General Thoughts: English Advanced Paper 2 (3 Viewers)

[Makematics]

High 80s could yield a band 6



Don't tell me ur one of those people who chuck that word in to sound intellectual, coz my tutor says its fairly obvious when that happens.



Hahah, wait till 4u, coz 2012 was fairly easy

Nope, i actually understand the concept pretty well. Our trial Q was about it and i did well.

 

[Amaranth_]

I somehow adapted my characterisation to that response. Somehow.

You can argue something along the lines of corruption is evident through characterization or something and link in the idea of Hamlet's Machiavellian characterization (if you studied that)

 

[ridwan1]

Thank god English is over

 

[anomalousdecay]

You can argue something along the lines of corruption is evident through characterization or something and link in the idea of Hamlet's Machiavellian characterization (if you studied that)

Yes I did something similar to that but provided how his existentialism allowed Claudius to continue to corrupt Denmark.

 

[Amaranth_]

Yes I did something similar to that but provided how his existentialism allowed Claudius to continue to corrupt Denmark.

Hamlet's Existential discourse, and epistemological views of the notion of relativity. I talked a little about that too

 

[anomalousdecay]

Hamlet's Existential discourse, and epistemological views of the notion of relativity. I talked a little about that too

So glad now. I have that relief that I'm not alone. :alone:

Belonging

By the way, good signature quotes.

 

[Crobat]

Easy to say now in hindsight, but most people with prepared responses who didn't focus on themes would have panicked beyond their ability to even comprehend time, place and corruption and adapt their response.

If they couldn't process how simplistic the question was in the exam, then they don't deserve a good mark since they obviously didn't understand the concept of textual integrity to begin with, or consider the clear links between the themes when preparing (though I think the vast majority of people could do that, unless they honestly thought their regurgitated essay was going to be good enough without a solid understanding of the text/module itself in which case I hope they fail because they deserve to and don't really know how to use memorising an essay to their advantage and are part of the retards that make memorising look ineffective /end rant). And just my opinion as an English tutor whose best text was Hamlet, if your essay doesn't focus on themes you've already limited yourself. Focussing on stuff like characterisation and relationships can be good, but I think it's more effective as analysis to complement your themes, e.g. Hamlet/Claudius (morality/corruption, loyalty/disloyalty), Hamlet/Horatio (loyalty/honour), etc. In any case, I'm not saying you'll get a bad mark by doing so, but you really just made it harder for yourself to adapt is all.

 

[Amaranth_]

So glad now. I have that relieve that I'm not alone. :alone:

Belonging

By the way, good signature quotes.

haha, I know.

thanks lol

 

[anomalousdecay]

If they couldn't process how simplistic the question was in the exam, then they don't deserve a good mark since they obviously didn't understand the concept of textual integrity to begin with, or consider the clear links between the themes when preparing (though I think the vast majority of people could do that, unless they honestly thought their regurgitated essay was going to be good enough without a solid understanding of the text/module itself in which case I hope they fail because they deserve to and don't really know how to use memorising an essay to their advantage and are part of the retards that make memorising look ineffective /end rant). And just my opinion as an English tutor whose best text was Hamlet, if your essay doesn't focus on themes you've already limited yourself. Focussing on stuff like characterisation and relationships can be good, but I think it's more effective as analysis to complement your themes, e.g. Hamlet/Claudius (morality/corruption, loyalty/disloyalty), Hamlet/Horatio (loyalty/honour), etc. In any case, I'm not saying you'll get a bad mark by doing so, but you really just made it harder for yourself to adapt is all.

I get what you mean. But my themes are quite different and I know that there were better themes I could have focused on for this question, but was not comfortable on explaining. Its better to just go with what you are most confident with rather than start on a fresh new slate of nothing. By the way, at least the questions weren't complete shockers which throw a year down the drain. Hamlet's usually my stronger section but I think I can still scrape off a 16 or maybe 17.

I was relieved to see that question 10 didn't ask for specific chapters as our year speculated. If it asked for something like Show Trials for TJG then everyone would've been screwed.

 

[hsclover]

Why? That question was easy as fuck. Time and place are the fundamentals of textual integrity (which everyone should have in their essay) and corruption is a pretty significant theme that I doubt anyone ignored, which could've been drawn out from a lot of other themes like appearance vs reality, deception, morality, etc too. I highly doubt anyone with memorised responses would've found it too difficult, unless they really over analysed the question.

Edit: Mod C is a flawed syllabus in that you cannot get a question that is not generic because the Module itself is too shallow for anything deep. Unfortunately, the question will be the same each year.



Ironically, legitimate essay writing relies on first person as it is supposed to be a personal, persuasive medium. A common misconception is that proper essay formalities neglects first person, but traditional essay writing begs to differ. HSC English forgets this except in Module B.

Hmmm, I must say I agree Crobat Although, I do think that students will be able to attain 19's-20's if using the time/place in terms of construction of the play. I know at Abbotsleigh (at least in some classes), we were taught Hamlet through themes, and specifically the role of divinity in shaping human discourse, as well as the whole 'imposing' of a revenger role. If I were to have sat the exam, I would have used the power of divinity as part of the whole 'time/place' and used the Ghost's imposing of a role on Hamlet as specific moments constructed by Shakespeare, which clearly involve both time and place. For example, Claudius' speech which urges the nation to move past mourning (corruption), which then leads to Hamlet's disillusionment. However, context should definitely have been included, even if never explicitly in the question. (It was more implicit in this year's q). And yes, Mod B centres on textual integrity, so an essay should clearly reflect this understanding. To all the students who used time and place literally, it may serve you well, if done properly. Corruption, on the other hand, should have been ridiculously easy Good luck to everyone, and I'm sure your hard work will pay off!

 

[anomalousdecay]

Hmmm, I must say I agree Crobat Although, I do think that students will be able to attain 19's-20's if using the time/place in terms of construction of the play. I know at Abbotsleigh (at least in some classes), we were taught Hamlet through themes, and specifically the role of divinity in shaping human discourse, as well as the whole 'imposing' of a revenger role. If I were to have sat the exam, I would have used the power of divinity as part of the whole 'time/place' and used the Ghost's imposing of a role on Hamlet as specific moments constructed by Shakespeare, which clearly involve both time and place. For example, Claudius' speech which urges the nation to move past mourning (corruption), which then leads to Hamlet's disillusionment. However, context should definitely have been included, even if never explicitly in the question. (It was more implicit in this year's q). And yes, Mod B centres on textual integrity, so an essay should clearly reflect this understanding. To all the students who used time and place literally, it may serve you well, if done properly. Corruption, on the other hand, should have been ridiculously easy Good luck to everyone, and I'm sure your hard work will pay off!

I spoke of Hamlet and Claudius being disillusioned biblically of that specific era and of the time and how that came through characterisation of Hamlet's enforced role of being the loyal son where Shakespeare's unique delay allows corruption to develop in Denmark. I probably should have wrote more on the corruption's effect on Denmark and how it destroyed the royal order.

 

[Queenroot]

Oh fuck I completely forgot about mentioning textual integrity... awks. I did mention rhetorical devices though... Probs not good enough.

 

[LoadingUsername]

Ahh module B. :/ Anyone think I can get away with talking about relationships within the person? (ie. dichotomy of humanity)?

 

[Amaranth_]

If they couldn't process how simplistic the question was in the exam, then they don't deserve a good mark since they obviously didn't understand the concept of textual integrity to begin with, or consider the clear links between the themes when preparing (though I think the vast majority of people could do that, unless they honestly thought their regurgitated essay was going to be good enough without a solid understanding of the text/module itself in which case I hope they fail because they deserve to and don't really know how to use memorising an essay to their advantage and are part of the retards that make memorising look ineffective /end rant). And just my opinion as an English tutor whose best text was Hamlet, if your essay doesn't focus on themes you've already limited yourself. Focussing on stuff like characterisation and relationships can be good, but I think it's more effective as analysis to complement your themes, e.g. Hamlet/Claudius (morality/corruption, loyalty/disloyalty), Hamlet/Horatio (loyalty/honour), etc. In any case, I'm not saying you'll get a bad mark by doing so, but you really just made it harder for yourself to adapt is all.

Agree, but still prefer to go in without a memorized response. I know most of Hamlet off the top of my head anyway.

 

[anomalousdecay]

Ahh module B. :/ Anyone think I can get away with talking about relationships within the person? (ie. dichotomy of humanity)?

If you relate it to personal corruption maybe? Or how their dilemma makes them perform corruption in the world?

The Hamlet HSC marker's will be like wtf at half of the varying answers which make half-sense, but didn't use textual form.

 

[anomalousdecay]

I bet half of the members viewing this thread are probably new here.....

Welcome and feel free to post.

 

[Crobat]

Hmmm, I must say I agree Crobat Although, I do think that students will be able to attain 19's-20's if using the time/place in terms of construction of the play. I know at Abbotsleigh (at least in some classes), we were taught Hamlet through themes, and specifically the role of divinity in shaping human discourse, as well as the whole 'imposing' of a revenger role. If I were to have sat the exam, I would have used the power of divinity as part of the whole 'time/place' and used the Ghost's imposing of a role on Hamlet as specific moments constructed by Shakespeare, which clearly involve both time and place. For example, Claudius' speech which urges the nation to move past mourning (corruption), which then leads to Hamlet's disillusionment. However, context should definitely have been included, even if never explicitly in the question. (It was more implicit in this year's q). And yes, Mod B centres on textual integrity, so an essay should clearly reflect this understanding. To all the students who used time and place literally, it may serve you well, if done properly. Corruption, on the other hand, should have been ridiculously easy Good luck to everyone, and I'm sure your hard work will pay off!

Thank you I do agree with you there too! But I think the Module itself is underpinned by textual integrity and I think putting the fundamental characteristics that constitute textual integrity is as good a hint as any that they want you to answer it with reference to it. And we were also taught Hamlet through themes, but I went full geeky and fell in love with the play and studied it through Hamlet's character on my lonesome . If I were to answer this year's question, I wouldn't really have changed much in my pre-prepared essay since it focusses on corruption and extends that a bit more to Shakespeare himself being restricted by his own context's values/his decisions in the play may have reflected his own life experiences (e.g. Hamlet dying was simply to satisfy the principle of God being supreme and/or a reflection of the loss of his own son). I think it was a pretty basic question as far as Hamlet questions go, but I can understand that exam stress might stint your thinking so to speak, so some students might have struggled with the question.

I spoke of Hamlet and Claudius being disillusioned biblically of that specific era and of the time and how that came through characterisation of Hamlet's enforced role of being the loyal son where Shakespeare's unique delay allows corruption to develop in Denmark. I probably should have wrote more on the corruption's effect on Denmark and how it destroyed the royal order.

I wouldn't worry too much if I were you. You seem to have a clear understanding of the text through characterisation so that probably won't limit you. As long as you didn't disregard corruption altogether, I think you'll be fine for a solid 17+

 

[anomalousdecay]

Thank you I do agree with you there too! But I think the Module itself is underpinned by textual integrity and I think putting the fundamental characteristics that constitute textual integrity is as good a hint as any that they want you to answer it with reference to it. And we were also taught Hamlet through themes, but I went full geeky and fell in love with the play and studied it through Hamlet's character on my lonesome . If I were to answer this year's question, I wouldn't really have changed much in my pre-prepared essay since it focusses on corruption and extends that a bit more to Shakespeare himself being restricted by his own context's values/his decisions in the play may have reflected his own life experiences (e.g. Hamlet dying was simply to satisfy the principle of God being supreme and/or a reflection of the loss of his own son). I think it was a pretty basic question as far as Hamlet questions go, but I can understand that exam stress might stint your thinking so to speak, so some students might have struggled with the question.



I wouldn't worry too much if I were you. You seem to have a clear understanding of the text through characterisation so that probably won't limit you. As long as you didn't disregard corruption altogether, I think you'll be fine for a solid 17+

It is my strongest section and a HSC marker has told me before that I have very good 19/20 essays but I just didn't use the word contexts which I find the hardest to address in essay writing for some reason.

For some reason the use of struggle, disillusionment, human experience and corruption are a lot easier for me than the literal text of a play and textual form.

Thanks. Great discussion with you all.
Although I never have to do this stuff ever again I surely think it was great in opening up my ways of thinking for my future studies.

 

[Web Addict]

Guys, guys, guys... Why are you still in this thread? ENGLISH IS OVER!!!

 

[Menomaths]

Guys, guys, guys... Why are you still in this thread? ENGLISH IS OVER!!!

why are you here?