Rftg Creative Writing (1 Viewer)

[luey88]

hey crew,

i don't know how confident everyone else is feeling about the creative writing section of monday's exam, but im fairly worried and URGENTLY need help! I've noticed that there are a few threads on creative writing, but they don't have much relating to the RFTG questions. If anyone has ANY ideas/suggestions on how to approach this question and incorporate the RFTG way of thinking, it would be so so so much appreciated!

good luck to everyone on monday!

 

[l-mercedes-l]

Glitterfairy told me to write something that sounded like a potential RFTG prescribed text.

My teacher tells me to trust my markers and not oversimplify things, he rekons they know enough to work out that it was a rftg without the character saying "What a wonderful thing to have retreated from the horrors of the global". (i think read between the lines and its dont be corny)

That aside im freaking to. im trying to just have a really simple character feature thing, kinda like Quoyle and the chin thing which singles them out.

You dont know what they will ask tho so theres not much u can prepare for which i hate. Im not going to say its all going to be ok, coz i hate being told that.

Goodluck

 

[666_blessings]

Be prepared for the creative to be something bordering on analytical, like a feature article. Otherwise, just write something with a lot of clever allusions to the prescribed texts and don't write poetry (tried it for the trials, it was a failed experiment). Good luck.

 

[luey88]

Ta for your suggestions guys! Lets just all cross our fingers and hope that the question isn't going to ask for anything too random (a short story would be REALLY nice!!), and if it does, we'll just have to take it as it comes!

thanks again

 

[c_james]

By all means prepare something, but there is one thing that will save you in this section in the event that they pull something random on you - a broad knowledge of theorists.

Fukuyama, Klein, Hegel, Kojeve, Lyotard, Baudrillard and the like.

Why? Because you can adapt their writings and philosophies to a feature article, a personal essay, a story, a transcript or whatever - plus, you'll be demonstrating independent investigation and a broad knowledge of the elective. Additionally, you won't be stumped for things to say, because you'll already have a good idea of what you're going to write.

Best of luck...

 

[scoby_2000]

Fukuyama, Klein, Hegel, Kojeve, Lyotard, Baudrillard and the like.

um.....who?

 

[fleepbasding]

um.....who?

Fukuyama- American writer who claimed "the end of history" following the collapse of the soviet union.

Klien- a famous designer of underwear

Hegel- A 19th century philosopher who viewed history dialectically- society changes by way of thesis, antithesis and the resulting synthesis

Kojeve- someone that not many people our age have heard of

Lyotard- pomo = "incredulity towards meta-narratives"... pomo is historical process whereby modernism is constantly rejected by pomo and that pomo becomes the new modernism and so on and so forth (dialectic model)

Baudrillard- 4 stages... simulcrum... relationship between signifier and signified break down.

... all of which is grossly simplified. most of these names are suited to pomo elective but who knows, maybe they can be for RFTG too.

 

[c_james]

Klien- a famous designer of underwear

lol

Scoby, if you don't know any of these by now, wikipedia is your friend...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Logo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Klein
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Kojeve
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Fukuyama
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baudrillard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyotard

While most of them (especially Lyotard and Baudrillard) are more specific to postmodernism, their ideas are applicable to the RFTG elective.

Lyotard, for example, in The Postmodern Condition stated "the self does not amount to much, but no self is island; we all exist in a fabric of relations more complex and mobile than ever" - an obvious allusion to globalisation.

Similarly, Baudrillard's writings the simulacrum suggest that we're today creating copies of copies with indiscernable origins, and are losing what is, so to speak, the 'originals' (or local, if you will).

Alexandre Kojeve, the self-professed 'Marxist of the right', believed socieities, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant, were defined by the 'struggle for recognition' - whether that be through religion, nationalism or whatnot (an obvious allusion to local culture's attempts to thrive amid global suppression).

You get the drift...

 

[luey88]

Lyotard and Fukuyama are theorists, and Klein (as in Naomi Klein) has a more contemporary view on globalisation-her website (type in 'no logo' and her name into google and it'll come up) has some great info on the issue.

I know who Fukuyama is but can someone give me a general description on his views?

cheers x

 

[*smiley_eyes*]

in our trials they gave us the visual stimulus of a leunig cartoon to write a short story about, and don't get me wrong i love leunig, but this one just didn't relate to rftg at all. it was amazingly polar and i'm kind of worried that if something like that comes up again in the paper, i'm not going to be able to fit a pre-conceived idea to the question and stimulus.

 

[c_james]

Lyotard and Fukuyama are theorists, and Klein (as in Naomi Klein) has a more contemporary view on globalisation-her website (type in 'no logo' and her name into google and it'll come up) has some great info on the issue.

I know who Fukuyama is but can someone give me a general description on his views?

cheers x

Alrighty, I suppose this'll be good study anyway...

Fukuyama takes a postmodern approach to a postcolonial phenomenon. He sees liberal parliamentary democracy as the final stage of human evolution/history - not because no more events will occur, but because no superior or more feasible political system (in his opinion) will ever come about.

He implicitly values globalisation, seeing it as a benign inevitability. The exponentially increasing outreach of late capitalist paradigms, he basically says, ensures the rise of globalism (perfect opportunity here to link this concept with your prescribed texts). So retreat, in essence, is futile and pointless. He even responds affirmatively to Immanuel Kant's question of whether the creation of a 'Universal History' - one devoid of the sponteneity and intricacies inherent to the global - is possible. So, essentially, science and technology, progressive marches of knowledge, combined with the most evolved political system, liberal parliamentary democracy, nullify the success of any retreat from the global.

Of course, it's important to note Fukuyama didn't specifically write on the subject of globalisation - I'm simply adapting his ideas to suit the elective.

 

[luey88]

YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH YOU HAVE JUST HELPED ME!!

that was brilliant! thankyou so so much! just a quick question, are you using his book the end of history blah blah blah as a sup? or just referring to him in general?

you're pure gold!

ps. who's emmanuel kant?

 

[c_james]

YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH YOU HAVE JUST HELPED ME!!

that was brilliant! thankyou so so much! just a quick question, are you using his book the end of history blah blah blah as a sup? or just referring to him in general?

your're pure gold!

Both - I'm interspersing my essay with his general philosophies, and then elaborating on his ideas by using 'The End of History and the Last Man' as a supplementary text.

Although, I must say his book isn't very strong on techniques, so I've mostly relied on "allusion" and "academic language" to get me by in that department.

As for Kant, he's just some really verbose, metaphysical philosopher who's a real bitch to read...

 

[luey88]

i'm thinking of using that book just incase i feel i need a third sup to back up my argument, but i really haven't talked about techniques at all. not a single one. im relying more on just talking about his views in general-is that bad?! im a bit scared now that you've said that...

 

[c_james]

i'm thinking of using that book just incase i feel i need a third sup to back up my argument, but i really haven't talked about techniques at all. not a single one. im relying more on just talking about his views in general-is that bad?! im a bit scared now that you've said that...

Ideally, you should be able to talk about techniques for each supp. text. However, if you're not using Fukuyama as a related text, but rather just as a theorist in general, then no, you don't need techniques.

 

[fleepbasding]

you do pomo c_james?

 

[c_james]

Nope, RFTG.

Although, after my Extension 2 major work, I have bequeathed unto myself the status of an honorary EE1 po-moer .

 

[fleepbasding]

ha ha ha, yeah your MW is probably the empitomy of pomo MW's (I mean that in a good sense)! good luck in the exam tommorow, I'm sure you'll own.