformation of his perspective on refugees illuminates the effect of discoveries evoked extraneous to themselves. Great! Loving the step-by-step build up of your argument here, but I think you could do more to link this to the prompt. Remember that you're meant to be talking about the key words 'curiousity' and 'wonder;' and those aren't really present in this paragraph. Perhaps you could challenge the prompt by suggesting that sometimes, more harrowing discoveries can stem from other impulses (i.e. the participants on 'Go Back' weren't especially curious or amazed at the wonder of what they experienced, but instead became more enlightened and informed as a result of the discoveries they made.)
Very interesting text selection - it'd be interesting to see how you tied these together in later paragraphs. The logical process of explaining ideas that you've demonstrated here is excellent, and you're doing the right stuff at the right moments in terms of when to bring up evidence and when to zoom out and talk about discovery in general.

However, relevance is a bit of an issue given that you're dealing with the second part of the prompt pretty well ('discoveries offer up new understanding of ourselves and the world we live in') but you've barely touched on the first at all ('discoveries are often evoked by curiosity and wonder.') As such, I'd recommend tailoring this discussion a little bit more to the key terms that the prompt uses if you want to increase your mark.  In this case, think about how 'curiousity' and 'wonder' relate to 'Go Back,' and how you might use that link to substantiate a point about discovery in general. It's possible you've left these terms to deal with in later paragraphs, but it'd be especially impressive if you managed to incorporate them here too, as if an assessor is reading this from start to finish, they'll get to the end of this paragraph and wonder why there hadn't been any exploration of certain facets of the prompt yet.

Aside from that, you seem to be pretty much on top of things. Be careful not to let your expression get too out of hand, as at time it felt a bit clunky or as though you were using the words to obfuscate what you were trying to say. Simplicity and clarity should always be your primary focus, and you can jazz stuff up with words like 'catalyse' and 'extraneous' later once the underlying message has been pinned down.

So from here on:
• Prioritise relevance, and make sure that the starts and ends of your discussion are closely based on the prompt and its key ideas. Give yourself a precise focus at the beginning, and reinforce the relevance at the end to ensure that all the evidence you bring up in between is on point.
• Watch out for your expression in some sections, and if in doubt, simplify the sentence. Your word choices were mostly fine, and the sentences were mostly grammatical; it's just that certain words weren't as efficient as they could've been, and it led to some rather laborious phrases that could've been cut down. So just make sure your wording isn't detracting from the quality of your analysis, and you should be fine :)

Good luck with it all!

nay103

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #76 on: February 10, 2016, 08:39:36 pm »
Hi there!
First of all thank you so much for doing this :) While we've finished our discovery assessment tasks already (wasn't an essay) I'm not really happy with the essay I have and my teacher actually recommended to change texts. Would you mind giving me some feedback?

Thanks!!
HSC 2016: Subjects:
| English Advanced | English Extension 1 | Mathematics Extension I | Mathematics Extension 2 | Legal Studies | Physics | Heritage Japanese |

2015:
| Mind and Morality |

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #77 on: February 11, 2016, 09:49:23 am »
Hi there!
First of all thank you so much for doing this :) While we've finished our discovery assessment tasks already (wasn't an essay) I'm not really happy with the essay I have and my teacher actually recommended to change texts. Would you mind giving me some feedback?

Thanks!!
Hey nay,

Will definitely take a look!

nay103's unmarked essay for reference
While the process of discovery leads to new understandings and renewed perspectives of ourselves and others, it can also lead an individual to question themselves and others, and thus have a less concrete understanding of people. Che Guevara’s memoir, The Motorcycle Diaries, published in 1995, asserts that discovery allows new ideas about ourselves and others to be formed, while Haruki Murakami’s short novel, South of the Border, West of the Sun, published in 1992, suggests that discoveries do not necessarily lead to a better understanding of ourselves or others. While both texts grapple with the notion of discovery as being intertwined in the formation of values and perspectives, each text takes a different stance upon this idea.

The Motorcycle Diaries documents Guevara’s travels through South America in forty-six diary entries over nine months. The personal nature of this form allows the reader to make deeper connections with Guevara, and experience the building up of discoveries as he does. As Guevara’s diaries are sandwiched between a preface written by his daughter and an appendix written after he became a revolutionary, the reader is able to appreciate the impact of the new understandings Guevara has made on his journey and how they have affected his view of himself and others. The reader is able to see the juxtaposition between the “old” Guevara and the “enlightened” Guevara, emphasising that discovery can and does lead to new understandings and perceptions.

Murakami’s South of the Border, West of the Sun, concerns an everyday man named Hajime, and the relationships he forms throughout his life, most importantly the one he forms with his childhood crush, Shimamoto. While it is evident Hajime is heavily based on Murakami himself – they both share passions for music, literature and jazz bars, Murakami writes in a way that makes Hajime’s emotions seem detached. As the reader goes through the book, due to the paradoxical nature of the isolated first person narration, it is difficult to develop a better understanding of Hajime. Though they read his story, and discover what he goes through, they fail to make any substantial new understandings about him as a person.

Guevara’s diaries also suggest that smaller discoveries, once built up, can lead to significant insights of one’s character. This is primarily expressed when Guevara reflects upon his journey. For example, in the first entry, “so we understand each other,” Guevara refers to himself in the third person, saying, “the person who wrote these notes passed away the moment his feet touched Argentine soil. The person who also re-organises them and polishes them, me, is no longer, at least I’m not the person I once was. This third person narration creates a distance between the reader and the pre-journey Guevara, while the first person narration in the second sentence creates a sense of intimacy between the reader and the post-journey Guevara. This accentuates the differences between the two Guevaras, which is only emphasised through the metaphorical death he describes. His discoveries on his journey have not only caused him to change his values and the way he views himself, but have resulted in a “rebirth” for him as well.

Guevara’s notion that discovering and discoveries always lead to a better understanding of self is subverted in Murakami’s work. He asserts that discoveries about one’s self and others leads to another revelation, where the individual realises how little they actually know. For example, despite the regular meetings Shimamoto and Hajime have, he says, “The most I can say about you was how you were at the age of twelve. Other than what I knew about you then, I’m in the dark.” He does not feel he understands her any better than before, though he has learnt more about her through their frequent conversations. It is also evident that Hajime feels he has not learnt more about himself, as his relationship with Shimamoto is a reflection of his relationship with himself, as indicated by, “Nothing is written in your eyes. It’s written in my eyes. I just see the reflection in yours.” The successive short sentences create a sense of resignation, that Hajime has finally conceded he really doesn’t know himself or Shimamoto. His realisations express that though individuals can continue discovering things about themselves and others, it is impossible to ever develop a true understanding of a person. The more people discover about individuals, the more they realise they have to learn, contrasting to Guevara’s stance.

Though discovery and discovering can lead to new understandings, as demonstrated by Guevara’s The Motorcycle Diaries, this is not necessarily true in all cases, as suggested by Haruki Murakami’s South of the Border, West of the Sun. In comparing these two texts, it seems that physical and observational discoveries tend to lead to more concrete understandings, while emotional discoveries tend to lead the individual to introspectively question themselves. (Not sure about this last sentence… not really sure how to word it)

nay103's marked essay
Discoveries and discovering can offer new understanding and renewed perceptions of ourselves and others.

While the process of discovery leads to new understandings and renewed perspectives of ourselves and others, it can also lead an individual to question themselves and others, and thus have a less concrete understanding of people. I really, really like the position you've taken here. Che Guevara’s memoir, The Motorcycle Diaries, published in 1995, asserts that discovery allows new ideas about ourselves and others to be formed, while Haruki Murakami’s short novel, South of the Border, West of the Sun, published in 1992, suggests that discoveries do not necessarily lead to a better understanding of ourselves or others. While both texts grapple with the notion of discovery as being intertwined in the formation of values and perspectives, each text takes a different stance upon this idea.

Notice what I've highlighted in blue :). I used to use that word a lot as well because it's really just so useful, but when you can make a sine graph out of your intermittent use of a word, then your essay starts to sound... well... like a really bunched up sine graph.

I like your take on the prompt, it's a good thesis.

After your thesis though, you don't flow with the texts you're introducing. I.e., it's like there's distinct chunks of writing. There's Chunk A, where you write your thesis, and then there's Chunk B, where you write about the texts. It's best to have you're entire introduction seem like it's a Chunk in itself. It seems as if SofBWotS really reinforces your thesis, so you could lead on from your first sentence like...

 While the process of discovery leads to new understandings and renewed perspectives of ourselves and others, it can also lead an individual to question themselves and others, and thus have a less concrete understanding of people. Haruki Murakami’s short novel, South of the Border, West of the Sun explore this notion, suggesting that new knowledge can shake the foundations of our reality.

Now, obviously talking about the shaken foundations of reality sounds like you're a bit of a wanker, but do you see how I blended the sentences? Focus not on the content, but on the grammar and structure. It looks as if there's One Chunk. Then you'd really try and continue that Chunk with the other text etc. You could say.... "However, The Motorcycle Diaries positions discovery as more akin to development; something that pushes us forward and lends us greater understanding of the world".

And that would blend.

Now, I've said a lot of things for the purpose of learning, but the key thing I want you to take out of what I've just said about your introduction is: It should be One Chunk. Not two or three Chunks. And you can do this by grammar and structure alteration!


The Motorcycle Diaries documents Guevara’s travels through South America in forty-six diary entries over nine months. The personal nature of this form allows the reader to make deeper connections with Guevara, and experience the building up of discoveries as he does. Good, hits 'ways texts are composed/responded to' As Guevara’s diaries are sandwiched between a preface written by his daughter and an appendix written after he became a revolutionary, the reader is able to appreciate the impact of the new understandings Guevara has made on his journey and how they have affected his view of himself and others. The reader is able to see the juxtaposition between the “old” Guevara and the “enlightened” Guevara, emphasising that discovery can and does lead to new understandings and perceptions. Good! Hits the criteria. Structurally, the paragraph is very quick and to the point, but I see you have many paragraphs so I won't necessarily tell you off for it. I can definitely see what you're going for in this paragraph, and I do like the cut of your jib.

Murakami’s South of the Border, West of the Sun, concerns an everyday man named Hajime, and the relationships he forms throughout his life, most importantly the one he forms with his childhood crush, Shimamoto. While it is evident Hajime is heavily based on Murakami himself – they both share passions for music, literature and jazz bars, Murakami writes in a way that makes Hajime’s emotions seem detached. As the reader goes through the book, due to the paradoxical nature of the isolated first person narration, it is difficult to develop a better understanding of Hajime. Though they read his story, and discover what he goes through, they fail to make any substantial new understandings about him as a person.

Hmmm. It "feels" like you're sort of, telling facts, instead of exploring discovery. A small point, but I might talk more on this at the end of the essay.

Guevara’s diaries also suggest that smaller discoveries, once built up, can lead to significant insights of one’s character. This is primarily expressed when Guevara reflects upon his journey. For example, in the first entry, “so we understand each other,” Guevara refers to himself in the third person, saying, “the person who wrote these notes passed away the moment his feet touched Argentine soil. The person who also re-organises them and polishes them, me, is no longer, at least I’m not the person I once was. This third person narration creates a distance between the reader and the pre-journey Guevara, while the first person narration in the second sentence creates a sense of intimacy between the reader and the post-journey Guevara cool, cool!. This accentuates the differences between the two Guevaras, which is only emphasised through the metaphorical death he describes I *really* appreciate and like this folllow up sentence. Follow up sentences of this nature... they good. they cool. they fresh.. His discoveries on his journey have not only caused him to change his values and the way he views himself, but have resulted in a “rebirth” for him as well.

Guevara’s notion that discovering and discoveries always lead to a better understanding of self is subverted in Murakami’s work. He asserts that discoveries about one’s self and others leads to another revelation, where the individual realises how little they actually know. For example, despite the regular meetings Shimamoto and Hajime have, he says, “The most I can say about you was how you were at the age of twelve. Other than what I knew about you then, I’m in the dark.” He does not feel he understands her any better than before, though he has learnt more about her through their frequent conversations. It is also evident that Hajime feels he has not learnt more about himself, as his relationship with Shimamoto is a reflection of his relationship with himself, as indicated by, “Nothing is written in your eyes. It’s written in my eyes. I just see the reflection in yours.” The successive short sentences create a sense of resignation love it, that Hajime has finally conceded he really doesn’t know himself or Shimamoto. His realisations express that though individuals can continue discovering things about themselves and others, it is impossible to ever develop a true understanding of a person. The more people discover about individuals, the more they realise they have to learn, contrasting to Guevara’s stance.Mmmhmm, mhmmm. Mmkay, kewl kewl.

Though discovery and discovering can lead to new understandings, as demonstrated by Guevara’s The Motorcycle Diaries, this is not necessarily true in all cases, as suggested by Haruki Murakami’s South of the Border, West of the Sun. In comparing these two texts, it seems that physical and observational discoveries tend to lead to more concrete understandings, while emotional discoveries tend to lead the individual to introspectively question themselves. (Not sure about this last sentence… not really sure how to word it)

Yeah I see what you mean about the last sentence. You mean this:

In comparing these two texts, it seems that discoveries of an empirical, tangible nature lead to more concrete understandings, whereas emotional discoveries (or even 'interpersonal' discoveries?) only make an individual's firm sense of self more distant and more complex.

I think that's what you mean at least, it was just a tiny bit of awkward grammar. (Even my sentence is a bit awkward - it's some tough meaning to convey).

Also, I do feel as if you perhaps compared the texts it too much of a detached way without really exploring your thesis and the nature of discovery. I.e., you flicked in some techniques, some statements... But I feel as if your thesis has more depth to it than you showed in the essay.

The structure is smart for the comparative nature of the essays, with the A-B-A-B structure. I wonder if four paragraphs is stretching you too thing though and not allowing you to hit the right depth.

Regarding changing texts... Why did your teacher recommend that? I.e., what was the context?


✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

Happy Physics Land

  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
  • MAXIMISE your marks by MINIMISING your errors
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #78 on: February 11, 2016, 10:26:21 am »
Hey guys, thank you for doing advanced english essay marking! What a benevolent act this is! If anyone is available, would you kindly mind to mark my essay on the area of study discovery? Thank you very much guys I really appreciate it! :)
Mathematics: 96
Maths Extension 2: 93
Maths Extension 1: 97
English Advanced: 92
Physics: 95
Chemistry: 92
Engineering Studies: 90
Studies of Religion I: 98

2017 ATAR: 99.70
University of Sydney Civil Engineering and Commerce
University of Sydney Faculty of Civil Engineering Scholar
Student Representatives Council Student Housing Officer
City of Sydney Council Sydney Ambassador
University of Sydney Business School Student Mentor
Entrepreneur, Company of Year Junior Achievements Australia

nay103

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #79 on: February 12, 2016, 08:17:49 pm »
Hey nay,

Will definitely take a look!

nay103's unmarked essay for reference
While the process of discovery leads to new understandings and renewed perspectives of ourselves and others, it can also lead an individual to question themselves and others, and thus have a less concrete understanding of people. Che Guevara’s memoir, The Motorcycle Diaries, published in 1995, asserts that discovery allows new ideas about ourselves and others to be formed, while Haruki Murakami’s short novel, South of the Border, West of the Sun, published in 1992, suggests that discoveries do not necessarily lead to a better understanding of ourselves or others. While both texts grapple with the notion of discovery as being intertwined in the formation of values and perspectives, each text takes a different stance upon this idea.

The Motorcycle Diaries documents Guevara’s travels through South America in forty-six diary entries over nine months. The personal nature of this form allows the reader to make deeper connections with Guevara, and experience the building up of discoveries as he does. As Guevara’s diaries are sandwiched between a preface written by his daughter and an appendix written after he became a revolutionary, the reader is able to appreciate the impact of the new understandings Guevara has made on his journey and how they have affected his view of himself and others. The reader is able to see the juxtaposition between the “old” Guevara and the “enlightened” Guevara, emphasising that discovery can and does lead to new understandings and perceptions.

Murakami’s South of the Border, West of the Sun, concerns an everyday man named Hajime, and the relationships he forms throughout his life, most importantly the one he forms with his childhood crush, Shimamoto. While it is evident Hajime is heavily based on Murakami himself – they both share passions for music, literature and jazz bars, Murakami writes in a way that makes Hajime’s emotions seem detached. As the reader goes through the book, due to the paradoxical nature of the isolated first person narration, it is difficult to develop a better understanding of Hajime. Though they read his story, and discover what he goes through, they fail to make any substantial new understandings about him as a person.

Guevara’s diaries also suggest that smaller discoveries, once built up, can lead to significant insights of one’s character. This is primarily expressed when Guevara reflects upon his journey. For example, in the first entry, “so we understand each other,” Guevara refers to himself in the third person, saying, “the person who wrote these notes passed away the moment his feet touched Argentine soil. The person who also re-organises them and polishes them, me, is no longer, at least I’m not the person I once was. This third person narration creates a distance between the reader and the pre-journey Guevara, while the first person narration in the second sentence creates a sense of intimacy between the reader and the post-journey Guevara. This accentuates the differences between the two Guevaras, which is only emphasised through the metaphorical death he describes. His discoveries on his journey have not only caused him to change his values and the way he views himself, but have resulted in a “rebirth” for him as well.

Guevara’s notion that discovering and discoveries always lead to a better understanding of self is subverted in Murakami’s work. He asserts that discoveries about one’s self and others leads to another revelation, where the individual realises how little they actually know. For example, despite the regular meetings Shimamoto and Hajime have, he says, “The most I can say about you was how you were at the age of twelve. Other than what I knew about you then, I’m in the dark.” He does not feel he understands her any better than before, though he has learnt more about her through their frequent conversations. It is also evident that Hajime feels he has not learnt more about himself, as his relationship with Shimamoto is a reflection of his relationship with himself, as indicated by, “Nothing is written in your eyes. It’s written in my eyes. I just see the reflection in yours.” The successive short sentences create a sense of resignation, that Hajime has finally conceded he really doesn’t know himself or Shimamoto. His realisations express that though individuals can continue discovering things about themselves and others, it is impossible to ever develop a true understanding of a person. The more people discover about individuals, the more they realise they have to learn, contrasting to Guevara’s stance.

Though discovery and discovering can lead to new understandings, as demonstrated by Guevara’s The Motorcycle Diaries, this is not necessarily true in all cases, as suggested by Haruki Murakami’s South of the Border, West of the Sun. In comparing these two texts, it seems that physical and observational discoveries tend to lead to more concrete understandings, while emotional discoveries tend to lead the individual to introspectively question themselves. (Not sure about this last sentence… not really sure how to word it)

nay103's marked essay
Discoveries and discovering can offer new understanding and renewed perceptions of ourselves and others.

While the process of discovery leads to new understandings and renewed perspectives of ourselves and others, it can also lead an individual to question themselves and others, and thus have a less concrete understanding of people. I really, really like the position you've taken here. Che Guevara’s memoir, The Motorcycle Diaries, published in 1995, asserts that discovery allows new ideas about ourselves and others to be formed, while Haruki Murakami’s short novel, South of the Border, West of the Sun, published in 1992, suggests that discoveries do not necessarily lead to a better understanding of ourselves or others. While both texts grapple with the notion of discovery as being intertwined in the formation of values and perspectives, each text takes a different stance upon this idea.

Notice what I've highlighted in blue :). I used to use that word a lot as well because it's really just so useful, but when you can make a sine graph out of your intermittent use of a word, then your essay starts to sound... well... like a really bunched up sine graph.

I like your take on the prompt, it's a good thesis.

After your thesis though, you don't flow with the texts you're introducing. I.e., it's like there's distinct chunks of writing. There's Chunk A, where you write your thesis, and then there's Chunk B, where you write about the texts. It's best to have you're entire introduction seem like it's a Chunk in itself. It seems as if SofBWotS really reinforces your thesis, so you could lead on from your first sentence like...

 While the process of discovery leads to new understandings and renewed perspectives of ourselves and others, it can also lead an individual to question themselves and others, and thus have a less concrete understanding of people. Haruki Murakami’s short novel, South of the Border, West of the Sun explore this notion, suggesting that new knowledge can shake the foundations of our reality.

Now, obviously talking about the shaken foundations of reality sounds like you're a bit of a wanker, but do you see how I blended the sentences? Focus not on the content, but on the grammar and structure. It looks as if there's One Chunk. Then you'd really try and continue that Chunk with the other text etc. You could say.... "However, The Motorcycle Diaries positions discovery as more akin to development; something that pushes us forward and lends us greater understanding of the world".

And that would blend.

Now, I've said a lot of things for the purpose of learning, but the key thing I want you to take out of what I've just said about your introduction is: It should be One Chunk. Not two or three Chunks. And you can do this by grammar and structure alteration!


The Motorcycle Diaries documents Guevara’s travels through South America in forty-six diary entries over nine months. The personal nature of this form allows the reader to make deeper connections with Guevara, and experience the building up of discoveries as he does. Good, hits 'ways texts are composed/responded to' As Guevara’s diaries are sandwiched between a preface written by his daughter and an appendix written after he became a revolutionary, the reader is able to appreciate the impact of the new understandings Guevara has made on his journey and how they have affected his view of himself and others. The reader is able to see the juxtaposition between the “old” Guevara and the “enlightened” Guevara, emphasising that discovery can and does lead to new understandings and perceptions. Good! Hits the criteria. Structurally, the paragraph is very quick and to the point, but I see you have many paragraphs so I won't necessarily tell you off for it. I can definitely see what you're going for in this paragraph, and I do like the cut of your jib.

Murakami’s South of the Border, West of the Sun, concerns an everyday man named Hajime, and the relationships he forms throughout his life, most importantly the one he forms with his childhood crush, Shimamoto. While it is evident Hajime is heavily based on Murakami himself – they both share passions for music, literature and jazz bars, Murakami writes in a way that makes Hajime’s emotions seem detached. As the reader goes through the book, due to the paradoxical nature of the isolated first person narration, it is difficult to develop a better understanding of Hajime. Though they read his story, and discover what he goes through, they fail to make any substantial new understandings about him as a person.

Hmmm. It "feels" like you're sort of, telling facts, instead of exploring discovery. A small point, but I might talk more on this at the end of the essay.

Guevara’s diaries also suggest that smaller discoveries, once built up, can lead to significant insights of one’s character. This is primarily expressed when Guevara reflects upon his journey. For example, in the first entry, “so we understand each other,” Guevara refers to himself in the third person, saying, “the person who wrote these notes passed away the moment his feet touched Argentine soil. The person who also re-organises them and polishes them, me, is no longer, at least I’m not the person I once was. This third person narration creates a distance between the reader and the pre-journey Guevara, while the first person narration in the second sentence creates a sense of intimacy between the reader and the post-journey Guevara cool, cool!. This accentuates the differences between the two Guevaras, which is only emphasised through the metaphorical death he describes I *really* appreciate and like this folllow up sentence. Follow up sentences of this nature... they good. they cool. they fresh.. His discoveries on his journey have not only caused him to change his values and the way he views himself, but have resulted in a “rebirth” for him as well.

Guevara’s notion that discovering and discoveries always lead to a better understanding of self is subverted in Murakami’s work. He asserts that discoveries about one’s self and others leads to another revelation, where the individual realises how little they actually know. For example, despite the regular meetings Shimamoto and Hajime have, he says, “The most I can say about you was how you were at the age of twelve. Other than what I knew about you then, I’m in the dark.” He does not feel he understands her any better than before, though he has learnt more about her through their frequent conversations. It is also evident that Hajime feels he has not learnt more about himself, as his relationship with Shimamoto is a reflection of his relationship with himself, as indicated by, “Nothing is written in your eyes. It’s written in my eyes. I just see the reflection in yours.” The successive short sentences create a sense of resignation love it, that Hajime has finally conceded he really doesn’t know himself or Shimamoto. His realisations express that though individuals can continue discovering things about themselves and others, it is impossible to ever develop a true understanding of a person. The more people discover about individuals, the more they realise they have to learn, contrasting to Guevara’s stance.Mmmhmm, mhmmm. Mmkay, kewl kewl.

Though discovery and discovering can lead to new understandings, as demonstrated by Guevara’s The Motorcycle Diaries, this is not necessarily true in all cases, as suggested by Haruki Murakami’s South of the Border, West of the Sun. In comparing these two texts, it seems that physical and observational discoveries tend to lead to more concrete understandings, while emotional discoveries tend to lead the individual to introspectively question themselves. (Not sure about this last sentence… not really sure how to word it)

Yeah I see what you mean about the last sentence. You mean this:

In comparing these two texts, it seems that discoveries of an empirical, tangible nature lead to more concrete understandings, whereas emotional discoveries (or even 'interpersonal' discoveries?) only make an individual's firm sense of self more distant and more complex.

I think that's what you mean at least, it was just a tiny bit of awkward grammar. (Even my sentence is a bit awkward - it's some tough meaning to convey).

Also, I do feel as if you perhaps compared the texts it too much of a detached way without really exploring your thesis and the nature of discovery. I.e., you flicked in some techniques, some statements... But I feel as if your thesis has more depth to it than you showed in the essay.

The structure is smart for the comparative nature of the essays, with the A-B-A-B structure. I wonder if four paragraphs is stretching you too thing though and not allowing you to hit the right depth.

Regarding changing texts... Why did your teacher recommend that? I.e., what was the context?



Hey,

Thanks! That was really constructive. Would you be happy to look at a fixed essay once I get around to that?
My teacher said to change texts because the book seems to offer a notion of discovery that is "too ambiguous." I don't really see a problem with it - perhaps it even emphasises the nature of emotional discovery - but do you think I should listen to her?
HSC 2016: Subjects:
| English Advanced | English Extension 1 | Mathematics Extension I | Mathematics Extension 2 | Legal Studies | Physics | Heritage Japanese |

2015:
| Mind and Morality |

MemeKing

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • School: James Ruse
  • School Grad Year: 2016
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #80 on: February 13, 2016, 01:13:04 pm »
Hey! -  I tried to fix some things before from the feedback mentioned.  This is my 2 body paragraphs so far and one related paragraph that relates with the "Identity" paragraph.  Thank you!  :)


Body 1:  Hurley

The mutability of truth renders discovery pivotal in order for us to appreciate otherwise ephemeral aspects of value.  The subjective feature of truth is confronted in the composite nature of Hurley’s work.  The notion that Hurley’s photographs are “amongst the most valuable ever taken” is a perspective that Nasht attempts to convey to his contemporary audience in Frank Hurley in order for us to discover aspects of value in his work that have been blurred by the ambiguity of truth.  Hurley’s “concoctions” lie in him seeing “a gulf between what he saw and what he captured” and thus provokes his transition into being a “master of illusions”.  Hurley’s “outright fakes” were attempted to be reconciled through Nasht’s quadtriptychs that endeavored to justify Hurley’s “dalliance with the truth”.  This juxtaposition was edited through the documentary in order to demonstrate that by discovering Hurley’s intention behind these “grand illusions”, could we then appreciate otherwise lost aspects of value.  Nasht’s then evocative zoom into the cyclical auction house emphasizing the “$100,000” portrays the value of his “forgotten work” that had now proved to be popular “in a world searching for hero’s”.  Nasht critiques the momentum of time that renders Hurley’s works “fake”, and thus conveys that only through discovery can we appreciate Hurley’s “grand illusions”.


Body 2:  Hurley

Man’s continual pursuit for discovery manifests the irony regarding human identity, allowing individuals to transcend their failures through art.  Throughout Frank Hurley, Nasht portrays Hurley’s intellectual discoveries that ultimately catalyses his ability to perpetuate a desired self-image.  This provokes the need to transcend himself past a “mere photographer,” utilizing his “elaborate concoctions” in order to attain a nirvana in which his fallacy of a “grand illusionist” may be adhered to.  As Hurley discovered, he realized he could not “capture his works on a single frame”, the frustrated tone of the narrator resonates with Hurley’s inherent failures that provokes him to seek alternative methods to let his work be known.  Through this journey of self-discovery, Nasht portrays Hurley as a “tireless photographer” that sees his intellectual inability lead him through “drinking melting ice” and “eating raw seal meat” that conveys his seemingly endless journeys in attempting to discover what may make his work timeless.  Nasht then reconciles the ephemeral existence of Hurley’s photographers through the title of “an inventor”, stating how Hurley is going to “make the photographers”.  Nasht engages this with a montage of composite images in order to portray Hurley’s affiliation as an “inventor”, emphasizing his ability to transcend himself through “manipulations”.  Although plagued by the momentum of time, Nasht demonstrates how Hurley’s intellectual discoveries can redefine his existence and transcend Hurley’s inherent inadequacies through art.



Body 3:  Black Swan [Relating Hurley’s Body 2]

Discovering the desire for perfection examines the duality in human identity, implying that insanity is possible in a search for perfection, even death.  Aronofsky depicts man’s continual pursuit for discovery in Black Swan through the protagonist Nina’s transcendence into the “black swan” that leads her to surpass her failures.  Nina’s goal is to dance both the roles of the “white” and “black” swan however she does not possess the “dark passion” required to “balance the opposing characters of good and evil”.  In the light of this discovery, Aronofsky portrays the dichotomy of black and white in the film as a reoccurring motif that demonstrates the “corruption” slowly delving into the protagonists mind leading her further into insanity.  The illusion that Nina experienced pulling a “feather” from her skin depicts her evolution as the metaphor portrays her transcendence to the “darkness” she needed for the “black swan”.  Much like Hurley’s ability to transcend himself through his “elaborate concoctions”, Nina is finally able to transcend herself in the final scene as she “bleeds black”, “killing herself” onstage in attempts to achieve “perfection”.  Through this scene, Aronofsky conveys that darkness was a cost from the plight for perfection that concluded with “suicidal death” and that Nina the “White swan” was metaphorically “set free” the more she discovered the “shadow within”.  Hence, both Nasht’s and Aronofsky’s texts mutually explore the irony of human identity, portraying man’s pursuit to transcend their failures through art.





summerxyingshi

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • School: St Ursula's College Kingsgrove
  • School Grad Year: 2016
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #81 on: February 15, 2016, 03:53:08 pm »
Hi,
I was wondering if you would be able to give me some feedback on my essay on The Crucible. The essay is just on The Crucible.

Thank you :)

literally lauren

  • Administrator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1699
  • Resident English/Lit Nerd
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #82 on: February 16, 2016, 03:46:15 pm »
Hope ya'll don't mind this VCE-er crashing your thread to scrawl in red all over your essays :3

Hey guys, thank you for doing advanced english essay marking! What a benevolent act this is! If anyone is available, would you kindly mind to mark my essay on the area of study discovery? Thank you very much guys I really appreciate it! :)
Tis the least we can do for those aboard the AN bandwagon, especially people as helpful as yourself.
Comments in the spoiler :)
Spoiler
“Discovery can affirm or challenge societal assumptions and beliefs about aspects of human experience and the world” How does this quote represent your own understanding of discovery? In your response, make detailed reference to your prescribed text and at least ONE other related text of your choosing.

Discovery – necessarily involving the overcoming of obstacles and recognition to greater human potentials –often challenges popular social assumptions through renewed perceptions towards the reality of remote circumstances and confronting human experiences. excellent opening sentence. This notion is explored in Simon Nasht’s documentary Frank Hurley: the Man who Made History (2004). This documentary which illustrates the magnificence and danger of Antarctica and the atrocity of World War I, hence depicting an alternative reality of these events for a contemporary audience. Similarly, Markus Zusak’s novel The Messenger I approve of this choice :D Awesome book (2002) affirms the social expectations singular, since I believe you're just talking about the one here(?) that for teenagers, life can be unfulfilling but through determined actions and self-actualisation, expectation as in, our own expepctations? Or societal expectations? You could afford to be more specific here can be challenged and become more realistic. Overall, strong intro, and you've forged a decent link between the set texts.

Hurley’s far-reaching human <--bit redundant experience during the Shackleton Expedition challenges the society’s assumption of Antarctica being an unknown, lifeless and barren land through illustrating the continent’s magnificent force of nature. Excellent topic sentence. These paradigms are challenged synonym? This is the kind of word that's likely to come up often, so having some alternatives up your sleeve would be useful through Hurley’s iconic composite photography, stimulating new worlds and possibilities. The Shackleton voyage took place between 1914 and 1917 with the intention to cross Antarctica from pole to pole. The Polar historian, Steve Martin’s description of the exploration through the biblical imagery “place of the gods is taken … incredible forces of nature” depicts both the transcendent nature of the discovery which challenges the societal perception of Antarctica as a land of emptiness and insignificance. As an outcome of the Shackleton Voyage, Hurley reaches an epiphany and discovers that the extreme weather of Antarctica, the force of nature and his human encounters constitute to expression(??) Are you trying to say that these things combine to form valuable parts of his photography? If so, 'constitute' doesn't really fit the sentence here. If not, I'm not sure what you're saying exactly valuable components of his photography. This idea is expressed through Hurley’s metaphorical celebration of “something that was gold dust” which reflects the unexpected discovery of the fascinating world around him. So how do you know this discovery is valuable to him based on that quote? The connection might be obvious to you, but being even more explicit would be really good here (i.e. the fact that 'gold dust' implies fine, intrinsic value, etc.) Moreover, during the emotional interview with the daughters, the close-up shot of their mourning expression and the sobbing tone “how they found a place to camp is beyond me” this quote isn't really integrated properly. If I were to take out the quotation marks here, it wouldn't really be grammatical, which tells you that you need to do more to make this fir challenges the society’s unless you're going to specify a society (eg. 1970's America; contemporary Australia, the middle ages, etc.) it'd be better to just say 'society' in general assumption that mankind cannot exist in Antarctica and endure under such a harsh environment. Overall, the documentary presents confronting experiences unveiling the timeless interaction between mankind and nature and how there is usually a re-evaluation of societal assumptions for a modern audience.
This is really nit-picky, but this sentence isn't really grammatical even though I know exactly what you're saying. Basically, we've got two core points here, and if we reverse the order, you'll see why they don't quite fit:
1. The documentary presents confronting experiences unveiling the link between mankind and nature, and how there is usually a revaluation of assumptions. (~simplifying a bit here)
2. The documentary presents how there is usually a revaluation of assumptions and confronting experiences unveiling the link between mankind and nature. ???

If this sentence were grammatical, I should be able to swap these components around, and everything would be fine. See:
1. The documentary suggests that art is really cool, and that the audience should take up painting.
2. The documentary suggests that the audience should take up painting, and that art is really cool.

But because you've got the verb 'presents' here, which doesn't quite gel with the second constituent ('how there is usually a revaluation...') it makes the whole things sound just a little bit off.

Admittedly it's the kind of thing most assessors would just ignore and skim over, but tidying up these little syntactic inconsistencies can make a difference to your quality of writing overall.


The personal and historical ramifications of Hurley’s emotional and psychological try not to split hairs unecessarily; your first divide: 'personal and historical' is valid, but this second one is a tad redundant. Is there a difference between an emotional disclosure and a psychological one? disclosure of life’s fragility during World War I offered a transformed societal perception towards the recording of human atrocity. An example of these ramifications is revealed through Hurley’s daunting simile when he describes how the war isIt’s like passing through the Valley of Death for no-one knows when the shell will lob”. <-- notice how I've integrated that quote now such that if you removed the quotation marks, it'd still fit the sentence? This in conjunction with the photographs of dead mutilated soldier in mud presents the devastating nature of war and consequences of human destruction. Hereby Hence, 1900s society’s the society of the 1900s' perception of war as a glorious event of courage? is effectively subverted. The emotional and psychological discoveries have led lead to the transformation within Hurley, from an objective war correspondent to an artist who desires to convey his understanding of the heroism within the soldiers when facing the devastation of war. The unbearable circumstance he disclosed for himself, expression - I'm not sure what you mean by 'disclosed' in this context? as illustrated through the frightening military imagery of there being a body “every twenty paces or less lay a body … covered with mud and slime” which has generated his intention to transcend the limitation of shots and create photographs. Consequently, through incorporating an extreme long shot to depict the vulnerability of the soldiers who are exposed under the attack of the planes, Hurley’s composite photograph portrays the soldiers’ courage in wars despite the observed danger. This effectively promotes a sense of heroism within them which cannot be achieved through factual photographs. Therefore, the power of composite imageries to illustrate the horrors of war challenges the importance of an objective analysis, signifying the importance of a subjective perspective to heighten the atrocity of war and confront the 1900s cultural belief of war as glorious. Freakin' awesome paragraph closer - there's not a thing about this I would change; you've done a great job zooming out after successfully building up your evidence over the previous sentences - great job!

Similarly, in The Messenger (2002), the protagonist Ed Kennedy subverts society’s assumptions towards underachieving teenagers through his transformative self-actualisation after accomplishing a series of confronting physical disclosures okay, this word definitely doesn't fit here. What exactly are you referring to? Physical tasks/challenges?. This is illustrated through the juxtaposition between in the representations of Ed in the establishing and final chapter. Preliminarily, Ed is displayed as an incompetent teenager whose doomed life simply involves cab driving and card games through the truncated sentences “No real career. No respect in the community. Nothing”. The repetition of “no” depicts a sense of hollowness in Ed’s life and affirms the assumption that real occupational world can be unfulfilling. EXCELLENT! You've got some quotes and metalanguage to describe what's going on in the text, but more impressively, you've been able to link this up with the intended meaning and overall significance!!! This is one of the best examples of this I've seen in an essay, and I've read a lot of essays :P Well done! However, his commencement on the Ace of Diamonds okay, I know what you're referring to because I've read the text, but if you said this to someone who hadn't you could understand how they might be confused. I think it's worth having maybe half a sentence of explanation about the significance of the different cards and notes just so your reader doesn't get lost here has led leads to discoveries of his hidden potentials, such as his ability to deal with the dilemma on the Edgar Street, heal people’s scars with happiness and encourage others to achieve beyond their abilities. In addition, Ed’s alternative method to punish the rapist instead of killing him is a spiritual landmark significant indicative of Ed’s enlightenment. The symbolism of the trigger in the quote “A moment of peace shatters me and I pull the trigger” represents Ed’s transition from a mundane, 19-years-old taxi driver to a hero who is ambitious, helpful and competent. In the last chapter of The Messenger, the spiritually meaningful outcomes have led Ed into becoming to become (though the expression is a bit simple here; instead of 'led to become,' consider something like 'engenders' or 'induces him to become...') a totally different person. Through the short but powerful closing sentence “I am not the messenger. I am the message”, Ed challenges for a popular-culture audience the society’s ignorance towards underachieving teenagers should be more like 'Ed challenges the ignorance of popular culture and society towards underachieving teenagers' by revealing his power to positively impact upon other’s lives and his capability to achieve beyond his potential. Overall, try not to overuse this as a paragraph conclusion; there are lots of other linking words like 'thus...' and 'ultimately' which would also work here through Ed’s contributive achievements either 'contributions' or 'achievements' would be fine here which are outcomes of his renewed understanding of his values, societal assumptions towards human experiences are effectively challenged.

Overall see above, both texts effectively portray the immense power of discovery to transform an individual’s perception towards social beliefs about human experience and the world. Through Frank Hurley: The Man who Made History, contemporary responders are enlightened with Hurley’s passion as an artistic photographer and this challenges societal beliefs about these composite imageries as being merely commodities. Similarly, the ramifications of Ed’s unexpected self-discovery in The Messenger has significantly transformed his life and confronted societal assumptions towards underachieving teenagers. good, functional conclusion, but I think there's room for you to do more than just sum up your points here. Ultimately, you're not going to lose marks for ending on a note like this, but you're not going to be gaining any marks either, so it's kind of a missed opportunity. Instead, try to zoom out and say something about the nature of discovery using both of these texts as your springboard, so that you can end by looking at discover as a whole, rather than relating the prompt to both texts in isolation.

So, to sum up, there are some really standout moments of top quality analysis here, and you've clearly got a lot of confidence in talking about the texts.

I think you could certainly work on your comparative skills though; dealing with the texts in their own paragraphs is perfectly fine, and it means you can explore relevant ideas without having to constantly flip back and forth between each one, but if you never talk about them together until the final bit of the conclusion, it makes it seem as though there aren't many viable links between them.

This actually ties in with a bigger point about argumentation. You've argued a lot of awesome points about the connection between Hurley and the idea of discovery, but when dealing with 'The Messenger,' you seem to conclude on the idea of societal expectations as they pertain to teenagers/underachievers which, whilst valid, is a little bit limiting and doesn't really showcase your or the text's potential. Spending some time just forging links between your two texts and then building out to ideas about discovery would be really valuable, I think.

Look at it like this - if the aim of your discovery module is to serve me up a delicious chocolate cake, and you serve me up one plain vanilla sponge cake on one plate and a big block of chocolate on the other... I'm not going to be too happy. I mean, I'll eat them both... but it'll be under duress  >:(

Instead, you should be aiming to produce an outcome which would not be possible with just some ingredients on their own. You can't make a chocolate cake with the ingredients for a vanilla sponge, nor can you make it with a block of chocolate alone. Your arguments about discovery should be like chocolate cake, and you need to combine BOTH texts to reach this goal.

So, if you're following my metaphor, what you've got at the moment is three paragraphs worth of delicious sponge cake, and one paragraph of tempting chocolate, but it's that final challenge of combination that you'll now have to reckon with. Don't compromise the quality of your analysis though, because that's clearly a strong point for you. But perhaps see if you could integrate a bit of each text into every paragraph, or at least have one of your bodies exploring some connections in more detail. That way, you'll be able to 'zoom out' and say things about discovery that wouldn't have otherwise been possible without the input of both textual reference points.

Other than that, really awesome job so far. Good luck with it all!

Hey,

Thanks! That was really constructive. Would you be happy to look at a fixed essay once I get around to that?
My teacher said to change texts because the book seems to offer a notion of discovery that is "too ambiguous." I don't really see a problem with it - perhaps it even emphasises the nature of emotional discovery - but do you think I should listen to her?
Hey man, feel free to post redrafts and other essays here! There'll always be someone happy to help out. :)

With regards to changing your texts, I'd definitely consult with your teacher further and see if she reckons your text is the kind of one you just need to deal with very carefully to make sure you're bringing those 'ambiguities' to the surface and explaining them clearly, or whether she thinks it's one that's better ditched and left alone because it'd be too much work.

I'm with you in that it seems to suit your discussion well and sheds some slightly different light on what would otherwise be a fairly straightforward discussion of certain facets of discovery, but perhaps this is your teacher's way of telling you 'you're going to have a tough time this year dealing with certain prompts and ideas,' so I'd probably give more credence to her opinion than mine :P Did you have any other texts in mind, or are there any particular texts you might consider? Ideally you'll be able to find one that deals with similar ideas in a less ambiguous way. Let me know what you're looking for and I might be able to suggest some.


@MemeKing, feedback below:
Spoiler
Body 1:  Hurley

The mutability of truth renders 'means that' or 'makes' would be more accurate here. You've got enough complex words going on in this sentence, and 'renders' is not quite right (-it tends to be used in the context of 'eliminating all other options,' as in, 'My ATAR rendered me unable to attend university.' It's kind of like the verb 'left,' as in, 'She was left/rendered crying by the phone waiting for it to ring' if that makes sense?) discovery pivotal in order for us to appreciate otherwise ephemeral aspects of value.  The subjective feature of truth is confronted in the composite nature of Hurley’s work.  The notion that Hurley’s photographs are “amongst the most valuable ever taken” is a perspective that Nasht attempts to convey to his contemporary audience in Frank Hurley in order for us to discover aspects of value in his work that have been blurred by the ambiguity of truth.  Hurley’s “concoctions” lie in him seeing “a gulf between what he saw and what he captured” and thus provokes his transition into being a “master of illusions”.  Hurley’s “outright fakes” were attempted to be reconciled expression - this makes it sound like the fakes were trying to reconcile themselves ??? through Nasht’s quadtriptychs that endeavored to justify So this sentence is saying Hurley's fakes were reconciled through the quadtriptychs that tried to justify his "dalliance"? I'm a little lost here; what is the textual evidence demonstrating, exactly. At the moment, you're cramming a bit too much information into these sentences Hurley’s “dalliance with the truth”.  This juxtaposition was is --keep a consistent present tense when talking about things the author/director does edited through the documentary in order to demonstrate that by discovering Hurley’s intention behind these “grand illusions”, could we could then appreciate otherwise lost aspects of value.  Nasht’s then evocative zoom into the cyclical auction house emphasizing the “$100,000” portrays the value of his “forgotten work” that had now proved to be popular “in a world searching for hero’s no apostrophe here”. Thus, Nasht critiques the momentum of time expression that renders Hurley’s works “fake”, and thus conveys that only through discovery can we appreciate Hurley’s “grand illusions”.

Body 2:  Hurley

Man’s continual pursuit for discovery manifests brings about? not sure what you're going for here the irony regarding human identity, allowing individuals to transcend their failures through art.  Throughout Frank Hurley, Nasht portrays Hurley’s intellectual discoveries that ultimately catalyses his ability to perpetuate a desired self-image.  This provokes the need to transcend himself past a “mere photographer,” utilizing his “elaborate concoctions” in order to attain a nirvana in which his fallacy of a “grand illusionist” may be adhered to.  As Hurley discovered, he realized he could not “capture his works on a single frame”, and the frustrated tone of the narrator resonates with Hurley’s inherent failures that provokes him to seek alternative methods to let his work be known.  Through this journey of self-discovery, Nasht portrays Hurley as a “tireless photographer” that sees his intellectual inability lead him through “drinking melting ice” and “eating raw seal meat” that slight repetition in sentence structure within this point conveys his seemingly endless journeys in attempting to discover what may make his work timeless. some great analysis going on here; this is much improved from your earlier drafts :) Nasht then reconciles the ephemeral existence of Hurley’s photographers through the title of “an inventor”, stating how Hurley is going to “make the photographers”.  Nasht engages this with a montage of composite images in order to portray Hurley’s affiliation as an “inventor”, emphasizing his ability to transcend himself through “manipulations”.  Although plagued by the momentum of time, Nasht demonstrates how Hurley’s intellectual discoveries can redefine his existence and transcend Hurley’s inherent inadequacies through art. V. good paragraph; watch out for expression errors, but other than that, good use of evidence.

Body 3:  Black Swan [Relating Hurley’s Body 2]

Discovering the desire for perfection examines involves an examination of the duality in human identity, implying that insanity is possible in a search for perfection, even death why does this imply insanity and death are possible? I'm not following the logic here.  Aronofsky depicts man’s continual pursuit for discovery in Black Swan through the protagonist Nina’s transcendence into the “black swan” that leads her to surpass her failures.  Nina’s goal is to dance both the roles of the “white” and “black” swan however she does not possess the “dark passion” required to “balance the opposing characters of good and evil”.  In the light of this discovery, Aronofsky portrays the dichotomy of black and white in the film as a reoccurring motif that demonstrates the “corruption” slowly delving into the protagonists mind leading her further into insanity.  The illusion that Nina experienced pulling a “feather” from her skin depicts her evolution as the metaphor portrays her transcendence to the “darkness” she needed for the “black swan”.  Much like Hurley’s ability to transcend himself through his “elaborate concoctions”, Nina is finally able to transcend herself I love that there's an overt connection between the texts here, but to 'transcend oneself' isn't really the most accurate way to phrase this in the context of the plot in the final scene as she “bleeds black”, “killing herself” onstage in attempts an attempt to achieve “perfection”.  Through this scene, Aronofsky conveys that darkness was a cost from the plight for perfection that concluded with “suicidal death” and that Nina the “White swan” was metaphorically “set free” the more she discovered the “shadow within”.  Hence, both Nasht’s and Aronofsky’s texts mutually explore the irony of human identity, portraying man’s pursuit to transcend their failures through art. Excellent para conclusion!

There's so much improvement here from your earlier pieces; the connection between evidence and ideas is way stronger, and it seems like there's greater clarity in your understanding of the set text, so well done. There were a few moments where your expression impeded clarity a bit and I couldn't quite work out what you were insinuating, so just keep an eye on your word choices (but again, keep varying your vocab so you can uncover these concerns - they're already getting less frequent, which is also a sign of improvement) & make sure you're not repeating vocab or sentence structures too much.

Let us know if you have any further questions! :)

@summerxyingshi, feedback below:
Spoiler
What are the individual political perspectives, ideas, events or situations of the community? How are these represented?
In your response examine context, characterisation, theme, the process of analogy and allusion, motif, tone, structure, language, the use of drama as a political instrument. In your response, refer to The Crucible.


Political consequences can occur as a result of individuals pursuing their own ideology in a confining theological society. V. good opening sentence. You're talking about abstract ideas, but you're still doing so in a way that hints at the key notions in the prompt, which is awesome! This is represented in Arthur Miller’s 1953 drama, The Crucible which recounts the political event of the 17th Century Salem Witch Hunts. Miller uses the allegory of the town of Salem to criticise the 1950s, <-- no comma needed here American McCarthyism trials whereby individuals feared (keep the tense consistent; you're talking about an event in the '50s, so it's pretty safe to use past tense) blinded the people’s true intentions and morals.

The Crucible portrays through the Salem witch trials, that Okay, idea-wise, I get what you're conveying, but the sentence structure is a little bit weird here. First of all, the word 'portrays' is a great one for describing how an author presents evidence (e.g. 'Miller portrays the damage of Abigail's lies' or 'The playwright portrays the hysteria of the town') but you can't really use it in the context of portraying a message (e.g. 'Miller portrays that Abigail is a liar' or 'The playwright portrays that the town is hysterical' ~~both of those sound a little clunky.) If those last two sound okay to you, it's probably because your use of the word 'portrays' isn't quite aligned with the correct grammatical use of the word. To give you a clearer example of why this sounds odd, think of a word like 'argues.' You can say 'Miller argues that hysteria can be damaging,' but you can't say 'Miller argues the damage of hysteria' - it just doesn't sound right with that verb choice.
The other thing you've done here is split the sentence a bit, which can work well in some contexts, but isn't ideal in a topic sentence where you want to be prioritising clarity. So instead of saying (The author argues) (through this piece of evidence) (that this idea is true,) you instead want to get that middle bit outside the core of the sentence, and have it either at the beginning, like so: (Through this piece of evidence,) (the author argues) (this idea to be true) or at the end, as in: (The author argues) (this idea to be true,) (as seen in this piece of evidence.) To take the first one as an example, that would give us something more like 'Through the frenzy of the Salem witch trials, Miller suggests that mass hysteria can skew... etc.' Make sense? :)
mass hysteria can skew an individual’s morals furthering political instability. Abigail, the antagonist, repetitively really minor thing, but 'repetitively' kind of means 'repeating something so often it becomes irritating,' as in, 'he repetitively asked me to buy him Maccas for lunch' whereas 'repeatedly' means 'doing something multiple times,' and it's this second definition that seems to fit the context better here claims that “I (she) when modifying quotes, the three rules you have to abide by are:
a) make the grammar of the quote fit your sentence (which you've kind of done)
b) use square brackets to insert any words you need (which you've kind of done - just need to be squarer :P)
and
c) delete any words that need replacing.
So rather than saying 'she claims that "I [she] saw" something' --> you can instead just say --> 'she claims that "[she] saw" something,' which is way more grammatical than doubling up on pronouns by adding information but not deleting any
saw…” you should probably fill in the blank here, even if you're not quoting. What is it that Abigail says she saw, exactly? (I know, and your teacher likely knows too, but you have to demonstrate that knowledge to the both of us), emphasising her blatant lying and rejection of Puritan morals. The hysterical fear of witches and supernatural events existing in Salem perpetuates Abigail’s lies, debunking Salem’s justice system demonstrated through the ironic stage direction ironic in what way? I like that you're going from an argumentative point about the thematic notion of hysteria into a discussion of evidence, but the link need to be a bit clearer here of Abigail’s “Ecstatic cries” as she condemns innocent people. This mirrors American 1950s McCarthyism, where suspected communists were blacklisted unless they named other people guilty of communistic views. As the curtain falls, morally strong-minded Rebecca Nurse is left alone on stage illustrating the moral weaknesses of other characters being swept up in the mass hallucination. Thus, highlighting SLIGHT TANGENT HERE --If you'll indulge this nerdy linguist for just a moment... what you've got here is an incomplete sentence, or more specifically, a FRAGMENTED SENTENCE

...but it's okay! We can fix it!! First, let me explain what this means.
Every sentence has to have a 'thing' it's focusing on (known as the 'topic' or main noun of the sentence,) and then a 'thing' that happens (known as the action or main verb of a sentence.) There can be other information too, but that stuff has to be there and it has to be in that exact order of 'noun thing' + 'verb action.' That's why I can say something like:
My uncle went to the shops
but not:
Went my uncle to the shops.

You can begin a sentence with a verb, but it won't be the main verb of a sentence. For example:
Following my recent fight with my friend, she decided to ditch me.
^See how the 'focus' of the sentence is that she decided to do something, not that it 'followed my recent fight with her?' That's because all the other stuff is just optional, additional info. The core of the sentence is that main topic+action combination.

If a sentence is missing either its topic or its action, it's not a complete sentence (i.e. = a fragmented sentence.)

Now let's look at what you've written:

'Thus highlighting how the disorder can affect the community.'
(I'm simplifying the last bit, but you get the idea.)
So now that this is taken out of context, you might already be able to see how it feels a bit incomplete. That's because we've got the main verb of the sentence, 'highlighting,' but there's no main noun or topic! :O
Compare this to:
- This highlights how the disorder can affect the community
- Thus, the playwright highlights how the disorder can affect the community
- By highlighting how the disorder can affect the community, the author suggests that instability is dangerous

^Now we've got some complete sentences.

But the pattern of writing a linking word (eg. 'Therefore...' 'Thus...' 'Hence...' etc.) and a verb (eg. 'suggesting...' 'implying...' 'highlighting...') at the start of sentences is a very common trap for students, so keep an eye out for these kinds of sentences so you can remind yourself to stick a 'topic' in there before the verb, or else reword the sentence to make it  more grammatical :)
how the mass psychogenic disorder pervading through the community can destabilise and corrupt the community.

<link to previous discussion?>The minority becomes scapegoats in order to satisfy a corrupt individual’s thirst for political power. Abigail, in a desperate attempt to escape suspicion for “call(ing) the Devil”, targets Tituba, who is unable to defend herself properly due to her cultural and language barriers, displayed in her syntactic the syntax of her dialogue “I don’t compact with no devil”. The double negative paradoxically has Tituba confessing to her crime and be ‘scapegoated’ by Abigail’s ‘snowballing’ of lies. Miller alludes to the communist hunt in 1950s America whereby power hungry individual’s <-- no apostrophe here attack the minority through accusations of communism to further their political power slight repetition here: 'power hungry people seek to further political power; hence power is transferred to power hungry people' :P Some synonyms would help a lot. Hence, power is wrongly transferred word check - what do you mean by 'transferred?' Where is it transferred from? Who is transferring it? Not sure this is the right word to describe this concept to power hungry individuals with no interest for the community, causing justice to be manipulated and distorted. 

Political tension can cause domestic suffering and household politics to be altered. see above regarding linking paragraphs The setting of John’s house “is the low, dark, and rather long living- room of time”. The lighting of the Proctor household displays the tension present, reinforcing the diminishing of John’s power to maintain domestic peace. Good stuff! The fear of witches in Salem, no comma here inflicts pressure on John and with the tension present in the Proctor household resulting in his angry outburst that he “comes into court when I (he) comes home.” The metaphor you need to explain this metaphor further. What does he mean when he says he 'comes into court' - what does this metaphorically represent? Again, I know what you're referring to, but I'm not meant to do any of the work here :) Spell it out within your essay, and then I/your assessor will have no choice but to give you marks demonstrates the degradation of love and trust within the household as well as emotional suffering.  This is directly linked to America’s McCarthyism, where allegations of “reds under the beds” eventually leads to broken relationships does it? How so? Hence political tension can degrade household politics. Structurally, the paragraph is pretty sound, but you could use a bit more evidence to support yourself. Resting your entire argument on a single character's outburst makes things a but unstable.

In Miller’s The Crucible, the political events of Salem and McCarthyism trials are represented, portraying the mass psychogenic disorder the people experienced. Thus illustrating the author illustrates... (another fragmented sentence here; same structure as before with the linking word + verb) the negative impact of individuals perceiving their own ideology as a result of a repressed theological society. Good ending.

Overall, a very strong discussion with some decent arguments - you seem to be really well-suited to a text like The Crucible with so many interesting socio-historical ties.

Essay structure was a clear highlight here with a good balance of 'zooming in' to closely examine evidence and 'zooming out' to comment on the broader significance of textual details, and you seemed to know what to do at the right moments. Just try to make sure your para conclusions are targeting the prompt as clearly as possible.

There were also a few instances when the connection between your examples and your ideas could've been made more obvious, and since this is a relatively short essay at the moment, you could also afford to add a few more examples in just to make your points a bit stronger.

& watch out for those fragmented sentences! Let me know if that explanation didn't make sense and I'm happy to clear up any uncertainties :)

Happy studying everyone!

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #83 on: February 16, 2016, 03:48:18 pm »
snip
You're too gracious. I'll do standard and Extension 1 okies so don't do that just in case you were going to
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

Happy Physics Land

  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
  • MAXIMISE your marks by MINIMISING your errors
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #84 on: February 17, 2016, 12:12:06 pm »
Hope ya'll don't mind this VCE-er crashing your thread to scrawl in red all over your essays :3
Tis the least we can do for those aboard the AN bandwagon, especially people as helpful as yourself.
Comments in the spoiler :)
Spoiler
“Discovery can affirm or challenge societal assumptions and beliefs about aspects of human experience and the world” How does this quote represent your own understanding of discovery? In your response, make detailed reference to your prescribed text and at least ONE other related text of your choosing.

Discovery – necessarily involving the overcoming of obstacles and recognition to greater human potentials –often challenges popular social assumptions through renewed perceptions towards the reality of remote circumstances and confronting human experiences. excellent opening sentence. This notion is explored in Simon Nasht’s documentary Frank Hurley: the Man who Made History (2004). This documentary which illustrates the magnificence and danger of Antarctica and the atrocity of World War I, hence depicting an alternative reality of these events for a contemporary audience. Similarly, Markus Zusak’s novel The Messenger I approve of this choice :D Awesome book (2002) affirms the social expectations singular, since I believe you're just talking about the one here(?) that for teenagers, life can be unfulfilling but through determined actions and self-actualisation, expectation as in, our own expepctations? Or societal expectations? You could afford to be more specific here can be challenged and become more realistic. Overall, strong intro, and you've forged a decent link between the set texts.

Hurley’s far-reaching human <--bit redundant experience during the Shackleton Expedition challenges the society’s assumption of Antarctica being an unknown, lifeless and barren land through illustrating the continent’s magnificent force of nature. Excellent topic sentence. These paradigms are challenged synonym? This is the kind of word that's likely to come up often, so having some alternatives up your sleeve would be useful through Hurley’s iconic composite photography, stimulating new worlds and possibilities. The Shackleton voyage took place between 1914 and 1917 with the intention to cross Antarctica from pole to pole. The Polar historian, Steve Martin’s description of the exploration through the biblical imagery “place of the gods is taken … incredible forces of nature” depicts both the transcendent nature of the discovery which challenges the societal perception of Antarctica as a land of emptiness and insignificance. As an outcome of the Shackleton Voyage, Hurley reaches an epiphany and discovers that the extreme weather of Antarctica, the force of nature and his human encounters constitute to expression(??) Are you trying to say that these things combine to form valuable parts of his photography? If so, 'constitute' doesn't really fit the sentence here. If not, I'm not sure what you're saying exactly valuable components of his photography. This idea is expressed through Hurley’s metaphorical celebration of “something that was gold dust” which reflects the unexpected discovery of the fascinating world around him. So how do you know this discovery is valuable to him based on that quote? The connection might be obvious to you, but being even more explicit would be really good here (i.e. the fact that 'gold dust' implies fine, intrinsic value, etc.) Moreover, during the emotional interview with the daughters, the close-up shot of their mourning expression and the sobbing tone “how they found a place to camp is beyond me” this quote isn't really integrated properly. If I were to take out the quotation marks here, it wouldn't really be grammatical, which tells you that you need to do more to make this fir challenges the society’s unless you're going to specify a society (eg. 1970's America; contemporary Australia, the middle ages, etc.) it'd be better to just say 'society' in general assumption that mankind cannot exist in Antarctica and endure under such a harsh environment. Overall, the documentary presents confronting experiences unveiling the timeless interaction between mankind and nature and how there is usually a re-evaluation of societal assumptions for a modern audience.
This is really nit-picky, but this sentence isn't really grammatical even though I know exactly what you're saying. Basically, we've got two core points here, and if we reverse the order, you'll see why they don't quite fit:
1. The documentary presents confronting experiences unveiling the link between mankind and nature, and how there is usually a revaluation of assumptions. (~simplifying a bit here)
2. The documentary presents how there is usually a revaluation of assumptions and confronting experiences unveiling the link between mankind and nature. ???

If this sentence were grammatical, I should be able to swap these components around, and everything would be fine. See:
1. The documentary suggests that art is really cool, and that the audience should take up painting.
2. The documentary suggests that the audience should take up painting, and that art is really cool.

But because you've got the verb 'presents' here, which doesn't quite gel with the second constituent ('how there is usually a revaluation...') it makes the whole things sound just a little bit off.

Admittedly it's the kind of thing most assessors would just ignore and skim over, but tidying up these little syntactic inconsistencies can make a difference to your quality of writing overall.


The personal and historical ramifications of Hurley’s emotional and psychological try not to split hairs unecessarily; your first divide: 'personal and historical' is valid, but this second one is a tad redundant. Is there a difference between an emotional disclosure and a psychological one? disclosure of life’s fragility during World War I offered a transformed societal perception towards the recording of human atrocity. An example of these ramifications is revealed through Hurley’s daunting simile when he describes how the war isIt’s like passing through the Valley of Death for no-one knows when the shell will lob”. <-- notice how I've integrated that quote now such that if you removed the quotation marks, it'd still fit the sentence? This in conjunction with the photographs of dead mutilated soldier in mud presents the devastating nature of war and consequences of human destruction. Hereby Hence, 1900s society’s the society of the 1900s' perception of war as a glorious event of courage? is effectively subverted. The emotional and psychological discoveries have led lead to the transformation within Hurley, from an objective war correspondent to an artist who desires to convey his understanding of the heroism within the soldiers when facing the devastation of war. The unbearable circumstance he disclosed for himself, expression - I'm not sure what you mean by 'disclosed' in this context? as illustrated through the frightening military imagery of there being a body “every twenty paces or less lay a body … covered with mud and slime” which has generated his intention to transcend the limitation of shots and create photographs. Consequently, through incorporating an extreme long shot to depict the vulnerability of the soldiers who are exposed under the attack of the planes, Hurley’s composite photograph portrays the soldiers’ courage in wars despite the observed danger. This effectively promotes a sense of heroism within them which cannot be achieved through factual photographs. Therefore, the power of composite imageries to illustrate the horrors of war challenges the importance of an objective analysis, signifying the importance of a subjective perspective to heighten the atrocity of war and confront the 1900s cultural belief of war as glorious. Freakin' awesome paragraph closer - there's not a thing about this I would change; you've done a great job zooming out after successfully building up your evidence over the previous sentences - great job!

Similarly, in The Messenger (2002), the protagonist Ed Kennedy subverts society’s assumptions towards underachieving teenagers through his transformative self-actualisation after accomplishing a series of confronting physical disclosures okay, this word definitely doesn't fit here. What exactly are you referring to? Physical tasks/challenges?. This is illustrated through the juxtaposition between in the representations of Ed in the establishing and final chapter. Preliminarily, Ed is displayed as an incompetent teenager whose doomed life simply involves cab driving and card games through the truncated sentences “No real career. No respect in the community. Nothing”. The repetition of “no” depicts a sense of hollowness in Ed’s life and affirms the assumption that real occupational world can be unfulfilling. EXCELLENT! You've got some quotes and metalanguage to describe what's going on in the text, but more impressively, you've been able to link this up with the intended meaning and overall significance!!! This is one of the best examples of this I've seen in an essay, and I've read a lot of essays :P Well done! However, his commencement on the Ace of Diamonds okay, I know what you're referring to because I've read the text, but if you said this to someone who hadn't you could understand how they might be confused. I think it's worth having maybe half a sentence of explanation about the significance of the different cards and notes just so your reader doesn't get lost here has led leads to discoveries of his hidden potentials, such as his ability to deal with the dilemma on the Edgar Street, heal people’s scars with happiness and encourage others to achieve beyond their abilities. In addition, Ed’s alternative method to punish the rapist instead of killing him is a spiritual landmark significant indicative of Ed’s enlightenment. The symbolism of the trigger in the quote “A moment of peace shatters me and I pull the trigger” represents Ed’s transition from a mundane, 19-years-old taxi driver to a hero who is ambitious, helpful and competent. In the last chapter of The Messenger, the spiritually meaningful outcomes have led Ed into becoming to become (though the expression is a bit simple here; instead of 'led to become,' consider something like 'engenders' or 'induces him to become...') a totally different person. Through the short but powerful closing sentence “I am not the messenger. I am the message”, Ed challenges for a popular-culture audience the society’s ignorance towards underachieving teenagers should be more like 'Ed challenges the ignorance of popular culture and society towards underachieving teenagers' by revealing his power to positively impact upon other’s lives and his capability to achieve beyond his potential. Overall, try not to overuse this as a paragraph conclusion; there are lots of other linking words like 'thus...' and 'ultimately' which would also work here through Ed’s contributive achievements either 'contributions' or 'achievements' would be fine here which are outcomes of his renewed understanding of his values, societal assumptions towards human experiences are effectively challenged.

Overall see above, both texts effectively portray the immense power of discovery to transform an individual’s perception towards social beliefs about human experience and the world. Through Frank Hurley: The Man who Made History, contemporary responders are enlightened with Hurley’s passion as an artistic photographer and this challenges societal beliefs about these composite imageries as being merely commodities. Similarly, the ramifications of Ed’s unexpected self-discovery in The Messenger has significantly transformed his life and confronted societal assumptions towards underachieving teenagers. good, functional conclusion, but I think there's room for you to do more than just sum up your points here. Ultimately, you're not going to lose marks for ending on a note like this, but you're not going to be gaining any marks either, so it's kind of a missed opportunity. Instead, try to zoom out and say something about the nature of discovery using both of these texts as your springboard, so that you can end by looking at discover as a whole, rather than relating the prompt to both texts in isolation.

So, to sum up, there are some really standout moments of top quality analysis here, and you've clearly got a lot of confidence in talking about the texts.

I think you could certainly work on your comparative skills though; dealing with the texts in their own paragraphs is perfectly fine, and it means you can explore relevant ideas without having to constantly flip back and forth between each one, but if you never talk about them together until the final bit of the conclusion, it makes it seem as though there aren't many viable links between them.

This actually ties in with a bigger point about argumentation. You've argued a lot of awesome points about the connection between Hurley and the idea of discovery, but when dealing with 'The Messenger,' you seem to conclude on the idea of societal expectations as they pertain to teenagers/underachievers which, whilst valid, is a little bit limiting and doesn't really showcase your or the text's potential. Spending some time just forging links between your two texts and then building out to ideas about discovery would be really valuable, I think.

Look at it like this - if the aim of your discovery module is to serve me up a delicious chocolate cake, and you serve me up one plain vanilla sponge cake on one plate and a big block of chocolate on the other... I'm not going to be too happy. I mean, I'll eat them both... but it'll be under duress  >:(

Instead, you should be aiming to produce an outcome which would not be possible with just some ingredients on their own. You can't make a chocolate cake with the ingredients for a vanilla sponge, nor can you make it with a block of chocolate alone. Your arguments about discovery should be like chocolate cake, and you need to combine BOTH texts to reach this goal.

So, if you're following my metaphor, what you've got at the moment is three paragraphs worth of delicious sponge cake, and one paragraph of tempting chocolate, but it's that final challenge of combination that you'll now have to reckon with. Don't compromise the quality of your analysis though, because that's clearly a strong point for you. But perhaps see if you could integrate a bit of each text into every paragraph, or at least have one of your bodies exploring some connections in more detail. That way, you'll be able to 'zoom out' and say things about discovery that wouldn't have otherwise been possible without the input of both textual reference points.

Other than that, really awesome job so far. Good luck with it all!
Hey man, feel free to post redrafts and other essays here! There'll always be someone happy to help out. :)

With regards to changing your texts, I'd definitely consult with your teacher further and see if she reckons your text is the kind of one you just need to deal with very carefully to make sure you're bringing those 'ambiguities' to the surface and explaining them clearly, or whether she thinks it's one that's better ditched and left alone because it'd be too much work.

I'm with you in that it seems to suit your discussion well and sheds some slightly different light on what would otherwise be a fairly straightforward discussion of certain facets of discovery, but perhaps this is your teacher's way of telling you 'you're going to have a tough time this year dealing with certain prompts and ideas,' so I'd probably give more credence to her opinion than mine :P Did you have any other texts in mind, or are there any particular texts you might consider? Ideally you'll be able to find one that deals with similar ideas in a less ambiguous way. Let me know what you're looking for and I might be able to suggest some.


@MemeKing, feedback below:
Spoiler
Body 1:  Hurley

The mutability of truth renders 'means that' or 'makes' would be more accurate here. You've got enough complex words going on in this sentence, and 'renders' is not quite right (-it tends to be used in the context of 'eliminating all other options,' as in, 'My ATAR rendered me unable to attend university.' It's kind of like the verb 'left,' as in, 'She was left/rendered crying by the phone waiting for it to ring' if that makes sense?) discovery pivotal in order for us to appreciate otherwise ephemeral aspects of value.  The subjective feature of truth is confronted in the composite nature of Hurley’s work.  The notion that Hurley’s photographs are “amongst the most valuable ever taken” is a perspective that Nasht attempts to convey to his contemporary audience in Frank Hurley in order for us to discover aspects of value in his work that have been blurred by the ambiguity of truth.  Hurley’s “concoctions” lie in him seeing “a gulf between what he saw and what he captured” and thus provokes his transition into being a “master of illusions”.  Hurley’s “outright fakes” were attempted to be reconciled expression - this makes it sound like the fakes were trying to reconcile themselves ??? through Nasht’s quadtriptychs that endeavored to justify So this sentence is saying Hurley's fakes were reconciled through the quadtriptychs that tried to justify his "dalliance"? I'm a little lost here; what is the textual evidence demonstrating, exactly. At the moment, you're cramming a bit too much information into these sentences Hurley’s “dalliance with the truth”.  This juxtaposition was is --keep a consistent present tense when talking about things the author/director does edited through the documentary in order to demonstrate that by discovering Hurley’s intention behind these “grand illusions”, could we could then appreciate otherwise lost aspects of value.  Nasht’s then evocative zoom into the cyclical auction house emphasizing the “$100,000” portrays the value of his “forgotten work” that had now proved to be popular “in a world searching for hero’s no apostrophe here”. Thus, Nasht critiques the momentum of time expression that renders Hurley’s works “fake”, and thus conveys that only through discovery can we appreciate Hurley’s “grand illusions”.

Body 2:  Hurley

Man’s continual pursuit for discovery manifests brings about? not sure what you're going for here the irony regarding human identity, allowing individuals to transcend their failures through art.  Throughout Frank Hurley, Nasht portrays Hurley’s intellectual discoveries that ultimately catalyses his ability to perpetuate a desired self-image.  This provokes the need to transcend himself past a “mere photographer,” utilizing his “elaborate concoctions” in order to attain a nirvana in which his fallacy of a “grand illusionist” may be adhered to.  As Hurley discovered, he realized he could not “capture his works on a single frame”, and the frustrated tone of the narrator resonates with Hurley’s inherent failures that provokes him to seek alternative methods to let his work be known.  Through this journey of self-discovery, Nasht portrays Hurley as a “tireless photographer” that sees his intellectual inability lead him through “drinking melting ice” and “eating raw seal meat” that slight repetition in sentence structure within this point conveys his seemingly endless journeys in attempting to discover what may make his work timeless. some great analysis going on here; this is much improved from your earlier drafts :) Nasht then reconciles the ephemeral existence of Hurley’s photographers through the title of “an inventor”, stating how Hurley is going to “make the photographers”.  Nasht engages this with a montage of composite images in order to portray Hurley’s affiliation as an “inventor”, emphasizing his ability to transcend himself through “manipulations”.  Although plagued by the momentum of time, Nasht demonstrates how Hurley’s intellectual discoveries can redefine his existence and transcend Hurley’s inherent inadequacies through art. V. good paragraph; watch out for expression errors, but other than that, good use of evidence.

Body 3:  Black Swan [Relating Hurley’s Body 2]

Discovering the desire for perfection examines involves an examination of the duality in human identity, implying that insanity is possible in a search for perfection, even death why does this imply insanity and death are possible? I'm not following the logic here.  Aronofsky depicts man’s continual pursuit for discovery in Black Swan through the protagonist Nina’s transcendence into the “black swan” that leads her to surpass her failures.  Nina’s goal is to dance both the roles of the “white” and “black” swan however she does not possess the “dark passion” required to “balance the opposing characters of good and evil”.  In the light of this discovery, Aronofsky portrays the dichotomy of black and white in the film as a reoccurring motif that demonstrates the “corruption” slowly delving into the protagonists mind leading her further into insanity.  The illusion that Nina experienced pulling a “feather” from her skin depicts her evolution as the metaphor portrays her transcendence to the “darkness” she needed for the “black swan”.  Much like Hurley’s ability to transcend himself through his “elaborate concoctions”, Nina is finally able to transcend herself I love that there's an overt connection between the texts here, but to 'transcend oneself' isn't really the most accurate way to phrase this in the context of the plot in the final scene as she “bleeds black”, “killing herself” onstage in attempts an attempt to achieve “perfection”.  Through this scene, Aronofsky conveys that darkness was a cost from the plight for perfection that concluded with “suicidal death” and that Nina the “White swan” was metaphorically “set free” the more she discovered the “shadow within”.  Hence, both Nasht’s and Aronofsky’s texts mutually explore the irony of human identity, portraying man’s pursuit to transcend their failures through art. Excellent para conclusion!

There's so much improvement here from your earlier pieces; the connection between evidence and ideas is way stronger, and it seems like there's greater clarity in your understanding of the set text, so well done. There were a few moments where your expression impeded clarity a bit and I couldn't quite work out what you were insinuating, so just keep an eye on your word choices (but again, keep varying your vocab so you can uncover these concerns - they're already getting less frequent, which is also a sign of improvement) & make sure you're not repeating vocab or sentence structures too much.

Let us know if you have any further questions! :)

@summerxyingshi, feedback below:
Spoiler
What are the individual political perspectives, ideas, events or situations of the community? How are these represented?
In your response examine context, characterisation, theme, the process of analogy and allusion, motif, tone, structure, language, the use of drama as a political instrument. In your response, refer to The Crucible.


Political consequences can occur as a result of individuals pursuing their own ideology in a confining theological society. V. good opening sentence. You're talking about abstract ideas, but you're still doing so in a way that hints at the key notions in the prompt, which is awesome! This is represented in Arthur Miller’s 1953 drama, The Crucible which recounts the political event of the 17th Century Salem Witch Hunts. Miller uses the allegory of the town of Salem to criticise the 1950s, <-- no comma needed here American McCarthyism trials whereby individuals feared (keep the tense consistent; you're talking about an event in the '50s, so it's pretty safe to use past tense) blinded the people’s true intentions and morals.

The Crucible portrays through the Salem witch trials, that Okay, idea-wise, I get what you're conveying, but the sentence structure is a little bit weird here. First of all, the word 'portrays' is a great one for describing how an author presents evidence (e.g. 'Miller portrays the damage of Abigail's lies' or 'The playwright portrays the hysteria of the town') but you can't really use it in the context of portraying a message (e.g. 'Miller portrays that Abigail is a liar' or 'The playwright portrays that the town is hysterical' ~~both of those sound a little clunky.) If those last two sound okay to you, it's probably because your use of the word 'portrays' isn't quite aligned with the correct grammatical use of the word. To give you a clearer example of why this sounds odd, think of a word like 'argues.' You can say 'Miller argues that hysteria can be damaging,' but you can't say 'Miller argues the damage of hysteria' - it just doesn't sound right with that verb choice.
The other thing you've done here is split the sentence a bit, which can work well in some contexts, but isn't ideal in a topic sentence where you want to be prioritising clarity. So instead of saying (The author argues) (through this piece of evidence) (that this idea is true,) you instead want to get that middle bit outside the core of the sentence, and have it either at the beginning, like so: (Through this piece of evidence,) (the author argues) (this idea to be true) or at the end, as in: (The author argues) (this idea to be true,) (as seen in this piece of evidence.) To take the first one as an example, that would give us something more like 'Through the frenzy of the Salem witch trials, Miller suggests that mass hysteria can skew... etc.' Make sense? :)
mass hysteria can skew an individual’s morals furthering political instability. Abigail, the antagonist, repetitively really minor thing, but 'repetitively' kind of means 'repeating something so often it becomes irritating,' as in, 'he repetitively asked me to buy him Maccas for lunch' whereas 'repeatedly' means 'doing something multiple times,' and it's this second definition that seems to fit the context better here claims that “I (she) when modifying quotes, the three rules you have to abide by are:
a) make the grammar of the quote fit your sentence (which you've kind of done)
b) use square brackets to insert any words you need (which you've kind of done - just need to be squarer :P)
and
c) delete any words that need replacing.
So rather than saying 'she claims that "I [she] saw" something' --> you can instead just say --> 'she claims that "[she] saw" something,' which is way more grammatical than doubling up on pronouns by adding information but not deleting any
saw…” you should probably fill in the blank here, even if you're not quoting. What is it that Abigail says she saw, exactly? (I know, and your teacher likely knows too, but you have to demonstrate that knowledge to the both of us), emphasising her blatant lying and rejection of Puritan morals. The hysterical fear of witches and supernatural events existing in Salem perpetuates Abigail’s lies, debunking Salem’s justice system demonstrated through the ironic stage direction ironic in what way? I like that you're going from an argumentative point about the thematic notion of hysteria into a discussion of evidence, but the link need to be a bit clearer here of Abigail’s “Ecstatic cries” as she condemns innocent people. This mirrors American 1950s McCarthyism, where suspected communists were blacklisted unless they named other people guilty of communistic views. As the curtain falls, morally strong-minded Rebecca Nurse is left alone on stage illustrating the moral weaknesses of other characters being swept up in the mass hallucination. Thus, highlighting SLIGHT TANGENT HERE --If you'll indulge this nerdy linguist for just a moment... what you've got here is an incomplete sentence, or more specifically, a FRAGMENTED SENTENCE

...but it's okay! We can fix it!! First, let me explain what this means.
Every sentence has to have a 'thing' it's focusing on (known as the 'topic' or main noun of the sentence,) and then a 'thing' that happens (known as the action or main verb of a sentence.) There can be other information too, but that stuff has to be there and it has to be in that exact order of 'noun thing' + 'verb action.' That's why I can say something like:
My uncle went to the shops
but not:
Went my uncle to the shops.

You can begin a sentence with a verb, but it won't be the main verb of a sentence. For example:
Following my recent fight with my friend, she decided to ditch me.
^See how the 'focus' of the sentence is that she decided to do something, not that it 'followed my recent fight with her?' That's because all the other stuff is just optional, additional info. The core of the sentence is that main topic+action combination.

If a sentence is missing either its topic or its action, it's not a complete sentence (i.e. = a fragmented sentence.)

Now let's look at what you've written:

'Thus highlighting how the disorder can affect the community.'
(I'm simplifying the last bit, but you get the idea.)
So now that this is taken out of context, you might already be able to see how it feels a bit incomplete. That's because we've got the main verb of the sentence, 'highlighting,' but there's no main noun or topic! :O
Compare this to:
- This highlights how the disorder can affect the community
- Thus, the playwright highlights how the disorder can affect the community
- By highlighting how the disorder can affect the community, the author suggests that instability is dangerous

^Now we've got some complete sentences.

But the pattern of writing a linking word (eg. 'Therefore...' 'Thus...' 'Hence...' etc.) and a verb (eg. 'suggesting...' 'implying...' 'highlighting...') at the start of sentences is a very common trap for students, so keep an eye out for these kinds of sentences so you can remind yourself to stick a 'topic' in there before the verb, or else reword the sentence to make it  more grammatical :)
how the mass psychogenic disorder pervading through the community can destabilise and corrupt the community.

<link to previous discussion?>The minority becomes scapegoats in order to satisfy a corrupt individual’s thirst for political power. Abigail, in a desperate attempt to escape suspicion for “call(ing) the Devil”, targets Tituba, who is unable to defend herself properly due to her cultural and language barriers, displayed in her syntactic the syntax of her dialogue “I don’t compact with no devil”. The double negative paradoxically has Tituba confessing to her crime and be ‘scapegoated’ by Abigail’s ‘snowballing’ of lies. Miller alludes to the communist hunt in 1950s America whereby power hungry individual’s <-- no apostrophe here attack the minority through accusations of communism to further their political power slight repetition here: 'power hungry people seek to further political power; hence power is transferred to power hungry people' :P Some synonyms would help a lot. Hence, power is wrongly transferred word check - what do you mean by 'transferred?' Where is it transferred from? Who is transferring it? Not sure this is the right word to describe this concept to power hungry individuals with no interest for the community, causing justice to be manipulated and distorted. 

Political tension can cause domestic suffering and household politics to be altered. see above regarding linking paragraphs The setting of John’s house “is the low, dark, and rather long living- room of time”. The lighting of the Proctor household displays the tension present, reinforcing the diminishing of John’s power to maintain domestic peace. Good stuff! The fear of witches in Salem, no comma here inflicts pressure on John and with the tension present in the Proctor household resulting in his angry outburst that he “comes into court when I (he) comes home.” The metaphor you need to explain this metaphor further. What does he mean when he says he 'comes into court' - what does this metaphorically represent? Again, I know what you're referring to, but I'm not meant to do any of the work here :) Spell it out within your essay, and then I/your assessor will have no choice but to give you marks demonstrates the degradation of love and trust within the household as well as emotional suffering.  This is directly linked to America’s McCarthyism, where allegations of “reds under the beds” eventually leads to broken relationships does it? How so? Hence political tension can degrade household politics. Structurally, the paragraph is pretty sound, but you could use a bit more evidence to support yourself. Resting your entire argument on a single character's outburst makes things a but unstable.

In Miller’s The Crucible, the political events of Salem and McCarthyism trials are represented, portraying the mass psychogenic disorder the people experienced. Thus illustrating the author illustrates... (another fragmented sentence here; same structure as before with the linking word + verb) the negative impact of individuals perceiving their own ideology as a result of a repressed theological society. Good ending.

Overall, a very strong discussion with some decent arguments - you seem to be really well-suited to a text like The Crucible with so many interesting socio-historical ties.

Essay structure was a clear highlight here with a good balance of 'zooming in' to closely examine evidence and 'zooming out' to comment on the broader significance of textual details, and you seemed to know what to do at the right moments. Just try to make sure your para conclusions are targeting the prompt as clearly as possible.

There were also a few instances when the connection between your examples and your ideas could've been made more obvious, and since this is a relatively short essay at the moment, you could also afford to add a few more examples in just to make your points a bit stronger.

& watch out for those fragmented sentences! Let me know if that explanation didn't make sense and I'm happy to clear up any uncertainties :)

Happy studying everyone!

Hey Lauren:

May I please just say, that my teacher would have never given me these precious feedbacks that you have given me in such great detail. I really really appreciate this because it tells me exactly what I need to improve on for each part. It must have taken you an incredible amount of time to mark my essay and I just cant express how to grateful I am towards this. Thank you Lauren for making it so easy for me to understand my flaws!!!!

Best Regards
Happy Physics Land
Mathematics: 96
Maths Extension 2: 93
Maths Extension 1: 97
English Advanced: 92
Physics: 95
Chemistry: 92
Engineering Studies: 90
Studies of Religion I: 98

2017 ATAR: 99.70
University of Sydney Civil Engineering and Commerce
University of Sydney Faculty of Civil Engineering Scholar
Student Representatives Council Student Housing Officer
City of Sydney Council Sydney Ambassador
University of Sydney Business School Student Mentor
Entrepreneur, Company of Year Junior Achievements Australia

achelray

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • School: Delany College
  • School Grad Year: 2016
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #85 on: February 18, 2016, 11:55:48 pm »
Hi this was an essay my teacher wanted as a 'final copy' but I'm not completely happy with it. Can you please tell me what I need to work on - I did try to link better but I don't know if it is better. Any help is very much appreciated thank you.

It is through Eliot’s rhetoric we better understand the human mind.

Eliot’s rhetoric allows readers to further grasp and shape their comprehension of context. In doing so, Eliot aids readers in gaining a better understanding of humanity and its psychological and internal state of mind. Works of Eliot, such as ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’, ‘Preludes’ and ‘Rhapsody on a windy night’ explore the themes of emotions, internal isolation, rise of urbanisation and its consequences. Each poem engendered within a vast, distinct context, contributing to a stronger understanding of how Eliot utilises time and place in his poetry to shape the reader's’ understanding of context.


The context sets the tone for the reader. Eliot’s works are known to stir a morbid, depressed feeling within readers. This is due to the reality Eliot explores through urban lifestyle and how it adds to the meaninglessness of life within society. ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’, said to be the first poem Eliot wrote in 1910-1911, explores the internal isolation and instillment of inferiority through the soliloquy of the persona adopted by Prufrock in a society that does not notice him. Although the title ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’ suggests and expresses a romantic aura in accordance with the noun “love”, Eliot ironically relates nothing to the euphoric, giddy, nervous feeling of “love”. This in turn portrays to the audience that there is a possibility he is too shy to speak openly and freely, although Eliot portrays Prufrock as a recreant figure. Contrary to his faintheart, there were moments when he nearly overcomes his immense fear of rejection when he rhetorically asks, “Do I dare?”. However, although acknowledging the women, he is being entranced by trivial pleasures like coffee and peaches that the audience is led to believe whether or not he truly is in love or if it is just attraction or lust. As pointed out by critic Mutlu Konuk Blasing, “The poem is a dramatic monologue a mimesis of speech…”, further frames the persona of Prufrock and his internal isolation and instillment of inferiority through the perpetual context of a meaningless society. Eliot explores through the persona of Prufrock an emotionally detached personality as seen in the lines of, “In the room the women come and go/ Talking of Michelangelo.” This starts the process of which Prufrock starts to feel intimidated adding to the fusion of emotion as stated by Eliot himself in his essay ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’ in which the context of an ordinary modern man experiences inferiority and faces despair of life as he is not a “Michelangelo”. The quote “For I have known the eyes already, known them all-/ The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase,” further exploits the persona’s confidence diminishing having being surrounded by women who do not cast a single glance his way. Prufrock asking rhetorical questions, “To wonder, ‘Do I date?’” and “Do I dare?”, reinforces the idea of the internal isolation he is experiencing to the audience in his soliloquy. Thus reestablishes the internal state of inferiority which sets the morbid tone underpinning the context of when urban life highlighted the meaningless of life in society.


‘Preludes’, the title can be viewed by the audience as ironic, such as ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’ and ‘Rhapsody on a Windy Night’ as it creates expectations about the poem’s contents that are not fulfilled. The context of Eliot's Preludes conveys the mundane and repetitive nature of lives in the modern, urban world. The poem itself consists of four descriptions of urban life at different times of the day. Within this day the dreariness and futility of human existence is highlighted. One critic in particular, J.Hillis Miller stated, “Space must be exterior to the self if movement through it is to be more than the following of a tedious argument in the mind.” which accentuates the mind and how Eliot explores the mind in the human existence through his poems. The first prelude “evening settles down” depicts a rainy, windswept evening that seems to educe that dreary feel of the day's end, especially with the imagery of strewn newspapers as leftover, unwanted rubbish. The monotonous rain beating down together along with the rhymes “passageways - days”, “wraps - scraps” and “lots -pots” where the repetitive 's' endings adds a sense of dullness and weariness to the prelude. The broad descriptive language accurately assists the audience in comprehending and shaping their understanding of context. The start of the third prelude portrays the dark early hours of the morning. In this section of the poem the persona begins to use 'you' in an almost authoritative tone. "You" in such a context, depicts one of the many “lifeless” people living in this hollowness society. As stated by T.S Eliot himself, “It may be formed out of one emotion, or may be a combination of several; and various feelings, inhering for the writer in particular words or phrases or images, may be added to compose the final result.”, which prominently addresses the consequences of urbanisation and therefore allows the audience to assemble a refined understanding of context and how it aids their understanding of tone within poetry.


Eliot’s works do not stray far from the inevitable timelessness that enables readers to understand a modern context. The poem ‘Rhapsody on a Windy Night’ explores themes of isolation and meaninglessness in society through the emotions of a single person. His journey involves going through a cross of reality and imagination as seen in, “Dissolve the floors of memory” disintegrating reality from hallucinations of the mind. As time goes by the person gets closer and closer to their breaking point expressed in the simile, “Beats like a fatalistic drum,” adding to the suspense of the inevitability of the person’s fate. Eliot successfully writes of events that the audience can relate to therefore instituting a greater understanding of context as it is easily relatable. The audience therefore gain a better understanding of poetry in the modern context as familiar emotions experienced by individuals are adopted by Eliot to bring to life “a new art emotion”. Critic Charles Altieri from the Department of English at UC Berkeley, states, “Eliot experimented with modes of presenting and projecting desire more immediate and also more inherently social than the culturally dominant modes of linking affects to causal narratives. And in doing that he developed an abstract modern imaginative space radically new for English poetry.” which in turn enhanced the chance of the audience to read and reshape their understanding of a modern context. Throughout the poem, the lamp becomes known as the medium into which Eliot uses to reflect and represent what the person is thinking. “The street lamp sputtered,/ The street lamp muttered,” symbolises one losing their mind as their internal mind gears are “sputtering” and “muttering” also symbolising being overworked, almost as if it were weary and tired. However when repeated in stanza five, it is almost as if the lamp is becoming less easier to hear, coinciding with the fact that the person may be regaining consciousness and coming back to reality. This relates to the feeling of despair of life as the person who wandered the streets alone lead nowhere but where they started in which they finally reach a breaking point with their conjured emotions. This then exposes the audience to embrace and relate to a modern context which explores time and place within Eliot’s work.

In contrast to ‘Rhapsody on a Windy night’, ‘Hollow men’ has more biblical and historical references. However, both are similar in that emotion is essentially a key concept within both poems. As explained in T.S Eliot’s essay, “The experience you will notice, the elements which enter the presence of the transforming catalyst, are of two kinds: emotions and feelings.” The poem, ‘Hollow men’ brings to life religion through aspects of biblical references and epigraphs of other texts. This adds to the timelessness of Eliot’s poems as he adopts excerpts from other texts in doing so creates a piece of work that the audience is able to form an understanding of a modern context. ‘Hollow men’ explores the experience of being a part of the world as seen in, “Let me also wear/ Such deliberate disguises” as it symbolises the world as broken therefore ultimately links to despair about life as their hope is nothing but metaphorically “a fading star.” This loss of hope symbolises a religious allusion and reflects Jesus’ light as a sign of hope for the “Hollow men”. The audience can relate to this in their modern context as Eliot never fails to include familiar experiences to ensure they are able to fully understand. Essentially comparing the “empty men” to scarecrows as when they both burn, they end up as nothing but ashes - no different from each other which adds to the hollowness of the “hollow men”. In describing the men, the earth has also been described as a “hollow valley” as symbolised through the words, “prickly pear” reflecting the unsterile, waste, barren land. As critic Altieri explains, “his formal and thematic elements are woven into specific emotional configurations explored within the work,”. This reflects Eliot’s essay on ‘Tradition and the Individual talent’ as he states, “It may be formed out of one emotion or may be a combination of several, and various feelings controlled through our minds, inhering for the writer in particular words or phrases or images, may be added to compose the final result.”. Therefore successfully incorporates experiences and emotions of the audience, exploring how time and place are used by Eliot to form an understanding of context.


The timeless works of Eliot allows readers to further comprehend and shape their understanding of context. Thus, the audience can successfully embrace an insightful, informative and broad understanding of humanity and its psychological and internal state of mind. This can be seen in works of Eliot, such as ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’, ‘Preludes’ and ‘Rhapsody on a windy night’ that explore the themes of internal isolation, rise of urbanisation and its consequences and emotions. Each poem dispenses a deep understanding of how time and place are used to shape a reader’s understanding of context.

gabriellav

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • School: East Hills
  • School Grad Year: 2016
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #86 on: February 20, 2016, 07:29:08 pm »
Hi, i would love if you could mark by 5 mark response in regards to the practise paper 1 - discovery question. (I will attach the exam paper and also my response.) I am trying to make it as sophisticated as possible( need ideas with the vocabulary), yet have a clear flow. I would appreciate if you could help me achieve that.

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

literally lauren

  • Administrator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1699
  • Resident English/Lit Nerd
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #88 on: February 21, 2016, 12:33:01 pm »
a note to bangali and lauren - these r mine ok thx
Well I do not respect the laws of dibs if I've already started marking stuff, and I was halfway through when I saw this, so fight me.
I'll just direct any complaints we get about giving too much feedback to you, okay?

Feedback for diiiiiiiii:
Spoiler
How has your appreciation of Pride and Prejudice been reshaped by the connections you have made with Letters to Alice on First Reading Jane Austen?

The content and construction of texts are intrinsically linked with the social and historical factors inherent in a composer’s contemporary context excellent opening sentence - this is nice and adaptable. Thus this is a great linking word, but stuff like 'thus'/'therefore'/'hence' work better towards the ends of paragraphs since they've got that 'summing-up' vibe about them. It seems a bit odd to have the very second sentence of your piece be a summative sounding sentence because of that linking word; basically try not to make it seem like you're drawing conclusions so soon. The intro is just for setting up ideas, so as much as I approve of your wanting to link sentences together, perhaps do so with a phrase like 'to this end' or 'accordingly' if you must, a comparative study of Jane Austen’s Regency social satire Pride and Prejudice (1813) and Fay Weldon’s postmodern epistolary novel Letters to Alice (1993) do you have to put the years here? That seems unnecessary to me, but perhaps your teacher prefers it as a genre convention or something. Otherwise, great quick descriptions of the two texts, demonstrates how the transition in context from 18th C make sure you write out the word 'century' here; don't just put 'C' Regency England to 20th C postmodern society engenders distinct values and attitudes.  Nonetheless, in light of shared authorial desire to examine attitudes towards marriage and theories of moral education, a comparative reappraisal elucidates new insights, enabling connections between texts to reshape and enrich appreciations of both texts. Great intro overall; you've set up a good, broad focus that'll let you flesh things out later, and you haven't focused too much on one text at the expense of another. Really awesome start!

Austen’s examination of relationships in Pride and Prejudice, supplemented by Weldon’s scrutiny of Regency feminist and post-feminist concerns, heightens the reader’s readers' (since you're talking about two texts here, it seems more grammatically natural to have the plural possessive) appreciation of contextual and authorial values regarding the institution of marriage. Critical of restrictions including the system of entailment which deprived women of financial autonomy, Austen condemns the economic imperative behind marriage and conversely endorses relationships founded on love and rationality very well constructed sentence; just try not to overdo this format where you have a phrase describing what the author does, followed by the name and main part of the sentence (e.g. 'Censuring the the patriarchal hegemony, Austen portrays her heroines as quietly determined and admirable...') Using it in moderation is good, but it can be temporarily confusing for your reader, which could be reflected in your mark if it's a persistent issue. ie. compare the previous sentence with: 'Austen censures the patriarchal hegemony by portraying her heroines as... etc.' <-- This one is a lot easier to read, even though they're both technically grammatical. However, through authorial intrusion I'm not sure intrusion is an appropriate word here given that it's Austen's text - how is it that she's intruding in her own novel?, Austen acknowledges the essentiality not a very common word. 'Necessity' would sound better here of mercenary unions for middle class women within her patriarchal society, with marriage being “the only honourable provision for well-educated young women of small fortune”. Employing the foil of Charlotte Lucas and Elizabeth Bennett, who subverts convention by seeking to marry on her “own terms”, Austen exposes and challenges the values underpinning the fabric of her society good link between textual evidence and authorial intent here, but what values is Austen challenging here, exactly? Specificity is always favoured in cases like these, so zooming in on particular concerns (eg. 'values of marriage and domesticity' or 'assumptions about the role of women and gendered limitations') would be a good idea. Charlotte’s pragmatic disposition, revealed through the matter-of-fact tone in her decree that “Happiness in marriage is entirely a matter of chance”, emphasises her alignment with social conventions in marrying Mr Collins out of practicality “for the sole disinterested desire of an establishment” instead of a “general similarity of feeling and taste”. In response, Elizabeth’s emotive exclamatory comment “In every view it is unaccountable!” try to contextualise this quote a bit more - I'm not too sure what she's referring to here. What is 'it' in this sentence? I can infer from context, but it's not made clear in your writing which means, if I'm your assessor, I can't give you credit for it enables Austen to critique the reality of marital opportunities of her context as in, her social context? or within the context of the novel?, implicitly challenging the conventions which suppressed female autonomy in marriage. Reflecting the sentiment of contemporary thinker Mary Wollstonecraft - namely that marriages were a social contracts between two individuals - Austen employs the relationship of Elizabeth and Darcy to exemplify the ideal balance of reason and romance in marriage So we're a few sentences in, and I'm already starting to notice patterns in your sentence structure. This isn't a big deal as what you're writing is still mostly grammatical, but varying your syntax to the point where even a grammar nerd like me wouldn't notice the repetition would mean that the assessors would have no chance to find fault with the quality of your writing. I'm actually quite a fan of the structure you're using here (fun fact: it's called 'Left Dislocation' because you're taking a phrase out of the sentence and sticking it out the front (or the 'leftmost' point of the sentence) as a bit of a preamble, ie. 'Challenging the traditional notions of femininity, Austen employs a series of parallels within her novel' as opposed to 'Austen employs a series of parallels within her novel, challenging traditional notions of femininity') but overuse can make this stand out a bit too much, and you want your marker to be able to focus on the content as easily as possible, so the more frequent your repetition or vocabulary issues, the more likely they are to be pulled out of the flow of your essay. Upon accepting Mr Darcy’s proposal, Elizabeth’s use of superlatives in “I am the happiest creature in the world” superlative declaration that she is "the happiest creature in the world" (- try not to use the word 'in...' prior to introducing quotes as a means of integration. Instead, make the quote fit your sentence to the point where, if I were to take the quotation marks away, everything would still flow perfectly well) implies Austen’s approval of the values in such a union.  Thus, Austen in her critique of mercenary relationships radically advocates for marriages founded on love and rationality. So what is it about Darcy & Elizabeth's relationship that Austen approves of? You've stated that Elizabeth is happy and that Austen clearly affords her that happiness as a kind of reward for her good character, but why is this relationship one of love and rationality? That last part hasn't been made clear in this paragraph. Other than that, this is an excellent argument that's well-supported.

Linking phrase would be good here; even if it were as simple as 'Likewise...' or 'Contrarily...' In Letters to Alice, Weldon adopts a New Historicist approach to reappraise the fundamental significance of marriage in the Regency Period, reflecting upon the reality of modern female emancipation and marital opportunities awesome work! I love the clarity  of these topic sentences; they set out your argument beautifully without giving your whole discussion away too early. Influenced by the writings of feminist Betty Freidan, whose revolutionary manifesto “the Feminine Mystique” helped facilitate second wave feminism in the 1980s, Weldon affirms a shift in societal values away from the necessity of marriage for women and thus explores the greater autonomy afforded to women by...?/in...? Where or when has this autonomy come in . As such, Weldon denigrates the importance of marriage by juxtaposing “the stuff of our women’s magazines...[with] (you have to juxtapose something with something else, so I'm assuming that's what you meant here?) the stuff of their life”, whereby connotations of “stuff” relegate marriage to a trivial obligation within the postmodern context excellent close analysis!!. However, by illustrating the constraints of primogeniture and conditions under which women lived through the factual detail that “only 30%...married” in the Regency era contextualise this quote. Where in the text does it come from? Rather than just saying the author demonstrates something through "this evidence," try and say something about where that evidence has come from, Weldon enriches an understanding of Mrs Bennett’s “anxiety for her five unmarried daughters”. Whilst Austen constructs the caricature of Mrs Bennett, “a woman of mean understanding, little information, and uncertain temper” to satirise the values of her time, Weldon’s intertextual reference vindicates Mrs Bennett as “the only one with the slightest notion of the sheer desperation of the world”. Awesome job with this. I was waiting for a 'Whist Text A does X, Text B instead does Y' kind of sentence, and you've given me exactly that :) You've shown a great insight into the kinds of important discrepancies that exist here. Furthermore, Weldon encourages a reconsideration of Charlotte’s entry into marriage, employing the rhetorical question “are we to disapprove?” to highlight the reality of disenfranchised women in contemporary society,  connecting the synchronic concerns of both contexts bit lost here - are you saying this has relevance for both Austen's and a modern day's audience? Which two contexts are being examined here? Stating try to go for a more descriptive word than 'states'/'stating' the analogy “now the pretty girl from Java marries the rancher from Australia...to escape hunger and poverty”, Weldon echoes Austen’s concerns, laying bare the paradox of having advanced so far in women’s rights, yet, in some parts of the world having gained so little. Through connections with Pride and Prejudice, Weldon heightens an appreciation for Pride and Prejudice the source text by reshaping good work on using this word where appropriate without overusing it. A lot of people will either ignore the prompt's key words, or will use them to the point where they become meaningless. Here you've established what 'reshaping' actually means within the context of the societal regard for marriage, so this is much safer an understanding of Regency values regarding marriage.

Furthermore, both Austen and Weldon are connected in their endorsement of a holistic education as essential for moral and intellectual development another solid topic sentence, and I like that you've demarcated a clearly comparative paragraph rather than doing the 1-2-1-2 structure. In Pride and Prejudice, Austen criticises the ineffectual education imposed upon Georgian women, circumscribed by an/the expectation to pursue superficial ‘accomplishments’ in order to attract a marriage partner. Through cumulative listing in Caroline Bingley’s depiction of the accomplished woman whom she declares must have “a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing” quote integration is much better here. Point of interest: this is also an example of asyndeton, which is a kind of listing where there are no conjunctions (e.g. kitchen, bathroom, garage, wardrobe) in contrast to polysyndeton, which is where there are conjunctions separating each article in the list (e.g. kitchen and the bathroom and the garage and the wardrobe.) Funnily enough, the effect is the same in either instance, i.e. implying accumulation and copiousness, Austen exposes how women have been suppressed by societal expectations to adopt ornamental roles. Austen’s criticisms of such traditional yet ineffectual modes of education, in failing to facilitate intellectual improvement, is extended to the use of conduct books, exemplified through the/her (there seem to be quite a few instances where you'll leave out words like 'a/the/her,' which isn't a massive problem for clarity, but can sound a bit odd when it's a persistent issue) allusion to Fordyce’s Sermons. To this end, she constructs the caricature of Mary I know this probably wasn't your intention, but this is the kind of thing that would make a VCE assessor kiss the page in delight. They (incl. HSC markers, based on the syllabus outline) are quite a fan of students who are able to acknowledge the text as a construct, and reflect this knowledge in their analysis of what the author does, not just what the characters in the text do. This is all really good analysis in this para, too. who constantly “copies out extracts”, yet ironically “had not the words” to add to a discussion v good quote integration. Despite her reputation as “the most accomplished girl in the neighbourhood”, Mary’s prolific study of traditional didactic texts is disparaged by Austen as failing something which fails to instill in her the capacity to think independently. As such, Austen advocates for Elizabeth’s unorthodox and independent education, elucidated through self-contemplative language as she “read and reread with the greatest attention” Darcy’s letter. In contrast to the stagnant characters of Caroline and Mary,  Elizabeth’s process of introspection culminates in moral growth, illustrated by the epiphany “Till this moment which moment is this? I know what you're getting at, and your assessor likely will too, but if your evidence is solely comprised of language which is taken out of context, a super fussy marker might penalise you for not making the connection clear I never knew myself”, reflecting the value of epistemological development promulgated by Regency philosopher John Locke this might sound silly, but be more specific here :P This link is valid, but you need to flesh it out a bit because at the moment, it kind of reads like saying "Austen's heroine exemplifies the ideals of J. R. Firth's semiotic theory"... that might be accurate, but just saying there's a link doesn't really qualify as analysis unless I specify what J. R. Firth's semiotic theory is. So in this case, what kind of epistemological development of Locke's are you discussing here? Employing the textual form of the didactic novel, Austen subtly enlightens readers on as to the significance of life experience and moral growth as the most valuable forms of education. Good concluding line. I'm not sure the notion of morality was a huge focus here, but your final point still feels valid to me nonetheless.

^Link?-->Weldon in Letters to Alice promulgates the attainment of experience through literature as conducive to the improvement of mind and morality, reshaping and affirming Austen’s endorsement of an effectual education to engender a renewed appreciation of Pride and Prejudice I'm an infamous advocate for good vocabulary, and this sentence is great, but it's edging close to that boundary where decent expression slips into verbose obfuscation ;) The rest of your essay tells me your quality of writing is pretty high level anyway, so this wouldn't come across as you just churning out some 'big' words to impress the assessor - I know what you're saying here, and I know that you know what you're saying here - but you want to try and play things fairly safe, so try to minimise these idea-heavy-and-expression-dense sentences. You don't have to cut them our entirely, and the balance you've struck in this essay is totally fine, but I'm just flagging this so you know to take care not to bog down your piece. Alluding to the socio-political turbulence of 1980’s, characterised by the cold war and radical feminist movements, Weldon’s hyperbolic description of a “world in crisis...future catastrophic” stresses the necessity for a broader understanding of society how so? With most of your other evidence the explanation is made clear, but in this case, how is it that this hyperbole could lead one to conclude that we need to better understand society and our own morals? and moral compass for individuals. As such, Weldon implores her fictional niece to read “Literature with a capital L”, employing the epistolary textual form to explicitly address the reader how is the language accomplishing this? And do you meant to say that the genre of letter writing is what's conveying the message to the audience directly? I'm not sure what your point is here, whilst reshaping Austen’s values of moral development to the postmodern context. The extended metaphor of the “City of Invention” emphasises the timeless maybe say 'inherrent' here, just to avoid the repetition with 'time' value of literature and its ability to transcend time, and as such provides the diachronic experience of “new” and “old” ways to further moral and intellectual growth. Through evocative imagery of the city as “brilliant...illuminated...pinnacles”, Weldon elevates the world of literature as illuminating to the mind, with the capacity for reading to expression is getting a little muddled here figuratively “stretch our sensibilities and our understandings”. In doing so, Weldon echoes Austen’s values, exemplified by Darcy’s didactic assertion that an individual “must yet add ... the improvement of ... mind by extensive reading”. Similar to Austen’s repudiation of traditional education as ineffectual, Weldon is satirically dismissive of institutionalised education, depicted by her parody of exam and essay rubrics “’People are getting nastier, society nicer’: Discuss”. this quote isn't integrated into the sentence. Instead, Weldon advocates the literary canon as a source of intellectual development, viewing experience as inherently linked to literature and in doing so reshapes Austen’s values on moral growth okay, I'm with you right up until this final point. Where's the connection between Weldon's extolling of literature and the reshaping of Austen's concept of morality?

Despite contextual disparities, Pride and Prejudice and Letters to Alice undertake parallel explorations of the values underpinning the marriage institution and the significance of moral and intellectual development. By providing new insights into Austen’s novel, Weldon concurrently enriches an understanding of Austen’s context and thus enhances an appreciation for Pride and Prejudice. This is a competent wrap-up, but I can't help but feel it lets you down given the high quality of everything else here. Your conclusion is your final chance to solidify that good impression, so ending on a plain-but-sufficient sentiment isn't quite as advantageous as ending on a really high note. Perhaps tease out some more ideas that stem from the differences between these two texts, as contrast tends to be the best starting point for more complex ideas.


Despite the fact that I've scribbled all over this, I had to try really hard to find faults in your analysis. For the most part, your arguments, analysis, and expression were really on-point, and you clearly know your texts well.

A few minor points: all the sentences highlighted in blue were examples of a certain sentence structure which stood out a bit, so taking one of these and brainstorming some alternate patterns to use should help you circumvent this problem fairly easily.

eg. instead of 'Challenging readers' values, Austen presents Mr. Darcy as an important character'
--> Austen presents Mr. Darcy as an important character in order to challenge readers' values.
--> Austen presents Mr. Darcy as an important character, thereby challenging readers' values.
--> In order to challenge readers values, Austen presents Mr. Darcy as an important character.
--> Austen's presentation of Mr. Darcy as an important character challenges readers' values.
--> That Austen presents Mr. Darcy as an important character challenges readers' values.
etc.


Also, you could use a few smoother paragraph transitions just to make sure your essay flows nicely. A few words at the start can make all the difference when an assessor is mentally preparing for your next sub-point. And on that note, try to make sure the final line in each paragraph is building from what you have established through your analysis and discussion. Most of the ones you've got here are totally fine, but at times it felt like you were drawing conclusions that hadn't been fully substantiated, so just keep an eye on that.

With regards to what should be cut, I'd say simplifying some of the more complex sentences should do it, and perhaps you could edit out the sentences at the start of your first B.P. (ie. the stuff on "authorial intrusion") but I really wouldn't change much. If you really have to make cuts for time, then you could always just cherry pick the best parts of your fourth paragraph and redistribute them into the other three. It doesn't have to be the chronologically fourth one you've written here, but just take the general gist of one of them and split the important bits off to form a three paragraph essay with slightly longer paragraphs.

Other than that, this is a really impressive piece with a bunch of good analysis, so play to your strengths and make sure those interpretive sentiments are made clear and concise in future pieces :)

Awesome job!

Feedback for achelray:
Spoiler
It is through Eliot’s rhetoric we better understand the human mind.

Eliot’s rhetoric allows readers to further grasp and shape their comprehension of context ...the context of what exactly? This is kind of like saying 'he allows the readers to have a more enlightened view' as opposed to '...view of humanity's shortcomings' or 'view of the limitations of man's aspirations.' Without a bit more specificity, this seems a bit weird. In doing so, Eliot aids readers in gaining a better understanding of humanity and its psychological and internal state of mind. I think this sentence could have easily been combined with the previous ones to form a single, strong introductory line rather than two shorter ones. Works of Eliot, such as ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’,  ;D love this poem... never got to study it in high school... feel my envy... ‘Preludes’ and ‘Rhapsody on a windy night’ explore the themes of emotions 'emotions' isn't really a thematic idea, could you be a bit more specific here? Which emotions are involved? What is Eliot doing with or saying about such emotions?, internal isolation, and the consequences of the rise of urbanisation and its consequences. Each poem engendered within a vast, distinct context, what does this mean? How can something be 'vast' and 'distinct?'contributing contributes to a stronger understanding of how Eliot utilises time and place in his poetry to shape the reader's’ understanding of context. see above regarding having a more specific argument here

The context sets the tone for the reader. This is quite short and stilted for an opening sentence. It's also quite a generic sentence, meaning that it doesn't tell your reader anything that's particularly pertinent to the discussion. Your next sentence has a similar problem: Eliot’s works are known to rather than saying something about what his works are known for (which is tangentially relevant,) try to instead focus on what Eliot intends to do using verbs like 'suggests/implies/vilifies/exalts/critiques' etc. which is much more central to the task stir a morbid, depressed feeling within readers. This is due to the reality Eliot explores through urban lifestyle are you trying to say that Eliot explores the reality of the urban lifestyle? I'm a bit confused by your sentence structure here and how it adds to the meaninglessness of life within society. ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’, said to be the first poem Eliot wrote in 1910-1911, this doesn't really tell us anything important explores the internal isolation and instillment of inferiority through the soliloquy this is a term that applies to plays, it doesn't really work when talking about poems of the persona adopted by Prufrock in a society that does not notice him. Although the title ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’ suggests and expresses a romantic aura in accordance with the noun “love” technically this is an adjective here, since the word 'love' is saying something about the word 'song,' but you could also argue 'love song' is a noun on its own... so I think you'd be better off just saying 'the word 'love'' here, though I like the specificity, Eliot ironically relates nothing to the euphoric, giddy, nervous feeling of “love”. This in turn portrays conveys to the audience that there is a possibility he is too shy to speak openly and freely, although Eliot portrays Prufrock as a recreant word check; 'recreant' pertains to cowardliness and betrayal, which I don't think is relevant here. 'Reclusive' would be more accurate figure. Contrary to his faintheart, there were are (keep a consistent present tense when talking about events in the text) moments when he nearly overcomes his immense fear of rejection when he rhetorically asks, “Do I dare?" I'm not sure this is rhetorical; you could argue that it is, but you need to support that judgment here. However, although acknowledging he acknowledges the women, he is being entranced by trivial pleasures like coffee and peaches that the audience is led to believe whether or not he truly is in love or if it is just attraction or lust losing the thread of the sentence here; perhaps try to separate this off so you can make it more grammatical. As pointed out by critic Mutlu Konuk Blasing, “The poem is a dramatic monologue [and] a mimesis of speech…”, which further frames the persona of Prufrock and his internal isolation and instillment of inferiority you've said this before already; try to vary your vocabulary through the perpetual context what do you mean by this? of a meaningless society. Eliot explores through the persona of Prufrock an emotionally detached personality of Prufrock  _____? There's something missing here! What is Eliot exploring? as seen in the lines of, “In the room the women come and go/ Talking of Michelangelo.” This starts the process of which Prufrock starts to feel intimidated so Prufrock is intimidated by the process? Your expression is a bit confusing here; keep things simple adding to the fusion of emotion which emotions? as stated by Eliot himself in his essay ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’ in which the context of an ordinary modern man experiences inferiority and faces despair of life as he is not a “Michelangelo”. The quote “For I have known the eyes already, known them all-/ The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase,” further exploits the persona’s confidence diminishing I'm assuming you mean 'explores' here? A line of poetry can't really 'exploit' an idea having being surrounded by women who do not cast a single glance his way. Prufrock asking rhetorical questions, “To wonder, ‘Do I dare?’” and “Do I dare?”, reinforces the idea of the internal isolation he is experiencing to the audience in his soliloquy. Thus reestablishes This is a fragmented sentence; I've written a fuller explanation of why this is in my feedback to summerxyingshi if you want to scroll up and check that out. But here, you need to either say 'Thus, Eliot reestablishes...' or 'This reestablishes...' to make the sentence grammatical the internal state of inferiority which sets the morbid tone underpinning the context of when urban life highlighted the meaningless of life in society. Notice how the topic you're responding to calls on you to explore how Eliot's rhetoric allows us to understand the human mind? That's what you should be building out to as your focus! These points about social context are okay, but they're not what the topic is asking for. You haven't said much here about the audience's understanding of the human mind, so you'd need to reshape your arguments to suit this discussion.

‘Preludes’, the title can be viewed by the audience as ironic, such as much like ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’ and ‘Rhapsody on a Windy Night’ as it creates expectations about the poem’s contents that are not fulfilled. Try to begin your paragraph with a broad idea, not a point of close analysis. Tell me what concepts you intend to focus on before you start zooming in to evidence. The context what are you talking about when you say 'the context of the poems?' Because that would usually mean the socio-historical context, being when and where they're written, and that doesn't seem to be what you're intending here of Eliot's Preludes conveys the mundane and repetitive nature of lives in the modern, urban world. The poem itself consists of four descriptions of urban life at different times of the day. Within this day the dreariness and futility of human existence is highlighted. One critic in particular, J.Hillis Miller stated, “Space must be exterior to the self if movement through it is to be more than the following of a tedious argument in the mind.” which accentuates the mind and how Eliot explores the mind in the human existence through his poems is there anything else you can say here? What is Eliot saying about the human mind? And what does this have to do with the start of that quote where the critic talks about space and selfhood? The first prelude “evening settles down” this quote isn't integrated depicts a rainy, windswept evening that seems to educe that dreary feel of the day's end, especially with the imagery of strewn newspapers as leftover, unwanted rubbish. Good stuff! The monotonous rain beating down together along with the rhymes “passageways - days”, “wraps - scraps” and “lots -pots” the convention here would be to say "passageways" and "days," "wraps" and "scraps" etc. since quoting "passageways - days" implies those words occur one after another in the poem, which isn't true where coupled with the repetitive repeated sibilance of the 's' endings adds a sense of dullness and weariness to the prelude. <-- Excellent analysis here! The broad descriptive language accurately assists the audience in comprehending and shaping their understanding of context. this sentence is way too general; what 'broad descriptive language' are you talking about, and what's the 'context' here? Also, you need to link ^this idea to the following one--> The start of the third prelude portrays the dark, early hours of the morning. In this section of the poem the persona begins to use 'you' in an almost authoritative tone. "You" in such a context, depicts to characterise one of the many “lifeless” people living in this hollowness society. As stated by T.S Eliot himself, “It what's 'it??' may be formed out of one emotion, or may be a combination of several; and various feelings, inhering for the writer in particular words or phrases or images, may be added to compose the final result.”, which prominently addresses the consequences of urbanisation does it? I'm not seeing the connection here and therefore allows the audience to assemble a refined understanding of context what does this mean? and how it aids their understanding of tone within poetry. Okay, but that's not the focus here - take your discussion back to the notion of understanding the human mind.

^Link?-->Eliot’s works do not stray far from the inevitable timelessness that enables readers to understand a modern context. Again, this doesn't strike me as a very relevant argument seeing as you're meant to be examining how his poems enable the audience to better understand human psychology and conscience. The poem ‘Rhapsody on a Windy Night’ explores themes of isolation and meaninglessness in society through the emotions of a single person. His journey involves going through a cross of reality and imagination as seen in, “Dissolve the floors of memory” this isn't really integrated disintegrating reality from hallucinations of the mind. As time goes by the person gets closer and closer to their breaking point expressed in the simile, “Beats like a fatalistic drum,” adding to the suspense of the inevitability is it suspenseful or inevitable? Those two words seem like of like antonyms in this context of the person’s fate. Eliot successfully writes of events that the audience can relate to therefore instituting a greater understanding of context as it is easily relatable. not sure about the relevance of this? The context you should be linking this to is the idea of the human mind, and that hasn't been made clear here. The audience therefore gain a better understanding of poetry in the modern context as familiar emotions experienced by individuals are adopted by Eliot to bring to life “a new art emotion”. Critic Charles Altieri from the Department of English at UC Berkeley, states, “Eliot experimented with modes of presenting and projecting desire more immediate and also more inherently social than the culturally dominant modes of linking affects to causal narratives. And in doing that he developed an abstract modern imaginative space radically new for English poetry.” minor point, but don't end the quote with a full stop if you intend to continue your sentence. Just leave it out here; you can change the punctuation pretty freely with little stuff like this - the assessors won't pull you up because a comma was out of place unless you somehow drastically alter the meaning of that quote which in turn enhanced the chance of the audience to read and reshape their understanding of a modern context. see end comments regarding your use of the word 'context.' & ^link?-->Throughout the poem, the lamp becomes known as the medium 'symbol' might be more appropriate here into which Eliot uses to reflect and represent what the person is thinking. “The street lamp sputtered,/ The street lamp muttered,” symbolises one losing their mind as their internal mind gears are “sputtering” and “muttering” also symbolising being overworked, almost as if it were weary and tired. However when repeated in stanza five, it is almost as if the lamp is becoming less easier to hear, coinciding with the fact that the person may be regaining consciousness and coming back to reality. This relates to the feeling of despair of life as the person who wandered the streets alone lead nowhere but where they started in which they finally reach a breaking point with their conjured emotions. Everything up to this point is really good, and it seems like you're building towards a point of discussion regarding what Eliot is saying about the human mind... This then exposes the audience to embrace and relate to a modern context which explores time and place within Eliot’s work. ...but that last sentence is letting you down a bit. It's quite general, and we're not interested in the notions of time and place, we want to know what you have to say about the prompt's key words and key ideas.

In contrast to ‘Rhapsody on a Windy night’, ‘Hollow men’ has more biblical and historical references. However, both are similar in that emotion is essentially a key concept within both poems. Much better linking! This is a great start. As explained in T.S Eliot’s essay, “The experience you will notice, the elements which enter the presence of the transforming catalyst, are of two kinds: emotions and feelings.” Is this quote relevant to what you're discussing? I can't see a connection on the surface, and it's up to you to make that obvious. The poem, ‘Hollow men’ brings to life religion through aspects of biblical references and epigraphs of other texts. This adds to the timelessness of Eliot’s poems as he adopts excerpts from other texts in doing so creates a piece of work that the audience is able to form an understanding of a modern context. That may be true, but it's not relevant. ‘Hollow men’ explores the experience of being a part of the world as seen in, “Let me also wear/ Such deliberate disguises” as it symbolises the world as broken therefore ultimately links to despair about life this sentence is getting messy; try not to let them run on for too long as that seems to be when things start to get ungrammatical as their hope is nothing but metaphorically “a a metaphorical "fading star.” This loss of hope symbolises a religious allusion and reflects Jesus’ light as a sign of hope for the “Hollow men”. The audience can relate to this in their modern context as Eliot never fails to include familiar experiences to ensure they are able to fully understand. Essentially comparing sentence fragment the “empty men” to scarecrows as when they both burn, they end up as nothing but ashes - no different from each other which adds to the hollowness of the “hollow men”. In describing the men, tThe earth has also been described as a “hollow valley” as symbolised through the words, “prickly pear” reflecting the unsterile, waste, barren wasteland. As critic Altieri explains, “his formal and thematic elements are woven into specific emotional configurations explored within the work,”. Eliot’s essay on ‘Tradition and the Individual talent’ wait, so, this critic's comment 'reflects' Eliot's essay? What are you trying to say here? as he states, “It may be formed out of one emotion or may be a combination of several, and various feelings controlled through our minds, inhering for the writer in particular words or phrases or images, may be added to compose the final result.”. You've used this quote in your second body paragraph already. Therefore successfully sentence fragment incorporates experiences and emotions of the audience, exploring how time and place are used by Eliot to form an understanding of context. Same problem as the above paragraphs - you're drawing all of your points out to a discussion of Eliot's work an its modern context, but there's nothing here about the human mind and the key concern of the prompt.

The timeless works of Eliot allows readers to further comprehend and shape their understanding of context. Thus, the audience can successfully embrace an insightful, informative and broad understanding of humanity and its psychological and internal state of mind. this is the first hint I've gotten that you're acknowledging the topic, and this is way too late. Try and flesh out this idea a bit more and expand on the notion of humanity's 'state of mind'. This can be seen in works of Eliot, such as ‘The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock’, ‘Preludes’ and ‘Rhapsody on a windy night’ that explore the themes of internal isolation, rise of urbanisation and its consequences and emotions. This feels a bit repetitious; most of these points have been made already, and you've used very similar words to do so here. Each poem dispenses a deep understanding of how time and place are used to shape a reader’s understanding of context. Right, but how is this linked to the prompt?

Okay, so there's some solid analysis in this piece, and you're using great metalanguage to describe Eliot's rhetoric. Your understanding of the poems was pretty spot on, though it would've been good to see some comparison and contrast between the ones you discuss.

Here's the really big thing though: you need a thesis statement. More accurately, you need a relevant thesis statement that connects your discussion to the prompt. At the moment, you seem to be trying to argue something along the lines of 'The sense of time and place in Eliot's poems helps readers understand their modern context,' but what you should be arguing is 'Eliot's rhetoric aids him in suggesting that the human mind is an intricate and complex thing' or 'Eliot's poetry shows audiences what happens to the human mind when it is isolated and lonely' etc. Basically, what do you have to say about the link between the essay topic you've been given? In this case, what is Eliot saying about the human mind!?

Your use of the word 'context' was also quite ambiguous in places, and I think being more specific about the contexts you're referring to would be very helpful. This seems like it was the product of you taking an essay that was originally intended for a different prompt and transposing it here, which is okay, but you need to know how to adapt your piece and make it suit this discussion. A lot of this evidence would work for multiple prompts, but without you consciously moulding your argument, I'm left wondering whether any of it is relevant.

There are a few key places in your essay where you should be tailoring your piece to the prompt, particularly the starts and ends of your paragraphs, so perhaps work on making those as precise as possible so as to better communicate to your assessor what your thesis statement is.

Aside from that, your discussion was really good, and you just need to keep an eye on little things like sentence fragments and word choices. Also, there were a few sentences that were a bit too short and jarring, and others that were too long and got a little bit rambly and confusing, so just watch out for your sentence length to make sure your writing is as clear as possible :)

Feedback for gabriellav:
Spoiler
“Childhood discoveries are intensely emotional and meaningful.”
Consider this quote and evaluate the effectiveness of TWO texts in conveying these types of childhood discoveries.

>thank you for including the exam paper, by the way!< :D

The transformation into early adolescence after several years of being cocooned is an intensely emotional and meaningful experience. This discovery of foreign terrain evokes emotions of curiosity and uncertainty as a child is confronted with the reality of the complicated world and loss of youthful innocence. Good, broad statements here that make your focus clear. It is however, not until the final stages of development that they will be capable of understanding the discoveries should be an apostrophe after the 's' here, assuming you're trying to say 'the significance and meaning of these discoveries.' significance and meaning. Texts 1 and 3 through evaluation and analysis this sounds a bit odd because it's as though you're saying the two texts justify this idea by doing evaluation and analysis, when what you're trying to convey is that when we evaluate and analyse these texts, we can see how they justify these ideas. Just a minor expression issue, but it pays to end your intro on a high note to help set a good foundation for the rest of your piece, effectively justify this notion to different extents. 

Text 3 skillfully positions the audience to understand the difficulty of entering adulthood. The child’s desperation for individuality and power causes rebellion quote? however enables him to reach a confronting discovery of self and transformation facilitates a confronting self-discovery and transformation. As the “ first shot struck”, this is the child’s first encounter this quote isn't really integrated here. See if I took out the quotation marks it would seem kind of ungrammatical? That means you need to make the language fit your own sentence. A bit more context would be useful here too; just a brief mention of how the poem focuses on a child who takes his father's gun and shoots an animal without fully understanding the consequences - a metaphor for transitioning into adulthood suddenly and incomprehensibly with power and rebellion which frightens him as he is “ afraid by the fallen gun, a lonely child who believed death clean and final”. The use of pathos in conjunction with negative connotations expressed in the words “ afraid” and lonely” reveals the child’s distress and incomprehension of his actions as a transitioning an innocent child transitioning to a rebellious teen seeking power. Good analysis Likewise, the consequences of the child’s rebellion reflected by the owl’s death, progresses his emotion expression is a bit weird here. Instead of saying it 'progresses his emotion,' try and say something about the actual emotion(s). The use of low modality to describe the owl as an "obscene bundle of stuff” further emphasises his the child's inability to overcome his bitter emotions. More importantly, it reveals his immaturity and incomplete intellectual development because he is unable to see the fragility of life, unlike however, the juxtaposition of the owl as a philosophical symbol of wisdom and foresight v good. Nevertheless, it is within the final stanza of the poem that illustrates the child’s new sense of understanding regarding his discovery and employs a metaphor “ owl blind” to encapsulate his sadness for what has begun; his journey to adulthood. Yes! Great job! You've gotten at the heard of the poem here. It is his tears with which symbolically validate the loss of innocence as a bitter experience and one that cannot be reclaimed.

Comparatively, whilst the perplexing process of childhood maturation is explored in text 3 as intensely emotion which emotions?? provoking, this concept is challenged in text 1, with the focus drawn to the value of childhood discoveries. Significantly, whilst the discovery in text 3 was initiated by a child who had just entered the rebellious teen stage, text 1 illustrates a youthful child that has not yet discovered adulthood but will be eventuated prompted(?) by curiosity.  The keyhole as a symbol of secrecy and a physical barrier, emphasises that a discovery behind the door is of high importance and value. Metaphorically, this foreign world behind the door represents the terrain of adulthood, which is just a key away Nice!:) Therefore, it is with the opening of this door that the child will initiate a change, that is, both his meaningful discovery and transformation into adolescence. Yet But as this child has not discovered adulthood yet, the child's expressionless facial gesture conveys his inability to see what is behind the door. He therefore is unable to express emotions, as the importance of this discovery, “ maturation” is all but a secret. This signifies the unawareness and lack of understanding children have when they are developing, similarly justified word check; I don't know if 'justified' is right here. 'Explored' perhaps, or 'depicted' in text 3. Moreover, the use of the large title with the placement of overgrown leaves running through the word “ Secret ”, also draws our attention to the fact that this child has not yet revealed seen ('revealed' would imply that he was revealing it to us) what is behind the door. The fact this discovery has been kept a “secret” reinforces that his journey into adulthood will be personal and private, and will offer him freedom like the untamed leaves behind the locked door awesome analysis here.  To be precise, the childhood discovery of maturation is experienced by all, yet personal to the individual, making it extremely meaningful.

Very good analysis of the pieces overall. You've made some solid links between the two, but haven't just kept comparing at the expense of quality analysis, and I like that you were able to offset your discussion of a child post-discovery with one who was teetering over the precipice but hadn't quite pushed past that barrier yet.

A few little expression issues, but nothing major. Most of my points would just be regarding opportunities for more analysis (eg. looking at how Harwood's poem uses the metaphor of a traumatic realisation of inevitability to convey the idea of adolescence, whereas the image has a more mystical, ethereal excitement stemming from the notion of opening up a doorway and accessing a new world) but you're not marked on what you don't cover, and what you have covered here is handled really well.

Try to keep your expression as succinct and precise as possible, as there's a chance you could cram in even more discussion as you get more and more practice with this, but aside from that, you seem to have a very good handle on the nature of the task and the process of analysis :)


Happy Physics Land

  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
  • MAXIMISE your marks by MINIMISING your errors
Re: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only)
« Reply #89 on: February 21, 2016, 11:26:59 pm »
Hey English Professors:

Sorry to bother you with another piece of writing from me. This is a module A essay using a question from 2013 HSC exam. Thank you very much in advance for sparing your time to mark my essay it is really kind of you guys to do stuff like this!!!! :))))
Mathematics: 96
Maths Extension 2: 93
Maths Extension 1: 97
English Advanced: 92
Physics: 95
Chemistry: 92
Engineering Studies: 90
Studies of Religion I: 98

2017 ATAR: 99.70
University of Sydney Civil Engineering and Commerce
University of Sydney Faculty of Civil Engineering Scholar
Student Representatives Council Student Housing Officer
City of Sydney Council Sydney Ambassador
University of Sydney Business School Student Mentor
Entrepreneur, Company of Year Junior Achievements Australia