How much context or text (In The Wild) (1 Viewer)

[zemaj]

When we studied ITW we focused very deeply on the text rather than context. I'm doing Blade Runner & Brave New World.

i.e. we address all the issues with the wild being complex - being able to address it both on the literal level (lack of the wild in both BR & BNW) and the human level (what is the wild/natural human? How this is developed in BNW and questioned in BR? etc...)

However we're also looked at the context part... but not so much.

However, I was looking at the standards package and the 5/6 spent the basically the whole time looking at the contexts. He/she hardly even went into the texts part!

How good is this? Esspecially since the question didn't really ask for context. I mean sure address the contexts, but focus on them?

The 5/6 also looked at techniques a fair bit, but there is NOTHING in the rubric, or question which has ANYTHING to do with this... am I missing something?

-zemaj

 

[Jellymonsta]

i know the response you are talking about, and that particular essay has been criticised for exactly that - there are no character names mentioned (i think). there was also an article in SMH, i believe. think of it as another demonstration of how the HSC stinks. and i wouldnt suggest emulating the essay. always best to try to answer the question.

 

[bex]

Context is a major part of the module so it is important to thoroughly discuss why each of the texts were composed and what they are getting us to realise is that even though the 2 tyexts were composed at completely different points in history, and therefore have completely different contexts, both BNW and BR share commonalities. That said, the In The Wild module focuses on mans suppression of Nature, so in talking about what goes on in the film/ book to demonstrate this, its important to realise the simlilarities and differences....

i think i just rambled.....

 

[Jellymonsta]

Bex it is v. important to talk about context, and i agree with what you said. but i (and others) am unhappy with that response because it responds with context almost to the exclusion of everything else. i mean come on, how can you get a 5/6 answer with only context and vague reference to technique???? there is not a single character named(i just checked) and it has a poor mention of "in the wild" in the actual texts.
mmmpf it is such a mediocre response...

 

[ben]

Yeah, but don't worry two much.

I've done 2 practice in the wild essays... and it's really hard to go into any depth into anything because of the damn syallabus.

My general essay outline:

- Introduction (1/2 page)
- Context: BNW (1/2 page)
- Context: BR (1/2 page)
- Setting: Opening chapter: BNW (1 page)
- Setting: Opening scene: BR (1/2 page)
- Overview of techiques used (i.e. language/film)
- Conclusion (1/2 page)

I did that in my trial and got 17/20, and the question just asked to compare 'the wild' in both texts.

I know that structure looks bad - but I really have trouble writing anything else in such a short time period of 40 minutes.

It's annoying - stuff like characters and and storyline in both texts is quite interesting and we spent so much time in class on it... but then I'll get to the exam and only talk about the opening of each text :mad1:

Any suggestions?

 

[Jellymonsta]

my advice (which doesnt mean too much)
be prepared to be unprepared for whatever they ask us.
other than that, in relation to BNW / BR texts and the sims and diffs between the two:

contexts --> setting (of the authors and within the texts)
comparative features (textual: purpose, style, / cinematic: film noir, mise-en-scene, visual motifs, style)
themes (conditioning, comformity, power, man vs nature / duality, redemption, man vs nature)
characterisation (Bernard, John, Helmholtz, Lenina / humans, Deckard, Replicants, Rachel, Zhora, Roy)
language
technique
values
intertextuality (shakespeare / blake and milton... kinda)
link with elective focus - in the wild

That is from a study guide specific to the module
Dont worry!! there is a whole 40 minutes to cover it all.
or you pick a mix of the above, use quotations and otherwise BS, and hope for the best.
i think we all know by now that 40 mins is not nearly enough to write a comprehensive essay. so abandon all hope now.

 

[ben]

Yeah 40 minutes is just pathetic for what they expect.

 

[zemaj]

Hmmm....

contexts --> setting (of the authors and within the texts)
comparative features (textual: purpose, style, / cinematic: film noir, mise-en-scene, visual motifs, style)
themes (conditioning, comformity, power, man vs nature / duality, redemption, man vs nature)
link with elective focus - in the wild

that's fine, but...

characterisation (Bernard, John, Helmholtz, Lenina / humans, Deckard, Replicants, Rachel, Zhora, Roy)
language
technique
values
intertextuality (shakespeare / blake and milton... kinda)

You don't need to go into that to much do you? We haven't looked at it at all!

I looked here:

http://hsc.csu.edu.au/english/advanced/comparative_study/in_the_wild/bnw_br/bnw_br_1.html#Heading6

It seems a very small part...

-zemaj

 

[Jellymonsta]

i wouldnt worry too much about those bits you havent done. obviously in 40 mins it is not possible to effectively mention half of what i listed. but i feel u should be prepared to able to talk about techniques a little, if it can be related to the question. and values is basically a part of context
also, i am personally somewhat dubious about half of what ive found on HSC online in general.

 

[Morgues]

hmmm I personally never discuss characters/story line of these texts as there is simply not enough time
By the time your done talking about the major themes, context and setting of the worlds plus a general technique or two your 40 minutes is just about up

 

[ben]

Originally posted by Morgues
hmmm I personally never discuss characters/story line of these texts as there is simply not enough time
By the time your done talking about the major themes, context and setting of the worlds plus a general technique or two your 40 minutes is just about up

i agree!

 

[superhubert]

It was only after the exam that i realized how ridiculous all our classwork was. I didn't use one note from class. We didn't even discuss 'in the wild'all we focused on was the alienation of nature and destruction of natural rhythms. How did everyone catergorize their themes. did you group them by commons like cloning/ conditioning etc, or by differences?