Thoughts on the exam (1 Viewer)

[Kujah]

What were the two questions?

 

[miss-smexy]

Mallie89 and tessery,

Q1 was definitely postmodern because it questioned the notion of truth. The fact that he is questioning whether there is objective truth classes him amongst the post modernists. He also questioned about narrative structures and how they make it seem like 'fiction'. Therefore, yes, it was definitely a postmodern source.

 

[chocolatecookie]

i did tacitus too ademir - i thought it worked really well for Tacitus. i did tyranny and freedom and characterisation of men and women. even though it was at least ONE debate, i still did my two, because it gave me more scope. i pretty much talked about how in the tacitean debates, historians have attempted to do what the quote said (lol, cant remember what it was), but it was depended upon their APPOROACH and then went on about context, methodology and used syme as the "accepted interpretation" and how he has been challenged by Woodman, Mellor, O'Gorman etc.

 

[chocolatecookie]

oh and, i think q1 was really different to previous years, in that munslow's argument wasnt at all explicit - and all the rhetorical questioning was confusing.

 

[miss-smexy]

rhethorical questions were confusing, but ultimately, they meant that he was questioning the ideals of modernism. It is postmodernism that has brought about such a line of thinking. Therefore, I discussed Keith Jenkins, Hayden White as a group of pomo thinkers. The other two i did were Herodotus and Von Ranke.

 

[Ademir]

It wasn't me who did tacitus, it was the guy i quoted hehe

 

[xinxin89]

i thot section 1 was a bit hard in that the author didn't give a concrete statement on what they thought, it was just strings of rhetorical questions.....that made it hard for me to make an actual judgement on him

section 2 was fine - quote was pretty accessible, though it seemed the quote didn't focus much on context, it was asking us to prove that to properly understand history, there will always be interpretations to be challenged

of course, u bring in the context stuff when u talked aobut the how the interpretations are formed, but i thought unlike the other years, the quote didn't distinctivly focus on use of evidence and the effect of context

is it just me thinking this? lol

 

[afro-girl]

well i wrote 11 for q1 and 10 for q2

kind of screwed the second one up a bit... really need to think about what i write before i write it lol :S

but personally i dont think you have to definitively state whether munslow is a postmodernist or whatever - the important thing is how he characterises the role of the historians and how that compares/contrasts to the views of other historians about it

 

[bored6]

Mallie89 and tessery,

Q1 was definitely postmodern because it questioned the notion of truth. The fact that he is questioning whether there is objective truth classes him amongst the post modernists. He also questioned about narrative structures and how they make it seem like 'fiction'. Therefore, yes, it was definitely a postmodern source.

Hmm I disagree. I don't think the author took a definitive position at all. You can question the notion of Truth and still remain an empiricist or a relativist or even simply an abstract writer i.e. E.H. Carr and even G.R. Elton was known to have a relativist streak in him.

If I recall correctly, he also raised points from both sides (of postmodernism and empiricism) (including the metaphor of the midwife) which I don't think alluded to a specific position he took as a historian but rather was intended to help the responder question / use the source as a means to discuss historigraphical issues.

 

[miss-smexy]

bored6,

Yes you definitely have a point! =) Whilst he did not, however, take a definitive position, nevertheless, the fact that he questions the notion of truth means that people should discuss pomo in their essay.

He asked about empiricism and analytical enquiry and asked how can readers ascertain that there is actually fact... if i recall correctly... hmm so i discussed Von Ranke.

 

[live.fast]

did you have to judge munslow? i thought it only wanted a critique-fingo on the role of the historian, with reference to Munslow's stuff?

??

or did i just fuk up my entire history extension HSC exam of 2007?

 

[Ademir]

Yes, people should discuss pomo, but it doesn't mean you have to discuss Munslow's own position per se. Or make a judgement on him.

 

[jelena001]

heyy guys,.. i thought the exam was ok.. just wanted to know though

does anyone do the women convicts of australia?

 

[jelena001]

heyy guys,.. i thought the exam was ok.. just wanted to know though

does anyone do the women convicts of australia?

 

[y3cart]

ok
i had a "omg ok im going to fail hsc, i think i will run away to zimbwabi, what will i do when the results come out ok i think ill kill myself , no thats too painful, ok omgomg" moment for about 30mins.
I was only able to fit in ONE debate on my q2

 

[dombro]

heyy guys,.. i thought the exam was ok.. just wanted to know though

does anyone do the women convicts of australia?

there was someone else!!! thank god for that! I'm the only one at my school who does extension history, and we did the female convicts. What did you focus on in your response?

 

[Kujah]

How'd you guys structure your essay for Question 1 around the role of the historians in constructing history?

 

[Kujah]

Anyone?