Module A: Comparative Study of Texts and Context (2 Viewers)

[abcd9146]

bnw/br had such a straightforward question... it felt like i've answered it heaps of times... my trials and half yearlies and like the same question X__X

 

[dagwoman]

^No, that's not what I talked about, but it's what I should have if I'd prepared enough! So you did the right thing. And yes, 7 pages is perfectly respectable.

 

[kezz_xxxx]

I loved this question for BR/BNW.
When I first read it I was a bit 'Ah, wtf?' but thankfully I realised what it was actually asking. I had a prepared essay and pretty much wrote that, slightly adjusting it to fit the question.

No more English

 

[rusty123]

For BNW and BR it was a very good question very straight forward

i agree it was easy and straight forward but it was pretty unexpected (not generic to the module as a whole). but i managed to write out my prepared essay with moderations of intro conclusion topic sentences etc. i thought i had written about a balance between the wild and 'progress'... turns out i had mostly written on control anyway! w00t

 

[sedated_mind]

ah loved the question, i had to read it a couple of times and think a little but then realised how easy it was and how well my essay fit it hopefully itll make up for my lear essay

 

[ari89]

I loved the transformations question for Hamlet and R&G are Dead! It with the one on speeches was so straightforward and what i prepared
Hopin for a band 6! and to bring up my papers mark considering i did so horrible in section 3!
I found it really easy to introduce the idea of moral order into what I had prepared since the points I chose can be said to reflect the lax of moral order of the 'swinging sixties' contrasted to Shakespeare's Christian humanism...However, it must be said that it wasn't the question I expected!

 

[lilsxcwog89]

Hamlet and R&G was dodgey and I spent more time struggling to find the right quotes to fit the "nature of moral order" than anything else, last years was way more broad.

 

[Meaghan]

OMG wtf is the nature of moral order for Hamlet and Ros and Guil. I was so pissed off with that our teachers even said to us when we got out that we wouldnt have been able to answer that question. Aaaarrgghh. I still maged to get six pages out of it though mostly talking about death and identity. Didnt finish though coz i did that last. Oh well UAI in the 90's down the drain.

But the BNW BR questions seemed pretty good for all people

 

[JayJay07]

I'm still not sure what Moral Order means .... *ahh* .... I think I answered the Q correctly though looking at the responses in here. I just did my generic essay plan and made reference to the term over and over and over and over again What I took it to mean was basically the social conventions/thinkings etc of the context and how Stoppard transformed the text and how they reflected the changed social order, values etc in terms of religion, death and what is beyond, fate, destiny, colloquialism, the uncertainty etc I dunno if that is right or not but that is what I went for.

 

[housemouse]

Im not sure if what i wrote was correct for the HAM and RAGAD question.

I just explained how the values differed where the context ,situations and events in hamlet changed as well when stoppard created RAGAD thus showing the nature of moral order.

 

[Triangulum]

I interpreted 'relationships in society' very broadly for Emma/Clueless and talked about how charity is a consistent value between the two, but expressed in different ways. The fact that the value is shown to be continuous highlights it as an issue. (And charity is about relationships because it involves relationships between members of society, and caring for others, and blah blah blah.)

Then I talked about how stable relationships are clearly valued above promiscuity in both texts. Hence bringing this issue to the fore, again, because it is highlighted.

Didn't make an enormous amount of sense, but what can you do when it asks about how studying it brings ideas to the fore? It was a very strange question.

 

[shimmy&shine]

so sad, I think i stuffed this one up, although

i had the exact same attitude thinking i failed after a King Lear assessment, and I got 14.5/15!

 

[shsshs]

i thought the hamletRAGAD was okish i talked about
- how shakespeare's language represented the higher order
- how stoppard focuses on the common man, to represent the loss of heroism&morality in XXth century. trivialising Hamlet who embodies moral order
- how hamlet's procrastination explores his moral conflict and how he finally acts to restore social+moral order. how rosNguil don't act to save hamlet (loss of morality)
- claudius and hamlet characterising the conflict between morality and evil - and the cathartic ending

 

[ane_st]

I noticed all the questions were extremely specific... However it was a pretty straight forward question... I think i couldve wrote better (as in language wise) but i was nervous for that first section...

 

[SuNrIsE_oVa_sEa]

4 em/clue i talked bout relationships through the social heirarchy and just quickley put in sumthn bout moral conduct applicable to 1's rank...i only got 2 write 8 pages though :burn::mad1:

 

[sja]

Thoughts on In the Wild:

the question asked you to talk about the consequences for desire for control.

if you thought for a minute or two about the question all you basically needed to incorporate was natural state, natural rhythms, any signs or symbols throughout BR/BNW that had anything to do with emotions - and then go ahead to compare the environments and lack of individuality.

it was so broad! i used john the savage's suicide as a simultaneous symbol for the suicide of the natural environment.

i also used the replicant, Roy, and his suicide as a simultaneous symbol for the suicide of human emotions and how he was truly more human than human.

i also suggest everyone go masturbate.

 

[f261120]

Emma and Clueless was alright... i think they wanted something about what we have learned or what we can learn from the comparative study. sooooo i wrote about emma and cher being more concenred with themselves, blinkers, alternativem motives etc... brought in a few themes but it seems like we learn all this stuff and do at least one assessment task on it... and our half yearliers, trial and hsc but only get examined on a TINY part of the syllabus that is confusing...

who agrees?

and where were all these varying text types?!?!?!!?!? we did speeches and interviews and feature articles and everything... then get to the exam and it is all this PERSONAL RESPONSE stuff. :|

 

[pLuvia]

A very nice question I thought

 

[problemgirl]

The Emma/ Clueless question killed my brain! Relationships in society? Were we even supposed to know that? Did we even learn it? It really really really sucked! Left it til last and nearly ran out of time but managed to write a 5 page load of nothing.

 

[sospecha]

well i interpreted the emma/clueless question - which was something about 'brings to the fore the relationships in that society'

as the relationship between text and context(society)

i think if you show you've interpreted the question in some way, and back up your points with evidence...then they can't mark you as wrong...no matter what your interpretation is