This Resource is for students in Year 12 studying ‘Never Let Me Go’ in comparison to ‘Things We Didn’t See Coming’ in AOS1: Unit 4, Reading & Comparing Texts, Analytical Text Response, in the Victorian VCE 2023 Mainstream English Curriculum

Introduction

Novels ‘Never Let Me Go’, by Kazuo Ishiguro (2005), and ‘Things We Didn’t See Coming’, by Steven Amsterdam (2009), offer thought-provoking views into alternative realities so close to our world that the parallels are obvious.  Advances in medical treatments through gene therapy, and experimentation with cloning, are current issues where technological capability is, at times, ahead of the ethical considerations and restraints.  Similarly, the Covid-19 pandemic, the environmental impact of climate change, the rise of oppressive political regimes, and the divide between the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ are also much-debated topics in our own society.

Why Compare these 2 Texts?

Whilst these are two quite different novels, they both have young first-person protagonists who are exploring the worlds in which they live, searching for meaning and exploring their identities within this context.  They form close friendships, fall in love, and create a sense of family and belonging.  They also face loss, betrayal, and existential crises of a very real kind.

Speculative/Sci-fi or Dystopian Fiction?

Set in a parallel present or recent past, both novels can be categorised as speculative, sci-fi or dystopian fiction.  The societies created in each text are recognisable to readers, even quite ordinary in the case of ‘Never Let Me Go’, but with a twist that jolts readers to question occurrences that might have once seemed acceptable by giving us a different viewpoint.  In the case of ‘Things We Didn’t See Coming’, we start somewhere familiar (Y2K panic) then are soon catapulted into an environmental catastrophe and a pandemic (Covid-19 or plague similarities) —although not beyond the bounds of belief—and the resulting social and political chaos.  As with most speculative fiction, the texts ask ‘what if…?’ and try to answer it with their narratives.

Both Question Survival

Each text leads us to question what we are prepared to do to ensure our survival, collectively and individually.  Both novelists position readers to see that human beings will ignore what they know is right, that they will bend their values and change their moral belief systems to get what they want, or need, to survive.  Would you be prepared to steal, lie and cheat to meet you and your family’s needs? Would you be prepared to sacrifice the lives of other beings for your own?

What Makes us Human?

The novels, however, also come back to ideas about what makes us human.  What is the essence of our ‘humanness’?  They both suggest that what humans need above all is to belong, to find a tribe to protect them and to know who they are.  Most times, these tribes are beneficial, but they can also be exclusive, divisive and threatening.  The texts offer views of each of these.  Mostly, however, each novel shows the importance of family or the need to belong to a family by whatever definition you give to this.

How much can we Control?

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, many of us have come to recognise that we can only control what we can control.  Both of these novels celebrate this idea.  Whilst the characters cannot control everything around them, what they do show is their resilience, their ability to adapt and change like the narrator of ‘Things We Didn’t See Coming’, or their ability to find the positives in the people around them like Kathy in ‘Never Let Me Go’.  This is all we can control.

Narrative Perspective & Style

Both have 1^st Person Perspective of the Protagonist

Both novels are written in the first person, from the perspective of the protagonist.  Amsterdam’s unnamed narrator relates events in a fairly straightforward manner with not a great deal of internal monologue.  The dialogue is narrated as it happens, and is often direct dialogue, related without any commentary from the narrator.  It is written in the present tense and the readers are positioned to feel a close affinity with the narrator as he progresses through episodes of his life.  Perhaps because of the nature of the discontinuous episodic structure, he is rarely shown to think back over his life to past events.  Readers observe the way that the pragmatic narrator moves forward to deal with the next thing and then the next.

Contrastingly, readers meet Ishiguro’s narrator, thirty-one-year-old Kathy H. at a crucial moment in her life and in a state of emotional reflection, and all that is revealed is filtered through her memories. Written in the past tense, in a nonlinear time scale of memories Kathy uses a conversational and colloquial tone with use of analepsis (flashbacks) and prolepsis (flash forwards).  However, the novel often positions readers to feel less sure of the accuracy of the naïve Kathy’s interpretation of the people and events of her past.  In a sense, even though Kathy is recalling her own past, the author makes it clear that she is, at times, an unreliable narrator.  Her interpretation of Ruth’s motives, for example, are somewhat naïve.  Further, Ishiguro sometimes gives us Tommy’s dialogue as a differing perspective, but this perspective is also filtered through Kathy’s fond memories.  The narration of ‘Never Let Me Go’ is complex and invites further consideration as do the writer’s intention.

Structure & Questions in ‘Things We Didn’t See Coming’

In ‘Things We Didn’t See Coming’, the episodic structure of 9 stories /discontinuous narrative/ gaps can make it a frustrating read for those readers who might want a continuous narrative with neat resolutions.  The first story ‘What We Know Now’ takes place on December 31, 1999 and the other stories are progressively later.  For the most part, each new chapter opens a new episode without any reference to the events or people who were in the previous one.

The novel asks a number of ‘what if’ questions which it attempts to answer:

• What if climate change immediately impacted our country?
• What if the country and city divide became political?
• What if the planet was overcome by a plague of insects?
• What if a virus wiped out the majority of the population?

Structure & Questions in ‘Never Let Me Go’

In ‘Never Let Me Go’ the novel is divided into 3 parts, with further chapter divisions.  Part 1, chapters 1-9 is set in Hailsham.  Part 2, chapters 10-17 is Life after Hailsham.  Part 3, chapters 18-23 is Kathy’s life as a carer.  The novel starts in ‘England, late 1990’s’ following narrator Kathy H. as a thirty-one-year-old carer who is about to become a donor and explores her memories of the past. 

The novel asks a number of ‘what if’ questions which it asks the readers to consider their answers:

• What makes us human?
• What rights must all humans have?
• What does an individual ‘owe’ society?
• How we live our lives in order for it to be meaningful?
• Why we should fight to ensure equality amongst all humans?
• Why is organ trafficking unethical?
• Is human cloning the future or is it unethical, just playing God?

All Resources created by englishtutorlessons.com.au Online Tutoring using Zoom for Mainstream English Students in the Victorian Curriculum

This resource is for students studying the film ‘Rear Window’ in the Victorian Mainstream English VCE Year 12 Curriculum.

It is important to include Message of Hitchcock as Director in your Analytical Text Response Essays.

Below are Themes with Message of Director for Revision.

Themes: Voyeurism, Ethics, Morality, Looking, Seeing & The Male Gaze

Message of Director = Hitchcock does argue that voyeurism is in poor taste, but that it is also a natural aspect of the human condition to look and spy on other people.  Hitchcock sends Jeff and the audience a message to choose carefully at what you look at because you might get involved in something more serious than you bargained for. 

Themes: Community, Social Isolation, Loneliness, Alienation, Sights & Sounds

Message of Director = Hitchcock critiques the lack of neighbourly love for each other in the apartment block and the lack of trust which ultimately displays the apathy of the 1950’s society.  Hitchcock demonstrates flaws in communal living between having a sense of community and looking out for one’s neighbours, but straying into voyeuristic territory.

Theme: Gender

Message of Director = Jeff’s perspective and male gaze allows males a measure of control and denies a female perspective in the film.  Hitchcock portrays Lisa as embodying changes in the position of women in 1950’s, wanting the audience to consider women should not be underestimated.

Themes: Love & Marriage

Message of Director = Hitchcock suggests the need for love and for connectedness of others is essential in our existence.  Hitchcock portrays relationships characterised by dissatisfaction and at times violent impulses.  Cynically, Hitchcock suggests marital discontent is inevitable.

Themes: Confinement versus Expansion

Message of Director = Hitchcock demonstrates a society in which people are isolated in their own worlds without taking risks and living a narrow existence.  He is somewhat pessimistic, though not completely hopeless, he challenges audiences to examine habits of their own especially in a world where sensitive information is at our fingertips. 

Themes: Post-war Paranoia & Red Scare & Title Significance

Message of Director = Hitchcock critiques the notion of post-war paranoia by showing how the communist red scare pervaded 50’s society where neighbours spied on neighbours, the atmosphere of betrayal, lack of trust filtered down from HUAC to every part of American society.  Hitchcock’s title ‘Rear Window’ also functions as a metaphor exposing Jeff’s repressed desires and fears but also the idea of a covert agenda, which is Jeff’s ethically murky voyeurism that uncovers a murder.

All Resources created by englishtutorlessons.com.au Online Tutoring using Zoom for Mainstream English Students in the Victorian Curriculum

This Resource is for Year 12 Mainstream English Students studying ‘The Women of Troy’ by Euripides in the VCE Curriculum in Victoria

What do we know about Helen?

The mythology of Helen places her as a siren, an adulteress; most legends have her leaving Menelaus of her own volition, though some say she was under the power of Aphrodite. Regardless, she is stigmatised in Ancient Greece as a loose woman, unfaithful to her husband, responsible for thousands of deaths during the 10 year Trojan War.

Modern western adaptations, however, treat Helen very differently: she was married young, treated as a prize, and finds true love with Prince Paris of Troy, with whom she escapes her loveless marriage and unhappy life. This latter characterisation certainly colours the lens through which the modern reader views Helen, and draws one of many clear distinctions between how elements of ‘The Women of Troy’ are experienced differently by the primary and secondary audiences.

In the play ‘The Women of Troy’ by Euripides, Helen is hated even by Poseidon; he does not see her as an innocent victim of Paris’s lust and Aphrodite’s interference, instead believing it is ‘quite right’ that she is ‘a prisoner, like the rest’.

Helen’s appearance also plays a role in how she is perceived by other characters

Helen’s appearance also plays a role in how she is perceived by other characters. She is the only female in the play not debased, she is dressed to kill and enters not pleading but complaining at the undignified treatment she received at the hands of Menelaus guards “your guards have dragged me out here in front of the building with such violence and contempt”. Hecuba disdainfully accuses Helen of ‘parad[ing] yourself’ before Menelaus, but if Helen pulls out her hair, scratches her face (as the other women in mourning have done), she has no leverage with Menelaus. Her beauty is her only weapon (and it connects her to Zeus); however, her beauty (and others value of it) also contributes to the stigma of ‘Helen the harlot’.

In mythology Helen is often referred to as belonging to a place or a man, for example, ‘Helen of Sparta’, ‘Helen of Troy’; she is an attraction, not a person. Euripides furthers this notion of Helen as property, e.g. ‘Menelaus’ Helen’, but interestingly, she is never referred to as ‘Paris’s Helen’ by Hecuba or any other Trojans, presumably in an effort to distance Paris from blame for the war. Helen is dehumanised, reduced to quarry by Cassandra: ‘These Greeks … sent a hunting party to track down Helen, to smoke her out’; yet Helen refers to herself as ‘Exported … a saleable asset’.

When women were generally written out of history, Helen of Troy was written in 

As her story passed down the generations it held up a mirror to the prejudices of society and to some of its truths.  Helen in Homer’s The Illiad declares ‘on us has been sent an evil destiny, that we should be a singer’s theme for generations to come’.  How prophetic, Helen might not be real, but she never loses her relevance. 

Is Helen a mere puppet of the men who wanted her?

Helen might be seen as a mere puppet, the victim of the gods and of the men who wanted her. But as Blondell insists, “her complicity is essential to her story.” Helen is abducted, but she is never simply passive. She agrees to go with Paris, although different versions of the story suggest different degrees of willingness. Both Paris and Helen are victims of lust, but are still committing an action and incurring moral responsibility for the deaths that result: “such acts are still acts.” The verbs most commonly used for Helen’s journey are all active: she left, she went, she sailed away.

Helen’s manipulation of Menelaus is helped by his weakness for her

When Menelaus arrives on the shores of Troy he does so unashamedly to claim back the woman that jilted him and seeks selfish revenge, not for the myriad of deaths she has caused by her actions, but to serve his own vain purpose. Menelaus values himself and everyone else is worthless, his revenge is clear “This most glorious of days when I shall finally get my hands on that wife of mine, Helen. Yes, I am the man Menelaus, who for ten years have endured this terrible war”. He has sacked Troy, killed Paris and “made him pay” and is happy that Helen is a prisoner who has been “counted into this temporary prison with the rest of the Trojan women”. He expects to see Helen in ruins, crawling and begging him for mercy when Menelaus commands the guards to “bring her out here, drag her out by the hair, sticky with dead men’s blood”. Instead Helen is composed and as Hecuba warned wearing make-up, well dressed and neatly brushed hair, nothing like a grieving widow or person who has any feelings of remorse. Menelaus is unprepared to see Helen in such a beautiful state and his vulnerability towards her explains his inability to decisively execute her in Troy.

Hecuba warns Menelaus that Helen is not just manipulative but dangerous

Hecuba knows how manipulative Helen is and the power of lust that self-centred Menelaus has such a weakness shows that he can easily succumb to Helen’s beauty. Hecuba warns him “If you mean to kill your wife, Menelaus, you’ll have my support. But don’t see her, don’t risk becoming a slave of your lust again”. As a result of this, the concept of his masculinity is put under scrutiny when Hecuba warns him against behaving “worthy of yourself [himself]…your race and of your family” and proving those that “called you [him] womanish” wrong by executing Helen swiftly and justly; associating mercy with a diluted sense of masculinity. Hecuba knows how Helen puts a spell on men and how dangerous she is “She makes men’s eyes her prisoners, she sacks whole cities, burns houses to the ground with that bewitching smile!” Menelaus says he wants Helen handed over to him “to kill her here on the spot” but shows his weakness when he adds “unless I decide to take her back to our Argive homeland”. His statement shows that he desires to postpone Helen’s death and does not intend to actually carry it out himself. His resolve to kill Helen is also shown to be weakened further when he states that “nothing definite was decided” about her fate.

Helen’s powerful speech to Menelaus blames everyone else but herself

In juxtaposition to the male character of Menelaus, Euripides presents a far more calculating character of his Greek wife Helen with ulterior motives that will continue their manipulation if given the chance. Helen’s refusal to admit defeat and her insistence that she is innocent is compounded as she makes attempts to alleviate the burden of guilt and place some on ‘Hecuba’s evil genius’ and the gods for their games. Helen’s powerful speech to Menelaus is brash and confident, shameless, blames everyone else not herself “To Paris … he destroyed Troy, Priam did, the old King, and he destroyed me too”. Helen claims she was just an asset, blameless “exported, I was, sold off abroad, my exceptional beauty was a saleable asset for Greece”. Helen stands firm saying she wasn’t happy in Troy in “abject slavery” and tried to escape and then shifts blame to the gods and false claims of being raped. The Chorus replies to Helen’s speech calling her arguments “for what they are, fluent, but wicked. She’s a dangerous woman!” Hecuba agrees and wants to expose “this woman’s slanders for the rubbish they are!”

It seems an important message that Euripides was keen to inject is that of the strength of a Greek woman like Helen. Even when she was disempowered after the sacking of Troy, her strength lies in her refusal to admit defeat. Euripides shows her ulterior motive of manipulation is more powerful than just a beautiful legend as told in other mythological retellings. 

All Resources created by englishtutorlessons.com.au Online Tutoring using Zoom for Years 11 and 12 VCE Mainstream English Students in the Victorian Curriculum

This Resource is for Year 12 Mainstream English students studing ‘The Women of Troy’ play by Euripides in the VCE Curriculum in Victoria.

What is the Meaning of Euripides Play?

Many of the themes and issues Euripides presents in ‘The Women of Troy’ are confronting because Euripides means to confront us in every literal understanding of the word.  The audience is forced to recognise and grapple with tremendous philosophical questions: Is this humanity? Is this morality? Is this a just war? He also makes the audience face their own moral inadequacies, as Euripides holds a mirror up to Athens.  Euripides believed that it is women and children who pay the ultimate sacrifice for war; they suffer through it and suffer after it, as society’s most vulnerable, at the hands of the powerful.  The play makes extensive moral arguments against unjust conduct in war by presenting a sympathetic look at the great suffering experienced by the vanquished women of Troy being at the mercy of their brutal Greek victors.  Euripides play is both anti-war and pro-feminist.  By giving power to the Trojan women through his narrative, he renders them as complete, complex people with strong voices, if not influence over their eventual fates.  Even though slaughtering the men of Troy, sacking their city and sending their women away to be slaves was standard military practice at the time, Euripides chastises the Greek victors for their violence, comparing them with the volatile barbarians whom they routinely disparaged [mocked].

Themes

The Cost of War               Euripides chose to focus on the aftermath of war and gives the women and children victims of war a voice in his play.  He highlights how the women are treated like chattels divided up between their Greek victors and the atrocities of war on innocent people.  Quote: “This is the crown of my sufferings, my last ordeal: to sail away and leave Troy in flames” (Hecuba).

Duty and Honour             Hecuba and Andromache cling to the ideas of obligation and duty and are honourable women who built reputations in respect of their royal positions in Troy.  Euripides places emphasis on a citizen’s service to family, friends and country which continues long after the death of their menfolk.  Quote: Hecuba as leader of the women is “a mother bird at her plundered nest”.

Fate                                       It is not until the last remaining lines of the play that Hecuba acknowledges the Trojans have always been fated with ill-luck and pleads with the gods to find another people to exercise their dastardly plans on.  Euripides argues that fortunes are changeable and tragedy indiscriminate.  Quote: “For what purpose have we suffered?  Why call on them [gods] we called before and they did not listen” (Hecuba).

Loss                                       The play is about loss on several levels – loss of a great war, loss of many lives both Trojan and Greek and the continual loss experienced by the survivors of war.  The Trojan women have lost many things in a physical sense and symbolically they have also lost power, position and Troy. Quote: “How must I deal with my grief?” (Hecuba) “What words of yours can release pity to match your pain?” (The Chorus)

Gender                                Menelaus is portrayed in the play as weak and officious while the other male Talthybius is represented as sensitive and decent but torn between his chivalrous inclinations and his duty as a Greek soldier.  In juxtaposition Euripides injects into the play the strength of the women who are disempowered.  He portrays Helen as more than just the beautiful legend, rather he presents her as a more calculating character with ulterior motives.  He presents Hecuba as one who has reasoning and strength of leadership, Andromache has pragmatism and Cassandra has revenge.  Quote: He puts masculinity under the microscope when Hecuba warns Menelaus about Helen and him behaving “worthy of yourself … your race and of your family” (Hecuba)

Social Class                         After Troy is destroyed all the women prisoners are reduced to equality and united in their suffering and loss.  Euripides chose to be realistic in his depiction of the Trojan royalty despite their torment, he comments on their social fall, deterioration of the class system and now they are reduced to mere slaves.  Quote: “Everything is turned upside down: royalty enslaved” (Andromache) “No queen’s bed for me now: I shall lay my shrivelled body to rest on the floor, and wear faded, worn rags to match my skin and mock my royalty” (Hecuba)

Symbols

The Flaming Torch           By entering the scene carrying a flaming torch, Cassandra is not only heralded as being different from the other women but also a vestibule of foresight.  The torch can be seen as hope to the women ordering them to “raise the torch and fling the flame … flood the walls with holy light” (Cassandra).  Also, the flaming torch can symbolise destruction of Troy at the end of the play “Let those officers appointed to fire the city now bring out their torches and use them well.  Up with the flames” (Talthybius).  The flaming torch can also symbolise the destruction Cassandra will reek on Agamemnon and his family when she sails to Greece as his slave.

The Walls of Troy             Poseidon, God of the Sea exclaims the sorrow he feels as the great city of Troy and its magnificent walls crumble “Troy and its people were my city.  That ring of walls and towers I and Apollo built, squared every tone in it”.  The significance of the high walls of Troy are symbolic of a great city, good people and a great royal line, but also symbolise fallibility of the gods and the things the people of Troy cherished can easily be destroyed and brought down low.  Significantly, the death of Astaynax who is thrown from the walls that should have protected him now are part of his brutal death.  Talthybius says the young prince’s end is nasty “You must climb to the topmost fringe of your father’s towers, where the sentence says you must leave your life behind”.

Hector’s Shield                 The great shield of the Trojan prince Hector “the bravest of the Trojans” holds a special memory to those who loved him the most, his wife Andromache and his mother Hecuba.  The shield first appears when Andromache enters the stage with her son on her lap and the shield by her side along with Hector’s armour.  The saddest mention of the shield is when the body of Astaynax, broken and bloodied is carried atop it, toted by Talthybius and Greek soldiers.  Talthybius carries the boy on the shield to give to Hecuba to bury.  Andromache begged to give the child a proper burial with “this bronze-ribbed shield … which used to protect his father’s body in battle, should serve him instead as a coffin”.  While Hector was protected in many battles from the shield, it was powerless to protect him from his ultimate death and also the death of his son and family.  The shield in this instance also symbolises the dying of the Trojan royal family and the tragedy of the play.

Waves/Ocean                   As they wait shackled at the shore, the Aegean Sea serves as a constant reminder to the Trojan women that their fate is inevitable and soon, they will be parted from each other and will sail to their allotted locations in Greece.  Much like the tempestuous ocean, their future is unpredictable and lonely.  Hecuba has never sailed but considers the waves of the ocean as like fortune, calm or stormy and sailors helpless to do anything but submit to them “The tide has turned at length/Ebb with the tide, drift helpless down/Useless to struggle on/Breasting the storm when Fate prevails” (Hecuba)

Helen’s Clothing              In direct contrast to the haggard appearance of the other Trojan women prisoners, Helen’s rich robes symbolise her difference from them and hint to the audience she will again live on the side of victory with Menelaus.  Her appearance and hair are kept neatly symbolising how she will use her beauty to manipulate Menelaus to forgive her and not behead her as he said he would do.  If Helen had pulled out her hair, scratched her face (as other women in mourning have done), she would have no leverage with Menelaus.  Her beauty is her weapon.  Hecuba exposes Helen’s superficiality and greed believing her dress and grooming shows “loathsome impudence” and that Helen feels no guilt for her past crimes.

All Resources created by englishtutorlessons.com.au Online Tutoring using Zoom for Years 11 and 12 VCE Mainstream English Students in the Victorian Curriculum

This resource material is for VCE Year 12 Mainstream English Students studying in Victoria

ALL MY BEST WISHES TO THE STUDENTS I HAVE TUTORED FOR YEAR 12 ENGLISH THIS YEAR

What is expected of students for the Written English Exam on Wednesday 27th October 2021

The Mainstream English Exam is set down for Wednesday 27th October 2021

• Reading Time                        9.00 am to 9.15 am (15 minutes)
• Writing Time                         9.15 am to 12.15 pm (3 hours)
• Contribution score to English = 50%

Exam Time Allocation

• Section A 60 minutes = 3 minutes to plan & 57 minutes writing time
• Section B 60 minutes = 3 minutes to plan & 57 minutes writing time
• Section C 60 minutes = (10 minutes from reading time) plus 60 minutes writing time

I suggest you wear a watch so you can look at your wrist and not get distracted looking up to the clock on the wall to keep to your allocated time for each section of the exam.

Suggestion as to Exam Order

During the 15 minutes reading time:

Go to Section A and look at the 2 prompts.  Pick one that you are either familiar with the topic or you feel comfortable you can answer the prompt and in a brief 2 minutes plan what you will write for the essay in your head.

Go next to Section B and look at the 2 prompts.  Pick one that you are either familiar with the topic or you feel comfortable you can answer the prompt and in a brief 2 minutes plan what you will write for the essay in your head.

Now go to Section C and read the ‘Background Box’ on the first page and then read the articles for a first reading.  Next reading look at where the Main Contention is and the arguments and language around the arguments.  Pay attention to the author and the title, tone and if it changes, look at the type of language and persuasive techniques and how they are used by the author to position readers.  If there are visuals look at where they are placed in the article and what argument are they next to.  Establish the main contention of the visual and how it aligns with the author’s article.

When the 15 minutes reading time is up and you can ‘pick up your pens’:

Go to Section A and pick that prompt you decided on – take 3 minutes to write a brief plan (which you had thought of in your head in the reading time and now you can write the plan properly) that includes your 3 ideas from the prompt – at least at this stage the plan will still be in your head and will definitely help when you get to Section A to write the full essay – don’t write anything else or waste too much time at this stage on Section A

Go to Section B and pick that prompt you decided on – take 3 minutes to write a brief plan (which you had thought of in your head in the reading time and now you can write the plan properly) that includes your 3 ideas from the prompt – at least at this stage the plan will still be in your head and will definitely help when you get to Section B to write the full essay – don’t write anything else or waste too much time at this stage on Section B

NOW GO BACK TO SECTION C and read the article again, this time with your pen, annotating the arguments (MC= Main Contention / A1 = Argument 1 etc), language, techniques and how the author positions the readers to Think (Logos) / Feel (Pathos) / Do (Ethos) something.

Keep to the time for each essay and try to not go ‘overboard’ with Section C first and cut yourself short for the other 2 essays.  Check your watch, have you stayed within the first hour so you can then go on to Section A and write that essay, check your watch again, then go on to Section B and write that essay. 

If you finish ahead of the 3 hours, go back to each essay to proof-read your writing and make sure you have written a proper Conclusion for each essay.  If you are short of time when writing the essays in Section A and B, then dot point your Conclusion.  At least the Assessors will know what you wanted to say for your Conclusion.  If you have an empty space, the Assessors can’t mind read what you wanted to conclude.

SECTION A          Analytical Interpretation of a Text

Students will be assessed against the following criteria:

• Knowledge and understanding of the text, and the ideas and values it explores
• Development of a coherent analysis in response to the topic
• Use of textual evidence to support the interpretation
• Control and effectiveness of language use, as appropriate to the task

SECTION B           Comparative Analysis of Texts

Students will be assessed against the following criteria:

• Knowledge and understanding of both texts, and the ideas and issues they present
• Discussion of meaningful connections, similarities or differences between the texts, in response to the topic
• Use of textual evidence to support the comparative analysis
• Control and effectiveness of language use, as appropriate to the task

SECTION C           Argument and Persuasive Language

Students will be assessed against the following criteria:

• Understanding of the argument(s) presented and point(s) of view expressed
• Analysis of ways in which language and visual features are used to present an argument and to persuade
• Control and effectiveness of language use, as appropriate to the task

MY TIPS FOR SECTION A & B ANALYTICAL ESSAYS

Introductions

1. Use a run-in line regarding the ‘big picture’ of the topic that shows you are using your analytical skills to consider ideas and issues in the texts
2. Make your Main Contention very clear that you are answering the prompt not being ambiguous
3. If you are writing in Section B comparative texts be clear how you are comparing the 2 texts (similarities or differences)
4. Do not forget to mention the author’s name and titles of the texts in the Introduction
5. Have 3 clear ideas that support your main contention that will form your body paragraphs
6. Include the author or director’s message how they feel about the issue and how they want their audience to react

Body Paragraphs

1. Use 3^rd person voice not 1^st person
2. Use present tense to discuss the world of the text
3. Try to vary verbs that describe author(s) values
4. Every Body Paragraph MUST INCLUDE MESSAGE OF AUTHOR(s) on the key issues and ideas
5. Have a clear Topic Sentence that explores the first of your ideas from your Introduction
6. Use quotes that support your contention as evidence but do not slab massive quotes into the paragraphs, rather embed them in sentences and then explain what the evidence is exploring about the idea/topic
7. How many quotes is dependent on your analysis but at least 3 per text (minimum)
8. If the prompt has a quote or quotes do not forget to include it in one of your body paragraphs and analyse the quote(s) in relation to the prompt
9. In Section B comparative texts include a Transition Sentence from Text A to Text B that shows you are analysing the difference or similarity between the texts
10. In both Section A and Section B texts finish body paragraphs with a Link Sentence that links back to the prompt and follows on to the next body paragraph

Conclusions

1. Sum up your main contention
2. Finish with message of author(s)
3. If you run out of time in the exam just dot point your conclusion at least the assessors will know what you intended to write which is better than no conclusions as the assessors can’t mind read an empty page

MY TIPS FOR SECTION C ANALYSING ARGUMENT

During Reading Time

1. During 15 minutes ‘reading time’ do not forget to read the ‘Background Box’ as it gives you the context of the issue, who the articles are written by and the target audience
2. On first reading of the article(s) try to find out what the main contention is and then search for the main arguments that support the main contention and the language around the arguments
3. Look out for images/visuals / their position in the article / form features like sub-headings and size of fonts / how do they link to the main contention / how does the author use images/visuals to make the audience Think/Feel or Do Something
4. Consider what the author wants the audience to embrace, condemn or find a solution to a problem
5. Consider if the author’s tone is logical or emotional (it can change during the article)

Analysing the Article & Annotating

1. Analyse WHAT IS THE ARGUMENT THE AUTHOR IS MAKING & LANGUAGE USED TO PERSUADE THE AUDIENCE
2. Analyse HOW IS THE LANGUAGE AND RELATED TECHNIQUES USED BY THE AUTHOR
3. Analyse WHY DOES THE LANGUAGE & TECHNIQUE AFFECT THE AUDIENCE
4. Analyse WHAT IS THE INTENTION OF THE AUTHOR WITH THEIR LANGUAGE TO MAKE THE AUDIENCE – Think something (LOGOS = logical response) / Feel something (PATHOS = emotional response) or Do something (ETHOS = ethical response)
5. Annotate clearly where the arguments are in the article(s) so that when you write your essay you can see where argument 1/2/3/4 sits in each article / underline techniques / appeals / tone / intention of author(s)

Writing the Essay

1. Your Introduction MUST INCLUDE Context / Author / Tone / Title / Audience / Contention / Intention / Source
2. Body Paragraphs could be 3-4 depending on size of article(s)
3. Body Paragraphs can be divided into 3 sections = Opening Strategy / Body Paragraphs / Closing Strategy
4. Each Body Paragraph must include your analysis of What / How / Why / Intention of Author to make the readers Think / Feel or Do Something
5. Each Body Paragraph must include examples of language and techniques (can be quotes from texts) / Tone / Intention of Author
6. Don’t forget the Visuals/Images how do they link to the main contention / where are they positioned in the article structure / how does the author use images/visuals to make the audience Think/Feel or Do Something
7. If Visuals/Images are separate from the article(s) they may have their own opinion on the topic so be careful to look at their main contention if they agree or disagree with the article(s)
8. Conclusions must sum up the overall cumulative effects of the writer’s main contention and language and arguments including the visual’s contention and the intention of the author(s) to persuade the audience to Think /Feel or Do Something

All Resources created by englishtutorlessons.com.au Online Tutoring using Zoom for Years 11 and 12 VCE Mainstream English Students in the Victorian Curriculum