I struggle with context because I can never seem to find substantial arguments or really just conceptualise the prompt. I'm fine with text response and LA because the ideas raised are more obvious, but context is just too vague for my liking. Every time I write a context piece, my ideas either diverge too much from the prompt or they're too boring. I'm struggling to find inspiration, I suppose. Articulation of ideas just doesn't come naturally for context It's frustrating because my other two pieces are normally fairly apt too! My writing style is analytical and cynical, so I prefer expository or persuasive pieces. I find writing persuasively more refreshing, but I just lack the ideas... I don't understand how I can be so incompetent in one style! I really want to tie historical examples into my piece, but I'm not sure how to coherently get examples of medieval prejudice to relate to 1950s western society! Also, is referencing Disney okay? Thank you
You can be relatively analytical in context, you just have to find way to do what suits you while still fulfilling the criteria. The somewhat sloppy analogy I've been using recently is that each paragraph is like an upside down McDonald's 'M.' Or any upside down M for that matter... or a W...
Anyway: when you start your paragraph, you're dealing with abstract (prompt-related) ideas. As always, there are exceptions; I occasionally liked to mess with things and throw in a snappy example to kick things off, then worked back around to the meaning and the context, but we'll deal with the general rule for now, then you can experiment as you see fit. Then gradually, you 'zoom-in' to a specific instance that demonstrates your point. This is the first 'dip' in the arch and the amount of highly-specific information you include should be pretty low. After this, you start zooming back out again and extrapolating a 'point' that will form the mid-point. This won't be as general as the starts and ends of your paragraphs, but it'll form a good connection between your examples.
Note: not every paragraph has to have two, some can have one, some can have 5, but again, this is just a basic format.
Zoom in again to a connecting idea, and then begin the process of drawing a 'big-picture' conclusion from your entire discusion thusfar.
Also note: I've picked 'M'/'W' as an example and not 'O.' While your points are returning to the same level/height, it's not coming back to exactly the same place. There should be some sense of progression in your piece, it's not as simple as
Conflict occurs when people are afraid. --> This can be seen when >character< did >action< and said >words.< Therefore we can conclude that conflict happens when people are afraid.Instead try:
Conflict occurs when people are afraid. --> Fear is a major motivator for mankind. --> It often dictates our actions in the heat of the moment. --> This can be seen as far back as medieval society when ...example --> That's not to say this is a concept confined to the annals of history, in fact such events have a modern day parallel in ...example --> But in each of these cases, upon retrospective reflection, people were able to admit their mistakes. --> Therefore, without fear restricting our capacity for logical and/or compassionate thought, we may even be capable of conquering a conflict.These are all really generalisable, and of course you'd be cleverer in unpacking the prompt and clarifying key terms. In general though, so long as your examples are relevant and have clear connections to your discussion, anything goes, even Disney. Just be careful not to assume
Beauty and the Beast is a waterproof indictment of the universal human condition; some sort of disclaimer about the fact that it's a fictional representation of emotion might be necessary
This is really for anyone doing The Lot: In Words for context, but does anyone know of any articles that delves into the concept of fantasy in the book? I can't seem to find out and I'm trying to write a fantasy piece, it's driving me insane.
There's a cool article from Leunig
here if you just need a starting point to launch into a wider discussion of fantasy. Otherwise, you might just have to latch onto an idea in the text and construct your own fantasy around it, making connections as you go.
I'm really terrible at Language Analysis and haven't really started studying it because I don't know where to start. I read your explanation but I'm just don't have the apt for it.
Do you have 3-4 paragraphs which are surrounding 3-4 ideas. You are identifying what techniques have been used by the author in attempting to persuade the audience about the issue, and whether it is calling for a change in behaviour on the readers behalf? Then if there is more than one text, you contrast the ideas among the different texts and saying how each is attempting to persuade the audience. Is that about it?
Go through the L.A. links at the start of this thread, there are a variety of breakdowns in response to questions asked previously.
I was wondering if it would be useful to take Literature with English?
Do the two subjects ever overlap? Or would taking two English subjects be too confusing (so is it easy to mistake the writing style of one subject with the writing style for the other)?
In my experience, Lit helps with English, but it doesn't work the other way. There's a much higher standard required in Lit. and the way you analyse passages is a hell of a lot more detailed than a standard language analysis. It's fairly easy to keep the styles separate since the essay formats are pretty different. If you're in Year 10 at the moment then I would strongly advise picking up Lit because the new English course (class of '16 and beyond) is much closer to the current Lit. design than the current English one.
There's no huge advantage, but the general consensus is that Lit is way more enjoyable for the literarily (?) inclined than English, so let your interests guide your subject selection more than any possible advantage in combinations