lear: # of productions to mention (1 Viewer)

[liddy]

hey guys
just wondering wot the general consensus is...

would it be better to cover 2 productions of lear (eg. blessed, brook) thoroughly OR 3 (eg. blessed, brook, kurosawa) in not so much detail?

i always find that to write all i want to say for each one i end up running out of time and only deal with 2 properly; the 3rd tends to look tacked on and interrupts the whole flow of the piece. i just want it to be balanced yet still in depth.

let me know wot u think please!

 

[anti]

If you consistently run out of time and never get to cover the 3rd in as much detail as you'd like, don't include it.

It is better to cover two productions in detail and be happy with the result than to cover three briefly without going into technical depth.

However, if you feel that your two productions are getting TOO detailed - if you find yourself caught up in the little things - then it may be wise to practise including that third production to add support to your argument, rather than go into so much detail in the first two (although you need not cover it in as much detail).

That's my opinion anyway.

 

[Emily.]

another question: when they say that you have to do two readings on two scenes, is it better to do the same readings for the scenes? Or do you get "marked down" if this is done?
For example, feminist reading for Love Test scene and the ending of the play as well as marxist reading for both scenes...
.....rather than....
feminist and Christian readings for Love test scene then Marxist and nihilistic readings for the ending of the play.

we were never taught any of this "marxist, "Christian" "nihilistic" stuff
i dont even know what it means!
weve only done the Harlos production from Bondi pavillion
the Brooks movie
and the BBS production

 

[Supra]

i think ur own interpretations come thru when ur actually analyzing the validity of a selcted interpretation...
e.g (off the top of my head) McKluskie claims that the daughters r the alter ego for lear, yet thru such and such techniques + features of the text it is clearly evident that blah blah (ur sort of interpreting the play yoself)...Harlos was in Bondi during May...is the Gemma Tamock production the one @ parra, i personally liked bondi ova parra

 

[senso]

do interpretations (like a feminist perspective) and productions count as the same thing?

 

[frazzle]

use productions to back up interpretations, eg. nihilistic - brook. but there isn't any set rules on that, it's just how i see as logical.

i have the same dilemma babout doign 2 readings in detail or 3... because i don't write fast enough. but isn't it better to even just mention the 3rd one than to just do 2?

 

[silvermoon]

do interpretations (like a feminist perspective) and productions count as the same thing?

no, theres not the same thing. the production is the actual film or play and the interpretation is the reading or readings that have been imposed on the play.

 

[silvermoon]

so much depends on how much you write. to decide whether or not to include the 3rd one - id do it this way:
*how much time do i have to include the third one? is it enough time to get some decent arguments done, or will it just look like ive tacked it onto the end? balance is the key.
*will putting this in add to the overall argument or am i just putting it in because i feel like i should have 3. is it necessary to my argument - how many marks will i get for it (if any) and, most importantly, will doing it take time away from writing a strong conclusion?
*also, never go overtime to put extra in - you;ll be denying yourself so many more marks in another section

personally, i do quite a few interpretations - but i write very fast and because i do productions with a couple of interpretations for each im able to integrate them very easily. (generally im able to do: feminist, psychoanalytic, christian, revisionist, absurdist/nihilist in the 40 minutes: but like i said, i write very fast and know my material inside and out - english is my baby! )