[NoSpeakNewSpeak]

Hi there,

Sitting this exam soon. Does anyone have any example essays that I may be able to look at, to get the general feel how to answer the questions. Stuck on an A/B at the moment and really want to push it up to an A*. I'm doing King Lear and Blake.

[lushaholic693]

Does anyone have any sample Donne essays they could post here?
They would be much appreciated as I am really struggling

[Bright]

(Original post by NoSpeakNewSpeak)
Hi there,

Sitting this exam soon. Does anyone have any example essays that I may be able to look at, to get the general feel how to answer the questions. Stuck on an A/B at the moment and really want to push it up to an A*. I'm doing King Lear and Blake.

I'm sitting this as well, did you find any good sample essays by any chance?

I'm so nervous for this exam and have done so little because of my other subjects

How many quotes have you memorised?

[NoSpeakNewSpeak]

(Original post by Bright)
I'm sitting this as well, did you find any good sample essays by any chance?

I'm so nervous for this exam and have done so little because of my other subjects

How many quotes have you memorised?

I know. Same here! I stupidly did Biology A level and its taken up all my time.

I found a few. Theres some on here:

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...t=wjec+english


And this is one off WJEC:


Script 1 Core Text: King Lear Partner Text: Oedipus Rex Explore the theme of pride in King Lear, making reference to Oedipus Rex

(1) Pride is a main theme in King Lear and Oedipus Rex as it is the identifying trait of the protagonist, vital in the genre of tragedy. The pride of the main characters initially drives the plot and ultimately causes the downfall or suffering of the tragic hero. This is evident in the plots of both plays, where Lear loses his dearest daughter and Oedipus is blinded and exiled. The extent to which the ‘punishment fits the crime’ is debatable – is simply pride enough to merit such suffering?

(2) That ‘the protagonist will have a tragic flaw’, or hamartia, is one of the criteria of a tragedy as described by Aristotle. In both these plays, pride leads to destruction. King Lear is a Shakespearean tragedy, and differs from the Greek tragedy of Aristotle. In King Lear, the suffering seems disproportionate to the crime. Lear’s crime, his tragic flaw, could be viewed as simply the pride of wanting to be flattered. This is shown most clearly in the ‘love trial’ scene, where he demands “Which of you shall we say doth love us most?” of his three daughters, wanting to be told he is adored in order to divide his kingdom. Alternatively, Lear’s tragic flaw could be hubris, or pride against the gods. This is shown in the act of deciding to divide up and pass on his kingdom himself. Shakespeare’s contemporaries had strong beliefs about religion and demonology, believing that there was a divine order (natural order) in the universe. However, the king could act ‘unnaturally’ by handing down the throne himself. It was believed that gods should decide the king’s reign and that it was not in the king’s power to hand down his throne. This shows that Lear’s crime could be perceived as hubris against the gods and their power, rather than simply being conceited and proud. If simply pride is his crime, then his suffering seems disproportionate and therefore makes his tragedy greater.

(3) Lear’s punishment is the grief of Cordelia’s death when he is already a man broken by guilt. The pathos is created by his plea “Why should a dog, a horse, a rat, have life, And thou no breath at all?” The animal references make Cordelia’s murder seem more unjust. Lear dies soon after, and it is a point of debate whether his death is further punishment, or a release from suffering? I believe that Lear’s death completes the sense of the catharsis at the end of the play by being an end to his suffering, particularly because as he dies he believes Cordelia is waking: “Look on her, look, her lips, Look there, look there!”. This view is confirmed by Kent telling Edgar “he hates him That would upon the rack of this tough world Stretch him out longer.” This means that Lear has suffered (“upon the rack”) on earth long enough and deserves to die naturally. The critic Charles Lamb holds a similar belief that Lear’s death is the only possible ending for this
play: “as if the living martyrdom that Lear had gone through – the flaying of his feelings alive, did not make fair dismissal from the stage of life the only decorous thing for him.”

(4) Oedipus Rex has all the characteristics of a Greek tragedy. Oedipus’ tragic flaw is hubris – his pride against the gods is shown by his belief that he is invincible and superior. He boasts to Tiresias that the Sphinx troubled Thebes “till I came, The unlettered Oedipus, and ended her, By sleight of wit”, and his arrogance is also displayed in his continued blind refusal to acknowledge the truth directly from the words of the gods. Because the gods’ presence is more immediate and continuous is Oedipus Rex (from the words of the oracle and the seer, and the omnipresent chorus), they seem more powerful and therefore Oedipus’ crime is greater from directly ignoring this, whereas the god references in King Lear are only beliefs. The Greeks believed that pride was an affront against the fates, therefore Oedipus was fully deserving of his blinding and exile. Some would say that Oedipus’ suffering is undeserved because it is not the fault of his pride, it is the gods playing with the fates of men. The Greeks believed that the gods were all powerful and not necessarily benevolent, and controlled the fates of men. As Tiresias tells Oedipus: “Nor is it fated You by my hand should fall; Apollo is Sufficient; he will bring it all to pass”, meaning that Oedipus’ fate is controlled by Apollo. Oedipus proclaims himself as the “Gods’ chief object of their hate”, and this does seem true to an extent. This makes us more critical of Lear’s actions because his fate was not predestined, and he could at any point have changed his behaviour to stop the chain of events. However, his pride prevented him from intervening, for example he could have called back Cordelia and Kent.

5) It could be argued that Lear’s loss of pride is the turning point in the play, his realisation and anagnorisis as a tragic protagonist. Critic Grenville‐Barker suggests “the supreme moment for Lear himself, the turning‐point ... is reached in the second of the three storm scenes, when the proud old man kneels humbly and alone in his wretchedness to pray.” This is supported by Lear’s exclamation to the storm of his realisation of what has happened: “two pernicious daughters join your high‐engender’d battles ‘gainst a head So old and white as this. O, ho! ‘tis foul.” The word “pernicious” shows that he has recognised Goneril and Regan for what they are, and identifying himself as “old and white” could suggest that he has gained an understanding of his weakness in age. An important aspect is his loss of pride against natural powers, given that this was his original offence, his tragic flaw which set this chain of events in motion. When exposed to nature’s power at its worst in the teeth of the storm, he succumbs: “I stand, your slave, A poor infirm, weak and despis’d old man”. However, Lear has not reached complete illumination because he does not see his part in the events of his downfall, only realised the true nature of Gonerial and Regan. He states “I am a man more sinn’d against than sinning.” The alliteration and repetition, and its foregrounding at the end of a speech and the precursing caesura make this proclamation seem more momentous and significant, despite its actual truth being ambiguous. However, I believe that Lear’s moment of anagnorisis is not actually witnessed on stage. We hear of it from Kent in the French camp when he tells us why Lear refuses to see Cordelia: “A sovereign shame so elbows him ... these things sting His mind so venomously that burning shame Detains him from Cordelia”. This is not as dramatic as Oedipus’ revelation, but in a way I think it makes it sadder because we hear of how he is a broken man from a conversation between those who love him.

(6) The point of anagnorisis is far less ambiguous in Oedipus Rex. When his true identity is confirmed by the Old Man, Oedipus cries, “Woe! Woe! It is all plain indeed! ... revealed to have been born of those Of whom I ought not – to have wedded whom I ought not – and slain whom
I might not slay!” The list of his crimes (borne of hubris, the tragic flaw) and the exclamations show the horror of his instant gain in knowledge. In the production I saw (National Theatre, London, October 2008), Oedipus’ reaction was emphasised by him fleeing the stage with a cry, looking at his hands in horror. Oedipus’ anagnorisis is at the end of the play, suggesting that this play is about a quest for the truth and the cause of the chaos. This shows a different focus to King Lear, where the initial cause seems less important as the play is about his demise. The damage to Lear’s world happens so quickly we are more interested of the development of chaos rather than whether his initial pride was to blame. The reason for this difference is that Oedipus Rex is a Greek tragedy, so the audience would have known the storyline and therefore be expecting a revelation. They would not have the sense of catharsis (a defining feature of tragedy, according to Aristotle) without the dramatic, horrible, pitiable reduction of Oedipus and his loss of pride. In this way it could be said the plays have their turning point where the protagonist loses his pride, but this does not necessarily coincide with the realisation of their tragic flaw.

(7) In both plays, pride starts the chain of events by clouding the vision of the protagonist leading to a lack of judgment. In King Lear, the ‘love trial’ scene shows both forms of this ‘blindness by pride’ which affects Lear. Firstly, he fails to see clearly the relationships with other characters, too proud to recognise that others may think differently from himself. He takes Cordelia’s silence as coldness, asking “So young, and so untender?”, where she replies with the pure honesty that mark her character, “So young, my lord, and true.” He also sees the loyal Kent’s intervention as rebellion when he implores “See better, Lear: and let me still remain the true blank of thine eye”. This example also shows that those characters without pride have clear vision and the strongest moral centres. Lear’s response to Kent’s words of truth and sense are “Come not between the dragon and his wrath” and proceeds to banish Kent. Disowning Cordelia and banishing Kent are acts which would not have happened had Lear had clear vision. Therefore his pride pushes away the two characters that could have helped stop his downfall, so the tragedy could be viewed as entirely his fault.

Secondly, Lear’s pride clouds his vision by giving him a misguided perception of the gods and the power of nature. He assumes that because he is an omnipotent king, the other powers will be support his decisions. When Lear calls on the gods Kent breaks in, “Now, by Apollo, king, thou swear’st thy gods in vain” pointing out that Lear is going against the gods by dividing his kingdom and banishing Cordelia this way. Also, Lear condemns Cordelia as “a wretch who Nature is asham’d Almost t’acknowledge hers”, whereas in fact Lear is the one acting unnaturally. Lear refusing to acknowledge the gods truly could be considered hubris and therefore contribute to his downfall.

(8) Oedipus’ loss of pride and loss of physical sight mean that he gains vision. At the start, the blind seer Tiresias tells him, “you have your sight and do not see what evils are about you”. This refers to Oedipus’ pride and arrogance leading to moral blindness and blindness to the truth and his own faults, which plays a part in the sequence of event leading to his downfall. When Tiresias tells Oedipus the truth he refuses to accept it, instead accusing the seer of being “Blind as you are in eyes, and ears, and mind!” Oedipus’ use of “blind” is ironic because it is actually he who is “blind instead of seeing” and is also structurally relevant as it foreshadows his physical blinding. The character of Creon is a stark contrast in terms of pride and its effects. Creon is proud but not excessively so as he does not have Oedipus’ arrogance. Therefore Creon has clear vision and moral vision and is comfortable with his power. He does not feel the need to boast about his status or achievements, shown structurally by the first scene being about
Oedipus’ telling his people how magnificent he is. He reasons “I am not yet so blinded as to wish for hour, other than is joined with gain”. Creon separates himself from Oedipus by claiming “a mind well balanced cannot turn to crime”, indicating that he has not let pride lead him into rash acts like Oedipus.

(9) The character of Lear can be compared with Cordelia to show that characters with pride are not necessarily punished by the gods, because pride is not always a tragic flaw. Cordelia’s pride is shown in her refusal to play the demeaning game of false words in the ‘love trial’ scene. She says “I cannot heave my heart into my mouth” and Lear responds by telling France later “Let pride, which she calls plainness, marry her.” Plainness here refers to one speaking the truth, although clearly Lear does not believe this because of his pride. It is also shown in Kent’s counsel “To plainness honour’s bound When majesty falls to folly”, showing his loyalty to his king despite the danger to himself of protesting when “power to flattery bows”. Cordelia’s pride or so‐called “plainness” consists of morality, truth and dignity, and Kent’s of truth and loyalty. Neither are punished by the gods because their pride is not excessive but fitting and reasoned. Cordelia dies, but it is argued that this is not a punishment but a plot device for Lear’s punishment as well as the removal of a character too pure to live in such a world of evil.

(10) Lear is excessively proud and it is this that leads to his downfall. Oedipus is also excessively proud, and both protagonists have gone against the gods. Pride cannot be considered the sole reason for the downfall of the protagonist; it is the initiating factor but the tragedy relies on a chain of events in between, especially in King Lear. It is his actions of pride and his failure to intervene later on, not being proud itself, that leads to his downfall, whereas in Oedipus greater emphasis is placed on the role of the gods in determining fate as a result of the tragic flaw, therefore we feel more pity for Oedipus because he has far less control over his own fate.

[Bright]

(Original post by NoSpeakNewSpeak)
I know. Same here! I stupidly did Biology A level and its taken up all my time.

I found a few. Theres some on here:
.

Ahh thank you SO much! I am dreading this! Currently doing Chemistry and I have Biology as well.. gosh why did I leave it till so late?

Thanks again and good luck! :]