[Tendedez]

hi everyone I have a english literature retake on may 16th

And I'm studying world war one at the moment.

I have a few questions about my revision.

I understand that in the exam you must write about form structure and language, but for section A, which will be an unknown extract, what type of comments can you make about the structure? I find this difficult because it's just an extract.. it's hard to make structural comments.

Also I've given up asking my teachers for help, they clearly aren't interested, so can someone let me know how much percentage of section A should be weighed on wider reading and how much on the extract?

Another question for you all, what would you say the impact of writing a play opposed to a letter would be? Or the impact of writing a poem opposed to a play? If you understand, I want to have valid arguments about how writing in different forms allows writers to approach the subject differently or more/less freely.

I would be thankful if there were any revision tips or poignant quotes that any of you could add which you think others would find helpful. Anyone got any specific ways of remembering quotes?

[hallesxd]

In terms of percentages, wider reading and extract should be 50/50. If you were going to focus a bit more on things go for wider reading but tie it into the originial extract.

For comments about structure, I tend to focus on sentence length or the build up to the writer's main point. Ie. if they're using short sentences, why do they do that? What is their main point? Think about paragraph length, is there a really long one to show enthusiasm or detail then a short one for impact? If you can tie some of these points with wider reading thats even better. For example, single lines for impact are often found in poetry like Sassoon's 'The General' that ends on a single sentence.

The impact of plays are that the general public would be more likely to want to see it rather than read a letter, particularly modern day audiences with plays like Blackadder. Form all depends on the intended audience honestly. For example Sassoon's letter Decleration of Independance was published in the newspapers and was intended for people to read it and recognise his point whereas plays are a more modern way to view WW1. Think about it, most letters + diaires are from the time so are more personal and 'in the moment' whereas plays were published at least a decade after the war, like Journey's End in 1927, whilst most were published way later, like My Boy Jack.

One good way of remembering quotes, for me, is to use them in essays now. I've learnt quite a lot of quotes from actually using them versus trying to sit there and remember them. If you're not that good at remembering quotes try and remember the ones that fit into many situations. Another tip is to focus on drama+prose quotes because you'll have your poems in the exam so as long as you know vague quotes you should be able to find them quickly in the exam.

If you have any other questions, I'm happy to help

[Tendedez]

(Original post by hallesxd)
In terms of percentages, wider reading and extract should be 50/50. If you were going to focus a bit more on things go for wider reading but tie it into the originial extract.

For comments about structure, I tend to focus on sentence length or the build up to the writer's main point. Ie. if they're using short sentences, why do they do that? What is their main point? Think about paragraph length, is there a really long one to show enthusiasm or detail then a short one for impact? If you can tie some of these points with wider reading thats even better. For example, single lines for impact are often found in poetry like Sassoon's 'The General' that ends on a single sentence.

The impact of plays are that the general public would be more likely to want to see it rather than read a letter, particularly modern day audiences with plays like Blackadder. Form all depends on the intended audience honestly. For example Sassoon's letter Decleration of Independance was published in the newspapers and was intended for people to read it and recognise his point whereas plays are a more modern way to view WW1. Think about it, most letters + diaires are from the time so are more personal and 'in the moment' whereas plays were published at least a decade after the war, like Journey's End in 1927, whilst most were published way later, like My Boy Jack.

One good way of remembering quotes, for me, is to use them in essays now. I've learnt quite a lot of quotes from actually using them versus trying to sit there and remember them. If you're not that good at remembering quotes try and remember the ones that fit into many situations. Another tip is to focus on drama+prose quotes because you'll have your poems in the exam so as long as you know vague quotes you should be able to find them quickly in the exam.

If you have any other questions, I'm happy to help

Hello, thank you for your detailed response - very helpful!

I was wondering, this may sound obvious, but can you explain to me why using humour to satire the conditions of war and the mass amount of death/futility is poignant? I know points such as these are obvious but I can never word them properly.

Also with plays, what is the director or writer able to capture that a piece of text cannot capture? Like a message/etc

[hallesxd]

(Original post by Tendedez)
Hello, thank you for your detailed response - very helpful!

I was wondering, this may sound obvious, but can you explain to me why using humour to satire the conditions of war and the mass amount of death/futility is poignant? I know points such as these are obvious but I can never word them properly.

Also with plays, what is the director or writer able to capture that a piece of text cannot capture? Like a message/etc

Humour is often used to almost highlight the stupidity of the war, particularly towards the ridiculously high casualty rate or the bad military decisions of the Generals. This is used a lot in 'O What a Lovely War' by Joan Littlewood or 'Blackadder', the one I've studied is the finale where they go over the top. OWALW focuses a lot on the body count and how niave the soldiers were to trust the Generals whilst Blackadder just makes satirical jokes about the war in general. Some ones I remember off the top of my head are "Who would notice a madman around here?" and "We have advanced no further than an asthmatic ant with some heavy shopping" and "General 'Insanity' Melchatt invites you to a mass slaughter!". Also jokes and satire can reach audiences that otherwise mightn't care, for example when I was a kid I watched Blackadder and learnt quite a bit from it, but now I can understand the jokes more. They're more accessable for teenagers compared to quite a heavy read like "All Quiet on the Western Front".

A director/playwright is able to use things like music and more general things than a book. For example, a film is able to show iconic scenery shots compared to a long paragraph by an author in a novel which quite honestly can easily bore someone. I think, with plays, you can use sound much more and focus on the 'little' moments like a slow-mo battle scene etc.

Hope that wasn't too long winded to read, it looks it to me but I hope that helps Any other questions I'd be happy to help with.

[Tendedez]

(Original post by hallesxd)
Humour is often used to almost highlight the stupidity of the war, particularly towards the ridiculously high casualty rate or the bad military decisions of the Generals. This is used a lot in 'O What a Lovely War' by Joan Littlewood or 'Blackadder', the one I've studied is the finale where they go over the top. OWALW focuses a lot on the body count and how niave the soldiers were to trust the Generals whilst Blackadder just makes satirical jokes about the war in general. Some ones I remember off the top of my head are "Who would notice a madman around here?" and "We have advanced no further than an asthmatic ant with some heavy shopping" and "General 'Insanity' Melchatt invites you to a mass slaughter!". Also jokes and satire can reach audiences that otherwise mightn't care, for example when I was a kid I watched Blackadder and learnt quite a bit from it, but now I can understand the jokes more. They're more accessable for teenagers compared to quite a heavy read like "All Quiet on the Western Front".

A director/playwright is able to use things like music and more general things than a book. For example, a film is able to show iconic scenery shots compared to a long paragraph by an author in a novel which quite honestly can easily bore someone. I think, with plays, you can use sound much more and focus on the 'little' moments like a slow-mo battle scene etc.

Hope that wasn't too long winded to read, it looks it to me but I hope that helps Any other questions I'd be happy to help with.

In section B of the question paper, the one where we use the anthology we studied, I did Scars Upon My Heart at school, not sure if you did the same but I think the principle of the questions are the same, you get a choice of one question which has a statement and you have to use the anthology to agree or disagree, and one basically states a poem and asks if it's key to the collection, what type of responses are the examiners looking for in this section? A balanced argument? Critiques? I only managed to get 22/45 on this section of the exam

Also thank you very much for your quick and detailed replies.

[hallesxd]

(Original post by Tendedez)
In section B of the question paper, the one where we use the anthology we studied, I did Scars Upon My Heart at school, not sure if you did the same but I think the principle of the questions are the same, you get a choice of one question which has a statement and you have to use the anthology to agree or disagree, and one basically states a poem and asks if it's key to the collection, what type of responses are the examiners looking for in this section? A balanced argument? Critiques? I only managed to get 22/45 on this section of the exam

I didn't do Scars Upon My Heart but the concept is still the same I think. I'm gonna admit that I'm not as good at poetry as I am for the extract piece but I can tell you stuff for the poetry.

I see it as a breadth vs depth argument. You can either focus on three/four poems in detail or go for a wider range.

Here is a question from my poetry selection:
“The most moving and effective poetry is written by young men who were killed in World War One.”
How far do you agree with this view of the poems in the Stallworthy selection?
When I answered this question I got 37/45 and I think I mentioned about 8 poets, using quite a few from Sassoon, Owen, Rosenberg + Brooke. I focused on my 'main' poems but tied in all the poems to reinforce my point. However my friend only did 3 poems and she still got 35/45, she just chose poems that she knew really well.

I'm going to take one from your selection (don't be too harsh on me as I haven't done these poems at all bar Brittan):
How far do you agree that ‘He Went for a Soldier’ by Ruth Comfort Mitchell is typical of the anthology in the ways in which it presents the victims of warfare?
I think for these types of questions, where it names a poem and asks for its typicality, you kinda have to think about poem choice even more than when you have free reign. I would chose one poem that supports Mitchell's view and one/two that contradicts it, perhaps making comments about other poems that link in but don't focus on that too much.

Tips my teachers gave me:
- Mention form, structure and language. They are all specified in the mark scheme and there is no way you are going to get high marks without them. You don't even have to focus on one if you don't want to, just make sure you get that you know what they are across to the examiner so they can tick it off the mark scheme. I tend to do this by saying something like this: "Structurely, the poet trys to convey their message by..." In terms of form, try to indenitfy why the poet used that type. Eg. if they used a sonnet was it for traditional means or to flaunt their contradictory views?
- Try and make the essay flow; use connecting phrases like 'On the other hand', 'This poet also shares the same views' and the ever simple and humble 'however'.
- Do what you feel comfortable with, if you prefer using a small amount of poems do it. If you prefer working with a wider range of poems, use a wider range. I think you can tell that I prefer using more than less but it's what you want to do, not what I think you should do.

[Tendedez]

(Original post by hallesxd)
I didn't do Scars Upon My Heart but the concept is still the same I think. I'm gonna admit that I'm not as good at poetry as I am for the extract piece but I can tell you stuff for the poetry.

I see it as a breadth vs depth argument. You can either focus on three/four poems in detail or go for a wider range.

Here is a question from my poetry selection:
“The most moving and effective poetry is written by young men who were killed in World War One.”
How far do you agree with this view of the poems in the Stallworthy selection?
When I answered this question I got 37/45 and I think I mentioned about 8 poets, using quite a few from Sassoon, Owen, Rosenberg + Brooke. I focused on my 'main' poems but tied in all the poems to reinforce my point. However my friend only did 3 poems and she still got 35/45, she just chose poems that she knew really well.

I'm going to take one from your selection (don't be too harsh on me as I haven't done these poems at all bar Brittan):
How far do you agree that ‘He Went for a Soldier’ by Ruth Comfort Mitchell is typical of the anthology in the ways in which it presents the victims of warfare?
I think for these types of questions, where it names a poem and asks for its typicality, you kinda have to think about poem choice even more than when you have free reign. I would chose one poem that supports Mitchell's view and one/two that contradicts it, perhaps making comments about other poems that link in but don't focus on that too much.

Tips my teachers gave me:
- Mention form, structure and language. They are all specified in the mark scheme and there is no way you are going to get high marks without them. You don't even have to focus on one if you don't want to, just make sure you get that you know what they are across to the examiner so they can tick it off the mark scheme. I tend to do this by saying something like this: "Structurely, the poet trys to convey their message by..." In terms of form, try to indenitfy why the poet used that type. Eg. if they used a sonnet was it for traditional means or to flaunt their contradictory views?
- Try and make the essay flow; use connecting phrases like 'On the other hand', 'This poet also shares the same views' and the ever simple and humble 'however'.
- Do what you feel comfortable with, if you prefer using a small amount of poems do it. If you prefer working with a wider range of poems, use a wider range. I think you can tell that I prefer using more than less but it's what you want to do, not what I think you should do.

Thank you. I think i would feel more comfortable doing less poems as when I do more I tend to not focus and be very very brief, I got a shocking and embarrassing 9/45 for section A in my retake and 22/45 in section B.

Would you say it would be good, for a question like that, to have one poem which shares the same concept and two which perhaps don't?

[hallesxd]

(Original post by Tendedez)
Thank you. I think i would feel more comfortable doing less poems as when I do more I tend to not focus and be very very brief, I got a shocking and embarrassing 9/45 for section A in my retake and 22/45 in section B.

Would you say it would be good, for a question like that, to have one poem which shares the same concept and two which perhaps don't?

I think that would definitly be the the way to go about it as then it would be a balanced critique. Try and pick poems which you can easily comment on, or feel more comfortable with. For example, I really don't like Owen and try my hardest not to use him. My bias against him seems to come across when I write about him so I try to just throw odd comments about him in and leave it at that.

[lilamm]

Hi everyone, im also doing the exam on WW1 and i was wondering how amny poems you are planning on learning (as in like what they mean, form, struc and lang) because we have gone through so many in class i dont see the point in knowing them all. What ones are you focusing on? currently i have narrowed mine down to 'men who march away', 'the hero', 'rouen', 'anthem for doomed youth' and 'the great war' but i dont think thats enough. Thanks.

[gypsyclimber]

(Original post by lilamm)
Hi everyone, im also doing the exam on WW1 and i was wondering how amny poems you are planning on learning (as in like what they mean, form, struc and lang) because we have gone through so many in class i dont see the point in knowing them all. What ones are you focusing on? currently i have narrowed mine down to 'men who march away', 'the hero', 'rouen', 'anthem for doomed youth' and 'the great war' but i dont think thats enough. Thanks.

Our teacher has told us to pick out a key 12 group of poems, although that may be too much I dont know...

[Tendedez]

(Original post by lilamm)
Hi everyone, im also doing the exam on WW1 and i was wondering how amny poems you are planning on learning (as in like what they mean, form, struc and lang) because we have gone through so many in class i dont see the point in knowing them all. What ones are you focusing on? currently i have narrowed mine down to 'men who march away', 'the hero', 'rouen', 'anthem for doomed youth' and 'the great war' but i dont think thats enough. Thanks.

I would say around 10. As long as they are like a spread of different key themes then that should be fine, five poems is definitely not enough. Our teacher gives us loads in class too, but I just went off and found ones which I thought were key and concentrated on those.

[dolllllllllllllly]

hi all

im sitting this exam too, only just found this forum which is very useful! sitting this in Year 11 along with my GCSE's so feeling the pressure, still hoping to achieve a high grade...

@Tendedez, we studied about 15 in class, some in detail some not so much... i wouldnt worry too much as most of them can be easily compared/contrasted.

[J95]

Hey I'm taking this exam too, and I'm so worried and it is tomorrow!! Has anyone got any last minute advice. Thanks

[dolllllllllllllly]

Re: Aqa english literature, world war one revision tips for may 16th exam
Hey I'm taking this exam too, and I'm so worried and it is tomorrow!! Has anyone got any last minute advice. Thanks



is there a particular bit you dont get? planning or what to write or.......?

[dolllllllllllllly]

also does anyone here have a mark scheme for the exam?

[J95]

in particular section B, i just can't seem to get a good grade, and also planning

[dolllllllllllllly]

planning for both or just section b?


im in high school and we have a really good teacher who has helped us through every single bit,

for planning section b we picked out key themes and words from the question, identified the debate (for example the poems reflect the horrors of war etc) and then picked two or three poems. One or two which agreed with the debate and one that disagreed. I normally pick two because i can analyse in lots of detail so, but maybe you prefer doing more than two.
The anthology we use is Up The Line To Death, and we have been advised to choose to analyse 2-3 poems rather than range through the anthology.

basically then make an analysis plan for each poem:

Dead Mans Dump

What? Shows that the men experienced pure horror and inhumanity

How? Emotive language, grotesque imagery, religious rhetoric, also could talk about odd size paragraph structure

Why? Give reasons for his use for these for example used religious rhetoric to show that the men were sacrified but had no glory etc etc


Then use a compare or contrast 'However, in a different way' or 'similarly' and then do the same with another poem. Remember to pick at least one for and one against.


i know thats quite a long ramble but i hope it helps a bit, its kinda jumbled hahha

Pick a quote for each of these and analyse it etc.

[HeyyImRyan]

(Original post by dolllllllllllllly)
planning for both or just section b?


im in high school and we have a really good teacher who has helped us through every single bit,

for planning section b we picked out key themes and words from the question, identified the debate (for example the poems reflect the horrors of war etc) and then picked two or three poems. One or two which agreed with the debate and one that disagreed. I normally pick two because i can analyse in lots of detail so, but maybe you prefer doing more than two.
The anthology we use is Up The Line To Death, and we have been advised to choose to analyse 2-3 poems rather than range through the anthology.

basically then make an analysis plan for each poem:

Dead Mans Dump

What? Shows that the men experienced pure horror and inhumanity

How? Emotive language, grotesque imagery, religious rhetoric, also could talk about odd size paragraph structure

Why? Give reasons for his use for these for example used religious rhetoric to show that the men were sacrified but had no glory etc etc


Then use a compare or contrast 'However, in a different way' or 'similarly' and then do the same with another poem. Remember to pick at least one for and one against.


i know thats quite a long ramble but i hope it helps a bit, its kinda jumbled hahha

Pick a quote for each of these and analyse it etc.

That's great advice!

What about Section A?! I've pretty much got 30-ish quotes for the various different themes, just kinda worried about structuring my answer!

[dolllllllllllllly]

glad to be of help! i cant really take credit its down to my teacher


Well basically for section A, form structure and language has to be covered. so:

Intro: should contain info about the form so its covered for example, if its a memoir/letter/extract from autobio, comment on that and thats pretty much form covered.

Analyse the extract, try and pick out key themes and seeing as every mock ive sat asks for 'thoughts and feelings' try and pick these out as you go along.

then once you have picked these and got a general idea of what the article is about, pick out four or five that you can make decent points from. also try and pick out a language or structural technique for each point (try and balance them, if you have four points pick 2 structural and 2 langauge or mix them up throughout if you prefer as long as they get covered).

then set it out like this (its really so simple and you will wonder how you didnt think of it!)


WHAT? WHAT THOUGHT/FEELING HAS THE AUTHOR PORTRAYED

HOW? WHICH TECHNIQUES HAVE THEY USED, FOR EXAMPLE METAPHORS/EMOTIVE LANGUAGE (TRY AND PICK A FEW OF THESE IF YOU CAN)

WHY? WHY HAVE THEY DONE THIS? FOR EXAMPLE IF IT WAS AN ARTICLE ON PACIFISM AND THE AUTHOR WROTE ABOUT BEING ANGRY AT GENERALS, IT WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE BECAUSE THEY ARE AGAINST WAR. SOMETIMES IT IS NOT SO OBVIOUS IN WHICH CASE YOU WOULD JUST COMMENT ON HOW THEY WANTED THE READER TO FEEL

COMPARE/CONTRAST: CHOOSE 1 OR 2 TEXTS THAT YOU COULD COMPARE IT TO, OR CONTRAST (EVEN NAME DROPPING IS FINE OR I WAS TOLD ACTUALLY IF YOU CANT REMEMBER A QUOTE JUST DESCRIBE THE SCENE FROM WHATEVER TEXT IT IS IN DETAIL AND YOU WILL STILL GET MARKS)

we set it up kind of in a table (so WHAT, HOW, WHY AND COMPARE/CONTRAST ACROSS THE TOP THEN FOUR OR FIVE ROWS TO FIT ALL YOUR POINTS ON) which makes it so easy as you can just tick off whichever point you have done.




Then basically repeat this for every point. This plan does take about 15 minutes but honestly it makes sure you cover everything and you will easily get it written properly in about 40 minutes!

also hope this has helped. i am feeling confident even though i am still in high school i think the key is definitely planning. and recording and listening to quotes hahahaha

[J95]

Thanks this is really helpful

also what kind of stuff do you need to comment on for form