Category Archives: Leaving Cert Paper 2

Paper 2 advice and notes.

Linking Phrases

Posted on December 13, 2013 by | 3 comments

To say the texts are similar:

  • Similarly
  • In the same way / In much the same way
  • In ______, we also see ___________
  • These characters react in the same way, both __________ because _____
  • These characters react similarly but for completely different reasons….
  • Both texts reveal that __________
  • This is also obvious in ________ when _______, just like ____ decides __________
  • We also see this in ________
  • Likewise, in __________
  • This is mirrored in _________
  • The two texts share a similarity in that __________

To point out differences

  • By contrast, in _________
  • In a different way ________
  • The opposite is seen in _________
  • Unlike _________
  • A completely different situation is clear in _________
  • In direct contrast to this, in _________, _________
  • The reverse is true in ________
  • Nothing like this is evident in _________ because they don’t value _______
  • These two texts could not be more different, particularly in thier outlook on _________
  • This is very different to ___________
  • This is somewhat different to _______

Here’s another list of linking phrases: http://jamietuohy.com/2012/04/12/essential-words-for-the-comparative-question-jamie-tuohy/

 

3 Comments

Posted in Comparative

Tagged , , ,

Essay Writing (Othello)

Posted on December 9, 2013 by | 11 comments

Writing an introduction

For this exercise, I first got students to tell me what they found confusing about introductions. We listed their “things we want to know” about introductions on the board first. I can’t remember the exact list but it was something like this:

How should it begin? (Re-phrase the question and respond with your opinion)

How do we avoid just repeating the question word for word? (divide and conquer! Separate out the ideas. Use synonyms). 

Should we include quotes? / how much detail goes into the intro ? (no quotes, unless you begin with one for dramatic effect. A list of topic sentences outlining what you will discuss but keep the detailed discussion for the essay itself)

Do we list the things we’ll discuss? (Yes, see above! But don’t be a baby about it! NEVER write “In this essay I will discuss… blah blah blah“. [This is like a little kid telling their parents exactly what they are going to do before they do it “Mammy, I’m going to do a wee-wee now!“] We’re not thick. If it’s in your introduction we assume that’s because you intend to discuss it!)

How long should it be? (Anywhere between a third of a page and hall a page. Three-quarters of a page is probably too long. An introduction is supported to be brief and to the point! Long-winded is irritating)

Think of your introduction as a road map. You have been given a destination (the question) and there are lots of perfectly acceptable ways of getting there. In your introduction you lay out clearly what directions you’ll take in your essay. MAKE SURE TO USE THE WORDS FROM THE Q – but don’t begin by simply parroting back the question word for word. There is nothing worse than “I agree 100% that…..”.

Instead

  1. Re-phrase the question in your own words to prove that you have understood it.
  2. Divide the question into manageable chunks and discuss each part of the Q.
  3. List the things your essay will discuss to answer the question asked.

Let’s take an example:

“Iago has a very low opinion of human nature and this colours his interpretation of every person in his life”

Begin with part of the question:I re-phrase it in my own words. (Give an example)

Iago certainly feels superior to many of the people in his life. In the opening scene he criticises Othello & Cassio and he delights in creating pain and suffering for Brabantio. He does not respect other human beings, nor does he have a high opinion of anyone but himself.

Now I turn my attention to the other part of the question & list the things I’ll discuss in the body of my essay

He takes the most negative possible interpretation of human behaviour in every situation, accusing Othello of being a lustful gold-digger; accusing Cassio of being a naïve ladies-man with little battlefield experience; accusing Dedemona of being fickle and motivated only by lust; and finally, confiding to both Roderigo and to us the audience his general outlook on human beings, which is that they are selfish and self-serving. 

Body Paragraphs

Next, I got students to list the things they found confusing about writing paragraphs. We came up with this set of Paragraphsquestions they wanted answers to:

When do you begin a new paragraph? (When you’ve got a new idea to discuss)

What should your first sentence do? (Respond to the Q with one relevant idea)

(NOT TELL THE STORY was actually my first response to this question!)

How long should it be? Do all paragraphs need to be the same length? How long is too long? (Depends how much you have to say about that idea. Paragraphs can vary in length. More than 3/4 of a page is too long.)

How many quotes and examples should you include? (Hard to answer this one. Depends on the point you’re making. At least 3 quotes, no more than 7? Quotes can be two or three words – e.g. “honest Iago” or half a speech! Don’t include really long quotes – it’s irritating and unnecessary). 

When do you quote? Can you begin with a quote or should you always begin with a statement (Quote to prove a point. Always begin with a statement? Yes, yes, yes – remember PQE from First Year English!)

How do you end a paragraph? (Show how what you’ve just said is relevant to the Q. You may want to flow into your next point – this can be done in the final sentence of this paragraph or at the beginning of the topic sentence in the next paragraph. FLOW MATTERS so make sure you use connectives in your writing)

Here’s the advice and example I came up with to answer their questions in a concrete and specific way:

Each paragraph should begin with a topic sentence. This first sentence indicates what your paragraph will be about. For example:

Despite having fought side by side with Othello for many years, Iago has a very negative opinion of his employer.  (this is your topic sentence)

The rest of the paragraph provides specific examples which illustrate that the topic sentence is true (either quotes or paraphrasing or RELEVANT plot details – but don’t fall into the trap of telling the story)

His bitterness at not getting promoted to lieutenant leads him to believe that Othello was “loving his own pride and purposes” when he gave the job to Cassio. Iago sees his decision as a personal slight and an insult, because Iago has a very high opinion of himself “I know my price, I am worth no less a place”. His bitterness leads him on a quest for revenge and he begins to see people as simply pawns in a game of chess; each one will either help or hinder him in his quest. For example, rather than search for a new job, Iago decides to do everything in his power to destroy Othello. He takes a very negative interpretation of Othello’s decision to marry Desdemona, telling Cassio that Othello was motivated purely by her money and is satisfied now because he has “boarded a land-carrick” or treasure ship and is now guaranteed wealth (through his wife’s fortune) for the rest of his life.

If you want to continue discussing the same basic idea (eg Iago’s low opinion of Othello) but your paragraph is getting too long, then break it into two paragraphs. You’ll still need a topic sentence, but this one will just introduce a related idea. For example:

Iago is also very quick to believe the rumour that Othello has slept with his wife. He comments that “it is thought abroad that twixt my sheets he has done my office” and refuses to even bother checking if this rumour is true or not. This is hardly surprising given how certain he was that Othello was motivated by lust rather than love (“even now, now, very now, an old black ram is tupping your white ewe”) – it’s as if Iago refuses to even consider the idea that human beings might be motivated by a noble emotion like love rather than by their base animalistic desires. Iago allows for the fact that human beings might be essentially ‘good’ when he describes Othello as being “of a free and open nature that thinks men honest that but seem to be so” but he sees this as naïve and stupid.

Finish your paragraph (or if the same basic idea stretches to two paragraphs, finish the second paragraph) by stating clearly how what you’ve just discussed is relevant to the question asked.

Thus, it is clear that Iago thinks very little of Othello, seeing him as motivated by lust and greed and interpreting his trusting nature as a weakness rather than a virtue.  (this is the final sentence of this paragraph/section on Iago’s interpretation of Othello’s behaviour).

SandwichI used the analogy of a paragraph being a bit like a sandwich. The top slice of bread is the topic sentence. The meat in the middle is basically the quotes and examples you use to develop your discussion and prove your point. The final sentence is like the bottom slice of bread in the sandwich – it holds everything together, connecting the meat (the quotes & examples) back to the top slice (the question asked).

Without the meat the sandwich wouldn’t be a sandwich but without one of the two slices of bread it would also not be a sandwich! You need both slices of bread and lots of filling. If you have lots to say for one idea and it stretches into two paragraphs, this is basically a double-decker sandwich. It’s fine but too many double-deckers in one essay might mean you run out of space (or time!) so don’t fill up that essay too much with double-deckers!!!

Alternative ways of structuring this essay:

You could go through the play chronologically –

par 1 could discuss his failure to get promoted;

par 2 could discuss breaking the news to Brabantio;

par 3 could discuss his interpretation of Othello & Desdemona’s marriage;

par 4 could discuss the speech he makes to Roderigo about reason being superior to emotion;

par 5 could discuss his plan for revenge.

There is not ONE PERFECT WAY to structure any essay – the important thing is that each paragraph has a clear focus and that each paragraph clearly responds to the question. If you just tell the story, you will NOT do well.

NOTE: This example only deals with Act 1 because this is an essay we did when we finished that act. Obviously in the exam you’d be expected to draw from the events of the entire play, not just Act 1.

11 Comments

Posted in Othello

Tagged , , ,

Conclusions (Othello)

Posted on December 8, 2013 by | Comments Off on Conclusions (Othello)

“Iago is a narcissist and a sadist, with a ruthless Machiavellian outlook on life, yet we find him utterly compelling”

Iago

To tackle this question we defined the key words of narcissist, sadist, Machiavellian and compelling.

Narcissist = if you love yourself, consider yourself superior to others physically or intellectually, take pride in your every achievement and are generally arrogant in your outlook and behaviour, you’re a narcissist.

Sadist = if you take pleasure in witnessing or inflicting suffering and pain on others you’re a sadist. We don’t have a word in the English language for the feeling of satisfaction you might experience if you saw someone walk into a wall, but they have one in German, it’s “schadenfreude” and for a very funny (and very rude – you have been warned) song explaining what it means, check this out:

[youtube_sc url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55fzXL3uc1s]

Machiavellian = if you are completely ruthless in your behaviour and will do whatever it takes to get what you want, no matter who you hurt in the process you are Machiavellian. Click here for some quotes from “The Prince” by Machiavelli for a deeper understanding of the origins of this word.

Compelling = if you command people’s attention when you walk into a room; if others are intrigued by you and see you as intelligent and charismatic, you’re a “compelling” character. Dictionary definitions, while impeccably factual, are to my mind often bland but I like this one “evoking interest, attention, or admiration in a powerfully irresistible way“. It captures the concept perfectly.

Here’s a picture of the list of reasons why my fifth years believe Iago is a compelling character.

photo

A few students struggled to write a conclusion however, as they feared they might end up just repeating themselves. They were right to worry – simply repeating your introduction IS NOT WHAT A CONCLUSION IS FOR! I like to think of the introduction as a road map, laying out the directions in which your essay will go. The conclusion, meanwhile, reflects back on the journey, identifying what the experience meant; what you have learnt from going on this journey. You must answer the question “so what?” in order to write your conclusion.

Here’s a sample conclusion I wrote to help a student whose essay was very good but whose conclusion was rubbish:

“Thus we see Iago’s sadistic, Machiavellian and to a lesser extent narcissistic behaviour is evident throughout the play. However, what I found really interesting was the counter-intuitive fact that these traits actually make him more intriguing, more compelling and more fascinating for the audience. Perhaps we are captivated by him because he is so unusual, so unapologetic and so honest in confiding his own ruthlessness to us. Like every great villain in literature and popular culture, we do not like him, yet we cannot look away. Iago, after all, is the focal point of the drama, the tension and the tragic violence that make this play worth watching“.

For more on conclusions, check out this link.

 

 

 

Comments Off on Conclusions (Othello)

Posted in Othello

Tagged , ,

Sample comparative link

Posted on December 3, 2013 by | Comments Off on Sample comparative link

You are asked the following question:

“The society we encounter in a text can be deeply disturbing for the reader/viewer” – Discuss.

You write this as part of your answer:

In ‘Casablanca’ & ‘Sive’ corruption is a feature I found deeply disturbing in both societies. In Casablanca pickpockets roam the streets and men are shot dead for daring to challenge those in authority. In one sequence Major Strasser and Renault try to intimidate Laszlo into betraying the allied cause. I was shocked to hear Renault comment of Urgarte’s death “we haven’t decided if he commit suicide or if he died trying to escape”, thereby suggesting that it would be easy for them to kill Laszlo too and get away with it. Similarly in Sive, Mena and Thomasheen are utterly corrupt and, like Renault and Strasser, use intimidation to get their way, threatening Nanna with the county home if she won’t go along with their plan to ‘auction’ Sive off to Sean Dota. One significant difference between these societies is that although the locals in Sive disapprove of this match (“In the village the public houses are full of the mockery of it”), they are unwilling to intervene, whereas, in Casablanca, all of the refugees stand together and challenge Strasser’s authority in the scene where they sing ‘La Marseilles’ to drown out the Nazis’ singing. However, despite the disgusting and disturbing lack of bravery shown by the community in support of Sive, I think selfishly I’d prefer to live in this society simply because it’s not as dangerous as Casablanca and you’re less likely to be putting your life at risk if you challenge those in authority.

Now, before I analyse the ingredients for you, can you answer the following questions:

  1. Identify the 6 linking phrases used above:
  2. Find 2 direct references to the Q asked & 2 implicit references to how I felt about these societies.
  3. Number the 6 key moments I referenced above.

Right, here it is again but with the different elements colour-coded:

In ‘Casablanca’ & ‘Sive’ corruption is a feature I found deeply disturbing in both societies. In Casablanca pickpockets roam the streets and men are shot dead for daring to challenge those in authority. In one sequence Major Strasser and Renault try to intimidate Laszlo. I was shocked when Renault commented of Urgarte’s death “we haven’t decided if he commit suicide or if he died trying to escape”, thereby suggesting it would be easy for them to kill Laszlo too. Similarly in Sive, Mena and Thomasheen are corrupt and, like Renault and Strasser, use intimidation to get their way, threatening Nanna with the county home if she won’t go along with their plan to ‘auction’ Sive off to Sean Dota. One significant difference between the texts is that the locals in Sive disapprove of this match (“In the village the public houses are full of the mockery of it”), yet are unwilling to do anything to stop it, whereas, in Casablanca, all of the refugees come together to stand up to Strasser and challenge his authority in the scene where they sing La Marseillese. Despite the disgusting lack of bravery shown by the community in support of Sive, I think selfishly I’d prefer to live in this society as it’s not as dangerous as Casablanca and you’re less likely to be putting your life at risk if you challenge those in authority.

Now let’s analyse the different ingredients in the answer:

In ‘Casablanca’ & ‘Sive’ corruption is a feature I found deeply disturbing in both societies. = statement linking the texts, linking phrase (both), direct reference to the question asked.

In Casablanca pickpockets roam the streets and men are shot dead for daring to challenge those in authority. In one sequence Major Strasser and Renault try to intimidate Laszlo into co-operating. I was shocked when Renault commented of Urgarte’s death “we haven’t decided if he commit suicide or if he died trying to escape”, thereby suggesting that it would be easy for them to kill Laszlo too. = Key moments & examples from text 1

Similarly in Sive, Mena and Thomasheen are corrupt and, like Renault and Strasser, use intimidation to get their way, threatening Nanna with the county home if she won’t go along with their plan to ‘auction’ Sive off to Sean Dota. = Make a comparison with key moment(s) from text 2

One significant difference between the texts (contrast/difference) is that the locals in Sive disapprove of this match (“In the village the public houses are full of the mockery of it”), yet are unwilling to do anything to stop it, whereas, in Casablanca, all of the refugees come together to stand up to Strasser and challenge his authority in the scene where they sing La Marseillese. (point out a significant difference between the texts/societies)

Despite the disgusting lack of bravery shown by the community in support of Sive, which I found both disturbing and upsetting, I think selfishly I’d prefer to live in this society as it is not as dangerous as Casablanca and you’re less likely to be putting your life at risk if you challenge those in authority. (final sentence gives personal response/preference)

Comments Off on Sample comparative link

Posted in Comparative

Personal Response – A Brief History

Posted on November 20, 2013 by | 7 comments

Brand-emotions

Personal response encapsulates the absolutely sensible and sound notion that you should not just analyse intellectually but also respond emotionally to texts. Sadly, however, this then morphed into the somewhat happy-clappy notion that you should be ready, willing and able to explicitly relive these emotions when writing about them months (or sometimes years!) later. This is a bit silly really, imho, because when the initial emotional response to any event, good or bad, is over, what we’re left with is the opportunity to analyse it logically and try to figure out what it all meant.

Who was it that said “the unexamined life is not worth living” ? I think it was Plato. Well, to my mind, the unexamined text – be it a poem, a play, a novel or a film – remains a wonderful, oftentimes deeply emotional experience, but without the intellectual rigour of analysis, it remains an opportunity lost for deeper understanding of who we are and how we live our lives as human beings.

By the by, I think ‘personal response’ was an attempt to convince teachers and students alike that how you feel as well as what you think when you encounter a story matters (and it does!). I think it was an attempt to encourage independent thought, originality and debate in classrooms instead of the ‘sage on the stage, top-down, sit in your seats & bow before my superior wisdom’ approach which (we are told) dominated (still dominates?) so many classrooms. I’m not convinced demanding personal response necessarily achieves this but it’s a worthy aim nonetheless. Finally, I think ‘personal response’ was a way of giving two fingers to the grinds schools and the revision books industry who were pumping out generic passive voice academic content for students to learn off so they could ‘fake’ understanding of their texts.

But whatever the intention, the plan soon backfired and the problem soon emerged, particularly in the studied poetry section, that students were basically learning off ONE pre-written personal response essay on each poet. These were essays which they may or may not have written themselves – oh the joys of having an older brother or cousin or sister who could pass their essays down through the generations, like family heirlooms to be treasured and polished and re-used ad-infinitum!  If they didn’t have the good fortune to get said essays from family members they could get them at revision courses or in books or, best of all, they could learn off their TEACHER’s personal response and pass that off as their own (sure weren’t you only doing justice to the ecstasies of enraptured joy and pain and suffering your poor old teacher went through every time he read “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”?  Sure you could never respond with such passion and despair and, God help him, that level of personal response deserves an audience and sure he can’t sit the exam again, he’s surely pushing fifty at this stage and a fifty year old man sitting the Leaving Cert English exam – for the fifth time – just for the craic – is just downright sad).

Personal response became shorthand for knowing exactly what would come up on the exam and therefore not having to do any critical thinking on the day, but rather a rote learn and regurgitate exercise that everyone was pretty happy with thank you very much. Until some genius in the State Exams Commission realised that the whole thing had somehow turned into a dumbed down touchy feely personal response nightmare that was encouraging students to fake personal engagement but which was – in most cases – letting them off the hook of having to actually think for themselves in the exam.

So then it all changed again, around 2010, and the airy-fairy personal response questions started to disappear off the exam papers and more demanding, much more focused and academically rigorous questions reappeared.

And that’s where we’re at now.

If the question demands a personal response, get in there, get stuck in, show that you have opinions and you’re not afraid to express them and they belong to you – I I I all the way captain! But remember that close analysis of the text, using a sophisticated vocabulary, is always required for Honours Leaving Cert English. And above all else, at all times, ensure that everything you say is responding directly to the question you were asked.

7 Comments

Posted in Comparative, Composing, Studied poetry, Unseen poetry