Here are the 3 level reading guides your classmates created for some of the Poe stories and poetry we've looked at in class, or will look at in class: Download
Don't forget also, your holiday homework is to read ALL of the selected stories and poems from Poe. They are:
The Premature Burial
The Fall of the House of Usher
The Oval Portrait
The Black Cat
The Tell-tale Heart
The Masque of the Red Death
The Cask of Amontillado
The Purloined Letter
The Murders in the Rue Morgue
The Pit and the Pendulum
The Raven
Lenore
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Friday, March 11, 2011
Practice Language Analysis Article...
This is the next article you'll be using to practice language analysis.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/assange-tirade-a-tired-distraction-from-wikileaks-work-20110227-1b9w7.html
Write a practice SAC referring to the guiding notes in the previous posts over the long weekend and bring it to the next class on Tuesday when we'll be working through it and looking at another article too.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/assange-tirade-a-tired-distraction-from-wikileaks-work-20110227-1b9w7.html
Write a practice SAC referring to the guiding notes in the previous posts over the long weekend and bring it to the next class on Tuesday when we'll be working through it and looking at another article too.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
SAC Advice...
Yo.
Below is the podcast from the opening summary of this morning's lesson. It goes for about 5 minutes and just covers the basics DOs and DON'Ts of what you should and shouldn't do in your second SAC on Monday.
Hope it helps. Good luck!
Hally
Language Analysis SAC Advice Podcast
Below is the podcast from the opening summary of this morning's lesson. It goes for about 5 minutes and just covers the basics DOs and DON'Ts of what you should and shouldn't do in your second SAC on Monday.
Hope it helps. Good luck!
Hally
Language Analysis SAC Advice Podcast
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
First SAC recap...
OK, so I wrote this for somebody who was away yesterday, but thought it might be useful for all of you, so here it is...
People who get Cs kind of get the same advice as those who get Ds. You need to provide more evidence and analysis of WHY the author is using the technique they are using and WHAT EFFECT this is intended to have on the audience.
The example I gave the class this morning was as follows; an average response might have said something like:
The author uses a metaphoric comparison between the government and the human brain, comparing the government to "neurons firing in the brain". This is clearly meant to make the audience see that the author thinks that the government is like a brain and stealing secrets from the government is like stealing people's private thoughts.
Now, the above example has some okay stuff in it. It recognises a technique and shows that the essay writer has a basic understanding of what's happening in the article, but by just saying what the brain comparison is showing is what the writer thinks is not enough to do really well, because it's still largely just comprehension. A good/better response might add the following sentences:
In addition to this, it could be interpreted that the brain is the most important part of the human body. It's the one thing that every other part of the body relies on to function smoothly and effectively. If a brain is damaged, other parts of the body will stop functioning correctly. By comparing the brain to the government, the author is suggesting to the reader that if the government is damaged, it will stop functioning effectively. If a government stops functioning effectively, the rest of society and us, as citizens, will be adversely affected. It is clear then, that the author feels that WikiLeaks releasing information could cause damage to governments, that doing so is "dangerous thinking" and is something that the audience should be extremely concerned about.
Now, the above section is a bit clunky and could be re-worded to read a little better, but the extra analysis is what makes for a stronger piece, because it shows analysis. It shows extra interpretation. It shows that you, as a writer, have stopped and asked yourself that question WHY and then analysed what the intended effect of doing that was.
So, if you re-wrote the above two snippets to be a bit better, cut out a few bits, cos it's probably a bit long, combine that with the improved paragraph I wrote on the board on Friday, you've got two body paragraphs that will be a much stronger piece. The challenge for you now, is to write that third paragraph. Remember, even if you write about tone, tone is still a technique, so discuss and analyse WHY the author has used a particular tone. What is he trying to achieve through that tone?
What I also told people this morning was to be more simplistic in their identification of tone. Remember that tone is HOW it's said, not what's being said. If I asked you to get up and speak in an aggressive tone, you would have an understanding of HOW to speak. Somebody wrote in their SAC that the author wrote in a "metaphoric" tone. What is a metaphoric tone? It doesn't exist. Somebody can write metaphorically and write using metaphors, but this isn't the tone, this isn't HOW they're writing. Yes, the author uses metaphors, but this doesn't make the tone metaphoric. If I asked you to speak to the class with a metaphoric tone, HOW would you speak? It's a difficult task because it doesn't really make sense. If I asked you to speak metaphorically in an aggressive tone, you'd have a clearer idea of what I was asking of you.
The other example I used this morning, was that somebody said he wrote with an "alarmist" tone. Again, I don't really think this makes sense. Yes, he is clearly trying to cause alarm to his audience, but this isn't the tone, this isn't the WAY he's communicating. It's just an intended effect.
Be more precise, clearer and straight forward with your choice of words when describing tone and ask yourself the question, "If I asked somebody to speak to me with an "insert word" tone, would they know what that meant and how to speak?" If it's a bit iffy, then choose a better word.
People who get Cs kind of get the same advice as those who get Ds. You need to provide more evidence and analysis of WHY the author is using the technique they are using and WHAT EFFECT this is intended to have on the audience.
The example I gave the class this morning was as follows; an average response might have said something like:
The author uses a metaphoric comparison between the government and the human brain, comparing the government to "neurons firing in the brain". This is clearly meant to make the audience see that the author thinks that the government is like a brain and stealing secrets from the government is like stealing people's private thoughts.
Now, the above example has some okay stuff in it. It recognises a technique and shows that the essay writer has a basic understanding of what's happening in the article, but by just saying what the brain comparison is showing is what the writer thinks is not enough to do really well, because it's still largely just comprehension. A good/better response might add the following sentences:
In addition to this, it could be interpreted that the brain is the most important part of the human body. It's the one thing that every other part of the body relies on to function smoothly and effectively. If a brain is damaged, other parts of the body will stop functioning correctly. By comparing the brain to the government, the author is suggesting to the reader that if the government is damaged, it will stop functioning effectively. If a government stops functioning effectively, the rest of society and us, as citizens, will be adversely affected. It is clear then, that the author feels that WikiLeaks releasing information could cause damage to governments, that doing so is "dangerous thinking" and is something that the audience should be extremely concerned about.
Now, the above section is a bit clunky and could be re-worded to read a little better, but the extra analysis is what makes for a stronger piece, because it shows analysis. It shows extra interpretation. It shows that you, as a writer, have stopped and asked yourself that question WHY and then analysed what the intended effect of doing that was.
So, if you re-wrote the above two snippets to be a bit better, cut out a few bits, cos it's probably a bit long, combine that with the improved paragraph I wrote on the board on Friday, you've got two body paragraphs that will be a much stronger piece. The challenge for you now, is to write that third paragraph. Remember, even if you write about tone, tone is still a technique, so discuss and analyse WHY the author has used a particular tone. What is he trying to achieve through that tone?
What I also told people this morning was to be more simplistic in their identification of tone. Remember that tone is HOW it's said, not what's being said. If I asked you to get up and speak in an aggressive tone, you would have an understanding of HOW to speak. Somebody wrote in their SAC that the author wrote in a "metaphoric" tone. What is a metaphoric tone? It doesn't exist. Somebody can write metaphorically and write using metaphors, but this isn't the tone, this isn't HOW they're writing. Yes, the author uses metaphors, but this doesn't make the tone metaphoric. If I asked you to speak to the class with a metaphoric tone, HOW would you speak? It's a difficult task because it doesn't really make sense. If I asked you to speak metaphorically in an aggressive tone, you'd have a clearer idea of what I was asking of you.
The other example I used this morning, was that somebody said he wrote with an "alarmist" tone. Again, I don't really think this makes sense. Yes, he is clearly trying to cause alarm to his audience, but this isn't the tone, this isn't the WAY he's communicating. It's just an intended effect.
Be more precise, clearer and straight forward with your choice of words when describing tone and ask yourself the question, "If I asked somebody to speak to me with an "insert word" tone, would they know what that meant and how to speak?" If it's a bit iffy, then choose a better word.
Your fourth short story...
This week's (a little bit late) story is another doozy from the Israeli writer, Etgar Keret. A different slant this week though, as it's actually an audio file. It's an mp3 version of a public reading the actor Robert Sean Leonard did of the story "Pride and Joy". If the name sounds familiar, it's probably because Robert Sean Leonard plays Wilson on the TV show "House". He was also one of the leads in the classic film "Dead Poet's Society" and if you haven't seen it, get it immediately and watch it. It's a cracker.
Anyhoo, enjoy this week's story.
Pride and Joy by Etgar Keret (as read by Robert Sean Leonard).
Anyhoo, enjoy this week's story.
Pride and Joy by Etgar Keret (as read by Robert Sean Leonard).
Friday, February 25, 2011
First SAC paragraph drafting...
So, as we covered in class this morning, here is the sample paragraph we re-drafted. The first version, the original, is the one that obviously needs work. The second one, the improved version, is an example of how to drastically improve your writing, just by making a few simple changes and addressing the structure of your writing.
Original
Pearce applies a fearful and an alarmed response which causes a sense of safety among the audience, “…dangerous…” which indicates that Wikileaks cannot handle confidential information appropriately which may lead to a country and it’s government in a hazardous situation. The shocking response from the audience causes to doubt the attention of the audience which leads to an alerted response. Wikileaks should treat information appropriately and should not place a higher personage in jeopardy and unethically expose information that should remain private.
Improved
Pearce contends via fearful and inflammatory language that WikiLeaks is “...dangerous…” and cannot handle confidential information appropriately. This assertion is clearly aimed at suggesting to the audience that should this information continue to be handled inappropriately, this could place a country and its government in a hazardous situation. By utilising such words as “dangerous”, and presenting his argument in a far more aggressive tone than his gentler opening paragraph, the author is potentially intending to alarm his audience and perhaps try and force them to pay more heed to the message he is providing.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Practice SAC Number 2
Yo.
So here's the body paragraph we wrote as a class yesterday. I've tweaked and drafted it a little to make it read a little better, but it's largely still the same.
So here's the body paragraph we wrote as a class yesterday. I've tweaked and drafted it a little to make it read a little better, but it's largely still the same.
Elissa Massimino passionately expresses her belief in the importance of Internet freedom and attempts to emotionally invoke the audience into understanding and appreciating her point of view. The importance of “the safety of innocent people”, Massimino highlights, is one of the most important restrictions that needs to be placed upon WikiLeaks. This is, however, the only restriction that needs to be put in place in her opinion. Massimino is possibly trying to frighten her audience by highlighting that “…governments and companies…pose a threat to fundamental rights.” This tonal shift towards aggression when discussing the US government and businesses compared to the more genial tone expressed towards Julain Asange in the previous paragraph, highlights clearly the author’s opinion of both parties and her obvious intention to persuade the audience to feel the same way.
The original article is linked below, in case you've misplaced it. You now need to write the rest of the essay yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)