Module B: Critical Study of Texts (2 Viewers)

[Smeed]

Damn anyone else think the King Lear question was ridiculously specific as compared to previous years? I mean, "Characterisation of King Lear" seems too explicit.

I'm so glad I studied two specific scenes beforehand though.

 

[Sgs2006]

Lear question was a bitch, but my prepared essay actually fit alrite

 

[kerfuffle]

-___-" Like everyone else studying Lear in this thread, almost screwed up the Lear question. I was all set to yak about Gonerill and Regan when I reread the question - and noticed that King Lear wasn't italicised.

 

[passion89]

Hmm...I found Lear to be ok. I'm confident I answered the question but I know I was a little thrown off by reading the question for the first time. So damn specific!

But all in all, KL was definately not my worst today. Damn you, Frontline!

 

[sinist4]

OH MY GOD Harwood poetry was really screwed up i was in no way prepared for that. "...harwoods poetic treatment of age and youth"? at school we definatley didnt see those as the main themes it was way harsh they specified that. I don't think it was consistant with the syllabus.

yea thta harwood question was bloody stuffed... i wasnt even answering the question i think. liink age and youth to a perspective ... :| i onli did about 4 pagesfor that section lol.


oh well the other Q's were't that bad... i did my best so im stoked hahaha

 

[spasticpirate]

Eeeeep. I knew that question was going to suck bigtime so i spent less time preparing it. It was a horrible question. How the hell is the "enduring power" of the charachterisation of King Lear supposed to shape your view of the play as a whole?? I just sat there for ages going ohhhhh noooo. I only wrote for like 1/2 an hour on this section which meant that I could do the other sections with time to spare...but seriously BOS should ask themselves a serious question about what they are trying to prove by asking a question so narrow that it really limits any real critical study of the play which is what we were supposed to be doing....

 

[abcd9146]

king lear question was good actually, i was scared they were gonna give some really hard question... i really hate king lear, glad the question wasnt that hard

 

[bmc]

You thought King Lear was hard! what about us stuck with Cloudstreet- we had to talk about the characterisation of Quick- he's not even one of the major, major characters. That was the crapiest question they could have asked- i spent the whole time writing about how much i disagreed with the statement because i didn't learn any scenes with Quick being prominent in them. At least you got your play's main character!

so so so so true it is not funny. Every advanced student in our exam room left off a big groan when that came up in the reading time

 

[sedated_mind]

well it appears like most i hated king lear, it was much more specific than the other years but i managed to make my essay fit it because it was to what extent about lear and i made it minimal and crapped my context essay on...

and liger the only way i was able to incorporate other peoples reading into it was to say that looking at other composers interpretations of the play shaped my understanding blah diddly blah

wosrt module of my day but no more english woot woot

 

[Ioup]

Liger:why? what? how????????? what did you write about and how did you link in other interpretations and readings?


Well I argued that to me Shakespeare's characterisation of King Lear supported my feminist interpretation of the play. I argued that as a character he represents a conservative patriarchal leader. I then argued that not only Lear but also other males in the play are misogynistic and demonise females etc. supporting my feminist reading. I used a number of quotes where Lear discriminates women ie "pelican daughters, "sulphorous pit" and "she foxes". I stated how not only Shakespeare's characterisation of Lear had lent me to a feminist response but also how the relevence of the issue to my time and place was also a major factor. I then also argued that feminist critics such as Janet Adelman, Kathleen McKluskie and Linda Bamber also helped to shape my personal response.
I also stated how I believed that the play of King Lear was about property, inheritance and class struggles. I argued that critics like John Dollimore who relate how Jacobean context influenced meaning in the text was important in my understanding of the play and my own response. I argued much like the critic Alexander Shurbanov that Lear represented a totalitarian leader obsessed with power which ultimately led to his arrogance. I used act one scene one as an extract to highlight Lears obsession with material wealth."Vines of France" "Milk Of Burgundy such that it highlights the paternal contest more so as a material contest of wealth. Similarly I related how context has influenced my personal response and talked about the influence of critics and Kosintevs marxist production which explored the wider implications on the public of Lears downfall. I looked at act 3 sc 4 and suggested that Lears renerwal was due to his understanding of the plight of the poor. "O I have taken too little care of this".
And yeah,
I just said that Shakespeare's characterisation of King Lear influenced to an extent the way I react to and look at the play, however, it was my time, place and context that ultimately determined the way i reacted and led me to my personal response which is a strange mix of feminism and marxism....

 

[izzy88]

King Lear question was alright in that it said "to what extent" so if Lear did not have too much to do with your personal response you could go to "some extent" or "no extent" and go on to how other characters etc influenced your reading...well thats what i thought you could do in anycase...

however the focus on two extracts was ANNOYING...i focused a bit on act1 scene 1 and act 5 scene 3 but i still included other examples from other areas...hope i dont get penalised too much!!!!

 

[surfing_chaos]

ARGH the WUTHERING HEIGHTS question was the gayest thing ive seen in my entire life!!!
sooo crap

 

[kezz_xxxx]

Speeches: It was a good question, fairly similar to others I have had in the past so it was easy enough to write about. The only annoying thing was that they only asked for two speeches. As people have said already.
I managed to write 8 pages by talking about context, values and whatever they actually asked about. I don't want to look at the paper again to remember :/ lol.

 

[BigBear_25]

however the focus on two extracts was ANNOYING

I agree but does 2 extracts mean two scenes or does it mean two specific sections such as a monologue or something like that. Cause if thats the case then iam stuffed.

 

[rusty123]

i didn't read the end of the question! so i didnt see the part about the 2 extracts... i did an analysis of the play as a whole but pretty much all of it was taken from act 1 scene 1 and act 3. hopefully they see that as me analysing two scenes. also, i prepared a marxist reading but then the question didnt ask for it, and i didnt have time, so i didnt mention a word of it! i thought this would be fine but everyone else is talking about their readings...were they necessary?

 

[XOXOLIZ]

I think the question was pretty specific and it scared me when I first read it. The only thing I said about Lear before I went into the test was that I would die if we had to focus on Lear and two specific scenes. I must have really bad karma. I think I did it okay though, I focused on Lear as a symbol of society as well as a person which is kind of abstract and I fo shizzle hope it made sense. I included the other readings by saying that to recognise and explore Lear's character it was necessary to examine a play in a context that is relevant to a particular audience. I actually have no idea now how I went. I was hoping for a good english mark, but now I'm going to have to cross my fingers...

 

[sweetsweetcandy]

In the Skin: Most retarded question I've ever had to answer. I completely screwed it up! I didn't study "two key episodes" and wtf was with focusing on just characterisation of one character? That was so messed up.

 

[SuNrIsE_oVa_sEa]

IM SO HAPPY THEY DIDNT STIPULATE A SPEECH!!!

 

[insanerp]

well i screwed up the king lear question
but i don't think i did too bad in the others so let's hope those can pull me through.

 

[dasphoebus]

Just to let you all know, if they say "To what extent...", you have to say to what extent you actually agree with the question. They don't normally like it when you use absolutes. I was done over with that sort of question in my Ext1 Trial, but now I am wiser I got it down. That was in the Poetry question, but it may have been in others.