u won't get owned, not much anyway. u had to have other readings in it anyway... that's the point of the topic! u'll do better than those who only put their own perspective, and no other readings!
i mostly concentrated on the values held by the sprits in the middle room in Dwellingplace and i talk about how people from a foriegn country wouldnt understand Guy Fawkes Night and how Fish was symbolic of those people.sub said:yeah i used "back in time" and i sorta blurred in the end reconciliation image towards the end as another extract - but then again i did post colonial and feminist reading...what did u end up doing?
i completely agree about the discrepancy between what we studied and what they asked. i hope you're right about the marking :SAngel45 said:Module B seemed to be completely different from the way we had looked at King Lear in class. In class we were looking at the way different critical theories interpreted the play and how different productions that supported those theories had staged it. Either way, in our study of the play we had never really considered OUR interpretation or how context came into the other critical theories. I just freaked out and wrote on what I'd studied. Barely responding to the question. Like, I did "family drama" as well as "aristotelian" and I was thinking what, for family drama am I meant to make up some bs story on how I have sisters who I am in rivalry with because the youngest one is favoured or something like that?!? I just couldn't work out how to answer it. Also, my response turned in to more of a diary entry than a well-structured essay!!
However, on the news the other night re. Paper I they were saying how they look at the students' responses and how the majority have interepreted it and go from there on how to mark 'em. Cause they can't fail everyone!! So perhaps they will realise it was a bit bizarre, maybe even some misunderstanding of the syllabus on our teacher's part, and mark accordingly. Fingers crossed anyway!
I agree totally, our question was simply stupid....wtf, out of the whole reason for studying gwen harwood our perceptions are changed? uhh no, how about asking us how we gained deeper insights into her life or challenged our thinking. stupid. I hope eveyone found it stupid (or most) so they realise they will have to scale us significantlyEnlightened_One said:That was the stupidest question possible. How has your own context shaped your interpretation? What a stupid question. Everyone should get top marks because they're asking for your interpretation, which is influcnced by your context. Well, they can't mark your interpretaion wrong because it's a personal thing, not Brook's or anybody elses, and they can't fault your context because each person has different beliefs.
Besides I hated the question. Stupid question.
so? they could specify a speech too! we had to know it inside out...even how every speech was recieved differently...withoutaface said:To the people doing speeches: We all have to do a non-fictive text, and a lot of the time thats split up into parts, although it may not be for module B. I myself had to do The Justice Game for mod C which consisted of 7-8 trials, each of which is 20+ pages. We had to know these inside out as they could specify any of them.
kthxbye
I'm just saying that we have it equally bad.~*HSC 4 life*~ said:so? they could specify a speech too! we had to know it inside out...even how every speech was recieved differently...
kthxdoublebye