BR/BNW Context (1 Viewer)

[Coles Punk]

anyone get this i had no idea then a friend of mine said she talked about the all Communist stuff in BNW and how it related to the time it was written, oh well can't change it now

 

[Spike]

yep that was what your ment to speak about...

 

[quartic]

I wrote shit but what I was trying to write about was the way the values of the societies in which each text was composed is reflected in the text. I didn't do it well though as I left it to last and I was tired though I had only a few minutes less than 40.

 

[philbert_frog]

I talked about Huxley's context, Scott's context, the context of the societies in which they lived (ie. 1920s England and 1980s America) and how the context, and the values of the composers affected what they wrote.

So in essence I agreed with the question.

 

[Coles Punk]

well i guess i just screwed that question

 

[quartic]

But then there was the element of values etc. Last year the examiners comments said all good responses had balance between context and themes/values. Though last years question didn't even mention context and if you didn't mention it you were screwed.

 

[jessika]

meh, I only had a little paragraph on context, then I ran out of time half way through my BNW/BR paper, pity, too because I had so much more to write.

 

[Spock]

the moment I saw that question I thought "what the bloody hell is the board trying to do with our minds?!" There were probably wayyy too many ways to interpret that question, although hopefully if enough people take a particular option, they'll mark it as correct, even if it isn't... or something like that, anyway.

I ended up taking the option of writing about human values in the texts - equal opportunities, animal rights, total crap like that... we'll see what the Board has to say about that...

 

[Morgues]

Even if you interpreted the question incorrectly, if it fits the question and backed up your views properly they could not really mark you down

All modules had many different ways they could be interpreted

 

[Doylie]

Sorry Morgues, i tend to disagree. I thought that the question was absolutely fine, it suited the Module perfectly ("Comparative Study of Texts and Context "). I don't see why people had trouble writing on it, we had spent so much time in class learning about the context -> values -> representation of each text, and our main focus was on the comparison aspect of the module. The essay, in my opinion was fine, and specific in what it asked for. It wasnt asking for an in-depth exploration of what the texts were saying about humanity's place in the natural world, or an extremely indepth analysis of how they were saying it (although the comparison of representations was a part of the question, and i did talk about it). As far as i viewed that question there was one way, and one way only to answer it..

 

[Morgues]

I can't remmember the question specifically (threw the question paper out) but didn't it give a statement on how the context shapes meaning and then ask if you consider the study of values more interesting?

That could be interpreted numerous ways. You could say one was more important/interesting then the other or that they both complement each other, that would influence the direction your essay would take.

 

[smithy]

I thought that i talked too much on the context and not enough on the finer detail and a close analysis of the texts- i did however tie in the similar values portrayed in both texts with the fact they were produced in similar contexts

 

[Eeeek]

Ummmm i was a bit confused by the question, but i pretty much just talked about how huxley was making a satirical comment about society, and humantiy....am i was off there? I also spoke about how Scott decided to make the mivie after seeing the living conditions in Japan and his ideas that this type of environment could occur through advancments in technology.....i chucked in a few techniques too......am i gunna fail?????

 

[A_Storia]

Went well in that question (I hope) Talked about Huxley commenting on communism "Everybody belongs to everyone", Production line manufacturing, through bokanovsky's, cosumerism, ending is better than mending that sort of stuff.

For Blade Runner talked about pollution concerns, esp. Acid rain and what America viewed as the "asian invasion"

 

[_sock_]

well, considering what everyone else put, i can say that I'm offically screwed for english. i just hope i pass now. i thought that the bnw/br q was harsh though. last yrs question was easy, so why did they have to change it?

 

[Confuzzled?!]

god!
i failed miserably!!!!

i sat there thinking 'what the bloody hell? to what extent has what not balh blah blah?' !?!??! what sort of question was that?!?!
omg!!!!

*sobs*
failed failed failed!

 

[Alex]

I read the rubrick the night b4 and it was all focused on context. Than I read one of the essays from the standards package and it was all focused on context. Than I wrote about context

 

[ALF STEWART]

i had no idea, and that was mainly due to the fact that i didnt no what CONTEXT ment, so i am fucked, and when my mate told me what it ment i realised how bad i went, so i went and drowned my sorrows with a few schooners at the bowling club

 

[superhubert]

what's everyone complaining about? I thought it was the most generalised question of the entire HSC so far. I just rehashed a memorised essay word for word, I didn't have change anything. compared with last years questions these were easy. would you rather write a conversation of Lear or an essay on order & chaos, or an essay on how Goneril and Regan have been portrayed in different productions?. I know which i'd rather!

 

[ben]

The question was soo simple! I wish I had memorised a general essay beforehand... but I didn't.

Unfortunately under exam pressure I screwed up the essay - i went on about context for a while but then got stuck when trying to talk about values and comparing them and just got in a big mess.

But the question was right out of the rubric!! i just wish I was better prepared.