The Lit Formula: Playing the Game of Lit- Part 1

I'm one of those people who just wants to pass Lit, but I seem to be doing pretty well in it lately so I think I might actually be in a reasonable position to give pointers to other people who just want to pass.

One of the most frustrating things with Lit is that it's not that obvious what it is that you need to do to pass and what you can do to improve. With maths and science subjects, you can always just do more questions to help build your understanding and in some cases just rote-learn the content that you need (the latter doesn't really work for me as I'm blessed with a terrible memory for rote-learning- yes, I mostly see it as a blessing- but it might work for some other people). Lit seems rather subjective, though, and sometimes the comments you get only really seem relevant to that one particular essay. So how does one improve their Lit marks?

Well, in Lit, just like any other subject, if your aim is simply to pass, then it helps to just learn the rules of the game and work from there. Normally I condone this somewhat reductionist approach to learning- you should be learning to learn, not just for the Curriculum Council's stupid little game- but an approach like this might be what you need to jump-start your understanding and increase your capacity to learn this subject.

That's enough waffling. Now for actual content.

First up: what are the rules of the game?

Let's look at the marking key. It's divided into 5 sections: quality of reading, engagement with task, expression of ideas, use of key concepts/literary terms and use of supporting evidence.

• Quality of reading is all about "[presenting] a detailed and critical reading of the text" and " [commenting] astutely on language and/or generic conventions and/or context." This is where the bulk of the marks lies. I'm not 100% sure what all this educational gobbledygook means (wow, Google Chrome doesn't mark "gobbledygook" as being incorrectly spelled), but I think it's all about content: how detailed and insightful is your response, and how much does it tie to relevant features of the text, like language, generic conventions and context?
• Engagement with task: This one is kind of weirdly worded. I think all they want here is for you to answer the question, or, as my maths teacher puts it, ATBQ (Answer The Bloody Question). Your essay also needs to have "focus and direction" to get a good mark in this category- I guess this means that your entire essay needs to be relevant (focus) and well-structured (direction).
• Expression of ideas: This is basically about how well you can get your ideas onto paper and how clear you can make them. You can get the full 6 marks of this category if you can write in a "sophisticated and lucid style" but if you, like me, like to play it safe and just be clear and simple, you can still net 4-5 marks here. Structure also helps here too.
• Use of key concepts/literary terms: This is where you get marks for using fancy terms. But you can't just use fancy terms- you have to use them well, and at least look like you know what you're talking about. (Unfortunately, it's not so easy to bluff in Lit if you don't know what you're talking about. English teachers are very good at reading between the lines. That's why they're English teachers.)
• Use of supporting evidence: Quotes! Quotes galore! And also other relevant examples and stuff too. When you use supporting evidence, however, you need to make sure that it fits in to what you are talking about and that the quote kind of "flows" in with everything else you are writing.

So to recap: Answer the question with the most insightful response you can muster, put in some quotes and literary terms and try and express all your ideas clearly if not in a "sophisticated and lucid manner" and then you'll be on the road to some good marks in Lit!

Of course, it's not that easy, which is why I'm going to break things down even further.

Engaging with the Task: Answering the Bloody Question

Answering the question sounds like such a simple task, but it's something so often forgotten about in the quest to write a good essay. Remember that you're not just writing an essay: you're providing an answer or a response to whatever's being asked of you. Sometimes, though, the question isn't all too easy to understand, or it's written in such academic gobbledygook discourse (a key Lit term!) that the question is obscured. Let's take a look at how to dissect these questions.

The first step is finding the 2 or 3 main parts to the question. Nearly all questions have a few main parts: one relating to course concepts like genre or intertextuality, and another relating to ideas. Normally the questions are broad- the exam writers don't know what texts you've studied, after all. Normally the question will point to a specific convention, or a specific idea, or occasionally both. (Of course, some questions don't point to anything specific, but most questions of this type that I've seen are better left avoided unless you have a text that really matches the question.)

The first sample question in my course handbook is "How can knowledge of the context of a text's production help readers to make meanings from it?" This question relates to the specific course concept of context, and then points towards the broad idea of the making of meaning. In answering this question, you would have to talk mainly about context, but then you would be able to (read: have to) push context towards whatever meanings you want to make. When planning, you could perhaps go paragraph by paragraph according to different meanings made, or you could go paragraph by paragraph according to different contextual influences on the text.

A question in my course handbook of the opposite type is "Literature may be read as a form of social and/or cultural history. Discuss, referring to one or more literary texts you have studied." Here, course concepts aren't mentioned at all, but remember this- you ALWAYS have to talk about them, regardless of whether the question mentions them or not. In other words, while you must talk about the social and/or cultural history, you cannot just talk about the social and/or cultural history on its own without talking about how it relates to the text, otherwise what would be the point of Literature as a subject?

And of course sometimes you get questions that specify both course concept and idea, like, "How do intertextual readings contribute to the circulation or construction of value systems in a society?" Here you have your specific course concept- intertextuality- and your specific idea- the circulation or construction of value systems.

(And then there are horrible questions like the 2012 paper's "Works of literature invite us to experience the lives of others. Discuss with reference to one or more works you have studied." My suggestion is to run far away from these questions as it's pretty iffy. Whatever you do, though, don't do what the weakest students did, which was simply write essays fantasising about themselves as handmaids or whatever.)

So, in a nutshell: find out what 1 or 2 specific things they're asking you to address, and make sure you address those things all throughout your essay. Also, make sure that you talk about course concepts like genre, intertextuality, language and generic conventions, regardless of whether the question specifically asked for them or not.

Structure and Logic: They Have Their Place in Lit Too

Structure is pretty important in an essay. It helps organise your ideas and make your essay easier for your marker to follow, which in turn leads to better marks. Yay!

Essays are pretty structured pieces of writing, and they're all held together by a single thread: your thesis. A thesis statement is a sentence or two that sums up pretty much everything that you're going to talk about. In your body paragraphs, you expand on whatever it was that you were talking about in your thesis. Finally, your conclusion reiterates what you were talking about in your essay. Yes, it sounds like you're repeating yourself a lot, but it helps to get your point across.

Here's a brief stupid example to explain the structure of an essay. Let's say that I want to argue that clarinets are wonderful musical instruments. To do so, I'd have to come up with a few reasons why clarinets are so amazing:

1. They have a large pitch and dynamic range.
2. They are versatile and can play a wide variety of musical styles.
3. They are very portable.

Then I would incorporate all of this into my thesis: "I believe that clarinets are wonderful musical instruments due to their large pitch and dynamic range, their ability to play a wide variety of musical styles and their portability."

The thesis would normally be part of an introduction paragraph rather than just a stand-alone sentence, but if you are struggling to find something to write in a 60 minute close reading, or if you are writing an extended response for another subject that doesn't require a lot of eloquence, writing the thesis alone might suffice. (You can always write a proper introduction later if you have time- just make sure that it's clearly marked.) An introduction paragraph should just introduce what you are talking about, including uncommon key terms (i.e. not in the course syllabus) relevant to your subject matter. For example, in this particular non-essay about clarinets, you could introduce the clarinet by providing basic facts (e.g. it's a woodwind instrument, it has a single reed, it came into use in the Classical period) before launching into the thesis. I personally like to have the thesis at the end of the introduction paragraph because it comes as a sort of "climax" to the intro, but you can always have the thesis at the beginning if that floats your boat. Just make sure your thesis statement is obviously a thesis statement.

In each body paragraph, I would then expand on each of the points. For example, for the first point, I could provide the following expansion:

1. Clarinets have a large pitch range. They can play from a low E below the treble stave to a high G on several leger lines above the treble stave (standard range). It is possible to make the clarinet play even higher.
2. Clarinets have a large dynamic range. They can go from being very soft such that they can be used in "fading away" effects like in Frank Ticheli's Sanctuary, or they can be loud enough to play solos in orchestral music.

Note that for each point, I've provided my statement, plus some evidence and explanation. There's an acronym for this: SEE, or Statement, Evidence, Explanation. An alternative acronym is PEE, or Point, Evidence, Explanation. As one of my Year 10 English teachers put it, "Try and PEE several times in each paragraph!" (And make sure you have a basin or something beneath you. Umm.) Seriously, though, just make sure that you go into as much detail as need be, and back up everything you say with concrete evidence.

So how does this tie into a Lit essay? Well, that's easy. Your thesis will obviously be different because it'll be all about generic conventions and how they do this or that or the other, and then all throughout your body paragraphs you'll be breaking down your argument and providing evidence and explanations for everything. I'm not the best Lit student so I feel kind of tentative providing a Lit example of my own, but here's an example from my Close Reading on the Semester 1 exam.

Remember what I said before about each question having 2 parts: generic conventions and ideas? Well, make sure to address both of those parts in your thesis statement, even if the question was as vague as the good ol' Close Reading "present a reading." Here is the thesis statement from my Close Reading:

"The extract from Bereft can be read as a Romantic text exploring the beauty and power of nature as well as a Realist text that provides the truth "as it is" and comments on different societal issues through the use of imagery, structure and intertextuality."

Yes, it's kind of long-winded and maybe I should have broken it down into two sentences. But hey, it does the job... somewhat.

Stuff to notice here:

• "can be read"- in this Lit course you have to use words like "can be read," "may be read," "can be seen" etc. as a way of letting the markers know that you know that there's more than one correct way to read a text, because there is. (Why else would people complain about the subjectivity of English so much?)
• Generic conventions- as you can see, I pointed my thesis directly towards imagery, structure and intertextuality.
• Ideas- the ideas I pointed towards are Romanticism and Realism.

So basically, when you write your thesis statement, you have to make sure that you make your reading contingent (for lack of a better word) and you have to include both generic conventions and ideas. Try and tie your reading to one of the course concepts because the markers like that.

As for the body paragraphs, you can divide them up in different ways: you might choose to have a paragraph on each of the generic conventions, or a paragraph on each idea, depending on what best fits your argument. Sometimes it might even be best to talk about the text chronologically (e.g. stanza by stanza in the case of a poem). No matter which structure you choose, however, you have to stay close to the text and talk about those generic conventions! After all, this is an essay primarily about literature and not an essay primarily about determinism or Romanticism or whatever ideas you're talking about.

In this particular case, I divided my essay up by ideas, writing a couple of paragraphs about Romantic ideas and a couple of paragraphs about Realist ideas.

Which reminds me. Each paragraph should start with a topic sentence that sums up what that particular paragraph is going to be about. (Yes, you do a hell of a lot of summing up stuff in essays.) Making a topic sentence is just like making a thesis statement except it's a bit narrower because you're only talking about one of the points that you made in your thesis. For example, in my first paragraph about Romantic ideas, my topic sentence is "The extract can be read as a Romantic text portraying the beauty and power of nature through imagery and structure." Once again, it's tying to generic conventions and ideas- but only one particular idea in this case, since we're trying to narrow things down a bit so that we can go into further detail.

That topic sentence was my statement. Now I need some evidence and explanation for how structure and imagery help to portray Romantic ideas about the beauty and power of nature. Here is an example of evidence and explanation for each point:

• (Structure)
  Evidence: A whole paragraph near the beginning of the extract is dedicated to simply discussing the myriad of creatures that live in the ocean.
  Explanation: This highlights the importance of nature through this paragraph's prominent place in the text.
• (Imagery)
  Evidence: Visual imagery- "Birds [bathing] in the rainbows"
  Explanation: This is a peaceful and beautiful image as bathing is a calming task, as well as one that cleanses and makes one more beautiful, while rainbows have connotations of beauty and happiness.

I have several other examples in my paragraph. What ties them together is, of course, the way I choose to express my ideas- I'll briefly talk about this later.

After writing several body paragraphs detailing pretty much everything you wish to say, it's now time to write a conclusion summing up everything that you have written. I'll be honest with you here- I have no idea how to write conclusions. They always end up looking like my introductions. I think what you're meant to do is mainly just sum up everything that you've said, but at the same time you could hint at how your argument could be applicable to the real world (e.g. if you're talking about the patriarchal society as portrayed in Ibsen's A Doll's House you could argue that some elements of this society can still be seen in parts of the world today). You just have to be careful that you don't introduce too much new stuff. In any case I'm not very good at writing conclusions so I can't give too much advice here.

This post is getting quite long, so I'm going to round it off here and write a Part 2 about key terms and how to use quotes, among other things.