Cloudstreet (1 Viewer)

[xlAndrew]

WOWOWOW

whos quick again !?!?!?!

really wasnt expecting that, hard, hard paper.

 

[sly_skittle]

exactly! how gay was that? 'the tragedy of king lear'-talk about king lear (how obvious is that) but we had to talk about one of the minor characters who practically spends the whole book in the middle of whoop whoop loosing his dog, sleeping around and seeing ghosts! what the hell kind of question was that? I mose well have just skipped going to class for the year!

do you reckon i could still get a good mark if i refuted that he played a significant role in my response? I used a quote from Marilyn Anthony; the characters of Cloudstreet 'glow like 60 watt light bulbs' and said that all the characters were significant however i valued to exploration of the issues of life and family and Quick's character wasn't prominent in these readings.

that questions was completely unexpected and was a load of #@!?

 

[eggo213]

Tell me about it! Everyone came out of the exam bewildered!!!

I disargeed with the statement. I said that while Quick has some significance Winton uses blah blah blah more effectively to persuade my person response.

Every past paper i have looked at was a shit load easier!!

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

hahahaha, omg, almost half my response was not even about quick. so that's going to be one retarded mark i'll be getting for that. but sweet mother, i prepared answers like this for every other character, and they go and ask us on Quick?! What the fuck?! So in my attempts to analyse him on the spot I ended up talking a lot about Rose and not so much about Quick. the second half of the essay was the only part that properly answered the question, except for the fact that in picking 2 incidents to discuss in detail i could only think of ONE that he was heavily involved in (when he first makes love to Rose) so i picked the river scene (you know the one at the beginning and end) for the other one and just tried to pretend that Quick was actually important here.

thank god for the other questions - the marker is gonna see these 2 quite good substantial responses and then THIS pile of crap sandwiched in the middle and be like what the hell, kid, ur a tard. haha.

 

[bananasmoothy]

exactly! how gay was that? 'the tragedy of king lear'-talk about king lear (how obvious is that) but we had to talk about one of the minor characters who practically spends the whole book in the middle of whoop whoop loosing his dog, sleeping around and seeing ghosts! what the hell kind of question was that? I mose well have just skipped going to class for the year!

do you reckon i could still get a good mark if i refuted that he played a significant role in my response? I used a quote from Marilyn Anthony; the characters of Cloudstreet 'glow like 60 watt light bulbs' and said that all the characters were significant however i valued to exploration of the issues of life and family and Quick's character wasn't prominent in these readings.

that questions was completely unexpected and was a load of #@!?

Wait... did you do King Lear or Cloudstreet??

 

[karoooh]

I disagreed with the statement. The two scenes I talked had Quick in it, but he no real significance.

Fuck. I just remembered I mentioned more than two scenes. Just to reinforce the idea that Quick wasn't important because these other people were more important. Fuck. would they mark you down? Shit, shit, shit.

 

[xlAndrew]

i was just like, "and quick went fishing ..." then i'd talk about the significance of water in cloudstreet LoL !

 

[shelley686]

I'll tell you what!!! A
lthough it was a RIDICULOUS question, Cloudstreet was SOOO much more disadvantaged than the other texts!!! All the others like King lear and Wuthering Heights asked them to analyse the MAIN CHARACTERS!!! not an insignificant other!!! like Quick!!!
That was RIDICULOUS

 

[ReneeM]

i totally agree... i mean, as dumb as the question was, at least they would have substantial information about that character...!!! how annoying
i got out of the exam, and although my teacher and i promised we wouldnt have a "post mortum" after it, we just went nuts baggin the teachers and how stupid it was... i mean, Oriel would have been great... post colonial, spiritual and feminism stuff there.. FIsh would have been BRILLIANT but NOOO lets just chuck in another random question which no one could be prepared for unless they guessed that something ridiculous like that would be asked..
but to answer it, i just said that quicks characterisation was not important to my personal reading, and that the families as a whole were important... etc etc etc

but its all over now, so im gunna stop caring about english after today.
no more english EVER again..... WHAT A RELIEF!!!!!!!!

good luck to everyone else out there with the HSC

 

[shelley686]

i totally agree... i mean, as dumb as the question was, at least they would have substantial information about that character...!!! how annoying
i got out of the exam, and although my teacher and i promised we wouldnt have a "post mortum" after it, we just went nuts baggin the teachers and how stupid it was... i mean, Oriel would have been great... post colonial, spiritual and feminism stuff there.. FIsh would have been BRILLIANT but NOOO lets just chuck in another random question which no one could be prepared for unless they guessed that something ridiculous like that would be asked..
but to answer it, i just said that quicks characterisation was not important to my personal reading, and that the families as a whole were important... etc etc etc

but its all over now, so im gunna stop caring about english after today.
no more english EVER again..... WHAT A RELIEF!!!!!!!!

good luck to everyone else out there with the HSC

Renee Darling, you do know it was me who posted that comment?! and that you and i just discussed this in depth five minutes ago on msn?? lol
Love you you dag

 

[bananasmoothy]

I disagreed with the statement. The two scenes I talked had Quick in it, but he no real significance.

Fuck. I just remembered I mentioned more than two scenes. Just to reinforce the idea that Quick wasn't important because these other people were more important. Fuck. would they mark you down? Shit, shit, shit.

I replied to your post in the other thread, cause I did the same thing, but I just realised that we should be fine cause the question said "closely analyse" or something. And poo, I just realised I closely analysed three. Meh. 25/20, I say!

 

[Budweez]

haha thank god i wasnt the only doomed one here

my response went something like

i don't like quick for following reasons
1) coward
2) insignificant
3) doesnt add anything to book
4) regressive character
5) cant relate to him

then i continued to badmouth winton and his claims that the book isnt magical realism cos i was so annoyed at the question

it was a well structured argument for why the book isnt worthy of critical study.. but basically i think the marker will stamp a big fat zero on it

but who cares! NO MORE ENGLISH!!

 

[MisterPresident]

I just hope they recognise all the brilliant things I wrote abotu textual integrity in trying to (even slightly) relate it back to Quick.

I agree that our question was quite fucked. Since when was Quick a MAJORLY significant character compared to, say, Fish?

Ahh fuck the BoS.

I smile and hope that Hamlet/R&G and Ted Hughes will do me proud...

 

[xx__savannah]

"Dear marker,
Hahahaha
I mean, I love Quick, but really? Nice question..."

 

[Rax]

Weeeeellll

For some complete reason my brain had a mental spasm, and I didnt realise that I could just say Quick was crap and not talk about him.
So instead my essay consisted of Quick being pulled into everywhere from nothing.

Moral of the story: That Band 3 is looking Reaaaaal good
CAMON 83 UAI

p.s I HATE ENGLISH, ESPECIALLY CLOUDSTREET
ATLEAAASSST ITS OVVVEEEEEERRR

 

[particle1]

our teacher tells us to put our selves out there, be brave and resist the question. so thats what i did. and also it was "to what extent blah blah blah Quick"... so i basically set up my argument saying that he didn't... my reading circled around Fish...

 

[Ben*]

*cuts* once for TWO scenes
*cuts again* for characterisation of Quick

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

oh gosh...i realised when i got home dat u could have argued that quick was not significant...why didnt i do that...i could have crapped on about rose or fish, both of whom i know tonnes more about than quick.

seriously, though...quick? really? why? i mean if they said "fish" or "oriel" or "dolly" ok then fair enough we should know enough to write about. but um quick is hardly even there for half the time and when he is he doesnt DO anything!!! gah.

 

[Rax]

oh gosh...i realised when i got home dat u could have argued that quick was not significant...why didnt i do that...i could have crapped on about rose or fish, both of whom i know tonnes more about than quick.

seriously, though...quick? really? why? i mean if they said "fish" or "oriel" or "dolly" ok then fair enough we should know enough to write about. but um quick is hardly even there for half the time and when he is he doesnt DO anything!!! gah.

That is exactly what I did. It was worded so peculiarly I just thought you had to talk about Quick, palming it off with a "He isnt important yadaydaya" didnt seem right. Especially when it said quote from two crucial scenes.
And I would like Board of Studies to outline to me what a crucial scene means also........so ambiguous. They should have just said a scene and been done with it. There goes uni. (And yes my grammar is quite inept just to enrage all the English boffins....there are too many of you)

 

[bananasmoothy]

Damn yeah, I did the same. I didn't even think, just read "Quick" and started writing. *slaps wrist*

And I agree with the "crucial scene" thing. I was writing about my scenes (one of which stretched on for a good portion of the book ... ) and wondered half-way through, "is this crucial enough?" Then realised I couldn't be screwed and kept writing what I was writing anyway. And once I got out of there, I realised that my second paragraph, which went for like, more than a page (drop a band instantly) was pretty much a biography of Quick. Hey, at least the markers know I actually read the book.