Representation And Meaning (1 Viewer)

[SkAnDi]

Ok ok, for the powerplay topic, the rubric states that

"evaluate and show understanding between Representation and Meaning "

What the hell does rep and meaning mean?!?!?

Looking through the examiner's notes... you get marked up well if you answer the rubric (as you think you would).

It's a scary thought, i don't really think myschool has been looking at that representation and meaning aspect to it.

 

[johnson]

well you've already done the exam by now...

but anyway i think it means something about techniques, and how that shows powerplay? i dunno i fucked up my frontline essay i dont really know

 

[KingofthieF]

Yes representation asks you what techniques are used, the what event in the novel, and how the characters are portrayed to represent the relationship between the powerful and the powerless.. and hence the powerplay

for example my 1984.. Ingsoc represents the powerful and Winston represents the powerless and through events like torture and double-think depicts the powerplay...

i think that's what it wants....

 

[SkAnDi]

Ahhh, well my question ended up on being.

"power in everything"

How is this shown in the texts you have studied...

So i took a slant on that, and said without power you can't do anything...

Then discussed how language/depravation used as tools to control, and have power over the people of Oceania.

I think my hand was really hurting at the time

 

[Jay_Gal]

I think the rubric means show your understanding of the text (ie. what is being represented/portrayed) and how is meaning made from what is being said.

Eg. How does Caesars death show evidence of powerplay...or something along those lines

 

[Hedera Colchica]

Representation is definitely the 'how' of it all. The Power and the themes are the 'what'. But the angles and perspectives advocated by the composer, the techniques used to portray these ideas, etc. Apparently, in the examiner's comments last year, they said that students were weak on the 'how', so it might be a good idea to get a lot of that in.

 

[Hannah]

Originally posted by KingofthieF
Ingsoc represents the powerful and Winston represents the powerless and through events like torture and double-think depicts the powerplay...

I don't think Winston is powerless. In the end he becomes powerless, however through the book he displays power through rebellion.

I think the whole concept of powerplay (well, this is what I think, not what I know) is that it comes from at least two side. As in, you can't have powerplay just one-sided.

but hell, my teacher sux and I came to that conclusion myself because she hasn't taught us, so it may very well be wrong.

 

[Mistress Lilith]

Originally posted by Hannah


I don't think Winston is powerless. In the end he becomes powerless, however through the book he displays power through rebellion.

I think the whole concept of powerplay (well, this is what I think, not what I know) is that it comes from at least two side. As in, you can't have powerplay just one-sided.

but hell, my teacher sux and I came to that conclusion myself because she hasn't taught us, so it may very well be wrong.

I agree when you say Winston is not powerless. He has little power, and he exercises that through rebellion--the diary, the love affair with Julia, buying the paperweight, his obsession with the past (especially trying to remember that rhyme-- you know the oranges and lemons one)
It's just that the state has much more power, and they choose to exercise this in a way which totally rules out any power an individual has. They use the fear factor, terror and brutality. Love of Big Brother isn't a choice, it's enforced upon them.
Winston's defeat in the end doesn't show that he's powerless, it just shows that regardless of how hard he tries, the state's power is always going to be stronger than any individual-- because it really gets them where it hurts.

 

[Hedera Colchica]

Mistress Lillith and Hannah, that would depend on your interpretation of power and the value of power. If every rebel will ultimately be rendered powerless, then how much power did they have to begin with? For xample, Winston doesn't even have that much power of his rebellion. His rebellion was triggered, guided and manufactured by O'Brien ad Mr. Charrington. (Except for Julia, and she's the one that exerts the power initially).

O'Brien has watched Winston for a very long time. Wasn't that look, which raised the consciousness of Winston to rebellion, wasn't that carefully calculated? The diary, one of the few beautiful items in the shop, just happened to be sitting there begging to be bought? The paperweight and the room? They were all a snare for Winston, and the ironic thing, even the painting. The painting that fascinates Winston and ironically turns out to be a telescreen. Even Winston's rebellion was initiated and controlled by the State.

 

[Mistress Lilith]

Hedera Colchica, I believe that Winston never loses whatever little power he had.
It's just not worth fighting in the end because the government's power will always be greater than his, and he accepts this in the end.

Winston is incapable of using his power against the State, because he is just an individual.
The Proles fail to recognise that they could have power, they are kept happy but ignorant--again, the State's doing.
The State choses to show their power in all circumstances, making them the prevalent controllers.
The State is always one step in front of everyone, and they do this through their power. They have the ability to rewrite the past every second of the day for crying out loud. This shows their abuse of power-- hence, powerPLAY.
In order for anyone to overcome that power, they need to become better strategists/manipulators than the State.

 

[Hedera Colchica]

okay. you've made the point that the State prevents individuals from having power. That's my point as well. Winston relinquishes all his power. He gives it up, and at the end, no longer has any. He succumbs to the power of the state, because he realises that his cause is futile, i.e. that he doesn't have the power to rebel, it's all futile anyway.

And what power lies in the proles being able to have power? they might be able tohave power, but the fact of the novel is, they don't. What's the power in not having power, and not knowing you *could* have power?

until they become conscious, they will never rebel, and until they rebel they can not become conscious

Until they become conscious tat they could have pwoer, they'll never gain that power. And they can't become conscious until they exert the power (which they do no possess)