NEED HONEST OPINION/INPUT (1 Viewer)

[MONONYMOUS]

So, in the Standard English Paper 2, I got a question that asked something like 'to what extent does dialogue allow us to create an understanding of cultural tension' or some sht like that. Anyways, I interpreted 'cultural tension' as the tension or issues between different cultures because of their diverse customs, practices, etc. E.g. European and Australians could clash due to culture. However, my text - The Castle - had very little of this, and since it asked to what extent does DIALOGUE allow us to... - it meant pretty much that NESA had decided that cultural tension was definitely explored in my text. In order to counter this, I decided to interpret 'cultural tension' differently and talk about how my texts' representation of key Australian values (such as multiculturalism, egalitarianism and family life) actually challenges the negative stereotypes against Australia (such as racism). Hence, readers are faced with two different perspectives that create a sense of cultural tension. So, that was basically the main idea I was writing about.

My question is, will I lose marks because I chose my own interpretation of 'cultural tension' as opposed to the generic, orthodox definition/interpretation? Also, I did back up my argument with roughly 3 pieces of evidence per paragraph (there were 3 body paragraphs), I wrote 5 pages, and I also went a bit further to argue that while DIALOGUE does show this 'cultural tension' to a great extent, film techniques let us create an understanding of it as well to a minor extent. Overall, my structure and my arguments were quite good, however, I just feel a bit sketch my (second) interpretation (that I used) of cultural tension wasn't uno the generic one.

Pls send me your input on my situation. Thank you

 

[#RoadTo31Atar]

You're being a sadkunt bro, you think Zyzz would worry about this shit?

 

[MONONYMOUS]

You're being a sadkunt bro, you think Zyzz would worry about this shit?

Yeah true, fk it. Mirin bra

 

[BLIT2014]

So, in the Standard English Paper 2, I got a question that asked something like 'to what extent does dialogue allow us to create an understanding of cultural tension' or some sht like that. Anyways, I interpreted 'cultural tension' as the tension or issues between different cultures because of their diverse customs, practices, etc. E.g. European and Australians could clash due to culture. However, my text - The Castle - had very little of this, and since it asked to what extent does DIALOGUE allow us to... - it meant pretty much that NESA had decided that cultural tension was definitely explored in my text. In order to counter this, I decided to interpret 'cultural tension' differently and talk about how my texts' representation of key Australian values (such as multiculturalism, egalitarianism and family life) actually challenges the negative stereotypes against Australia (such as racism). Hence, readers are faced with two different perspectives that create a sense of cultural tension. So, that was basically the main idea I was writing about.

My question is, will I lose marks because I chose my own interpretation of 'cultural tension' as opposed to the generic, orthodox definition/interpretation? Also, I did back up my argument with roughly 3 pieces of evidence per paragraph (there were 3 body paragraphs), I wrote 5 pages, and I also went a bit further to argue that while DIALOGUE does show this 'cultural tension' to a great extent, film techniques let us create an understanding of it as well to a minor extent. Overall, my structure and my arguments were quite good, however, I just feel a bit sketch my (second) interpretation (that I used) of cultural tension wasn't uno the generic one.

Pls send me your input on my situation. Thank you

I mean if your analysis was good, I don't think you would be penalised much/at all.

 

[LyricalYellow9]

Yo I also did the castle for mod B! I talked about how disparities in the formality and register in dialogue distinguished people from different social classes apart. I only did 2 body paragraphs and the second one was about multicultural Australia and how dialogue differentiated people also.
Tho I'm pretty sure didn't really address the 'tension' part of it.

I think you'll be fine? I mean if you've argued it really well then I'm sure you'll get good marks

 

[MONONYMOUS]

I mean if your analysis was good, I don't think you would be penalised much/at all.

I feel as though my analysis was good, and when the marker reads my essay they should understand the point I'm trying to get across. Just a bit sketch about them wanting me to refer to the uno general, most accepted definition of cultural tension. Thank you

 

[MONONYMOUS]

Yo I also did the castle for mod B! I talked about how disparities in the formality and register in dialogue distinguished people from different social classes apart. I only did 2 body paragraphs and the second one was about multicultural Australia and how dialogue differentiated people also.
Tho I'm pretty sure didn't really address the 'tension' part of it.

I think you'll be fine? I mean if you've argued it really well then I'm sure you'll get good marks

Thanks man. When you talked about how dialogue distinguished people from different social classes. Did you talk specifically about like the lawyers, Lawrence, Barlow Group/government, and how they can be distinguished from people such as Darryl and Dennis, etc?

 

[LyricalYellow9]

Thanks man. When you talked about how dialogue distinguished people from different social classes. Did you talk specifically about like the lawyers, Lawrence, Barlow Group/government, and how they can be distinguished from people such as Darryl and Dennis, etc?

Yep pretty much exactly that. I compared the sayings of Darryl's household to the formal language from the lawyers and said something like 'it shows they can't really coexist well, hence tension or something lmao