Thanks, all of that really helped. (EDIT: Just looked and I can't actually find the text response techniques. I found one that I think was for context, and some hyperlinks don't work for some reason on my MAC.)
I'll download that thing you mentioned on page 2 or whatever and see if that helps. What my main problem is that I don't really know how to deconstruct a prompt properly and respond to it with in-depth details. For that prompt of ...
‘There father! There, Achilles! You are avenged!’ How does Ransom suggest that there are more noble characteristics than the ability and desire to kill.’
I can honestly say I had no idea what I was meaning to respond to. My teacher said to focus on 'metalanguage' (whatever that is I'm a spastic) for the 'how' and then I have no idea what else, so basically no idea for everything
If it were me I'd simply write 3 paragraphs addressing something like the positives of love and legacy (one paragraph each) in comparison to the ability and desire to kill (one paragraph) a person, which would be me sort of contrasting the two but that isn't right because I'd only be focusing on one idea. I'm supposed to be able to integrate multiple themes and eloquently write within the matter of 55-60 minutes and I don't really know how; I've basically been on par with borderline failing English in former years, yet people who can't even string a sentence together without innumerable imperfections score highly.
'It's the relevance and the quality/sophistication of your ideas that will be a more influential factor in determining your mark.' I'm not sure if you are informed or adept with Ransom, but I'll just hope you are for the sake of me trying to improve
Let me pretend I think 'love' is the most noble characteristic that Malouf explores in the text, I'd probably say something along the lines of that with a touch of sophistication as a topic sentence. Then I'd say something like this is evident with Somax who exemplifies his love for his children who have passed. I could stop here, or I could continue to string crap out that is basically altering what I'm saying by the slightest in a new sentence, just adding wider meaning to what I've already said. For example, he shows this when prattling with Priam when he is so disheartened when his daughter-in-law gets sick and wish he was in her position etc. How could I formulate my next idea which my teacher is pushing me into doing, for example, Hecuba's love for Hector into the same paragraph? This is where I go wrong in text response because I simply don't understand. I wish I could write like 6 sentences per paragraph and be done, and have some formulaic writing to it.
Like aforementioned, the storytelling of a published book that I did for my first paragraph because I'm an uncoordinated loon took me FOREVER, like an hour to find quotes and write it and it basically has no conceptual ideas to it. It took me ages to continue writing my next paragraph so I basically gave up and wrote like 250-300 words in 2-3 minutes because I hate this. I'm a bit worried because my SAC is on Monday week and I have countless other SACS I also have to focus on (cram).
I wish I was more adept with English.
EDIT: The rest of my essay. You'll realise I have absolutely no 'ideas' behind what I'm writing - it is a piece of shieeet.
The vexatious of murder is explored through Priam’s role of boar hunting. Priam was ‘symbolically as the centre’ of the boar hunting but ‘could have no part in the merely physical business’ as it was ‘his duty to maintain and make shine.’ The visual imagery of murder that is portrayed, such as ‘a ton of steaming flesh and bone waiting to be hacked’ entails the vivid depths that killing has on a man, whether human or lower on the food chain. Priam ‘could have no part in the merely physical business’ or killing the boar for this reason as it polarises men from their fundamental characteristics of being human, yet ‘a little of the beast’s thick blood [was] smeared on his brow,’ being symbolic of his strength to conquer this animal as ‘the realm of the royal was representational.’
The lower orders of creation can often teach the most virtous elementary principles to men..Ransom is a Bildungsroman of sorts, as King Priam was a being that lived through the transition of slavery to royalty and was searching for the catalyst for him becoming a man which is found through a carter. Somax was ‘a bearded, shaggy-headed fellow’ that was representative of an ‘ordinary man’ throughout Ransom and leads Priam in an adventure outside the walls of Troy. Somax teaches Priam the lessons of being a man through the ‘chatter’ that ‘was of no use’ which was atypical for Priam, coming from a world where ‘a man only spoke to give shape to a decision he had come to…’ Through the simple ‘prattling’ of the men, Priam learnt about love and humility that was elusive to him, and also regret and life was now ‘curious’ and of ‘interest’ to him. Both men had lost children, and Somax relates to Priam when he ‘closed his fist and brought it to his chest to indicate the heart,’ exemplifying that worrying for the health of children ‘is in our nature.’ However, the men also shared experience with regret and not doing the right thing by their children, demonstrated by Somax ‘open[ing] his (son) lip with my fist’ which had the affect of Priam feeling more human through relation of mistakes as he had no close relation with his children. In turn, Priam feels less like a man detached from humanity, and is willing and excited to engage more in life.