Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AisAis)
    Sadie and I can dominate this discussion until the kids get back from school. :p:

    I did these two too.

    The first poem seemed difficult to understand though. I spent a lot of my answer talking about how images like the initial "they had frost of them" and "the coats barely covered their wings" were confusing and it was all part of the discourdant atmosphere of the poem - hence the irregular metre, stanzas, etc etc - whereas Dickinson's was more clarified. I didn't plan, I just wrote constantly and linked things up as they occured e.g. in Dickinson the thought of death was presented as a chill, whereas in Oswald's the ignorance surrounding their mortality was associated with the "frost" in the fourth line, and the revelatory sunrise caused them to sway and warm their hands.

    But remember guys, the worst case scenario is that you get a bad score, and even a bad score will get you an interview. The bands are as follows:

    Band 1 (top) - should indicate those candidates most likely to be called for interview (unless other indicators suggest otherwise)
    Band 2 - should indicate those candidates who should probably be invited to interview
    Band 3 - will contain candidates who may not be called to interview (unless there is convincing evidence to suggest otherwise)
    Band 4 - should indicate those candidates who are less likely to be invited to interview (unless other factors outweigh the evidence of the test)

    Last year I was band 4 with 3.5A*s at GCSE and no language qualification, and they still invited me.
    I take it they asked how the author presented death then? Your's sounds excellent :yes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chebanana)
    I take it they asked how the author presented death then? Your's sounds excellent :yes:
    I can't even remember the theme... it was transcience, and possible death/mortality. :o:

    I'm just worried I didn't grasp the poem well enough.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That topic was SO much better than last year.

    I used extracts D and E, the Dickens and the Milton one. I can't remember in detail now what I wrote, but it hinged around man's desire to control time, through objectifying and personalising it in the Dickens one (also mentioned something about the prizing it over nature bit with belief in our progress as a species tying in with the fear of time), and talked about the nature of afterlife, and over-zealous belief in it highlighting fear, with the Milton one. Obviously (hopefully?) it sort of made more sense in the exam than that garbled sentence.

    Oh, and I always finish these things with so much time to spare - so I forced myself to chill out at the beginning and write nice and neatly and slowly. In the end I was about 15 minutes short on time, so I had to reeeeeally rush over Milton. Boo .

    P.S. I hated extract A. Did nobody else :p:?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rubberband)
    That topic was SO much better than last year.

    I used extracts D and E, the Dickens and the Milton one. I can't remember in detail now what I wrote, but it hinged around man's desire to control time, through objectifying and personalising it in the Dickens one (also mentioned something about the prizing it over nature bit with belief in our progress as a species tying in with the fear of time), and talked about the nature of afterlife, and over-zealous belief in it highlighting fear, with the Milton one. Obviously (hopefully?) it sort of made more sense in the exam than that garbled sentence.

    Oh, and I always finish these things with so much time to spare - so I forced myself to chill out at the beginning and write nice and neatly and slowly. In the end I was about 15 minutes short on time, so I had to reeeeeally rush over Milton. Boo .

    P.S. I hated extract A. Did nobody else :p:?
    I think I find it quite hard to concentrate on reading unfamilar texts for a long time, so I trailed off as I went through the booklet and skimmed the Milton and didn't even try the Shakespeare. :o:

    So the fact Oswald was extract A counted for a lot.


    By the way, does DDN meant anything to you? :ninja:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Is it just me or is it difficult to remember what you wrote in the exam? It all seems so blurry to me now.
    I did Dickinson and Milton and talked about the personification of time and death in both poems and in Milton's I wrote about how he fights against these through his experiences: truth, peace and love. I also remember talking about the deadly sins (gluttony, envy..). Hmm what else.. another point I made was that both poems decribe the inevitability of death although Dickinson's attitude seems more indifferent and accepting of death than Milton's and that they both mentioned the speed of life.

    I think my biggest accomplishment was actually finishing the exam within the time limit! I always have problems with timing...
    Oh well at least it's over !
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Oswald and Milton. Purretty ****. Well, done now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    it was time, transience and mortality.
    Also I have to leave for work pretty soon, so I guess you'll be alone till the kids get back :p:
    I can barely remember what I wrote - I did a lot about the choices of Form - Dickinson's there was almost a juxtaposition between it and the subject matter, whilst Oswald's reflected the emotion and was more complex. I wrote a lot about ambiguity - I couldn't quite make up my mind whether the old couple were dead, whilst Dickinson almost euphemised death - I did a bit of comparison based on that. I wrote about the nature of immortality; I think I ended up deciding that the light imagery, use of language etc in Oswald's had christian feeling about it (wings - angels, sunrise - link with God and Jesus and light) whilst Dickinson's was really quite strange - with the me and immortality bit in the first stanza yet later she describes a grave as a house - living in a grave doesn't really support the ideas associated with immortality. I mentioned the idea of transience with regard to the moments described - the schoolchildren playing at recess must have all grown up and died as there was the line which went something like several centuries have passed, whilst the moment of sunrise was conciously a memory that had been preserved and I wrote about how the memory had been immortalised in poetry. blargh, this is all sounding horribly incoherant, I have yet to get dressed and I start work at 1. f.m.l.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone else think it's weird that they ask for your DOB on the exam? I mean why don't they just look it up on UCAS if they wan't to know?!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sadie-kiki)
    it was time, transience and mortality.
    Also I have to leave for work pretty soon, so I guess you'll be alone till the kids get back :p:
    I can barely remember what I wrote - I did a lot about the choices of Form - Dickinson's there was almost a juxtaposition between it and the subject matter, whilst Oswald's reflected the emotion and was more complex. I wrote a lot about ambiguity - I couldn't quite make up my mind whether the old couple were dead, whilst Dickinson almost euphemised death - I did a bit of comparison based on that. I wrote about the nature of immortality; I think I ended up deciding that the light imagery, use of language etc in Oswald's had christian feeling about it (wings - angels, sunrise - link with God and Jesus and light) whilst Dickinson's was really quite strange - with the me and immortality bit in the first stanza yet later she describes a grave as a house - living in a grave doesn't really support the ideas associated with immortality. I mentioned the idea of transience with regard to the moments described - the schoolchildren playing at recess must have all grown up and died as there was the line which went something like several centuries have passed, whilst the moment of sunrise was conciously a memory that had been preserved and I wrote about how the memory had been immortalised in poetry. blargh, this is all sounding horribly incoherant, I have yet to get dressed and I start work at 1. f.m.l.
    That sounds really good!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AisAis)
    I think I find it quite hard to concentrate on reading unfamilar texts for a long time, so I trailed off as I went through the booklet and skimmed the Milton and didn't even try the Shakespeare. :o:

    So the fact Oswald was extract A counted for a lot.


    By the way, does DDN meant anything to you? :ninja:
    Oh, I suppose that's true about the first one sticking with you. After an initial high when I saw the subject, I skimmed over all the extracts very quickly to start and thought "Oh no, I want to do any of these ". After looking over the first one again for a bit, I went straight to the Dickens piece and saw there was actually loads to use there, huge sigh of relief. Then I went to Milton by instinct, I think because the poem I had to analyse in my interview last year was Milton, and quite liked that too. I looked over the Shakespeare quickly, but to be honest my brain was starting to spazz out by then and the text just felt like a wall, so I got on with writing.

    DDN...I don't think so...I feel like it should? :p: I'm curious now.

    Edit: Man, I'm slow! Dance.net. Yep . I'm not that Rubberband though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Wow, I did something completely different to everyone else. XD

    I compared Milton, Dickinson and Conrad. It seemed interesting, I used the sub theme of religion to compare their own interpretations of time and mortality. The language and structure of all three seemed to suggest time was meaningless to them, it was mortality that was of more consequence.

    But let's face it, I've probably failed. XD
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Also did Dickinson and Oswald. Can't remember anything I wrote (apart from waffling a lot about window imagery and the natural rhythms of birth and decay) but I think it went pretty well.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1960)
    Also did Dickinson and Oswald. Can't remember anything I wrote (apart from waffling a lot about window imagery and the natural rhythms of birth and decay) but I think it went pretty well.

    haha, I was like "this poem doesn't make much sense so I think it must be using lots of symbols. Maybe we could paraphrase the opening stanza as follows, and this then opens up much of the rest of the poem". :rofl:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    AisAis, that's kind of what I did! Except I really liked the Oswald poem. Am I the only one?

    Also, crap, totally didn't get that the bit in Dickinson's poem about the house was really describing a grave. I did, however, talk about poetry's ability to transcend time and preserve moments... oh god it's all coming back to me now...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Tricky, tricky, tricky. I can't even join in this discussion--the passages for us Americans were different. I wound up comparing three pieces of prose by MacNeice, Eliot and Shakespeare.

    How much did everyone write? I got out two and a half pages, but I may be slow. Withal I found the most difficult thing to be organizing. My notes were pretty scratchy and brief (a few lines), even though you're supposed to spend half an hour making them. I spent that time looking at the poems instead.

    I gleaned from the instructions that they weren't looking for an incredibly organized essay, merely one that flowed and demonstrated aptitude in comprehension and close reading. I dashed off an introductory paragraph about how the joy of transient moments versus the despair of eternity result in an internal conflict of the narrator/character, then got right down to business showing I could understand the intricacies (at one point I explained why MacNeice said "hardened" instead of "hard"). To that end I also didn't write a concluding paragraph, just sort of ended on a logical point. I was rather weak at first but it progressively improved as I read the works over again (and over again). I chose the three poems because it was less text haha.

    Anyway, just take note of what the Balliol English tutor said: "We know you only have an hour and a half."
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rubberband)
    That topic was SO much better than last year.

    I used extracts D and E, the Dickens and the Milton one. I can't remember in detail now what I wrote, but it hinged around man's desire to control time, through objectifying and personalising it in the Dickens one (also mentioned something about the prizing it over nature bit with belief in our progress as a species tying in with the fear of time), and talked about the nature of afterlife, and over-zealous belief in it highlighting fear, with the Milton one. Obviously (hopefully?) it sort of made more sense in the exam than that garbled sentence.

    Oh, and I always finish these things with so much time to spare - so I forced myself to chill out at the beginning and write nice and neatly and slowly. In the end I was about 15 minutes short on time, so I had to reeeeeally rush over Milton. Boo .

    P.S. I hated extract A. Did nobody else :p:?
    i did dickens and milton too, although i seem to have written completely different stuff, which is a bit disorienting in a way since yours seems to be very good. i tried to highlight the materialism/idealism divide between the two and their joint reliance on "time" as a concept to kind of anchor each text, with milton trying to put forward his metaphysical image of the afterlife and dickens instead trying to create a very humble portrait of a man living in 'reality' with no suggestion of anything spiritual at all really.

    no idea if i got it across though, it's not unusual for me to fail that bit completely. also thought that the dickens' link to "mortality" was very tenuous at best which was quite annoying.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ITISCLARISSAHESAID)
    i did dickens and milton too, although i seem to have written completely different stuff, which is a bit disorienting in a way since yours seems to be very good. i tried to highlight the materialism/idealism divide between the two and their joint reliance on "time" as a concept to kind of anchor each text, with milton trying to put forward his metaphysical image of the afterlife and dickens instead trying to create a very humble portrait of a man living in 'reality' with no suggestion of anything spiritual at all really.

    no idea if i got it across though, it's not unusual for me to fail that bit completely. also thought that the dickens' link to "mortality" was very tenuous at best which was quite annoying.
    :five: Good taste! I think it sounds as though you tied the two together far more strongly than I did...mine was a bit "Right I think this about you, okay, done, I think this about you, meager conclusion tying it all together." I commented on the differences in spirituality between the two also, so that's comforting.

    I took the materialism in the Dickens one to be about permanence, and extracted that to be about mortality.

    Did you kind feel that the Milton one was a little...insincere? Or did I just want to read that? I thought he was taking the piss a little bit with his effusions. I can't remember what the last line was but I remember using that to underline that in the end!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sadie-kiki)
    it was time, transience and mortality.
    Also I have to leave for work pretty soon, so I guess you'll be alone till the kids get back :p:
    I can barely remember what I wrote - I did a lot about the choices of Form - Dickinson's there was almost a juxtaposition between it and the subject matter, whilst Oswald's reflected the emotion and was more complex. I wrote a lot about ambiguity - I couldn't quite make up my mind whether the old couple were dead, whilst Dickinson almost euphemised death - I did a bit of comparison based on that. I wrote about the nature of immortality;
    Dickinson's was really quite strange - with the me and immortality bit in the first stanza yet later she describes a grave as a house - living in a grave doesn't really support the ideas associated with immortality. I mentioned the idea of transience with regard to the moments described - the schoolchildren playing at recess must have all grown up and died as there was the line which went something like several centuries have passed, whilst the moment of sunrise was conciously a memory that had been preserved and I wrote about how the memory had been immortalised in poetry. blargh, this is all sounding horribly incoherant, I have yet to get dressed and I start work at 1. f.m.l.
    i wrote far too much on the dickinson.:o: i saw it as a journey, with the rythm possibly mirrioring the hooves of the horses drawing the carriage. at first she underestimates death, not fearing her mortality (she seems apologetic by the syntax in the opening line), but as it goes on she realises its implications. from a bold rhyme in stanza one, there was only a pararhyme in stanza 2 and stanza 3 nothing. i saw this as realisation creeping in, and culminated in the opening line of stanza 4 were the rythm awkwardly ended on a double stress, missing a foot. then said that she still struggled to come terms, tried to see the grave as a house etc
    i compared this to the conrad piece where mr verloc similarily didnt take mortality seriously. he see's the knife ec early on, and there seems time, repetition of 'leisurely', but he merely fantasises about possible escapes rather than acting. he too is too late, only being able to sigh a 'don't'. the languid style of writing seemed to mirror his mood, no short sentances to suggest desperation etc.

    main thing was they both dealt with mortality in offhand ways due to style of writing by conrad and the form vs content of dickinson

    no idea if it was a good idea....:rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey y'all.
    I haven't commented on this before but I've been reading it and stealing your thoughts both before and after the exam.
    Just thought I'd leave my mark and explain what I wrote.

    I did extract A, the Dickens and the Shakespeare. I compared humanity's subjective view of mortality as signified by the window in A, i.e. they were straining to look out of the window and the medium of the glass prevented them from truly knowing what the sunrise (truth) looked like, with an objective view of death and decay. In A, the couple's 'slow walk' to the window was society's steady progress toward enlightenment philosophy and modern democracy. And the window presented a natural bottleneck that could only be escaped from by death (therefore linking it to existentialism).

    With Dickens, that bastion of Victorian liberty, I used to explain how his barber's preference of discovering the time by the clock rather than the sun, represented man's urge to believe his own subjective view over objectivity.

    Using Shakespeare I explained how Ulysses' retort to Achilles (that he should not worry about valour and human emotions because man only cares for the present) to compare how humanity's need for personal, immediate satisfaction was a stumbling block to societal progression and much alike to the window.

    Thoughts please, honestly, because no one at my underfunded state school could talk with me about it so I have no idea if that even made sense.

    Peace up, A town, down.

    x
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oh! such a dastardly plan)
    Wow, I did something completely different to everyone else. XD

    I compared Milton, Dickinson and Conrad. It seemed interesting, I used the sub theme of religion to compare their own interpretations of time and mortality. The language and structure of all three seemed to suggest time was meaningless to them, it was mortality that was of more consequence.

    But let's face it, I've probably failed. XD
    Not so completely different; I compared Milton, Conrad and Dickens. And wrote about time. So, how Conrad quantified time in terms of 'limb movements', how Dickens' clock represented time (might have made a bit of a hash of that in retrospect) and of how in Milton, the constraints of time that existed in the other two didn't exist. Think it all came together alright.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,631

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year

University open days

  1. University of Oxford
    All undergraduate colleges and departments Undergraduate
    Fri, 14 Sep '18
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.