Module B - Critical Study of Texts (1 Viewer)

[townie]

Worst Hsc Question ever

 

[senso]

yeah, the question kind of threw me off. I do king lear and io guess the extracts meant talk about two scenes in the text.. And i was expecting the question to be more about other interpretations.
So i just sort of talked about a few interpretations nd put examples of what they would think for certain scenes..
It wasn't too bad though

 

[Acid]

I'm so happy they didn't specify the texts! I only learnt two of my Harwood poems....

Did anyone write a personal reflection statement for this question? It said "reflect" in it and didn't specify a text type, so I just did a reflection statement. Will I be penalised for this?

 

[Jase]

wow.. this has sure caused an upriot.

But i agree.. worst. question. ever. its not much about its difficulty.. it was afterall a pretty easy generic question.
But the worst part is that it didnt explicitly ask us to decode other interpretations .. which is bassically what weve been learning all fucking year.. so i gotta hand it to the SHM article, we should have listened. hah

 

[lukebennett]

apparently we were meant to talk briefly abou some other interpretations to prove the stimulus quote correct but mostly talk abou our context and our interpretation. you need to look at the above marking criteria. it was the most vague question i have ever had for english before. trust it to pop up here. i should have done ok but was not confidnet while i was writing which means i probably could have wrote better answer

 

[Craig]

yet u didnt use two extracts

Ah yeah I did. I did a major analysis of act 1 scene 1 and the storm scene. Also I gave brief mention to the final scene and how those scenes showed the ideas of a political interpretation.

 

[*Princess*Jess*]

am i gonna fail that module because i didn't mention my own interpretation? :,(

 

[neo o]

am i gonna fail that module because i didn't mention my own interpretation? :,(

You wont be alone

 

[mayhemily]

it was shit shit shit shit shit. Thats all i have to say. SHIT.

 

[saadme]

We did Wuthering Heights., Itw as a good question as that what the module is abou: critial intepreation and the different contexts form which they arrived. I talks about my intepretation and mentioned some others.

The only stupid thing was "refer to two extracts" I mean bloody hell, thats kinda limiting, and i assume if u refer to other bits and quote, you'll ket marked down.

saad

 

[derek_]

lol @ the my own interpretation...i didn't have ANY of that in my response ... all i did was other people's interpretations =(~~

 

[lukebennett]

i kept telling everyone they needed their own interpretatioin but i didnt expect it to be the most part of the question. i did about 2 pages on other interpretations but focused mostly on my own for about 3-4 pages. mentioned two extracts directly with qqoutations etc and others indirectly. it was so shit though because my interpretation relied on more than two parts of the play. the hsc markers will have fun marking this one!!!! lol

 

[*Princess*Jess*]

You wont be alone

...but i WILL fail... right?

 

[Shuter]

So easy for speeches!

I did Martin Luther King I have a dream:

Talked about how it was relevant to the audience he was speaking to in 1963 (negro's, repressed)

Mentioned how it was not that relevant to me in Aus as not much repression anymore, ect.

Talk about Aung San Su Kyi's speech.

Mentioned how it was more relevant to her country not the world and western countries.

Mentioned how I rejected the speech as I saw it as outdated.

Done!

 

[Katie123]

i hope extracts meant scenes cos thats what i did
1st scene
and storm scene
tried to do my opinion in general cos i was wary of using I
who knows

 

[neo o]

...but i WILL fail... right?

Ummm, no.

It depends how well you referred to other productions and whether these can be shifted around to reflect your own interpretation. Like, I described feminist productions etc, and talked about it generally enough that it could by taken as my own interpretation.

Itll drop you a band or maybe two if the marker is feeling particularly mean. (So about 4 marks)

 

[Jezzabelle]

F*** YOU BOS!

I did CLOUDSTREET and it made NO sense cos the shit book is still kinda in my context, like my parents and grandparents experience. and its about 20 yrs in one F***KING house so yeh lots of place diversity there... I knew so so much for this module and nearly burst into tears when i read the Q.
i knew structure, themes, language blah blah .... and can someone please define EXTRACTS?!?! i knew Scenes, but not like two that were big enough to write heaps on.. or that related to place and time.... any other Cloudstreet ppl out there?!?!
i left it to last cos i didnt get it, then sat there pulling my hair out trying to think about 2 extacts.. and then went SHIT 20min! and just started writing bull worst ever

 

[sainuka]

Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrgggggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!

The test was easy except for mod B. I was wondering if anyone can help me out and write down what we were meant to write in the stupid essay. I talked about two different readings and two scene plus a small third one. I also said stuff like they were relevant to my time and context, because of current world state do you think that's right. I hope its right otherwise I'm screwed.

 

[miffytoki]

cos i did cloudstreet...i assumed (along with all the other students in my grade who i talked to) that the extracts referred to critic quotes....at the time of the exam tho i didn't know what the term 'extract' meant but i couldn't have answered the question if it just meant like two chapters or something...i just basically did what i practiced...cos in the sutdy of cloudstreet we have to focus on the various interpretations the novel gives and what about a reader (whether religious, marxist or feminist etc) effects their reading. ...horrible exam

 

[acmilan]

FUCK YOU SHAKESPEARE.
FUCK YOU BOARD OF STUDIES.
I HOPE YOU FUCKING DIE IN YOUR SLEEP TONIGHT YOU BASTARDS.

What he said

This section was the only one that i was a bit iffy with, did good in the rest