YACOUB's Submission THREAD FOR LA

[Yacoubb]

Hi guys I'll be submitting a few things here for corrections so thought I'd make my own thread. Could someone correct my LA below? I've written this in one hour and fifteen minutes. A mark out of 10 would be appreciated. This is from VATE 2013 Book 2. I'm more so looking at how I've analysed (technique - example - effect) the piece.

How is written and visual language used to attempt to persuade the audience to share the point of view of the writer?

The increasing foothold that the traditional American Halloween celebration has been gaining in Australia, has stirred much controversy as of late. In the opinion piece, 'Summer in Aus: just not spooky', which was published in The Clarion (24/10/2013), Jean McIntyre contends that celebrating Halloween in Australia is yet another American antic that has no significance being commemorated in Australia, and that this American tradition should not be celebrated outside the United States. Adopting a predominantly circumspective tone and conversational register, McIntyre intends to appeal to an audience of morally-conscious Australians in order to convey her style of thinking. Accompanying the opinion piece is a photograph of various horror figures that illustrates the lack of significance that celebrating this American festival in Australia possesses. Good good. Ticks all the boxes. Your writing seems a bit stiff which isn't a massive concern, but like.. if your writing were a guy at a party, it'd be the slightly nervous guy with overly good posture. You want to be the guy who is really relaxed but is still having super intelligent conversation about macroeconomic policy in the corner as he sips his Corona. I'm not sure how to explain it other than to say it could be "looser" but equally as formal.

McIntyre repudiates the validity of Halloween celebrations in Australia at the outset of the piece, describing it as being 'just not spooky'. By mentioning this in the headline, McIntyre intends to position her readership to affirm the pointlessness of this festival during the 'summer in Aus' How? You could mention how the casual use of "just" emphasises her straightforwardness or takes away any glamour surrounding Halloween due to its bluntness. Furthermore, the author employs phrases such as 'the night gets longer' and 'the dark closes in', to create a gothic raiment, immediately before mentioning restless spirits rising to 'stretch their legs'. AwesomeSatirically deriding the supernatural facet of horrendous, horror creatures, McIntyre attempts to instil readers with the belief that what would otherwise possess a rivetting facade during the Halloween season in the United States, simply carries no such gothic nature during the summer in AustraliaThis could be less basic. Just in the sense that, you've basically said "Australia can't do Halloween as good as America" in a bit of a roundabout way, but you could talk about how the satire derides Australian Halloween, associating it with a 'joke', thereby impacting the belief systems of the audience through them wanting to join in on the derision (as opposed to being subjected to it) or something of that nature. Like, what you wrote is good, but could have been more insightful. Thus, McIntyre's readership is more likely to gain trust in her assertions that Halloween celebrations in Australia are unnecessary, from the initiation of her argument This is a really 'stiff' sentence. Like, it could have been integrated more fluidly - it's great that you've got it here - it's great that you've remembered that you need to continually be linking back to hte audience's belief system and feelings, but just lopping this sentence here lacks a little bit of 'zazz'. Placed prominently on the page, the photograph of the supernatural creatures is caption, 'Not spooky!'. By employing an exclamation mark, McIntyre intends to reinforce within the reader that there really is nothing 'spooky' How? Again, you've lacked a little bit of specificty here, as you've essentialyl said "By saying 'not spooky', she wants them to believe that it is 'not spooky' (a bit circular) --- This is a HUGE temptation in language analysis, especially when it seems blatant and obvious, but you'll make huge gains by discarding that temptation and trying to be very specific about what the language does - so specific as to escape that circularity. Honing in on exclamation marks and ellipses and things of that nature is a nice touch though about such phantomic beings in the forefront of summer in Australia. Moreover, the figure of the phantom is draped merely in a long, white material so as to resemble a ghost. Depicting the ghost in this manner represents how a costume made out of mere material possesses no quality of horror in AustraliaThis is an awesome pick up, but again, you could have been really specific about the connotations of silliness that such a sheet has, as it might remind the audience of a time they've tried to mock being scary, which in turn puts a humiliating association around Halloween and its supporters. I feel like your insight is there, you just need to be a bit more specific about it.. Therefore, readers are more likely to acknowledge the fact that a celebration that carries no significance in AUstralia, should not be commemorated.

Throughout the opinion piece, McIntyre seeks to establish how different Australia and the United States are, in order to facilitate the underpinning of her contention that Halloween should not be celebrated outside the United States. Calling on readers to 'draw a line', McIntyre intends to unveil the importance and easiness in extracting this American tradition from Australian culture. This is further compounded by references to how even the language of Americans varies from that of Australians. Juxtaposing the American 'Farenheit' with the Australia 'Celcius', and contrasting 'thong' with 'flip-flop' and 'lollies' with 'candy', McIntyre reveals that if even words employed by Americans and Australians vary to such an extent, then surely celebrating Halloween in Australia does not have the same amount of 'spooky' that it does in the United States. Such an approach is likely to coerce readers to accept that Halloween should not become a festival that is a part of the Australian cultureWhy?  How? Is this statement really true?. Presenting the plethora of factors of American culture that have been 'well and truly integrated into Australia', including 'US films', 'television' and 'pop culture', is intended to underpin the dependence Australia has on 'aspects of American life'. In this way, McIntyre's readership is more likely to reason with her that Halloween is yet another example of an American tradition that has now become a part of Australian culture, that should be removed from the Australian way of lifeHow? Why? What about the words is impacting on the readers? The dependence? If that's it, then why is the dependence goign to impact the readers? How will it make them feel? THEN, how will that feeling translate into a legitimate thought/belief?

Having proposed the lack of significance of the Halloween festival, McIntyre intends to appease her readership by providing them with alternative celebrations that could be created, that are uniquely Australian. This is intended to work in a number of different ways. Asserting that a 'Blinky Bill Day' or a 'Bogan Day' can become 'one of our own', McIntyre appeals to the reader's sense of innovation and creativity, attempting to espouse intrigue and excitement within the reader at the prospect of a 'new celebration'. This reads nicely. Could this also be a humorous assertion? If so, analysing humour well often lends to nice marks.Also, the collective pronoun 'our' is employed by McIntyre to induce a sense of inclusion within the readers. Such an approach is likely to instil the reader with the belief that McIntyre holds their interests at heart, and that the author genuinely cares about providing her audience with alternative solutions to celebrate a day, even if it is as strange as 'Lamington Day'.Feels like a dressed up textbook regurgitation of inclusive language Thereforem, readers are more likely to accept that Halloween belongs in the United States, and that embracing such a tradition would possess no value in Australia.

Modulating from a less circumspective to a more sinister tone, McIntyre highlights the drawbacks underlying Halloween as a tradition, let alone having this celebration commemorated within Australia. In doing this, McIntyre dichotomises parents into a 'responsible' group, and accordingly, those who are not. Insinuating that this 'obsession' and 'celebration' of junk is contributing to the obesity epidemic, McIntyre appeals to parents' sense of responsibility regarding how they manage the health of their children. Furthermore, the capitalisation of the term 'REALLY' in the question asking parents if they should contribute to childhood obesity, reinstates that parents have an increasingly important duty to make decisions that minimise their children's health diminishingHow? What does the capitalisation do to the rhythm, the intonation in the reader's head? What impact does that have [how]? You gave up the tone too early, too. It's not enough to just 'tick the box' that you've noticed a change of tone. Discuss how the sinister tone really influences the type of language (the specific words) behind that section of the article. She's clearly discussing negative shit, so the sinister tone works in conjunction with that.Discuss how and why.. Thus, the likelihood of parents allowing their children to celebrate Halloween is decreased, as they recognise the health risks on children. McIntyre also proposes the magnitude of seriousness of sending children to the homes of strangers. By positioning the clown-masked figure behind the phantom in the photograph, the photographer illustrates how the identity behind the mask is unknown in the same way that the faces of the strangers' homes that children visit is unknown. This exploits the reader's fear of the unknown, and positions them to protest against celebration of Halloween for not only its lack of value in the Australian way of life, but also the ramifications on children's health and well-being that celebrating this festival can invite.

Through the medium of the opinion piece and the complementary photograph, McIntyre entertains the notion that the lack of importance of Halloween in Australia should be a cue to stop this American tradition becoming a facade of our Australian culture.

Really great effort man.

One thing to note is, the words you're choosing to analyse, and the tytpes of thing you're choosing to analysis are really great. The cluster of words you occasionally use all work well together, and you make consistently insightful pick ups (the sheet on the ghost, other written language pick ups. That's defintiely a big strength, because half the battle is picking out the type of stuff that allows you to access the really high marks, and you're doing well of that front - kudos. Consistency is what I look for in an LA. Some people might pick quotes that are fucking brilliant, but only do it 10% of the time. It says something when someone can do it consistently.

On your actual analysis, you're doing that less consistently. Sometimes you really hit the mark quite suitable, but then sometimes you're lacking in detail, specificity, and proper insight -- you start to fall back on generic or circular analysis. This is the major area of improvement, because if you can get consistently, deeply insightful analysis on top of the things you're choosing to analyse, then you will do supremely well. FOCUS!! FOCUS: How? Why? -- DEEPLY why. It's not "so they agree". There are more nuanced reasons for specific words in specific places. To lube them up for the next sentence? To get them to put their guard down? To get them to forget about some other minor point that will ultimately be very valuable to the author? To get them to laugh, just so they like the author more? So they feel like friends? All of these things in turn have stepping stone effects to the ultimate goal of "they agree". So yeah. How and why - that's your focus.

You were pretty stiff at the start, but it improved as you got into the groove of your essay, I think. Feels like you were really conscious of your writing and the start and trhen that feeling went away as you properly let the analytical thoughts envelop your mind (as opposed ot thoughts of "have to make it sound okay". At the moment, your version of "have to make it sound okay" is making it sound a bit ugly.


As always man - you know the drill - focussed on negative stuff so you can improve etc etc bla bla. You're a hard worker, I'm sure you'll improve rapidly. Focus on writing fluidly, focus on analysing hyper-specifically and insightfully, you're going to do really well.

[Nadaxa1]

For one and a half hours this is really good! Lol a billion times better than the language analysis I'm writing now.
10/10

[AmericanBeauty]

For one and a half hours this is really good! Lol a billion times better than the language analysis I'm writing now.
10/10

haha how depressing is it looking at someones language analysis piece when you're stuck on a level that's like 'Jimmy said 'you suck cococola' which means that Jimmy don't want his audience to drink cococola.' You'd think reading an essay like this is completely pretentious but all his words have complete accuracy of context.

[brenden]

Uhhh........ Accidentally clicked modify instead of quote. My bad! Feedback in the OP. 

[Yacoubb]

Uhhh........ Accidentally clicked modify instead of quote. My bad! Feedback in the OP. 

Thank you SO SO much! I really needed this, and will definitely work on becoming really specific about the effect on the reader. Thank you

[Yacoubb]

Hey again  I just wrote a LA on VCAA 2009, and would appreciate it if you could please check it out? I reduced the number of words from 1200 that I normally did to around ~900, so I want to see if this is still yielding good analysis. I didn't actually analyse the visual, though I would have included it in place for another bit of analysis in body paragraph 2 if it were present (it was unable to be viewed due to copyright issues). PS. I've also tried to work on being more specific with my effect on the reader.
__________

The recent advancement of technology, and the implications that this revolution has on humanity as a whole, has stirred much controversy as of late. In the online blog, entitled ‘Keyed In’, which was published in the online journal Ctrl Alt, Voxi contends that society must embrace the pursuit of technology, and that those who choose to dispute this advancement will be left behind as humanity progresses. Through the adoption of a predominantly circumspective and optimistic tone, in addition to the use of various linguistic techniques, Voxi intends to appeal to a wide demographic of readers of Ctrl Alt, in order to convey his style of thinking. Accompanying the blog is an illustration of the illuminating power of technology and its ability to enhance the human mind.

From the onset, Voxi intends to establish a dichotomy between those who are ‘afraid of the new’, and those who are ‘fired up by new things’. By juxtaposing ‘the safe’ with those who ‘grab the future with both hands’, Voxi endeavours to reinstate the polarised perspectives of the innovative power of technology. Associating grabbing the future with adventure and intrigue, and ‘the safe’ with a drab and dull world, the readership is more likely to find interest in the initiative to make a difference in the world, as opposed to remain within the security of ‘the predictable’. Such a response is likely to cause readers to want to belong to the innovative dichotomy that the reader has established, thereby gaining the reader’s trust from the outset. Moreover, the conscious decision to inform readers that accepting the revolution of technology will prove ‘even more dramatic for humankind’ than men as revolutionary as Copernicus or Galileo, Voxi hopes to engender readers with the belief that they possess the ability to make a difference that exceeds even the innovations of legendary men such as Darwin. Potentially invoking a sense of keenness and eagerness to become involved, the reader is positioned to acknowledge the magnitude of contributing to the enhancement of technological resources, and thereby endorse the pursuit that Voxi underscores will revolutionise ‘human experience’.

Having consciously developed a group of innovators to which the readership is likely to be disposed to, Voxi then goes on to propose the plethora of benefits that are associated with the embrace of digital technology. By employing the term ‘drowning’ as a metaphor of being in a state with a lack of revolutionary technology, Voxi hopes to instil readers with the state of individuals who do not accept technological evolution. Intended to concoct an image of absolute helplessness and powerlessness, readers are positioned to almost experience the struggle that would ensue such a circumstance. Likening this struggle to that of a failure to accept the innovative power of technology renders the readership more likely to recognise the drawbacks of remaining in a world of ‘the tried and the tested’. Heightening the reader’s alarm to a point where they are ready to accept any resolution to evade such hopelessness, the writer presents forth the multitude of factors that render the motions of life easier. By mentioning ‘global shopping’, ‘online banking’ and ‘[checking] out where [individuals’] friends live’ through the use of technology, Voxi appeals to the readers’ recognition that they are prepared to support anything that will render their lifestyle and everyday tasks much simpler. The references to an overwhelming array of tasks that the reader is likely to engage in on a nearly day-to-day basis, Voxi endeavours to appease the readership in the prospects of embracing technology lessening the troubles associated with every-day tasks. In this way, Voxi is more likely to gain the readers’ camaraderie in the pursuit towards establishing technological evolution.

Modulating from a less optimistic to a more condemnatory tone, Voxi insinuates that it is the ‘older people’ who demonstrate a decreased familiarity with the essence of enhancing themselves technologically. Labelling those who do not wish to be ‘digital[ly] savvy’ as ‘losers’, pejoratively connotes these individuals as being at a major loss out of their own decisions. Associating such individuals with a frequently used term is intended to enunciate the derision they are creating through their inability to acknowledge that technological advancement is beneficial. In this way, Voxi’s readership is more likely to discredit those who repute the validity of technology from their ambitions to become ‘better informed’. Furthermore, the reference to how ‘we’d still be swinging in the trees’ underpins the notion that technology advanced the human race from a stagnant state of primitiveness. Hoping to construct an image of individuals ‘huddling in caves’, Voxi enables the reader to envisage the lack of advancement of the human race prior to the evolution of technology. Through making the link between the consequences of not advancing then with individuals not advancing technologically now, readers are at a position where they accept these allusions as being quite sinister. If the human race, particularly those inclined to oppose the potential of such advancement, fail to advance now, they will become in a position on level playing field with the primitive days of ‘swinging’ from tree to tree, whilst the remainder of the world advances.

Through the medium of the blog, as well as the complementary illustration, Voxi entertains the notion that embracing technological advancement also welcomes the benefits that humanity could avail itself with, which forms the crux of his argument.

[Paulrus]

ok sorry about the wait, hopefully this feedback is helpful!

Hey again  I just wrote a LA on VCAA 2009, and would appreciate it if you could please check it out? I reduced the number of words from 1200 that I normally did to around ~900, so I want to see if this is still yielding good analysis. I didn't actually analyse the visual, though I would have included it in place for another bit of analysis in body paragraph 2 if it were present (it was unable to be viewed due to copyright issues). PS. I've also tried to work on being more specific with my effect on the reader.

here is the visual that was attached, if it's any help:
http://i.imgur.com/x0ibKxi.png
maybe a bit late for this to be useful lol, but for what it's worth my interpretation of the visual was this: '[...]This is compounded in the inclusion of the visual, which depicts a circuit board emanating from within a human brain. The boards are adorned with binary digits, signifying how Voxi aims to break down the ‘binary’ dichotomy that is perceived by their opposition to exist between humans and technology. In doing so, the author aims to acclimatise their readership to the new forms of technology by drawing comparisons to humans themselves, compelling readers to concede that they are not as unfamiliar as they seem, and thus assuaging any fear readers may hold towards them.'
__________

The recent advancement of technology, and the implications that this revolution has on humanity as a whole, has stirred much controversy as of late.solid opening sentence, contextualises the issue well. In the online blog, entitled this feels a bit clunky. just 'In the _____ 'Keyed In', which was ____' works well, and flows a bit better imo‘Keyed In’, which was published in the online journal Ctrl Alt actually i've just noticed that you've referred to the piece as an 'online blog' that was published in an 'online journal' - which doesn't make much sense. it's most likely just an oversight due to not proofreading (it's sooo easy to make stupid mistakes like this haha) but you could replace 'online blog' with 'blog post' or 'opinion piece', or something similar. , Voxi contends that society must embrace the pursuit of technology, and that those who choose to dispute this advancement will be left behind as humanity progresses. good Through the adoption of a predominantly circumspective hmm i'm not sure i got the same impression while reading the article, but i'm definitely interested to see how you justify it and optimistic tone, in addition to the use of various linguistic techniques not a fan of this. doesn't add anything to your intro and it just feels a bit obvious, cos it goes without saying that they'll use various linguistic techniques. get rid of this bit i think, Voxi intends to appeal to a wide demographic of readers of Ctrl Alt, in order to convey his be careful not to assume a gender. voxi is deliberately gender neutral, and that actually contributes to that attempt to reach a wider demographic that you were talking about. not sure if you've mentioned this later on in the essay, in which case ignore this lol, but yeah you should definitely be mindful of it. a style of thinking. Accompanying the blog is an illustration of the illuminating power of technology and its ability to enhance the human mind. introductions aren't really worth that much in terms of marks, because the majority of that comes from your actual analysis. that said, this ticks all the boxes in terms of structure, and it's nicely written so apart from a couple of very tiny things this is good stuff so far.

From the onset, Voxi intends to establish a dichotomy between those who are ‘afraid of the new’, and those who are ‘fired up by new things’. By juxtaposing ‘the safe’ with those who ‘grab the future with both hands’, Voxi endeavours to reinstate the polarised perspectives of the innovative power of technology this sentence feels a bit clunky. the vocab is nice, but maybe lacks a bit of clarity? could be expressed a bit clearer imo. Associating grabbing the future with adventure and intrigue, and ‘the safe’ with a drab and dull world could potentially use another quote here to substantiate this association, the readership is more likely to find interest in the initiative to make a difference in the world, as opposed to remain within the security of ‘the predictable’.pwoah this is nice, love it Such a response is likely to cause readers to want to belong to the innovative dichotomy innovative side of the dichotomy maybe that the reader has established, thereby gaining the reader’s trust from the outset. Moreover, the conscious decision to inform readers that accepting the revolution of technology will prove ‘even more dramatic for humankind’ than men as revolutionary as Copernicus or Galileo, Voxi hopes to engender readers with the belief not sure this phrasing works - maybe 'engender the belief in readers' that they possess the ability to make a difference that exceeds even the innovations of legendary men such as Darwin. Potentially invoking a sense of keenness and eagerness to become involved, the reader is positioned to acknowledge the magnitude of contributing to the enhancement of technological resources, and thereby endorse the pursuit that Voxi underscores will revolutionise ‘human experience’. your expression is really good so far. clear and concise for the most part, and sophisticated when it needs to be. your analysis is pretty specific and focused as well - this is pretty great all around so far.

Having consciously developed a group of innovators to which the readership is likely to be disposed toget rid of this 'to', you've used it twice in the sentence, Voxi then goes on to propose the plethora of benefits that are associated with the embrace of digital technology. quite neatly states the topic for this paragraph while tying it in with the last one - solid stuff By employing the term ‘drowning’ as a metaphor of being in a state with a lack of revolutionary technology, Voxi hopes to instil readers with the state of individuals who do not accept technological evolution i'm not entirely sure what you're saying here, might need to reword it for clarity's sake.. Intended to concoct an image of absolute helplessness and powerlessness, readers are positioned to almost experience the struggle that would ensue in such a circumstance or maybe 'under such circumstances', but up to personal preference. Likening this struggle to that of a failure to accept the innovative power of technology renders the readership more likely to recognise the drawbacks of remaining in a world of ‘the tried and the tested’. Heightening the reader’s sense/level ofalarm to a point where they are ready to accept any resolution to evade such hopelessness, the writer presents forth the multitude of factors that render the motions of life easier. By mentioning ‘global shopping’, ‘online banking’ and ‘[checking] out where [individuals’] friends live’ through the use of technology, Voxi appeals to the readers’ recognition that they are prepared to support anything that will render their lifestyle and everyday tasks much simpler. The references to an overwhelming array of tasks that the reader is likely to engage in on a nearly day-to-day basis, Voxi endeavours to appease the readership in through? the prospects of embracing technology lessening the troubles associated with every-day tasks. In this way, Voxi is more likely to gain the readers’ camaraderie in the pursuit towards establishing technological evolution. your expression gets a bit clunkier here than your last paragraph, although this is probably just due to time constraints. there are flashes of greatness in your writing here, but there are also a few bits of phrasing that are a bit unclear. can't really fault your ideas though - solid analysis, substantiated well, and discusses the specific effect on the audience rather than being vague and general.
also something that would work well with this paragraph - you could interpret the name voxi as a contraction of 'vox populi' or voice of the people, which mirrors their attempt to portray their argument as the majority opinion ("and aren't we all?") so people want to place themselves on the 'good' side of the dichotomy. but yeah anyway

Modulating from a less optimistic to a more condemnatory tone good discussion of tone shifts + nicely phrased, Voxi insinuates that it is the ‘older people’ who demonstrate a decreased familiarity with the essence of enhancing themselves technologically. Labelling those who do not wish to be ‘digital[ly] savvy’ as ‘losers’, pejoratively connotes these individuals as being at a major loss out of their own decisions. Associating such individuals with a frequently used term is intended to enunciate the derision they are creating through their inability to acknowledge that technological advancement is beneficial. In this way, Voxi’s readership is more likely to discredit those who repute the validity of technology from their ambitions to become ‘better informed’. i'm not sure if the word 'repute' works here. i might be misinterpreting the sentence (ignore this if i am) but maybe 'denounce' could work? Furthermore, the reference to how ‘we’d still be swinging in the trees’ underpins the notion that technology advanced the human race from a stagnant state of primitiveness. yeeeeah good stufffff Hoping to construct an image of individuals ‘huddling in caves’, Voxi enables the reader to envisage the lack of advancement of the human race prior to the evolution of technology. Through making the link between the consequences of not advancing then with individuals not advancing technologically now, readers are at a position where they accept these allusions as being quite sinister. they're sinister - so what does that now do to the audience? link it back - what does them viewing these allusions specifically do to angle them towards supporting the author's contention? you've gotta be more specific here If the human race, particularly those inclined to oppose the potential of such advancement, fail to advance now, they will become in a position on level playing field with the primitive days of ‘swinging’ from tree to tree, whilst the remainder of the world advances.
ok remember how you talked how voxi creates a dichotomy in the readership? remember that the audience is made of those two sides - which pieces of language are specifically tailored to each side? for example the epithet 'loser' might be convincing for those who oppose technology because they won't want to be associated with such a negative characteristic, and may be compelled to adjust their beliefs. you've kiiinda discussed this, but you need to be more explicit and directly discuss how language used affects different sections of the audience. this might help you secure the top marks because it shows a more sophisticated understanding of the relationship between the writer and the audience.
also i feel like structurally this paragraph might work better second, cos in a sense it's exploring the other side of the dichotomy discussed in paragraph one. doesn't really matter though, still works well here

Through the medium of the blog, as well as the complementary illustration, Voxi entertains the notion that embracing technological advancement 'entertains the notion' feels too weak here. it seems like more of a phrase you'd use for a text response in a 'directly challenging the prompt' paragraph, but here you're talking about the main contention. also welcomes the benefits that humanity could avail itself with, which forms the crux of his watch out for gender again! argument. short and sweet, but maybe a tiny bit too short. a lot of people have different strategies for the conclusion, but you could possibly quickly summarise the different strategies and how they're effective given a certain audience? i'm not 100% sure about lang analysis conclusions though so i dunno haha

ok so
- your expression is fantastic in some areas, but a bit clunky in others. maybe proof-read at the end if you have the time
- watch for gender neutrality (this is more specific to the piece, but the text on wednesday could be gender neutral as well so you never know)
- you substantiate your analysis well, good use of quotes.
- the analysis itself is insightful, shows both depth and breadth
- focus on how different techniques affect different sections of the audience

overall this is a pretty damn solid piece though. i don't think you need to be worried about the exam, i'm pretty sure you'll smash it haha.
i haven't proofread this so i'm not sure if all of it completely makes sense so... if you have any questions or need anything clarified (or anything else really), feel free to ask! good luck! 
and also if anyone disagrees with any of this please feel free to contradict me cos i'm not an english expert by any means haha

[Yacoubb]

ok sorry about the wait, hopefully this feedback is helpful!
ok so
- your expression is fantastic in some areas, but a bit clunky in others. maybe proof-read at the end if you have the time
- watch for gender neutrality (this is more specific to the piece, but the text on wednesday could be gender neutral as well so you never know)
- you substantiate your analysis well, good use of quotes.
- the analysis itself is insightful, shows both depth and breadth
- focus on how different techniques affect different sections of the audience

overall this is a pretty damn solid piece though. i don't think you need to be worried about the exam, i'm pretty sure you'll smash it haha.
i haven't proofread this so i'm not sure if all of it completely makes sense so... if you have any questions or need anything clarified (or anything else really), feel free to ask! good luck! 
and also if anyone disagrees with any of this please feel free to contradict me cos i'm not an english expert by any means haha

I really really appreciate this Paulrus! Thank you thank you thank you!!