Australian Question (1 Viewer)

[i_am_an_genius]

What was with that Aussie question????
How does belonging have anything to do with any of the previous questions??? sure, once you translate it, it kjinda reflects it, but then ud still have to be talking about a noun, a group of people or something - without a good knowledge of the texts, i and im sure a million others would have been totally stuffed! Even though it can be sort of twisted to say what you want to say, we still have to add in stuff from the question, and thats a little hard when that hits you straigh out of left field!
Absurd question was good - wrote a very sophisticated little number for that, after i had clamed down a little from the nice shock they gave me in the 5 minute reading time.

 

[welshi]

What was with that Aussie question????
How does belonging have anything to do with any of the previous questions??? sure, once you translate it, it kjinda reflects it, but then ud still have to be talking about a noun, a group of people or something - without a good knowledge of the texts, i and im sure a million others would have been totally stuffed! Even though it can be sort of twisted to say what you want to say, we still have to add in stuff from the question, and thats a little hard when that hits you straigh out of left field!
Absurd question was good - wrote a very sophisticated little number for that, after i had clamed down a little from the nice shock they gave me in the 5 minute reading time.

i thought it was a horrible question. awful.

 

[chiken_lips]

Yeah i thought it was ordinary but i twisted it to say that the playwrights used the dramatic form of relaism to pose questions about whether women belonged to men, Aborigines belonged to the white race, people belonged to their lanscape... and then backed it up - pretty ambiguous....

 

[flipsyde]

Same chickenlips I did the same

 

[chiken_lips]

Yay! that either means we can dominate or suck together!

 

[matty_boi17]

How does belonging have anything to do with any of the previous questions??? sure, once you translate it, it kjinda reflects it, but then ud still have to be talking about a noun, a group of people or something - without a good knowledge of the texts, i and im sure a million others would have been totally stuffed!

Am I misinterpreting what you've said.. if so, forgive me. But, NO exam has to follow the previous years direction. None at all. So, to get a question on plays exploring the idea of belonging is quite fair... because no where does it say that future exams have to reflect past ones.

And, in my opinion, you probably should have a good idea of the texts. I thought the question, even though it pinpointed an idea.. that of belonging... it still left it open for quite a bit. I used Mrs. Lind from Mother and Son for an example of belonging. It's her overwhelming sense of ownership that drives Harry to his death. Emma represents city life, that is freedom and minimalist restraint, which compromises Mrs. Lind's values, hence their instant disliking to one another. The former lacks ANY ideas of belonging to something, whereas the former emobdies it and attempts to reinforce it in her son. So, that ENTIRE notion of belonging is relevant in the characterisation and presentation of the characters.... do you see what I mean? I thought it was easy to mould to...

Anyways, I didn't think it was too hard. I enjoyed that one...

 

[Candypants]

I loved it. I love quirky questions.

But it has lot's to do with Australian drama: belonging to another person/ social group = mateship (HUGE issue portrayed); belonging to another person - exploring the nature of love and relationships; belonging to a society = characters being a product of the land, ie, the true 'Australian character', ie, the aus identity, ie steretoypes, ie. a dramatic convention.

 

[neo o]

mateship! Good one

 

[Serg01]

I foudn it easy!! I loved it.. many ways for example.. Gary doesnt belong so sucide.. and the drip[ping Ice in Seven stages which is a result of not belonging...

 

[Ezzmaye]

I loved it so much!!! It was the best question I've had in drama. I liked showing how Gary and the Aboriginals felt that they didn't belong...it was great!!!

 

[bextahunt]

That was the easiest question... come on.. if you struggled with that... then.. oh dear.

But hey I found the American theatre slightly challenging.

 

[Trigger189]

Why was it left field? I thought it was a very simple question.

 

[emmamar]

the australian was heaps easy yeah you say what you'd normally say but just had to link in stuff like belonging as a daugther to a motherand vica verca (RUAD) and belonging as Indigeous peoples to the land, family, culture and finding their sense of identity through belongning (7 Stages)... oh well its all over now woo hoo!

 

[i_am_an_genius]

Ok, many peeps saying it was a good question so i, who was the first to say contrary should really defend my thoughts. Im not going to back down ( like many annoying people i know) and say, "yeah well, now that you guys say it wasnt that hard i agree/ i was only really wanting to see who found it hard"/ not answer at all.
I never said that the question has to follow the same format as other questions. Nor did i say that it was against the syllabus to do something different. But when one looks back over previous questions (being a student of history), every single one is about how the conventions are limited/ used/exaggerated to create a comment on something uniquely australian/ reflect a slice of australian life/show what its like to be australian. When these are the only questions used for practise essays, far beit for me to be teaching maths (i dont do any) but the probability of one such questions is quite high - one would say almost 100%. Although they dont have to be the same, the trend was likely that it was. This is simply what i meant about "left feild"
Nor was i saying that they were not looking for the same information as one of these expected questions, as im sure they were, and i like you changed the structure of my argument to show the peeps in No sugar felt they didnt belong, and the peeps in 7 stages have always belonged. I didnt struggle, apart from a matter of minutes in the reading time to decipher the interesting "Quirky" way in was put and how to transform this into an essay. Far beit for me to also project hypothetically, but for people out there who had prepared essays, their mood would have been shattered. For me however, for whom that method has never worked, a good knowledge of text meant i was able to twist the argument, hopefully successfully (as stated previous)

Mistake not my long winded rebttle for me being offended with any contrary comments to mine, i am just one who likes to sharpen one's teeth on small and irrelevant argument. I still maintain that it was a strange and "left field" question, obviously contrary to some other people.

That is all.

 

[dynamic22]

I foudn it easy!! I loved it.. many ways for example.. Gary doesnt belong so sucide.. and the drip[ping Ice in Seven stages which is a result of not belonging...

......uh oh....

 

[skankit]

i completely twisted it to fit with my point..

i pretty much said that contemporary theatre reflects, and strives to belong to the society in which its set, ie at the time RUAD was written, feminist issues were the biggest and so this is explored, and theres also the isue of belonging within a family, and then at the time 7 stages was written, aboriginal issues were hte biggest and so THIS is explored


argh i think that was a dumb idea. oh well, who cares? IM FINISHED

 

[neo o]

But hey I found the American theatre slightly challenging.

Really? I thought it was completely standard, or did you guys primarily learn about context and values?

 

[euphonic_quest]

I know how you feel skankit! =D I'm done too. =)

I thought the drama essay was pretty straightforward personally... thought the Brecht question was a little limiting. But meh. I felt fine about it when I walked out... =)

Anyway, freedom! =) hehe. Good luck to those who still have exams! Not long to go!

~ Euphonic_quest!

 

[hotcocoababe]

I found the aust one pretty straightforward - just chucked in a whole lot about symbolism and mateship and Olive's (from the Doll) refusal to live out the stereotypical "Australian Dream" and therefore she wasn't really an accepted member of society.

American Theatre I found harder - I did it first and COMPLETELY forgot anything to do with symbolism! :s not very good but i couldn't re-write it afterwards...not enough time.

BUT HAY ITS ALL OVER WITH NOW!!!

and never again..yippee!!!!

 

[Chelly_bee]

complexity plus!! omg

i did similar to skankit- i wrote how the plays belonged to all australians coz they deat with issues, situations, themes and stereotyes that australian society have faced and lived with and how the playwrights wanted to, through realism, reflect australia and while each playwright had a different perception on the idea of national identity (Silk was against it, Doll sort of was for it) and issues dealt with, they allowed the audience to ponder on the question of belonging to which i concluded that the plays belong to australians who have/do either believe or odnt believe in the australian national identity. i talked about the themes, use of realism and other such conventions and how they allowed the readers/viewers to form their own opinion about the belonging of the plays. that was my interpretation of the question- omg!! as i read that back i sooo wish i was smarter!!
i hope its right!!!