PLEASE mark me! (1 Viewer)

[Ringo]

You know what they say, it's good to teach.... so therefore it must be good to mark other people's work These are some intros I've been working on. They're just introductions to the last two HSC exam questions. I'll post question, then intro.
If anyone could critique them for me, I'd be grateful. I just need to know if I'm addressing the question, intriducing a thesis etc.

How has your understanding of the consequences of change been shaped by the techniques used by various composers?

Change has many effects upon its subjects, and these consequences of change in self are represented by a plethora of literary and film techniques. In My Place , by Sally Morgan, the composer positions the responder to appreciate the full impact of change through use of the first person narrative and vernavular language. Similarly, The Door by Miroslav Holub presents us with the idea that any consequence of change is positive, despite its initial appearance, through the use of optimistic tone, metaphors, and other poetic methods. Coleridge, in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner , creates a morally sound but destructive consequence of change through his use of romantic language. Finally, Fried Green Tomatoes enshrines many examples of proprs, camera angles and mis-en-scene which are deployed by Avnet to portray the results of transmogrification. Thus the consequences of change are shaped by composers, and the techniques they use to convey a message to the responder

Your feature article (ignore the fact it's meant to be in a text type) should examine how composers use tets to explore concepts of changing self

Changing Self is represented in many traditional and contemporary texts through the deployment of film and literary techniques by composers. In My Place , Sally Morgan presents several characters who act as catalysts for change through her use of colloquial expression and the first person narrative. However, influenced by external factors, Changing Self is portrayed in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner as destructive. Coleridge uses romantic language juxtaposed with unemotive statements to suggest this. Holub stresses the importance of self-change in The Door through the use of metaphors, paradox, tone, and other poetic techniques. In a similar way, the positive effects of self-change are represented by props, camera angles and mis-en-scene in Fried Green Tpmatoes directed by Jon Avnet. Thus concepts of changing self are explored through a plethora of methods in many texts.

 

[ND]

Ok for the first q, you need some sort of aspect common to all your texts, just going through and listing the changes undergone will not get you a high mark. For example, you could say that changes induce negative feelings, and then proceed to show how your texts have demonstrated this notion.

edit: same with the second q, you need to take a stance on what change means to you and not just describe the changes occuring in your texts.

 

[d00d]

i reckon ur intro is too long

 

[Ringo]

Originally posted by ND
Ok for the first q, you need some sort of aspect common to all your texts, just going through and listing the changes undergone will not get you a high mark. For example, you could say that changes induce negative feelings, and then proceed to show how your texts have demonstrated this notion.

edit: same with the second q, you need to take a stance on what change means to you and not just describe the changes occuring in your texts.

so if one of my texts disagrees with the statement, can I still use it? Is there any scope for discussion in an AOS question?

 

[Ringo]

Originally posted by d00d
i reckon ur intro is too long

can you suggest any ways I cut it down? Should I not mention techniques until I get to the actual point?

 

[Nupil]

You shouldn't mention the techniques - that's what the bodies for and you need one final harmonising sentence to your second introduction.

I personally agree with the comment that you need a common thesis - and it's better if your texts don't agree. Because you can contrast and parrallel them to have a unifying thesis along the lines of self-change being so difficult to define because of it's diverse nature.

That's atleast what I'm doing. Beh.

 

[iambored]

yeah, i normally don't put all that stuff on techniques till the actual essay, i use the 1st for introducing thesis and texts

 

[ND]

Originally posted by Ringo
so if one of my texts disagrees with the statement, can I still use it? Is there any scope for discussion in an AOS question?

Yep, refer to Nupil's reply.

 

[redslert]

too long of an intro!

shorten your sentences, well just join ideas together...
eg: you say "similarly" for the Door and My Place, why can't you just put the two in one sentence, like,

"My place by bah and the door by bah, presents the idea that any consequence of change is positive, despite its initial appearance, through the use of optimistic tone, metaphors, and other poetic methods"

one whole sentence gone!

i like mentioning techniques in the intro, kinda leads the reader into what im goin to be talking about, but it's a danger if you list it but don't talk about it....but if you list it and talk about it, it shows that you have planned the essay

 

[Winston]

Originally posted by ND
Ok for the first q, you need some sort of aspect common to all your texts, just going through and listing the changes undergone will not get you a high mark. For example, you could say that changes induce negative feelings, and then proceed to show how your texts have demonstrated this notion.

edit: same with the second q, you need to take a stance on what change means to you and not just describe the changes occuring in your texts.

What ND said is correct, they either share a similar aspect or is different in some way, always talk about your other texts as well, for example if ur talking about a stimulus text u gotta talk about how similar or how much ur set text differs to your stimulus text, this is part of what they call "context".

 

[Viper]

I noticed in your 1st intro that you referred to the section you are doing as "Change in Self". If you examine the syllabus / exam paper, you may be shocked to discover that the section is called "Changing Self".

I know heaps of people that have presumed that it is called "Change in Self" (including my teacher).... I think the markers would probably prefer us to use the correct name of the elective we are doing....

Cheers

 

[redslert]

Originally posted by Viper
I noticed in your 1st intro that you referred to the section you are doing as "Change in Self". If you examine the syllabus / exam paper, you may be shocked to discover that the section is called "Changing Self".

I know heaps of people that have presumed that it is called "Change in Self" (including my teacher).... I think the markers would probably prefer us to use the correct name of the elective we are doing....

Cheers

i doubt that it would make much of a difference, but if you want to be pedantic then maybe...
ill doubt you will loose anything from writing, "changing self" or Change in self....
as long as the idea is there

 

[Ringo]

Originally posted by Viper
I noticed in your 1st intro that you referred to the section you are doing as "Change in Self". If you examine the syllabus / exam paper, you may be shocked to discover that the section is called "Changing Self".

I know heaps of people that have presumed that it is called "Change in Self" (including my teacher).... I think the markers would probably prefer us to use the correct name of the elective we are doing....

Cheers

do you think I'm an idiot? lol of course I know its called Changing Self, but composers don't show a 'changing self' they portray a change in self...

 

[Ringo]

Originally posted by Nupil
You shouldn't mention the techniques - that's what the bodies for and you need one final harmonising sentence to your second introduction.

I personally agree with the comment that you need a common thesis - and it's better if your texts don't agree. Because you can contrast and parrallel them to have a unifying thesis along the lines of self-change being so difficult to define because of it's diverse nature.

That's atleast what I'm doing. Beh.

that is beautiful haha thanks

everyone, thanks for all your help

 

[rushworld]

Originally posted by Viper
I noticed in your 1st intro that you referred to the section you are doing as "Change in Self". If you examine the syllabus / exam paper, you may be shocked to discover that the section is called "Changing Self".

I know heaps of people that have presumed that it is called "Change in Self" (including my teacher).... I think the markers would probably prefer us to use the correct name of the elective we are doing....

Cheers

A thing we dicussed at the start of the module was that there is a difference between "Change" and "Changing". Depending on which one you use can change (ha) the way the phrase is percieved. Changing refers to something with continual change (that is, it's still resulting from a change), whereas Change doesn't always refer to that. The module being called "Changing Self" is important because you're meant to study the way things have changed, and how they continue to change.

 

[connie]

ok everyone said ringo's intro is too long, i just did an intro for another question and mine is way longer, so can you guys suggest how to cut it down.... and other comments would be appreciated, here goes;

For every person who welcomes change, there is someone who wants life and experience to
remain unchanged.

Do you find this true of the texts you have studied?

The above statement in question is entirely untrue for any text. The statement in question generalises
that either a person welcomes change or wants life to remain unchanged. It is evident in the
autobiography, My Place, by Sally Morgan, that Sally welcomes the changes in self in relation to
uncovering her past and discovering her Aboriginal heritage. Yet Sally does want the to have to go to
either primary or secondary school and resents this change. In a like manner Sallys grandmother,
Daisy, is initially adamant not to reveal the past, covering up and not even accepting her Aboriginality.
Nevertheless Daisys determination weakens and she reveals secrets from the past for composition in
Sally book. Daisys interest in black people also heightens. Thus, while a character may welcome some
changes in self they may also want parts of life and experience to stay the same., hence the statement
must be untrue. Similarly to say that for EVERY person that welcomes change there is another who
wants life to remain unchanged is making the presupposition that there is an equal number of characters
in each text and therefore the number of opinions could equal. Although it is apparent after comparing
the The Conciliation and The National Picture that both the Aborigines and European/s in the
foreground welcome the change and the Aborigines in the background do not appear so welcoming, but
rather would like life and experience to remain unchanged. Hence the statement in question becomes
untrue when it specifies that for every person who embraces change there is another that wants life to
remain unchanged, it is evident that the number of people welcoming change clearly do not equal the
number of people opposing it. In a like fashion in an article from the Sunday Telegraph (30/09/01),
My Life As a Drunk, Caroline Knapp reveals that she was very welcoming of the changes in self that
led her to recover from alcohol abuse. This article does not present the responder with a view on change
other than Carolines welcome for change. Therefore the statement in question is found to be untrue as
the article does not demonstrate that for every person who welcomes change there is another that wants
life to remain unchanged. Similar to My Place, is the classic film, Pretty Woman, directed by Garry
Marshall. Vivien does not welcome some of her childhood experiences, nevertheless she could not be
happier to embrace her change in appearance and manner, catalyzed by Edward. Edward also welcomes
the changes in his attitude and morale catalyzed by Vivien. Again demonstrating a flaw in the argument,
that is, a person can either welcome change or not. Rather a person can welcome certain change and
want other parts of life to remain unchanged. Subsequently is evident that the statement in question is
incorrect in each text mentioned.

 

[Inhuman]

I think you've put too much detail about the texts into the intro. The intro is only supposed to show where your argument is going, as opposed to doing the 'how' and 'why' of each text which you're meant to leave to the body. Also remember that repeating yourself in the exam too much might lose you marks, and that the examiners don't really care what your texts are about. A long as you can talk about techniques and how they show changing self they don't give a shit about any of the plots.