Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Why do you love/ hate Literature and examiners

Hi,

*Disclaimer: the following post should only be read by those macho, fortunate people who have thick skins and who can bear the criticism of their favorite subject: English Literature - it's a god to me, you know.*

I attempted a past paper of a level English Literature and I have arrived at the conclusion that the examiners who generate the questions are dumb, simply, utterly, devastatingly dumb, just like the subject itself. For an example, look at the following question on a passage based question of A Passage to India (by E.M. Forster) which comes from oct/nov 2012 paper 31 of Eng lit (I know at this point you may be reluctant to read on, but do just skim the passage and read the question and then go to the end to see what ridiculous comments the examiner report contains):

Comment closely on ways Forster presents Ronny’s thoughts in the following passage:

The death took subtler and more lasting shapes in Chandrapore. A legend
sprang up that an Englishman had killed his mother fortrying to save an Indian’s life – and there was just enough truth in this to cause annoyance to the authorities. Sometimes it was a cow that had been killed – or a crocodile with the tusks of a boar had crawled out of the Ganges. Nonsense of this type is more difficult to combat than a solid lie. It hides in rubbish-heaps and moves when no one is looking. At one period two distinct tombs containing Esmiss Esmoor’s remains were reported: one by the tannery, the other up near the goods station. Mr McBryde visited them both and saw signs of the beginning of a cult – earthenware saucers and so on. Being an experienced official, he did nothing to irritate it, and after a week or so the rash died down. ‘There’s propaganda behind all this,’ he said, forgetting that a hundred years ago, when Europeans still made their home in the countryside and appealed to its imagination, they occasionally became local demons after death – not a whole god
perhaps, but part of one, adding an epithet or gesture to what already existed, just as the gods contribute to the great gods, and they to the philosophic Brahm.

Ronny reminded himself that his mother had left India at her own wish, but
his conscience was not clear. He had behaved badly to her, and he had either to repent (which involved a mental overturn), or to persist in unkindness towards her. He chose the latter course. How tiresome she had been with her patronage of Aziz! What a bad influence upon Adela! And now she still gave trouble with ridiculous ‘tombs’, mixing herself up with natives. She could not help it, of course, but she had attempted similar exasperating expeditions in her lifetime, and he reckoned it against her. The young man had much to worry him – the heat, the local tension, the
approaching visit of the Lieutenant-Governor, the problems of Adela – and threading them all together into a grotesque garland were these Indianizations of Mrs Moore. What does happen to one’s mother when she dies? Presuma bly she goes to heaven, anyhow she clears out. Ronny’s religion was of the sterilized public-school brand, which never goes bad, even in the tropics. Wherever he entered, mosque, cave or temple, he retained the spiritual outlook of the Fifth Form, and condemned as ‘weakening’ any attempt to understand them. Pulling himself together, he dismissed the matter from his mind. In due time he and his half-brother and - sister would put up a tablet to her in the Northamptonshire church where she had worshipped, recording the dates of her birth and death and the fact that she had been buried at sea. This would be sufficient.

And Adela – she would have to depart too; he hoped she would have made the suggestion herself ere now. He really could not marry her – it would mean the end of his career. Poor lamentable Adela … She remained at Government College, by Fielding’s courtesy – unsuitable and humiliating, but no one would receive her at the Civil Station. He postponed all private talk until the award against her was decided. Aziz was suing her for damages in the sub-judge’s court. Then he would ask her
to release him. She had killed his love, and it had never been very robust; they would never have achieved betrothal but for the accident to the Nawab Bahadur’s car. She belonged to the callow academic period of his life which he had outgrown – Grasmere, serious talks and walks, that sort of thing.

--------------

Examiner report for the paper: (in italics are my comments at the futility of choosing literature, and the stupidity of the examiner).

There were not many responses to this question. The majority of these described an unsympathetic portrait of Ronny (really? the questions was about the presenation of Ronny's thoughts, not about the presentation of Ronny himself) as he thinks through events with his mother and Adela. Candidates discussed his approach to religion and his abandonment of his marriage plans. These ideas were all relevant, but candidates often found it difficult to look closely and analytically at the language Forster uses to narrate these issues. More successful answers noted how his attitudes are defined by his Schooldays, with the reference to the ‘Fifth Form’ and ‘sterilized public-School’, which suggest immaturity (Ronny's immaturity? But the questions specifically asked the candidates to comment on how Forster presents Ronny's thoughts, not how Ronnys himself is protrayed) , and Forster’s use of restrained language, such as ‘tiresome’, ‘behaved badly’ and ‘unsuitable’, showing the character’s difficulty with emotions (these comments are all about the character's nature, etc. not about his thoughts. According to me, his thoughts are troulbed and muddled -like India has been portrayed in the novel). A few candidates’ responses suggested limited knowledge of the novel, as they read the second line of the passage as fact, indicating that Ronny had in fact killed his mother. (now coming to the major issue, the first paragraph has nothing to do with Ronny's thoughts. It's brimming with Forster's own telling/ narration, and doesn't even mention Ronny once, except a brief referecne to the "Englishman", which seems to be the narrative voice.) :confused:

---------------------------------

In the end, somebody please tell me what was the purpose of adding the first paragraph, which has nothign to do with Ronny's thoughts? I couldn't comment on it, and so my answer was very breif. I don't know why the examiner failed to mention the purpose/ mistake of adding the first paragraph. But he's not to blame. After all, no one accepts their mistakes. The examiner mistakenly added the first paragraph, mistake one; and said that the question was about Ronny's thoughts, when in fact - as can be seen in the examiner report - the question was about Ronny's portrayl. How could he make these two big mistakes and pretend that there was no mistake in the paper? Why can't we admit our mistakes and ask for forgiveness? :cool:

I would have forgiven the examiner if he had asked. HE didn't ask for forgivenss. I didn't grant it.

Moral: :wink:

Every single person who has the foggiest intention of studying Literature, beware!!!!!!!! Litereture is death, madness, stumbling right into the Pshychiaritrist's office. Hell, yeah, that is THE SINGLE TRUTH OF LIFE: the examiner asks the candidates to comment on thing X, and assumes the candidate will know that he actually means thing Y!!! But logical candidates like me comment on thing X, because they can't do telepahty. So they are hexed just like that. My Advice: Please don't study literature, folks :angry:

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 1

KingStannis

You portray a character through their thoughts. All this means is that you analyse how the thoughts of the character portray the character. You can't portray a character's thoughts without portraying the character.

The extract is a bit odd I'll grant you. Was it from a set text, or an unseen extract?

Reply 2

WitnessMO

I read Literature at A-level. Whilst it wasn't my fav subject, i enjoyed some of the poems, plays and books we studied. I think most people who study literature, it's because they love books and writing. The grades you worry about much latter.