I was wondering - how are people approaching introductions and conclusions?
Personally, I do introductions which are very brief (because I struggle for time). I start with a phrase such as 'I agree for the most part' or 'I disagree with..' and then pretty much write out the question. I then unpick the question term a bit, so if it was about the pastoral being about a childhood state I'd state that this consists of a time of innocence, free from the troubles of the world. I'd then put across the counter argument.
So it might go something like this, if the question was 'To what extent do you agree with the view that pastoral writing always celebrates the freedom of a childhood state?':
"I agree for the most part that pastoral writing reflects, as a central idea, the freedom of childhood. Many authors portray the countryside as a place where characters live a life replicating that of youth, blissfully free from the adversities and pressures of the outside world. However, in my mind this is not 'always' the case, as some authors present visions of childhood which are, beneath their seemingly Arcadian surface, far from idyllic."
I just realised this doesn't fit with my texts very well, so I wouldn't actually choose this question. The examiners' report suggests looking at the verb 'celebrate', looking at texts where freedom is a bad thing ie. not celebrated ('Blue Remembered Hills' would have been brilliant for this but is unfortunately no longer on the syllabus
). It also suggested looking at different types of freedom (I might look at Rosalind's freedom in Arden and how that allows her to live in a world distant from reality (like a child's game of make-believe ??) )
They are my thoughts on how to approach this - would like to know if anyone agrees/disagrees with this approach! At time Litb3 seems a bit of a mystery.
Posted from TSR Mobile