Login | Register
Enrol now for our new online tutoring program. Learn from the best tutors. Get amazing results. Learn more.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

January 29, 2022, 05:45:30 am

Author Topic: Compilation of Text Response Feedback  (Read 75738 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2590
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #60 on: May 22, 2013, 05:09:54 pm »
+1
This is only an introduction for a Twelve Angry Men essay, I may post the finished piece later:

'Despite questioning the ultimate fairness and reliability of the jury system, Twelve Angry Men is, at heart, a tribute to this system.’  Discuss.

In Twelve Angry Men, the jurors are all men with different opinions, who have been called together to determine the fate of a young man who has been accused of murdering his father. The playwright, Reginald Rose, recognises that there are flaws in the jury system, as some jurors let emotions cloud their judgement or hinder their ability to express their opinion to the other jurors, which could have resulted in an innocent man being executed. In contrast to the 1953 Rosenberg case, Juror 8 is able to convince all the other jurors to vote "not guilty" by the end of the play. By this, Rose shows that if there is someone who encourages deliberation, the jury system can function as a fair and reliable method of justice.
As for your first line, I'd read previous pages of this thread to see how I recommend going about it. Your  first line is relatively bland and it doesn't do much for your essay. It doesn't hit criteria, it doesn't tell the reader anything new. (I notice you're relatively new to the site, please don't think I'm being a prick here by using mean words like 'bland', I'm just trying to give good feedback). "The playwright" is also unnecessary. Use one or the other. That sentence that beings with 'the playwright' is also pretty clunky.. I think you could use a better verb than recognises - what's the message? Does he condemn, endorse? The 1853 case seems very out of place and I'm not sure how much you'd want to discuss the world outside of the text... It makes me uncomfortable however, I'm not an expert so if your teacher is telling you to do it, definitely do it for the SAC. Your ideas could also do with showign a bit more depth. I mean, take "Juror 8 can convince the other jurors" and replace it with something like "Rose's characterisation of the play's protagonist demonstrates that objectivity and a rigid adherence to the principles of the justice system are imperative for a just result." -- see how the second one has a bit more depth? Do this three times over (your intro also seems to not very strongly identify three main/key ideas of your essay. I should know what you're going to talk about by the end of your intro). "By this" - just say, hence, therefore, or even 'due to this' if you want to keep that sort of expression. By this seems quite casual.

I would strongly recommend reading through the past pages of this post for my 12AM feedback and recommendations.
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2590
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #61 on: May 22, 2013, 05:12:40 pm »
+2
I'm temporarily locking this topic, guys. There's just four weeks until my last exam, in which case I can come back and mark properly. I just won't be able to continue keeping up with these threads unless I decide I don't want to pass my first semester of Uni... I'm going to try and get the other threads up to date and also lock them. Sorry, but I'll be back in four weeks! (please don't hate me)
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2590
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #62 on: July 17, 2013, 09:58:56 pm »
0
Updated the original thread so sets of essays and feedback are compiled and easily accessible :)
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

Yacoubb

  • Guest
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #63 on: July 25, 2013, 11:17:53 pm »
0
This is on Gattaca by Andrew Niccol :)  This is my first Gattaca piece


Question: The society of Gattaca works to repress rather than to enhance the potential of human beings. Discuss

Andrew Niccol's controversial film Gattaca demonstrates that in a vain attempt to create a Utopian world ridden of any imperfections, the qualities of individuals and their capabilities are disregarded. Vincent is hindered of his ability to live his dream of becoming an astronaut as a consequence of his genome. Furthermore, Jerome's depression originates from coming second place and the prospect of not being good enough, a sentiment instilled within Gattacians. The overall pall of gloom that hangs over the workers at Gattaca, and the absence of any human qualities, further insinuates that creating such a perfect race is damaging the human persona. The viewer recognises that although the ability to rid the world of diseases through genetic intervention may carry positive significances, the negative repercussions of discrimination against the genetically inferior do exist.

Niccol suggests that a low genetic quotient revealing possible genetic defects plays a paramount role in the decision made at Gattaca regarding employment, substantiating the reality that "discrimination had come down to a science". Vincent, the film's protagonist, is a "faith child" - conceived naturally with no genetic intervention to rid him of any susceptibilities to becoming an alcoholic, or inheriting any illnesses. Upon his birth, it is revealed that there is a 99% chance of him having cardiovascular complications, and genetic sequencing indicates that his life expectancy will be approximately thirty years of age. Antonio's reaction to naming him Vincent, as opposed to the traditional inheritance of the father's name, exemplifies the reality that in the world of Gattaca, a "child conceived in love [does not] have a greater chance of happiness; on the contrary, their prosperity and liberty is supressed by their inferiority. Nevertheless, Vincent's genome prevents him from being able to fulfil his ambition as an astronaut whilst retaining his identity as Vincent Freeman. Instead, he is forced to borrow Jerome Morrow's identity by borrowing urine samples, blood vial samples and other genetic specimens, merely to allow Vincent to fulfil his dream of travelling to Titan, a moon in Saturn. The reader acknowledges the fact that Vincent's determination and human qualities of ambition and perseverance, all facets of his persona completely ignored by Gattacians, have allowed him to survive in a world demanding the eradication of imperfections on the basis of genes.

Moreover, the mentality acquired by Gattacians that anything below perfection, or first place, is enough to tarnish one's superiority proves to be a plausible explanation for Jerome Morrow's prolonged misery. During the film's exposition, Jerome is seen tied to a wheelchair with a drinking problem; Vincent complains that "there is more vodka in this piss [sample], than there is piss" when Vincent must use the urine sample to use Jerome's identity to fulfil his dream. This follows Jerome coming second place in a swimming competition, and his inability to comprehend how his perfect genetic quotient could possibly hinder his capability of obtaining first place. This substantiates the sinister reality that in Gattaca, they "get [the invalids] working so hard for any flaw that after a while that is all[they] see". However, when Jerome and Vincent decide to work together to fulfil their dreams together, Jerome awakes to the realisation that he is able to complete his disrupted journey to success through Vincent, before suiciding by the film's resolution when Vincent and the other astronauts travel to Titan in Saturn, a cathartic moment in the film, that unveils the reality that in Gattaca, individuals are deprived of their happiness and ability to transform dreams into realities, unless their genetic quotient yields excellent sequenced results.

Niccol purposely portrays all the workers in Gattaca segregated from each other and having very little interaction with one another, to expose the Gattacians as being neglectful of nature surrounding them and having one mission in life - to reach perfection that is arguably not able to be reached by humans, irrespective of genetic quotients. Anton, the genetically-engineered brother of Vincent, is "the son [Vincent's] father would have considered worthy of his name". He is portrayed as being hungry for perfection, consistently feeding his ego by observing the inadequacies of Vincent, from the moment they are measured for height and Anton is taller than Vincent, in spite of being two years younger. Additionally, the workers at Gattaca seem to lack individuality and character; they are all just "[other] suits in a world of similarly attired valids", signifying the fact that creating a world where genomics is the most imperative aspect of life will stifle the world of its creativity, prosperity and individuality, that is all withdrawn from Gattacians in a pursuit of being perfect. This supports the fact that rather than enhancing the human race to improve and progress, the Gattacians society is institutionalising injustice on the basis of genes, that have no correspondence to character, persona and psyche.

By the film's resolution, the viewer recognises that although a Utopian world would involve the eradication of diseases and the improvement of the human race medically, several ethical issues lie that could pose to be threatening to the social structure of the human race. The mistreatment of invalids, such as Vincent, on the basis of their genetic quotient, signifies that in such a world, character and an established ethic to persevere are completely irrelevant. Furthermore, the prolonged depression that ultimately consumes Jerome Morrow can be owed to the acquired order of thought that Gattaca cannot cater for those who are not perfect, repressing the human race opposed to enhancing it. The world of Gattaca portrayed as a world involving no creativity and life further indicates that the presumed potential of human beings being enhanced is ultimately being doused by the vision to be perfect, and settle for nothing less. Andrew Niccol's message is quite sinister - the human race will be lead to its destruction if one's genome's significance surpasses the significance of their character, which is one asset that cannot be determined by a molecule of DNA.

 Criticism will be much appreciated!


jeanweasley

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Trust only in yourself
  • Respect: +73
  • School: SHGC
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #64 on: August 18, 2013, 09:08:57 pm »
0
This is a Ransom text response responding to the prompt :

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


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

Humans do not have full control in Ransom, yet Malouf suggests that through storytelling, humans are able to control their fate and choose to live or act in a way that they want to be perceived or remembered. Priam's desire to be perceived as an ordinary man instead of a king propels his doing of 'something new' and 'unheard of' by ransoming his son's body from Achilles. Here, Malouf utilises the imagery of the knot to represent Priam's self-consciousness and his longing to feel like a normal person instead of a 'ceremonial' king whose face is Troy's 'living map'. Malouf also alludes to the fact that when Priam was ransomed, he lost his identity as 'Podarces' and became Priam, the 'price paid'. This transformation from a pampered 'lord of pleasures' to an 'indistinguishable' person is a testament that at any time, Priam could lose everything he has and start all over again. This motivates him to engage in the notion of chance that in a world where Gods interfere, it is also possible for one to alter their fate. This gives Priam the ability to find himself as a normal person, especially a grieving father whose mission it is is to redeem his son.  Thus, the act of ransoming gives Priam the ability to be remembered not for the destruction of Troy and his death but for his simple act, an act that 'any man might do'.

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

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

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

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

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

---
Phew. Didn't think it was going to be this long. It was only three pages on paper :P
2014: BA @ Monash University
2015: LLB(Hons)/BA @ Monash University

Smiley_

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
  • Respect: +147
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #65 on: August 25, 2013, 09:08:48 am »
0





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




Through the 1954 film, “On the Waterfront”, Elia Kazan portrays the moral and emotional growth of Terry Malloy as well as presenting characters as good and evil. Kazan presents those who fight against injustices as superior as well as those who give protection and those who are cause of these injustices as corrupt and unjust.

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

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

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

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

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


thanks for reading

any feedback would be great :)

unfamila

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 142
  • Lad
  • Respect: +1
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #66 on: August 31, 2013, 01:03:35 pm »
0
Joey and Edie are both catalysts for Terry’s transition.

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

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

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

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

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

 Joey and Edie are both catalysts of ‘on the waterfront’, however there are others who influence his transformation. Father Barry is extremely influential in pursing his testification, to help him learn ‘what’s wrong, from what’s right’. As well as these influential individuals, Terry’s evocative conscious and emotions build to form revenge against friendly and are pivotal in his transformation. Thus there are many factors that are involved in terry testifying against the powerful Friendly, however Kazan masterfully includes all these techniques to successfully depict; Terry’s transition from a bum to someone with great dignity.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2013, 01:08:19 pm by unfamila »

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2590
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #67 on: August 31, 2013, 03:06:55 pm »
+3
This is on Gattaca by Andrew Niccol :)  This is my first Gattaca piece


Question: The society of Gattaca works to repress rather than to enhance the potential of human beings. Discuss

Andrew Niccol's controversialPersonally, I think adjectives of this nature are a waste of words, saying that the film is controversial doesn't really hit any of the criteria, and I think most of the time is used to try and 'spruce' a sentence film Gattaca demonstrates that in a vain attempt to create a Utopian world ridden of any imperfections, the qualities of individuals and their capabilities are disregarded.Decent contention, however, perhaps it's too absolute? I mean, surely the potential of human beings, just generally, has been enhanced by Gattaca? I think that's undeniable. Vincent is hindered of his ability to live his dream of becoming an astronaut as a consequence of his genome. Furthermore, Jerome's depression originates from coming second place and the prospect of not being good enough, a sentiment instilled within Gattacians How does this repress his potential? . The overall pall of gloom that hangs over the workers at Gattaca, and the absence of any human qualities, further insinuates that creating such a perfect race is damaging the human persona So perhaps, damaging our emotional persona? It's okay to be direct.. The viewer recognisesdoes the viewer, though? Have you interviewed all of them? that although the ability to rid the world of diseases through genetic intervention may carry positive significances, the negative repercussions of discrimination against the genetically inferior do exist.  "the negative repercussions of discrimination... do exist" -- this doesn't really follow on from "although the ability to rid the world of diseases..." I mean, that's what happens in the movie, but this sentence is talking about the viewer. Would the view recognise that there are negative repercussions of ridding the world of disease, one of those potentially being the discrimination against the genetically inferior?

Niccol suggests that a low genetic quotient revealing possible genetic defects plays a paramount role in the decision made at Gattaca regarding employment, substantiating the reality that "discrimination had come down to a science". I dislike quotes in the topic sentence. I think it promotes lazy writing when you could better hit hte criteria ny leaving out quotes and just showing your sub-argument in relation to the text and the prompt in your topic sentence instead.Vincent, the film's protagonist, is a "faith child" - conceived naturally with no genetic intervention to rid him of any susceptibilities to becoming an alcoholic, or inheriting any illnesses alcoholism or illness. Upon his birth, it is revealed that there is a 99% chance of him having cardiovascular complications, and genetic sequencing indicates that his life expectancy will be approximately thirty years of age. Antonio's reaction to naming him Vincent, as opposed to the traditional inheritance of the father's name, exemplifies the reality that in the world of Gattaca, a "child conceived in love [does not] have a greater chance of happiness; on the contrary, their prosperity and liberty is supressed by their inferiority. Nice!Nevertheless, Vincent's genome prevents him from being able to fulfil his ambition as an astronaut whilst retaining his identity as Vincent Freeman. Instead, he is forced to borrow Jerome Morrow's identity by borrowing urine samples, blood vial samples and other genetic specimens, merely to allow Vincent to fulfil his dream of travelling to Titan, a moon in Saturn. The reader reader?!acknowledges Drop any type of "the audience now knows x" It's fine to say "the author shows the audience x" or "the audience is positioned x", but it's just logically lazy to assert definitive things about the audiencethe fact that Vincent's determination and human qualities of ambition and perseverance, all facets of his persona completely ignored by Gattacians, have allowed him to survive in a world demanding the eradication of imperfections on the basis of genes. I think this is suitable for Year 11. In Year 12 you'll want more quotes to justify the more analysis that also comes along with Year 12.

Moreover, the mentality acquired by Gattacians that anything below perfection, or first place, is enough to tarnish one's superiority proves to be a plausible explanation for Jerome Morrow's prolonged misery. During the film's exposition, Jerome is seen tied to a wheelchair with a drinking problem; Vincent complains that "there is more vodka in this piss [sample], than there is piss" when Vincent must use the urine sample to use Jerome's identity to fulfil his dream. This follows Jerome coming second place in a swimming competition, and his inability to comprehend how his perfect genetic quotient could possibly hinder his capability of obtaining first place. This substantiates the sinister reality that in Gattaca, they "get [the invalids] working so hard for any flaw that after a while that is all[they] see". However, when Jerome and Vincent decide to work together to fulfil their dreams together, Jerome awakes to the realisation that he is able to complete his disrupted journey to success through Vincent, before suiciding by the film's resolution when Vincent and the other astronauts travel to Titan in Saturn, a cathartic moment in the film, that unveils the reality that in Gattaca, individuals are deprived of their happiness and ability to transform dreams into realities, unless their genetic quotient yields excellent sequenced results. mammoth sentence,

Niccol purposely portrays all the workers in Gattaca segregated from each other and having very little interaction with one another, to expose the Gattacians as being neglectful of nature surrounding them and having one mission in life - to reach perfection that is arguably not able to be reached by humans, irrespective of genetic quotients. Anton, the genetically-engineered brother of Vincent, is "the son [Vincent's] father would have considered worthy of his name". He is portrayed as being hungry for perfection, consistently feeding his ego by observing the inadequacies of Vincent, from the moment they are measured for height and Anton is taller than Vincent, in spite of being two years younger. Additionally, the workers at Gattaca seem to lack individuality and character; they are all just "[other] suits in a world of similarly attired valids", signifying the fact that creating a world where genomics is the most imperative aspect of life will stifle the world of its creativity, prosperity and individuality, that is all withdrawn from Gattacians in a pursuit of being perfect. This supports the fact that rather than enhancing the human race to improve and progress, the Gattacians society is institutionalising injustice on the basis of genes, that have no correspondence to character, persona and psyche.

By the film's resolution, the viewer recognises that although a Utopian world would involve the eradication of diseases and the improvement of the human race medically, several ethical issues lie that could pose to be threatening to the social structure of the human race. The mistreatment of invalids, such as Vincent, on the basis of their genetic quotient, signifies that in such a world, character and an established ethic to persevere are completely irrelevant. Furthermore, the prolonged depression that ultimately consumes Jerome Morrow can be owed to the acquired order of thought that Gattaca cannot cater for those who are not perfect, repressing the human race opposed to enhancing it. The world of Gattaca portrayed as a world involving no creativity and life further indicates that the presumed potential of human beings being enhanced is ultimately being doused by the vision to be perfect, and settle for nothing less. Andrew Niccol's message is quite sinister - the human race will be lead to its destruction if one's genome's significance surpasses the significance of their character, which is one asset that cannot be determined by a molecule of DNA.

 Criticism will be much appreciated!
This is actually really nicely written for the majority of it.
The things you need to do to get marks:
show textual knowledge,
analyse well
write/structure your essay nicely

You've done the third pretty well, but in Year 12 you'll want to quote more to show textual knowledge, but mostly to springboard your analysis of the text in relation to the prompt.
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

Yacoubb

  • Guest
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #68 on: August 31, 2013, 03:14:05 pm »
0
This is actually really nicely written for the majority of it.
The things you need to do to get marks:
show textual knowledge,
analyse well
write/structure your essay nicely

You've done the third pretty well, but in Year 12 you'll want to quote more to show textual knowledge, but mostly to springboard your analysis of the text in relation to the prompt.


Thanks a lot :) That's really helpful, and I appreciate the time you've taken to do this!

How much would you give out of 10 for this essay? I mean, my knowledge of this text is far from flawless. I know that next year, I'll be using a lot more textual evidence.

What's one way of not making my reference to the viewer being so general?

Thanks

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2590
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #69 on: August 31, 2013, 04:09:49 pm »
+1
You're really welcome :)

Ah, I really don't like giving marks out of 10 haha - at what standard? The end of Year 12?

Well, those things you'd like to say about the viewer recognising and whatever else, just put that into your analysis with metalanguage or authorial verbs (X Author demonstrates, reinforces, illuminates, highlights, asserts, conveys etc etc etc)

By the film's resolution, the viewer <the director's name> recognises demonstrates that although a Utopian world would involve the eradication of diseases and the improvement of the human race medically, several ethical issues lie that could pose to be threatening to the social structure of the human race.

Attributing it to the author evades the type of "how do you know?" thing, because the author can demonstrate things and not do it deliberately. So I'd just say "Author demonstrates that...." or "<image> symbolises that...", does that make sense?
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

Yacoubb

  • Guest
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #70 on: August 31, 2013, 05:22:15 pm »
0
You're really welcome :)

Ah, I really don't like giving marks out of 10 haha - at what standard? The end of Year 12?

Well, those things you'd like to say about the viewer recognising and whatever else, just put that into your analysis with metalanguage or authorial verbs (X Author demonstrates, reinforces, illuminates, highlights, asserts, conveys etc etc etc)

By the film's resolution, the viewer <the director's name> recognises demonstrates that although a Utopian world would involve the eradication of diseases and the improvement of the human race medically, several ethical issues lie that could pose to be threatening to the social structure of the human race.

Attributing it to the author evades the type of "how do you know?" thing, because the author can demonstrate things and not do it deliberately. So I'd just say "Author demonstrates that...." or "<image> symbolises that...", does that make sense?

I see :) Thanks

And a mark of standard at the end of yr 11 and then one for the end of year 12 :)

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2590
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #71 on: August 31, 2013, 05:25:11 pm »
0
Hm. Well, at my school I suppose this would get close to full marks in Year 11 lol. For an end of year Year 12 exam, maybe a 4 or 5?
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

Yacoubb

  • Guest
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #72 on: August 31, 2013, 05:26:04 pm »
0
Hm. Well, at my school I suppose this would get close to full marks in Year 11 lol. For an end of year Year 12 exam, maybe a 4 or 5?

Oh God that is so bad.... I need to work really hard next year!

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2590
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #73 on: August 31, 2013, 05:26:55 pm »
0
...If it makes you feel any better, a guy on the forums gave me a 4 for an essay I wrote in a practise SAC halfway through the year :P
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

Yacoubb

  • Guest
Re: [English] [Text Response] [Feedback]
« Reply #74 on: August 31, 2013, 05:29:25 pm »
0
...If it makes you feel any better, a guy on the forums gave me a 4 for an essay I wrote in a practise SAC halfway through the year :P

Over this summer, I'm going to read A Christmas Carol (our first text) a few times, and write a whole lot of essays, and hopefully get some people on the forum (including you) to read them, correct them. I want a 40+ for English, and I hope I can reach a 8+/10 by mid-year next year.

Thanks a lot :) I appreciate it!