I am confused (1 Viewer)

[fallenstar]

Many teachers of our English department have been markers and after trials we had a King Lear week with a HSC Critical Study Marker.
She said that as the Rubric states "the text's reception in different contexts" you absolutely HAVE to discuss a few readings.
BUT she did also mention that personal response is essential and will distinguish a band 6 response from a band 5.
So, I am definitely not going in there with no knowledge of readings. The fact that Lear can be received and interpreted differently in accordance with changing context shows its TEXTUAL INTEGRITY (a third rubric point)...So I do think it is vital to displaying a critical understanding of Lear.

 

[fallenstar]

they are apparently 'experienced teachers'...

well when i called up today about this particular issue... the lady was a bit iffy on it. she was clear that the marker wants us to present our personal interpretation from the original text by shakespeare.. and said not to emphasise on readings..

but then when i asked her "then if we dont emphasise readings, how are we addressing the dotpoint in the rubric about evaluating the texts reception in different contexts?"
then she was kinda silent and said in this matter-of-fact tone "listen.. this is what u have to do... make clear your personal interpretation. you are closely studying king lear as a text by shakespeare... analyse textual features and quotes from the text that show your deep knowledge... " yadda yadda...
or something along those lines, and thus she didnt really answer my question.

tomorrow im gonna persist until i get a clear-cut answer.

haha.
sounds like you got her there.
i don't think there is much consensus among teachers and that's half the problem.
personally i believe let's go with the rubric - reception in different contexts = readings + textual integrity = ability of play to be received in different contexts, giving it value and relevance etc.
all roads point to readings, people.
+ personal response
but you can't have one without the other.

 

[Rhanoct]

Lol, fuck this module.

I've been taught to learn/include in my essays:

- the play's reception in its original (Jacobean) context
- two other readings of the play: we did nihilist and liberal humanist, polar opposites, to show the extent to which differening values/beliefs can produce diff interpretations.
- two productions to support the readings: brook --> nihilist, eliot --> humanist
- own personal response, making sure not to simply agree/disagree with your 'readings'. while i tend to learn towards the humanist reading i try add other bullshit (hey, it's english).

that's about it... i have a very shaky understanding of textual integrity (we were not taught this at school- THANKS), which i guess you need to include too...

 

[shanks27]

our teacher said that as a rule you should discuss about 25% to 1/3 about other readings and 2/3 to 75% your own. So 2 readings along with your own view he thinks is enough. He has marked HSC for something like the past 10-15 years. And that in the past few years they have been shifting away from set essays and more testing your own view and knowledge of the text.

edit- just found this from the markers comments from last year "The informed personal response was crucial in addressing the terms of the question. Unfortunately, some responses still placed an inappropriate and undue emphasis on the mere descriptions of ‘readings’ which overshadowed a close analysis of the text." and also "Weaker responses showed a lack of personal engagement and tended to rely on a description of readings" and their final comment about King Lear specifically was "The primary focus of discussion must be the prescribed text; readings and productions should not detract from an analysis of the text itself" so yeh your own view on the play has to make up a decent amount of your analysis you cna't just rely on other readings.

 

[fallenstar]

Lol, fuck this module.

I've been taught to learn/include in my essays:

- the play's reception in its original (Jacobean) context
- two other readings of the play: we did nihilist and liberal humanist, polar opposites, to show the extent to which differening values/beliefs can produce diff interpretations.
- two productions to support the readings: brook --> nihilist, eliot --> humanist
- own personal response, making sure not to simply agree/disagree with your 'readings'. while i tend to learn towards the humanist reading i try add other bullshit (hey, it's english).

that's about it... i have a very shaky understanding of textual integrity (we were not taught this at school- THANKS), which i guess you need to include too...

Yep that's exactly the same as me (except we were taught textual integrity, haha).
2 readings + Jacobean
Personal response
Productions/key scenes to support
& textual integrity.

 

[A.Chair]

This may be a stupid question, but what exactly does it mean when it wants you to give your own personal judgement/interpretation?

 

[Grey Matter]

This may be a stupid question, but what exactly does it mean when it wants you to give your own personal judgement/interpretation?

how are we addressing the dotpoint in the rubric about evaluating the texts reception in different contexts?

Your interpretation = what you think the most important things about the play are.

Eg; I look at the text as being a traditional Elizabethan Tragedy that is influenced by family themes in its creation.

This is where you can use other peoples' interpretations to an extent to support your own interpretation. (in case you don't have a focused idea).

If you did look into readings & such too much (as our class did a bit), it can still be useful if all the effort is put into using at support for a thesis NOT THE THESIS ITSELF

If there are interpretations you DON'T LIKE, you can argue against them to support your thesis too.


Different Contexts= Historical, Social & Cultural

Contexts change as histoical, social & cultural contexts change

Historical is obvious, use general knowledge about early Jacobean England, such as Divine Right of Kings, Wheel of Fortune and their influence on the play

PLUS; mention the re-writing of the play as an example of changing context- people couldn't handle the plays views on different areas so had to change them

This doesn't have to be too deep; use the text for support ("the wheel hath come full circle" ring any bells? ) of these ideas and it should be fine.

So; yes, it is hard to do context without going into a shopping-list of performances & readings, but they can be used to bring a little support for your own ideas.

 

[Mond]

This module is so annoying. I planned on using the same essay (obviously changed to suit the question more) as I did in my trials which received a good mark, but now I'm trying to rewrite it all from scratch because I'm worried about getting a marker that doesn't think the 'readings' are important. My whole essay was based on the readings! Basically, I was discussing the readings in the same detail as I would with any other text.

 

[A.Chair]

Your interpretation = what you think the most important things about the play are.

Eg; I look at the text as being a traditional Elizabethan Tragedy that is influenced by family themes in its creation.

This is where you can use other peoples' interpretations to an extent to support your own interpretation. (in case you don't have a focused idea).

If you did look into readings & such too much (as our class did a bit), it can still be useful if all the effort is put into using at support for a thesis NOT THE THESIS ITSELF

If there are interpretations you DON'T LIKE, you can argue against them to support your thesis too.


Different Contexts= Historical, Social & Cultural

Contexts change as histoical, social & cultural contexts change

Historical is obvious, use general knowledge about early Jacobean England, such as Divine Right of Kings, Wheel of Fortune and their influence on the play

PLUS; mention the re-writing of the play as an example of changing context- people couldn't handle the plays views on different areas so had to change them

This doesn't have to be too deep; use the text for support ("the wheel hath come full circle" ring any bells? ) of these ideas and it should be fine.

So; yes, it is hard to do context without going into a shopping-list of performances & readings, but they can be used to bring a little support for your own ideas.

Cheers, Thanks

 

[georgealmighty]

Someone may have already said this - but the rubric requires you to evalute the texts reception in different contexts - or readings/productions. If you fail to do that, your missing out completly on a whole point. It would just be like failing to mention themes. Its essential.

Anyway. Good luck everyone.