Are you a slow writer who struggles to write down all of the information that you hear in the listening audio clip? Have you ever been in a situation where the next sentence in the audio comes up way before you finish writing down information from the previous sentence? If yes, then this blog is for you! 

You want to write down as much useful information as possible in a short period of time during your VCE EAL exam, so it is very useful to implement a system of techniques that works well for you personally. Here are some ideas and suggestions that you may want to use to increase the speed of your note-taking. 

1. Use Different Coloured Pens or Keys for Different Speakers

Under the stress of exams/SACs, you might lose track of which speaker is talking. This is likely to happen if the speakers are of the same sex or they sound similar to each other (from personal experience, I had a listening task with 3 female speakers!) A simple way to remind yourself of who is speaking is to take side notes with different coloured pens and/or symbols for different speakers. 

‍For example:

If in the audio: Lisa says, ‘The weather is lovely’ and Cici replies ‘Let’s go for a run’. We can write side notes using L (for Lisa) and C for Cici, which may look like: 

L ‘weather is lovely’

C 'Let's go for a run’ 

Or, you could use a red pen for Lisa and blue pen for Cici. 

2. Use Signs & Symbols to Replace Words

Using symbols is an efficient way to increase the speed of writing and ultimately increase the amount of information that you can record. Here are some examples of symbols I have used in the past and the meanings I gave them. 

→ Leading to/Stimulate/Result in

↑ Increase   

↓ Decrease  

$ Money  

↔ Swap  

⇆ Exchangeable 

☓ Cross/Incorrect   

& And

@ At 

= Equal 

/ Or

∵ Because 

∴ Therefore OR Consequently 

?  Uncertain/Possibly/Disapprove  

> Greater than/More than

< Less than/Fewer than

# Number 

~ Approximately OR Around OR Similar to OR Not Equal OR Not the same as

∆ Change  

◦ Degree 

c/b Could be 

- Negative/Before 

+ Positive/Plus

3.Use Abbreviations

Use abbreviations that work for you. There is no right or wrong here as the ‘blank space for scribbles’ will not be marked. Abbreviations can take the form of short notes or letters...you get to be creative here!

You can also choose to keep only the essential vowels and consonants in words. Or, leave out the double consonants and silent letters. The following list contains some abbreviations for common words or phases:

Answer = answ

About = abt

Morning = am 

Afternoon = pm

As soon as possible = asap 

Before = bef/b4

Between = bt

Because = bc

Common = com

Condition = cond

Diagnosis = diag

Regular = reg

You = u

Notes = nts

To = t

Take = tk

Very = v

With respect to = wrt 

With = w/

Will be = w/b 

Within = w/i 

Without = w/o

Here are some examples of how you might use abbreviations and symbols:

Example 1

‘You should remember to take notes in classes’ 

Can be abbreviated as:

‘U shld  rmbr t tk nts in cls’

Example 2 

‘Gidon has a rare blood condition which means he visits the hospital quite regularly. Since his diagnosis, Gidon’s family paid more than ten thousand dollars just to visit the hospital. Gidon initiated a petition that advocates for lowering the fees for parking in hospitals and putting a limit on how much the hospital can charge.’

Can be abbreviated as:

• G has rare blood condi → he  visits hosp. v. reg.

I've used G as an abbreviation for Gidon, and the arrow here represents that the stuff on the left side of the arrow (i.e. his rare blood condition), led to the events on the right side of the arrow (i.e. regular hospital visits). 

• Since his diag. →  G’s fam paid  >$10K to visit hosp.

Here I’ve also used the arrow, indicating that the stuff on the left side of the arrow (i.e. his diagnosis), led to the events on the right side of the arrow (i.e. Gidon's family paid more than 10 thousand dollars). I’ve also used  >$10K to indicate that the amount Gidon’s family paid is more than 10 thousand dollars.

• G → petition → advocates for  ↓ $ parking & limit how much hosp. can charge

Using my symbols and abbreviations above, it’s your turn to work out how I’ve abbreviated this ;)

---

I hope these tips and tricks will assist you with note taking during the EAL listening SACs and exam. If you would like more practice on the listening section, check out the following blogs!

EAL Listening Practice and Resources

EAL Listening Practice

Tips on EAL Listening

‍

Charlie’s Country is an Australian drama film directed by Rolf de Heer, starring David Gulpilil. The linear film, co-written by de Heer and Gulpilil, tells the story of Charlie, a middle-aged Aboriginal man living in the town of Ramingining. The audience follows Charlie as he sets off to reconnect with his Indigenous origins; choosing to abandon urbanised society, Charlie flees into the bush to live by his “Mother country”. Much to his demise, Charlie subsequently becomes ill and is admitted to hospital in Darwin. After discharging himself from the hospital, Charlie is quickly arrested for assaulting a policeman. Charlie serves time in prison for his crime and the film’s final scenes show Charlie, free and mentoring young Aboriginal boys in their native cultural traditions. As the audience follows Charlie’s everyday encounters, they gain insight into the harsh realities faced by Aboriginals in modern-day Australia. Through his individual plight for survival amidst illness and poverty, de Heer presents profound political commentaries on this very pertinent social issue, spanning decades in Australian history.

The film's critical acclaim upon its release in 2013 was the impetus in prompting conversations and debates about the politics of Indigenous Australians. De Heer’s depiction of this remote community grappling with issues as a result of government-imposed law serves to capture the oppression and deeply ingrained racism that continues to persist.

Tracks is one Australian woman’s survival narrative. The 1980 autobiographical memoir by Robyn Davidson, recounts her courageous 1700 miles trek across Australia, beginning from Central Australia towards the Indian ocean. In the effort to escape the monotony of her daily life, Davidson travels to her first destination -- Alice Springs -- in 1973 to start preparations. In the 2 years she spends there, she learns how to train camels and live minimally, the former proving to be a challenge. Despite her vehement will to refuse any kind of donation or financial help, Davidson eventually accepts a writing deal in partnership with National Geographic, providing the much-needed funds to confirm her departure. It's through this deal that she meets Rick Smolan, whom under the conditions of her deal has been recruited to photograph this journey - an unsettling compromise for Davidson which she ruminates on frequently in the novel. With her beloved dog Diggity and her camels, Davidson traverses the Australian landscape, discovering more about herself, her country and the people. 

Fundamentally, this book is as much about Davidson’s internal transformation and personal frontiers as it is about exposing the colonial and masculine ethos that permeates Australian history.

Themes (Similarities and Differences)

At LSG, we use the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy to help us easily find points of similarity and difference. This is particularly important when it comes to essay writing, because you want to know that you're coming up with unique comparative points (compared to the rest of the Victorian cohort!). I don't discuss this strategy in detail here, but if you're interested, check out my How To Write A Killer Comparative. I use this strategy throughout my discussion of themes here and in a later section, Sample Essay Plan.

Isolation and Alienation

Charlie, drawing on Gulpilil's own experiences, becomes profoundly alienated from his Ramingining community to the extent where he serves no major function in the community life. Charlie is alienated both physically and figuratively, not only does he live in a makeshift hut on the outskirts of town, but he is separated from the Aboriginal community in this town and resents the fact that white Australians have assumed power over his land. He is evidently neglected from the wider society, which causes much of the internal and external conflict he experiences in the film, an ordeal which many within the Indigenous minorities can empathise with. 

In his efforts to escape his life within the confines of the intervention, Charlie sees isolation and social rebellion as a mechanism to rediscover his Indigenous roots, spending time in nature to fulfil his journey for self-discovery and to gain the freedom he’s lost. Removing himself from a town permeated by imperial powers provides him with an opportunity to restore his lost sense of self-autonomy. De Heer is intending to reveal the difficulty of assimilation for Aboriginal Australians. He also highlights the importance of human connection and relational harmony for individuals.

“Do you mind if I call you Charlie? I have difficulty pronouncing foreign names.” “Now I’m a foreigner?” (Charlie and the Darwin doctor) 

“It's isolated, it's remote.” (Policeman Luke on Ramingining)

“I work for them catching criminals, they don’t pay me.” (Charlie)

“I don’t know what’s wrong with him… shaming us.” (Pete on Charlie)

Robyn Davidson views complete isolation as a way to detach herself from the commercialism and expectations of modern-day Australia, to connect with nature and to challenge her own beliefs of herself. For her, complete solitude in this journey is a private and personal gesture designed to intentionally preserve the sanctity of the trip. While Rick Smolan’s company appears benign, Davidson’s abrasive attitude towards him as well as her reluctance in ‘selling’ her story is particularly revealing of her attempt to maintain the subjectivity of the trip. The act of breaching this solitude is what Davidson sees as an egregious debasement of the sacredness of the journey, allowing it to be objectified by the eyes of the public. In addition to this, isolation signifies liberation and freedom from a society laden with rigid expectations, Smolan acts as a constant reminder of these external responsibilities. Davidson experiences alienation from the wider society, being a confident, decisive woman trekking independently and defying the limitations imposed on her sex. She also repeatedly expresses her sense of alienation when entering Aboriginal communities and although she is sensitive to the impression she gives, she acknowledges her persistent feeling as an outsider. Davidson is aware of the divide between these two cultures that have resulted from a history of inequality and oppression. In Tracks, Davidson also demonstrates the need for meaningful connections, however she sources this from her animal companions and nature.

“My aloneness was a treasure which I guarded like a jewel... but like everything [it] had to follow the laws of change.” (p. 40)

“No more loved ones to care about, no more ties, no more duties, no more people needing you to be one thing or another, no more conundrums, no more politics, just you and the desert baby.” (p. 94)

“I could never enter their reality, [I] would always be a whitefella tourist on the outside looking in.” (p. 146)

“I could not be with the Aboriginal people without being a clumsy intruder.” (p. 146)

Conformity

Charlie’s displacement from his community is the driving force behind his decision to return to the Aboriginal way of life. De Heer uses this depiction of Charlie, to serve as a wider embodiment of the difficulty for the Indigenous people to assimilate and conform to the western lifestyle. After witnessing the limitations he faces under the ‘whitefella’ laws in Ramingining, it is Charlie who first attempts to escape his community. He repeatedly rejects the life of subordination and compliance under the government laws, which as shown in the film has forced many of the Indigenous people to neglect their own traditions and way of life (for example, they must now eat unhealthy fast foods to survive and go through school). Charlie’s individualistic expressions seen through crafting a spear and going hunting are actively suppressed by the white authority, leaving him to conclude that the only way to fully exercise his personal agency is to live in the Australian wilderness, alone. His act of abandoning the car with his belongings and parting with almost nothing in his possession is significant in demonstrating his defiance of the imposition of western culture and his journey for self-reliance. De Heer depicts how conforming to an oppressive society is detrimental and praises the self-transformative effects of embracing individualism rather than blindly conforming.

"Live the old way… …going to my Mother Country.’"(Charlie)

“F--- those thieving…white bastards.” (Charlie)

“The kids go to school now. They don’t care.” (Charlie)

“Why did you come here? From far away… stealing people’s stuff! Is this your land?... F---ing bastards.” (Charlie)

“I’m free now. I have my own supermarket! And this is my country! I can dance with it!” (Charlie)

Robyn Davidson’s decision to leave her normal life in Queensland to cross the Australian desertland is one that becomes the subject of much scrutiny and doubt. Her bold, dauntless approach towards pursuing this journey, specifically as a single, young woman was radically counter-cultural to the perception of women in the 1970s as delicate and docile individuals. Davidson’s indifference and somewhat dismissive attitude towards the derogatory remarks and reductive characterisations are indicative of her acknowledgement of the unjustified prejudice that permeates Australian culture. Additionally, Davidson’s assertive personality and commitment to travelling in the wilderness alone is ultimately an establishment to herself as an autonomous woman, rebelling against the traditional conventions of marriage, motherhood and domesticity that was previously expected of her. Ultimately, Davidson strongly asserts the need for resistance, particularly where there is the expectation for conformity, as well as her experience, is revealing of the cleansing and liberating feelings of embracing individualism rather than conforming.

“(Dropping eyes to chest level). "Where’s yer old man?" "I don't have an old man." (p. 5)

“I was self-protective, suspicious and defensive and I was also aggressively ready to pounce on anyone who looked like they might be going to give a hard time.” (p. 34)

“It was essential for me to develop beyond the archetypal female creature who from birth had been trained to be sweet, pliable, forgiving, compassionate and door-mattish.” (p. 34)

“I wanted to… unclog my brain of all extraneous debris, not be protected, to be stripped of all social crutches, not to be hampered by any outside interference.” (p. 91)

Belonging and Identity

The laconic and monotonous pace of the film is suggestive of a more deeply rooted issue surrounding the identity distortions experienced by Aboriginals, even to the present day. This depiction acts as a personification of the widespread troubles of Indigenous Australians -- the deep struggle between submitting to the institutions of the ‘whitefella’ intervention and clinging to what is left of their traditional heritage, often rendering them feeling separated from both cultures. The mundane nature of his daily activities conveys the social incongruence between Charlie’s struggle to live sufficiently as a ‘traditional’ elder or as a ‘modern’ Australian, finding himself disconnected from both. This internal battle is psychologically taxing for Charlie, as he encounters many contradictions: receiving welfare payments, only to have to give them away to his family, and so he goes without food and later becomes hungry, only to be denied the opportunity to hunt for his own food. Fulfilling one culture means rejecting the other, and freedom in one means rebellion in the other. Thus, Charlie sees social transgression as his only choice of refashioning his own identity. De Heer reveals how freely establishing a secure sense of identity and belonging in their culture is critical in the lives of these individuals, however, the long-term damage that western society has inflicted has made this almost impossible.

“You’ve got a job, and you’ve got a house…on my land. Where’s my house? Where’s my job?” (Charlie)

“We need to teach them… the traditional ways.” (Charlie’s friend) 

“I’ve been away fishing, now I’m home. I’m eating well. It’s my own supermarket.” (Charlie)

“I’m free now. I have my own supermarket! And this is my country! I can dance with it!” (Charlie)

In Tracks, Davidson’s attempt to escape the responsibilities and social pressures to immerse herself in nature is ultimately a journey of self-discovery; to define her own identity irrespective of the expectations imposed on her by the 1970s society. As a solitary female, challenging the restrictions of her sex and exposing herself to unpredictable surroundings, she can curate her own identity as a progressive, post-colonial feminist, seizing and capitalising on the autonomy she has. This endeavour allows Davidson to undergo a form of self-transformation, a search for meaning for herself and others, what she describes as a “desocializing process -- the sloughing of, like a snakeskin”. Furthermore, Davidson is determined to rediscover her place in respect to the desertland, educating herself about the native biodiversity and most importantly, the native people. Although Davidson recognises that she will always be considered a ‘whitefella’, she finds a sense of fulfilment and belonging in engaging with and observing the rural Aboriginal communities. She demonstrates a deep understanding of the distorted identity and loss of belonging for the Aborigines at the hands of imperial white forces and is sensitive to the damage that has been inflicted. Above all, Davidson gains a renewed, stable sense of identity and belonging through her resistance to the imperial Australian racist mentality, challenging the male-orientated culture. However, she is also confronted by the reality of this breakdown of identity within the Aboriginal communities.

“This was my first home, where I felt such a sense of relief and belonging that I needed nothing and no one.” (p. 40)

“From the day the thought came into my head ‘I’m going to enter a desert with camels’, to the day I felt the preparations to be completed, I had built some intangible but magical for myself…” (p. 95)

“I wanted to understand so much… I melted into a feeling of belonging. They were letting me into their world. They asked me if I wanted to dance.” (p. 145)

“Once dispossessed of this land, ceremonial life deteriorates, people lose their strength, meaning and identity.” (p. 167)‍‍

Connection to Nature

The significance of nature to the Aboriginal people is at the core of this film. Charlie embodies this connection through his escape to the Australian wilderness. This first acts as a fresh alternative to the restrictive, repressive lifestyle within his government-intervened community, given. It's an opportunity to rebel against the western lifestyle and restore his traditional way of life, which leaves him feeling free, happy and powerful. However, his struggle to adjust to this change is indicative of the corruption of the intrinsic link between the people and the land. The harmonious, symbiotic relationship that the Indigenous people once had with the land has deteriorated; having been essentially poisoned through the introduction of a progressive white society. As much as Charlie tries to balance elements of both cultures by hunting and quitting smoking, it becomes apparent to him returning to where ‘[he] was born’, is the only way to rediscover his sense of self and truly experience freedom. Ultimately, like much of the wider Indigenous people, Charlie’s unable to fully abandon the constraints of white society and has become dependent. De Heer confronts the audience with the consequences of this irreversible separation through the illness and poverty that the Aboriginal people must endure.

“There’s lots of food in the bush… It's like a supermarket out there.” (Charlie’s companion)

“Then you’ll die in the wrong place… a long way from your country… They’ll be no one with you, no one to look after you.” (Charlie to a friend)

“I was born in the bush. They didn’t find me in the bush.” (Charlie)

“I want to go home now......back to my own country......where my place is...” (Charlie)

The connection to nature seen in Tracks serves several functions for Davidson. Contrary to the majority of attitudes of the time, Davidson can recognise the sanctity of the Australian land and is determined to learn about and experience this connection between the Aboriginal people and their environment. Like in Charlie’s Country, Davidson’s encounter with the rural, minimalist Aboriginal communities is a distinct contrast to the urban society which she leaves behind. It’s a sobering reminder to Davidson of the persisting racism and colonialist mentality which pervades Australian history and confirms the serious consequences that have occurred from the loss of connection between land and people. Even further, her battle to survive and adapt to the unpredictability of the desert is the ultimate test of endurance, which Davidson acknowledges enables lasting self-transformation and consolidates to her the true majesty and reverence of nature. Therefore, this escapism into the desertland is Davidson’s own challenge for personal change and a chance to experience true liberation like Charlie, as well as finding peace with the natives by means of acknowledging the usurpation of their traditional land and rights.

“All around me was magnificence. Light, power, space and sun. And I was walking into it. I was going to let it make me or break me.” (p. 101)

“It is difficult to describe Australian desert ranges as their beauty is not just visual. They have an awesome grandeur that can fill you with exaltation or dread, and usually a combination of both.” (p. 122)

“Besides, no amount of anthropological detail can begin to convey Aboriginal feeling for their land. It is everything -- their law, their ethics, their reason for existence.” (p. 167)

“And just as Aborigines seem to be in perfect rapport with themselves and their country, so the embryonic beginnings of that rapport were happening to me.” (p. 193)

Author Views and Values

Aboriginal Rights and the Intervention

Like in any comparison, it is important to understand some of the key events that were occurring at the time of both the text and the film. While Tracks and Charlie Country are set more than 3 decades apart, the issue of Aboriginal rights is still equally as important in both settings.

In Tracks, the 1970-80s saw many progressive milestones in Aboriginal history. Just years prior to Davidson’s departure, Australians voted for change in the constitution officially recognising Aboriginal people in the national census. Later, 1976 saw the Aboriginal Land Rights Act, which allowed the Indigenous people to assume ownership of land that was acknowledged to be rightly theirs. Many of these legislative changes were indicative of a larger-scale shift in attitudes towards the fairer treatment of Aborigines. While the oppression and racism continued, it was individuals like Robyn Davidson who pioneered the way for greater change and equality. Davidson ultimately intends to highlight the devastation that has occurred to the Aboriginal people following colonisation and aims to shine the light on the persisting issues these individuals face in an ostensibly ‘post-colonial’ Australia.

Examples:

• Despite some advancements of Indigenous rights in the 1970s, Davidson is firmly opposed to the ongoing racist attitudes held by white Australians.
• Davidson sympathises with the deep hardship endured by the Aboriginal people, which was characteristic of the evolving attitudes towards racial equality in 1970s Australia.

In addition to this, was the 2007 ‘intervention’. Charlie’s Country is set some years following the introduction of the Northern Territory National Emergency Response. Following reports of child sexual abuse and neglect, the Howard Government unleashed national forces to remote Indigenous communities in the effort to act as law enforcement and impose alcohol and drug restrictions. De Heer examines the consequences of what was described as a ‘last-ditch’ attempt to maintain power; an act that was widely criticised and showed to further exacerbate the suffering of the Indigenous people. Hence, de Heer’s film provides a personal insight into the difficulty of navigating life for Indigenous citizens as a result of the Intervention, and how Charlie’s struggles are representative of the anguish of the wider Aboriginal community.

Examples:

• Drawing parallels with the time of 2007 Northern Territory Intervention, de Heer intends to reveal the identity distortions that Indigenous individuals suffered due to the enforcement of westernised laws.
• De Heer’s depiction of Charlie’s alienation from Ramingining was indicative of the wider Aboriginal population in the time following the 2007 Intervention, which saw the introduction of new restrictions into rural communities in the Northern Territory.
  

Women's rights in Australia

The 1970s was a critical time for women's rights in Australia. At this point in time, after the first wave enabled women to vote, the second wave of feminism was moving through the nation. Women all across Australia were now fervently advocating for their own autonomy and freedom in the workplace and at home; their efforts directed more to dismantle the rigid social structures and expectations that were demanded from them. Davidson is an avid proponent for this cause and demonstrates a tactful and astute understanding of her image as a white, middle-class woman. She openly reiterates her distaste for the sexist remarks and misogynistic caricatures she faces and is determined to confound the restrictions placed on her sex of being a domesticated and weak female. Overall, Davidson is promoting the principles of breaking through societal expectations, however, also reveals the many challenges she encounters in doing so.

Examples:

• Davidson’s defiance of the traditional female image is indicative of the progressive attitudes regarding women's rights in 1970s Australia.
• Davidson’s embodiment of feminist ideas was synonymous to the 1970s second wave of feminism, where women in Australia were fighting for more freedoms at work and at home.
  

Comparing metalanguage and film techniques

It can be a bit daunting trying to compare techniques in a novel to those in a film. In this instance, it is crucial to first look at the idea you are comparing. For example, we can observe that both Tracks and Charlie’s Country show the liberating and cathartic feeling that comes from escaping social pressures. Now, let's look at how Robyn Davidson and Rolf de Heer achieve this, albeit in different manners. In Tracks, Davidson uses imagery to describe the desertland she meets, when she says, “It is like a vast unattended communal garden, the closest thing to earthly paradise I can imagine”. De Heer communicates this premise of freedom, however, does this by featuring a variety of diegetic sounds of the biodiversity in which Charlie finds himself.

Another example is how intimacy with protagonists is edified. De Heer uses sustained, intimate close up shots and at many times breaks the fourth wall by having Gulpilil look directly at the camera. On the other hand, Davidson employs colloquial language and is liberal with her use of expletives in order to convey a casual, conversational mood between herself and the reader.

Other aspects to consider:

Anthropomorphism in Tracks is the act of attributing human traits or behaviours to a god, animal or object. Davidson’s use of anthropomorphism to describe the animals around her (specifically the camels and her dog Diggety) is suggestive of the necessity for companionship for humans; the need to establish meaningful connections with others. For Davidson, companionship with animals comes easier than with humans (presuming this stems from her perception of society as problematic and grossly flawed).

Examples:

• Davidson on camels: “They are haughty, ethnocentric, clearly believing they are god’s chosen race. But they are also cowards and their aristocratic demeanour hides delicate hearts. I was hooked.” (p. 14)
• “[The camels] hung around me like flies, shuffling their feet, looking embarrassedly at the ground or coyly through their elegant lashes, acting apologetic and loving and remorseful…” (p. 80)
• “Diggity had become a cherished friend rather than simply a pet.” (p. 227)
• “[Diggity] combined all the best qualities of god and human and was a great listener." (p. 207)

Cinematography, specifically types of cinematic shots in Charlie’s Country. Those commonly seen in the film include wide shots (camera captures a wide view of the context or setting), close up shots (camera captures events from a short distance away; involves a character’s facial features and expressions), as well as panoramic shots (camera pans around horizontally, showing surroundings). Directors are intentional in the type of cinematography they employ; therefore it is crucial to observe the context in which these shots take place in order to enrich the analysis. 

Examples:

• Several wide angle, landscape shots of nature, both at the beginning of the film and when Charlie first enters the Australian wilderness.
• Close up shots of Charlie sitting by the fire, and when he is in prison.
• Panoramic shots of Aboriginal art that Charlie discovers in the wild.
• Panoramic shot also in the courtroom where Charlie is on trial.

Remember! When analysing, you must consider where these occur in the context of the film’s narrative, and the effect they have on enhancing the events/themes/broader ideas being presented in the scene. (i.e. How are the characters portrayed compared to their surroundings? Compared to others? How are they interacting with these elements? Why has the director chosen this angle/shot?)

Sample Essay Plan

Compare how Tracks and Charlie’s Country present the importance of Individualism.

Sample Introduction:

Set amidst an era of significant social and political change, Robyn Davidson’s autobiographical memoir ‘Tracks’ and Rolf de Heer’s film ‘Charlie’s Country’ explores the plight of individuals who embrace individualism. Both Davidson and de Heer assert that individualism is necessary for the protagonists, who find themselves marginalised from the wider population. Through their respective journeys to independence, Robyn and Charlie achieve a sense of empowerment through identity self-refashioning, as well as they express their disapproval of the toxic institutions of society. However, the text and the film also demonstrate how at times, embracing individualism can present challenges to those who pursue it. Ultimately, Davidson and de Heer commend those who do not fully conform to society.

Paragraph 1: Charlie and Robyn gain empowerment through independently establishing their own identity.

Robyn sees the trip as a demonstration to herself of the shedding of the traditional image of white, middle class woman: 

• “Am I an individualist because I believe I can take control of my own life? If so, then yes, I was definitely that.” 
• “I had… been sick of carrying around the self-indulgent negativity which was so much the malaise of my generation, my sex and my class.”
• Describes the experience as a “gentle catharsis” and that “[She] was happy”.

Charlie’s abandonment of the Ramingining community is an attempt to resolve the identity ambiguity he feels as a result of the Government intervention.

• Charlie appears to receive government benefits only to have to give it away to family, later divulging that “I have no money left… or food. I’m hungry”. When he tries to source food by traditional means, he is punished. All this demonstrates his struggles in balancing two cultures.
• Going back into his “Motherland” he is joyful, dancing and eating again. Recognises a sense of security in going back -- “That’s what I want”, “now I’m home”.

Paragraph 2: Embracing individualism for the protagonists means resisting toxic societal constructs.

Robyn adamantly condemns the deeply entrenched racism of Australian culture and sympathises with the Aborigines and their hardship. Her determination to learn about the Aboriginal people is an attempt to overcome the wedge that has been driven between the two communities: 

• “Racism is a daily experience for blacks in Alice Springs. It reinforces their own feelings of worthlessness and self-hate.”
• “Large mining corporations… lusting after Aboriginal Reserve land.”
• The dependency of the Aboriginal people termed as a “handy PR stunt” for government and policies equated to “apartheid in South Africa”.

Charlie becomes increasingly resistant against the traditions and policies of the government institutions.

• Many times he is seen throwing cigarettes into the fire -- his resentment towards the introduction of white customs. "You come from far away and bring us alcohol, ganja, tobacco... all bad!"
• Charlie rejects the white lifestyle by refusing to eat the food in the community, recognising its detrimental properties. Charlie on illness: “It’s all that… white man junk food we eat."

Paragraph 3: Resisting conformity is challenging for Robyn and Charlie, particularly in an oppressive society.

Robyn is met with harsh opposition and derogatory depictions in the media: 

• Labelled “the next town rape case.” 
• Discovers feces on her pillow one night in Alice Springs -- “let my presence be known as if I were a trespasser.”
• “‘Camel lady’ had that nice patronising belittling ring to it.”

Charlie is constantly shut down when embracing the ways of his culture; ultimately submitting to individualism also unveils his dependency on white society.

• He is charged with ‘recreational shooting’, and his hunting spear is considered "a dangerous weapon."
• Charlie’s confession earlier about his false teeth: “I can’t eat with them… I can eat without them” alluding to this dependency on society.
• The irreversible damage of white intervention is evident in Charlie’s poor health as a consequence of going back to “the old way” -- must go to the hospital.

Additional essay topic and prompts:

‘Resistance to conformity is at the forefront of Tracks and Charlie’s Country’. To what extent do you agree?

Discuss the ways in which the environment assists the protagonists in their journey for self-discovery.

‘The connection to the land is significant for the characters of both Charlie’s Country and Tracks’. Discuss.

‘The stories of Charlie and Robyn represent the plight of many others’. To what extent do you agree?

Compare the ways in which characters in Tracks and Charlie’s Country seek to discover what really matters to them.

‘Despite their deep hardship, Charlie and Robyn find transformation in their journeys’. Discuss.

Useful Resources

How to Write a Killer Comparative

Reading and Comparing Tracks into the Wild

Compare the Pair- A guide to structuring a reading and comparing essay

The link between your contention and topic sentences in relation to the prompt

Master Reading and Creating

The White Girl is usually studied under the Text Response component of the Australian curriculum. For a detailed guide on Text Response, check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response.

In The White Girl, author Tony Birch introduces a new generation of young readers to the lived experiences of countless Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people throughout Australia’s racist and colonial history. The novel (which documents the perils, hardships and injustices of life for Aboriginal people in the 1960s) champions the values of pride, resistance, compassion and love, all while condemning the legacy of systemic oppression and subjugation which continue to stain Australia’s national identity to this day.

To better understand the key ideas at the heart of the text, we’ll be breaking down the historical and cultural context surrounding the novel and introducing some of its more tricky concepts. 

Contents

• Institutional Racism and Oppression - What Is It?
• Colonisation and Dispossession
• Forced Removals and The Stolen Generation
• Law and Justice

Institutional Racism and Oppression - What Is It? 

Virtually every conflict that the protagonists of The White Girl confront is in some way or another a manifestation of the pervasive racism which underlies Australian history. At its core, the novel is a response to an enduring legacy of racial inequality and the resultant trauma that Aboriginal people continue to suffer.

There are certainly many instances throughout the novel where characters demonstrate overt acts of what is often called individual or interpersonal racism. This is what students often imagine when they hear the word racism, and it refers to individual interactions in which one person might harass, abuse or intimidate others based on their race. You might remember, for example, the school children who paint Henry Lamb’s face black while shouting racial slurs, or Bill Shea’s sister who throws stones at Odette. However, this isn’t the only kind of racism that exists, and for the most part, it’s not the main focus of The White Girl. Beyond just individual acts, Birch directs us to consider a more insidious, wide-scale and deeply embedded type of discrimination: that is, institutional or systemic racism. In an article for the National Indigenous Television Channel at SBS, Indigenous journalist Bronte Charles defines the term as follows: 

Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, describes the existence of racism in the structures that make up modern society. It manifests when institutions, organisations and governments directly or indirectly discriminate against an ethnic group. It systematically disadvantages those groups and further marginalises them within society. 

In speaking to contemporary readers, it is clear that Birch wants us to redefine our understanding of racism beyond the bounds of individual beliefs and actions, and instead consider the ways in which societal and cultural systems of authority systematically oppress people based on their race, leading to far more devastating and long-lasting impacts. In The White Girl, these authorities can be seen in the federal government, the Aborigines Welfare Board, the police and the Church - all of whom represent either a direct threat to Odette and Sissy’s continued happiness or play some role in the broader historic injustices perpetrated against Aboriginal Australians. Systemic racism and its effects play out in several significant ways throughout the text, some of which we will explore below. 

But first, some context: how did we get here in the first place?

Colonisation and Dispossession in The White Girl

As you might have learned in History class, Australia was first invaded by British settlers in 1788, beginning a long history in which the invaders captured and occupied Aboriginal lands to establish colonies, appropriated natural resources and killed many Indigenous peoples, either directly or indirectly (for example, through the introduction of new diseases). This process was justified by the racist assumption that Aboriginal people and their culture were inferior to the British, therefore permitting the British to do what they wished without consequence. Today, we refer to the process by which these colonists seized control as colonisation and use the word dispossession to refer to the fact that Aboriginal people had their lands systematically stolen from them.

As with all modern Australian history, the events of The White Girl play out in the wake of these brutal processes, and their effects can be felt throughout. As early as the first page of the novel, Birch establishes that even in the 1960s, the legacies of colonisation and dispossession continue in and around Deane, fundamentally shaping the environment in which Odette and Sissy have lived their entire lives. For example, let’s consider the following quote:

[Odette] watched as the kite hovered above Deane’s Line, a narrow red dirt track skirting the western boundary of town. The Line, as the track was commonly known, had been named in honour of the early squatter and land speculator, Eli Deane. Deane carried the blood of so many Aboriginal people on his hands it could never be scrubbed away, not from the man himself or the town that carried his name. The Line had been drawn a century earlier to separate the Aboriginal people incarcerated on the nearby mission from the good white settlers of Deane. A government regulation deemed that any Aboriginal person living west of Deane’s Line was a resident on an Aboriginal reserve. (p. 1)

This quote immediately illustrates the deep and fundamental chasm which separates (in this case, literally) the lives and experiences of Aboriginal and white Australians, both in terms of their rights and treatment by the government, and how they are framed in the public consciousness. Not only do the white residents of the area possess freedoms that their Aboriginal neighbours are denied, but they are also viewed as deserving of this unjust privilege. Notice Birch’s use of sarcasm, as he refers with italics (formatted in bold on this blog) to the ‘good white settlers’ of the area. We know from this passage that Deane was “settled” through violence and the unjust incarceration of the local indigenous people and yet, as becomes clear throughout the novel, these injustices are rarely acknowledged or condemned. Instead, again and again, the violence and subjugation exacted by white perpetrators and institutions of authority against Aboriginal people is normalised, excused and sanctioned. This is echoed in the words ‘good white settlers’, which satirise the way that many people in power have historically utilised language to minimise the violent harm that these same ‘settlers’ committed.

The various inequalities referred to in this passage are examples of both systemic racism in action and continuations of the same racist beliefs that justified Australia’s colonisation. In fact, Deane itself, with its legacy of violence and inequality, can be considered a symbol of this same deeply rooted racism throughout the country. Just as Deane is marked by the stains of its founders’ violence, the various systems of authority and control which Odette and Sissy must navigate throughout the novel (most notably, the police and the welfare system) have also been built upon racist ideology; they, too, have blood on their hands. 

The White Girl also considers the impact of land dispossession from an Aboriginal perspective, as in the quote below, where Odette reflects on the loss of the native lands around Deane.

[…] Sissy stopped to look down at the riverbed. ‘I wish there was water in this river, Nanna,’ she said. ‘When the weather is warm I could swim the same as you used to do in the old days.’
‘Oh, I wish you could too. That water here was once the clearest you would ever see,’ Odette lamented. ‘The fish and eels would be swimming with us. The old people, they knew the river and its stories from the time it had run free. All along this way the water overflowed into the old billabongs. Now all we have is the muddy bottom and the frogs,’ Odette said. ‘There’s hardly a drop of water left for them.’
‘What happened to all the water?’ Sissy asked. ‘Tell me that story.’
‘There’s not much to tell. White people got even greedier than we thought possible. That’s what happened.’ Over the years Odette had witnessed local government officials seizing more and more land and then filling in old billabongs and covering the muddy ground with screening from the mine before selling off the land.
‘Between the farmers and the politicians we were left with nothing. Our people have been hurting since, […] Because the river, all the rivers, we need them. And they need us.[…]’ (pp. 51-52)

Birch suggests that the harm that colonisation has wrought on both the land and First Nations people is inherently intertwined, drawing a link between land dispossession and widespread trauma. For Aboriginal Australians, connection to Country is deeply cultural, spiritual and personal, and this quote reflects both how this connection once flourished in ‘the old days’ and how its forced severance has left great scars on Odette’s people and the land itself. Without the wisdom and respect of its traditional caretakers, the land has starved and wasted away under the greed of the white authorities. This decay mirrors the suffering and trauma of Indigenous peoples, who have been similarly controlled, brutalised and commodified under colonialism. 

Now that we’ve considered the background behind the novel, let’s take a look at some of the main forms of institutional racism it tackles within its pages.  

Forced Removals and The Stolen Generation in The White Girl

By far the biggest source of tension throughout the text is the ever-present threat of Sissy’s forced removal from Odette. From the mid-1800s to the 1970s, both federal and state governments forcibly removed thousands of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families and communities, resulting in what we now call the Stolen Generation. It is estimated today that during this time, between one in ten and one in three Aboriginal children were stolen. In particular, mixed-race children like Sissy who had some white ancestry, often referred to as “half-castes”, were disproportionately targeted and often placed in white families where it was hoped that they might be assimilated into white society. These removals were predicated on racist assumptions and beliefs about the supposed superiority of white society and culture and further marginalised Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people across the country. 

This process was naturally deeply traumatising to all affected, and its effects still live on to this day. Child victims of the Stolen Generation were culturally dispossessed, losing connection to not only their families and communities but also to Country and their culture, spirituality, language and identity. This has resulted in a long legacy of alienation and isolation for not just the stolen children, but their descendants, many of whom deal with intergenerational trauma as a result of the policies. The families and relatives of the stolen children also experienced significant trauma at the loss of their loved ones, with many never recovering after their children were taken. Overall, the effects of these policies have touched virtually every Aboriginal Australian, leaving an indelible scar. Birch himself is quoted as saying, ‘I’ve never met an Aboriginal person who doesn’t have a story of that sort of loss [through the stolen generations] somewhere in their family. No Aboriginal person I know is completely intact because of that…Everyone is missing someone, and someone in that family has got to carry that repository of memory.’ (Daley, 2019). 

Indeed, in The White Girl, the impacts of the Stolen Generation are visible around every corner, and the threat of Sissy’s removal drives the central narrative. In the course of Odette and Sissy’s journey, Birch presents us with various victims of the policy, all of whom display the scars of their ordeal. 

One example of such a character is Delores Reed, the mother whom Odette meets at a church in Gatlin. Delores’ two daughters are stolen from her and placed first in a church in Gatlin, and then in white families. Their removal causes their mother significant psychological distress, leading her first to a period of hospitalisation and later to suicide, as we can see in the following quotes. 

Odette observed Delores gripping the edge of the table with both hands, her eyes sharp and her cheeks reddening.

‘The first time the Welfare lady set eyes on my babies,’ Delores said, ‘I knew I had no hope of keeping them.’ She took one hand away from the edge of the table and slammed it against her chest, alarming Odette. ‘From that day on, that bitch followed us around like a bloodhound. My eldest girl, Colleen, she was the first to go. […]’ (p. 80)

‘[…] After Iris was taken away I was put into one of those hospitals. You know? For sick people? And by then I was mad.’ Delores had exhausted herself. She could hardly look at Odette. (pp. 81-82)

‘The church authorities, about eight years ago, they decided to move a group of the girls away, including Mrs Reed’s daughters.’ […] ‘She wasn’t told what had happened to them until after they’d gone. It was more than a week after when the priest came to her. It was too late by then. There was nothing she could do.’
‘Taken? Where to?’ Odette asked.
‘To the city. A long way to travel for a woman without means.’ […] ‘She lay in the room there for days on end, unable to move. It broke her, what they did to her.’
Odette dreaded her next question, but had to ask. ‘What happened to Delores?’
Robert looked up to the sturdy limb above his head. ‘Delores took her own life.’ (p. 85)

Along with other characters like Wanda and Jimmy Brown, Delores demonstrates the human cost of systemic racism, representing the untold damage that the Stolen Generation wreaked upon countless Aboriginal families. In many ways, she is also a narrative foil to Odette, representing what could befall her if Sissy were to be successfully taken by the authorities. 

Speaking of authority, …

Law and Justice in The White Girl

Throughout the novel, Birch makes it clear that in 1960s Australia, the law and legal system were designed to marginalise and control Aboriginal Australians while upholding the pre-existing systems of power that benefit white citizens. In other words, law and justice - and the authorities who enforce them - represent institutional racism over order and protection. 

The White Girl demonstrates that the law denies even basic rights and freedoms on the basis of race: not only are Aboriginal Australians not considered citizens, but under the Aborigines Protection Act, they are unable to move freely from place to place and are denied legal custody of their children. Instead, this custody is afforded to the Aborigines Welfare Board and to guardians like Sargeant Lowe, who could at any time threaten to remove children from their families without consent. To even be considered for an exemption from these rules, Aboriginal residents must in some ways give up even more of their freedoms and subject themselves to often humiliating and degrading conditions, as we can see in the following conversation between Jack and Odette: 

‘[…] This is a certificate of exemption. It means that I can go anywhere I like, when I like. Even across the border. With some rules, of course,’ he offered as a cautionary note.
[…]
Jack listed the orders he was subject to, counting on his fingers as he went. 
‘To start with, to get the certificate I needed to provide testimonials to the Welfare Board from reputable people. White people. I can live where I want and I can have a drink,’ he added, winking at the smiling Sissy. ‘But I can’t give grog to a blackfella. That’s rule number one, just about. And ...’ Jack hesitated and looked at Sissy.
‘And what?’ Odette prompted him.
‍‘And ... I can’t fraternise with Aboriginal people,’ he said, lowering his voice. ‘Unlawful association, they call it.’ He looked away, unable to hide his sudden shame. (p. 138)

Although an exemption from the Act ultimately helps Odette save Sissy, the exchange above demonstrates that even this exemption is built upon certain restrictions which function to further dispossess and disconnect Aboriginal people from their communities and identities. In a fundamentally unjust and unequal society, the law punishes marginalised people, even when it claims to help them. 

The police are another clear example of this point throughout the novel. Both Sargeant Lowe and Bill Shea demonstrate the police’s systemic failure to protect and serve Aboriginal Australians, either through active persecution or neglect. Although Lowe is the far more obvious antagonist of the two, Birch is careful to demonstrate that the threat he poses is representative of a far larger systemic issue in wider society. As the following quotes indicate, it is his steadfast commitment to doing his job properly that makes him so dangerous: 

He’d been in Deane for only a week, and with little to distract him he’d had time to examine the information on each Aboriginal person under his control, young and old. The station records revealed that in the decades following the town’s foundation, the blacks had been kept on a tight rein. The log book for the police cells indicated that a week rarely passed without an inmate from the nearby mission being locked up, from a period of twelve hours to several weeks, and for matters including trespassing, drunkenness, absconding and co-habitation with those of a superior caste.

Lowe also noted that in recent years the cells had rarely been used, and punishment more generally was almost non-existent. He had little idea of how Officer Shea spent his working day, but he was clearly not concerned with policing. Lowe was determined to bring about change. He would begin with auditing each of the Aboriginal children under his guardianship, with a view to deciding the best outcome for their future welfare. (p. 28)

Lowe straightened his back. ‘As the representative of the state, and as there is no longer a Justice of the Peace serving this district, all Aboriginal children come under my direct care. I am their guardian. It would be negligent of me to allow the child to travel outside the district.’ He leaned across the desk. ‘I’ve been meaning to talk to you about the ongoing welfare of the child. In fact, I will be speaking with all remaining coloured people under my control.’ Lowe glanced across at Bill Shea. ‘The whole business of native welfare has been neglected in this district for many years. I will not allow it to continue. Your people need certainty, just as we do, as officers of the Crown. (p. 104)

Although Odette, Sissy and the other Indigenous characters face hardship and adversity in many forms, ultimately the most consistent barriers to their freedom, self-determination and happiness are the very culture, systems and institutions of control in which they find themselves embedded. Through their stories, Birch paints a powerful picture of the harm that colonisation and continued widespread systemic racism have wreaked upon Aboriginal Australians and illustrates the importance of challenging systems that uphold inequality and marginalisation, even today. 

Further Reading for The White Girl

If you’d like to read more about some of the topics discussed in this blog, here are some of the resources I referenced and/or used to deepen my own understanding of the text:

Bringing them home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families. 

Institutional racism is at work in Australia. How does it affect Indigenous People?

‍Tony Birch on The White Girl: ‘No Aboriginal person I know is intact’

Passage 1: Act 1 Scene 3

MACBETH

   [Aside] Two truths are told,

   As happy prologues to the swelling act

   Of the imperial theme.--I thank you, gentlemen.

[Aside] This supernatural soliciting

   Cannot be ill, cannot be good: if ill,

   Why hath it given me earnest of success,

   Commencing in a truth? I am thane of Cawdor:

   If good, why do I yield to that suggestion

   Whose horrid image doth unfix my hair

   And make my seated heart knock at my ribs,

   Against the use of nature? Present fears

   Are less than horrible imaginings:

   My thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical,  

   Shakes so my single state of man that function

   Is smother'd in surmise, and nothing is

   But what is not.

‍

Passage One from Act 1 Scene 3 takes place just after Macbeth has just been announced as Thane of Cawdor proving part of the Witches’ prophecy true “All hail Macbeth…Thane of Cawdor…/that shalt be king hereafter.” This part of the play is the first insight we have on Macbeth’s inner thoughts.  

Macbeth’s firm and thoughtful tone in the opening alliteration “two truths are told” stresses how serious he takes the Witches’ predictions. Shakespeare presents this passage as a soliloquy in order to convey Macbeth’s true inner thoughts and motives. As this is Macbeth’s first soliloquy, it emphasises the strong possibility of Macbeth heading down a dark journey as he cannot forget the Witches’ predictions “(it) cannot be ill, cannot be good. If ill, / Why hath it given me earnest of success, Commencing in a truth?”

Shakespeare uses the metaphor of theatre for fate. The meta-theatrical reference, ‘as happy prologues to the swelling act’ makes the audience consider the action that will unfold in the following scenes through foreshadowing.

Macbeth feels that committing regicide will be a “supernatural soliciting”.The word “supernatural” demonstrates that Macbeth acknowledges that such an act is “against the use of nature.” It suggests that if Macbeth kills Duncan, he will forever be trapped in the supernatural world for his dishonourable action. The alliteration of “supernatural soliciting” sounds incredibly seductive, and therefore highlights Macbeth’s lust and thirst for the crown.

There is a physiological response to his unnerving thoughts as the ‘horrid image doth unfix my hair’ and ‘my seated heart knock at my ribs’, emphasising the horror of Macbeth has with himself  at his thoughts.

The personification “my seated heart knock at my ribs” once again depicts the increasing fear that Macbeth experiences as his heart is not “seated” with its connotations of calmness and steadiness but “knock(ing)” which is associated with alarming fear.

As Macbeth struggles with his conscience and fears “my thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical,/ Shakes so my single state of man,”  he is uncertain whether or not he should take the prophecy into his own hands and murder Duncan or, let time decide his fate “time and the hour runs through the roughest day”. The consonance ’s’, Shakes so my single state of man”..‍

The alliteration “smothered in surmise” demonstrates how Macbeth’s vivid imagination causes him to struggle with fear and hesitate undergoing the action that is foreseen by him as a “horrid image.” These mental images are of significance throughout the play as it is evident that Macbeth’ conscience results in him “seeing” a dagger and also Banquo’s ghost.

The antithesis “and nothing is,/ But what is not” is deliberately broken up into two lines to demonstrate the ambiguity of Macbeth’s thoughts and the confusion which evidently contributes to his overall fear. Macbeth’s actions become overpowered by his imagination until ‘nothing is but what is not’ or imagination carries more weight than action. The partial alliteration of ‘smother’d in surmise’ and the antithesis of ‘nothing is but what is not’ makes this notion seem again, particularly seductive to the audience. The word ‘smother’d’, with it’s connotations of oppression, further amplifies the notion and even suggests that Macbeth’s imagination takes the place of his will.

The following blog post (updated 02/10/2020), is a mix of the video transcription, along with some new pieces of advice and tips. Happy learning!

‍

[Video Transcription]

Hey guys. Welcome back to Lisa's Study Guides.

Right now, it's in the middle of December, and I know that most of you should have finished school by now, and you're enjoying your school holidays. Because it is summer holidays, and most people aren't really studying right now, this is for the truly keen beans, the people who are reading the text before the school starts, which, by the way, you should be doing. I'll pop that video in a card up above and so if you are studying Burial Rites, then this video is for you. If you're not, as always, it doesn't really matter because the type of advice that I will be giving would definitely be relevant to any text, because it's more about your thinking and how you actually go around approaching essay topics.
‍

Summary

‍
Burial Rites is about this girl called Agnes, and she is the last person in Iceland to be sentenced to the life sentence. This book covers the last few months of her life, living with these people who she's sharing her story with. She has been sentenced because she has murdered Natan. And although we first initially hear that she has murdered this guy, when we start to hear her story develop, that's when we start to see that there are shades of gray. That she did have reason behind what she did, and you can start to feel quite sympathetic towards her. At the same time, though, and this is what today's essay question will be about. There's a lot to do with the patriarchy. Agnes being not just a woman, but an intelligent woman, was something that was looked down upon, and people were scared of that. That's just to give you a little bit of context so that we can start this essay topic.
‍

Essay Topic

‍
Today's chosen essay topic is:

Women have no power in Burial Rites, the patriarchy dominates their lives. To what extent do you agree?

‍
Step 1: Analyse

‍
The first step, as always, is we look at keywords. What are the keywords here? To me, they are women, no power, patriarchy and dominates. These words really stand out to me, and these are the words that I feel are necessary for me to focus on in order to answer this prompt properly.

The second step that I do is I define keywords. So what I do here is I try to understand what the keywords mean and also their implications.

• Women, is our first keyword. it's easy just to say, "Oh, women includes this character and this character." But we can start to think about more so the implications as well. So don't just think about the major characters like Agnes and Margret, but also think about the minor characters like Sigga and Rosa.
• No power. So to me, no power means to lack freedom. It's not necessarily no power like you know I'm not strong and this is why we need to actually define the words because many words have multiple connotations or they have multiple meanings. So you need to figure out, "Okay, how am I going to find this word so that I've got the right focus for the rest of my essay?" This is silly, but what if you, halfway through your essay, went, "Holy crap, power could also mean electricity, and I didn't talk about electricity." So electricity is not part of Burial Rites, but it's just something to get you thinking. You know you don't just want to dive straight into the essay, assuming you know what the keyword means and what it entails. Actually spend time to define it, so that it's a lot clearer for you, too. So I've also added that no power means a lack of power compared to men. So because it is a patriarchy, the fact that they have no power is very much sort of linked to the fact that it's male-induced.
• The third keyword is a patriarchy, so a male-dominated society, which means that an analysis of male characters is also required to fully understand male and female interactions. If you have an essay where you only talk about the women, then you're maybe only answering it 50%. To really add extra value to what you're saying and to really solidify your points, talk about the men because everyone influences each other one way or another.
• The last thing is I would also add, 'to what extent'? When a prompt says, "to what extent?" to me, it means that some sort of challenge is required here. It's probably not enough if I just completely agree with it because it's only suggesting that the extent does end somewhere and that you need to go beyond it.

Step 2: Brainstorm

While in this video I don't cover the brainstorm process, you can learn more by reading up on my THINK and EXECUTE strategy, which has helped thousands of students achieve better marks!
‍

Step 3: Create a Plan

‍
My third step is I plan out key arguments. So this is how I'm going to break down this essay prompt. I am going to do two body paragraphs where I agree and one body paragraph where I disagree. So this should mean that I'm only agreeing to a certain extent. Here's a video about this type of essay structure and response:

‍
Body paragraph 1:

So my first body paragraph is yes, under male authority, the women are robbed of freedom and power. My example for that would be Agnes, who is the protagonist. She is a woman who's being sentenced to death for murdering Natan, more about him later, and, as a result, society condemns her and she's robbed of her identity and freedom. "Everything I said was altered until the story wasn't my own." The metaphor of a story represents her being stripped of her experiences and identity, and instead replaced with how others think of her, whore, madwoman and murderess.
‍

Body paragraph 2:

My second body paragraph would be another agreement, but this time I'm going to focus on the men. In this second body paragraph, my argument is men hold exploitative power over women. One, Natan, the person who was murdered, toys with all his whores, demonstrating male dominance in 1820s Iceland. All his workmaids are stranded, shipwrecked with nowhere else to go, highlighting women's hopelessness in changing their situation. Additionally, there's Blondal. So Blondal is a government authority and he's torn when commanding Lauga, Lauga, not too sure how to say that. You guys let me know. "I'm sure you would not question me," which is also another example of women's subordinate status.

Body paragraph 3:

The third one is one where I disagree. Here will be that there are rare instances of female empowerment in the novel. The first one will be Rosa, the poet. So Rosa has an affair with Natan, but Kent praises Rosa and she's described to be a wonderful woman and beautiful. Rosa transcends patriarchal structures, as she is assertive, headstrong, going against social codes in an act of female empowerment.

The second one will be Agnes. Her storytelling and ability to express what she is inside allows her to gain a voice in the patriarchal world that has silenced her. Through her storytelling, she asserts her self-worth and dignity and despite the fact that she has been locked down, she is being treated like crap by the men, her ability to hold herself strong and to be able to face her death with dignity means that with some sense, at least from within, that sense of empowerment has not been completely diminished.

‍

If you found this blog and video helpful, and would like to see Burial Rites essay writing in action, then I recommend you check out How To Write A Killer Text Response below!

For an overview of the EAL study design plus tips and tricks for reading comprehension, time management and more, check out The Ultimate Guide to EAL.

The listening tasks of the EAL exam are worth 20% of the total exam marks.  Since this section was introduced to the exam fairly recently, limited past exam questions are available for students to practice. In my blog post EAL Listening Practice and Resources, I provide you with some awesome listening resources that you should definitely check out! And more importantly, I teach you a step-by-step approach for how to use those listening resources to help you better prepare for EAL listening. If you haven’t already read that blog post, go and check it out before coming back to this one so that you understand the steps we’re following.

Here we’ll be working through another exam-style practice to help us improve on the EAL listening section. We will be adopting the same strategies introduced in EAL Listening Practice and Resources. For more advice on how to boost your skills in the listening section, check out Tips on EAL Listening.

Use this link to access the audio clip that we’ll be using in this listening practice: Hospital Parking Fees - Classroom - BTN (abc.net.au)

Download this worksheet so that you can work through this listening task on your own too!

1st Time Listening

Step 1:  Read and Annotate Background Information (below)

• Highlight the name of the speakers.
• Underline important information.

Step 2:  Read and Annotate the Questions 

Develop a system that works well for you personally. For example, I usually underline the keywords that give me information on ‘what’, ‘why’, ‘how’, ‘where’, ‘when’. I highlight the speakers in the example below. 

Step 3: Listen to the Audio (Without the Visual)

Hospital Parking Fees - Classroom - BTN (abc.net.au)

Step 4: Write Down Side Notes

2nd Time Listening  

Step 1: Fill in the blanks and try to be aware of words you don’t quite ‘get’.

This is where you have the opportunity to fill in the blanks for the challenging words that you did not pick up in the first round. For example: petition, democratic, campaign, rare. 

COMMON MISTAKE: check the spelling for ‘rare’, not ‘rear’

Step 2: Note down how the speakers convey their attitude, feeling, ideas, etc.

Let's take a look at this section of the audio clip:

GIDON: ‘It gives me a really good feeling to know that I've made a change, that change has happened. I think what I would like to say to all the other people, especially kids who want to start change, is that it really does sometimes seem impossible that someone that doesn't have a vote and who doesn't have as much democratic power really as adults do, I think what this has shown is that it really is possible to do these things that we still can affect our country and that small people can make great change.’ 

Here’s one way I analysed the delivery of the audio:

The cheerful and hopeful tone used to deliver the message that the change brings him ‘a really good feeling’ demonstrates Gidon’s approval of the change in parking fees. Furthermore, Gidon states this in a high pitch and fast pace, unveiling that he is pleased and satisfied about the reduction in hospital parking fees. 

Step 3: Interaction between speakers. 

This step does not apply to this particular audio clip since the audio/ video is a recount of the event rather than direct conversation between two or more speakers. 

3rd Time Listening  

The transcript is available HERE. 

Whilst reading through the transcript with the audio on, try and pick up any information that you missed in previous rounds of listening and also words that you might have spelt incorrectly. 

Sample Questions and Answers

Have a go at these VCAA-style questions that I wrote up, and then check out my sample answers to see how your own answers compare. You will probably notice that a lot of the information you gather from the ‘W’ words actually provides you with the answers to the majority of the questions here.

Sample Questions

Sample Answers

1.  Gidon’s petition is about lowering the fee for parking in hospitals and putting a limit on how much the hospital can charge.

2. Gidon has a rare blood condition which means he visits the hospital quite regularly. Since his diagnosis, Gidon’s family paid more than ten thousand dollars just to visit the hospital.

3.  When hospital parking fees are too expensive, patients will buy food and other necessities instead of going to the hospital. Thus, patients may not go to the hospital because parking is too expensive, these poor patients need to choose between paying parking fees and buying food. 

4. Regular hospital attendants will receive a 90% discount on what they are currently paying.

 5. Families, patients and carers for regular visitors of public hospitals.

COMMON MISTAKE: check the spelling for ‘carer’, not ‘career’ or ‘carrier’

6. Gidon is very happy and proud of the change in hospital fees. Gidon uses a cheerful and hopeful tone (1st mark) to deliver the message that the change brings him ‘a really good feeling’ and he feels ‘unbelievably proud’ that ‘small people can make great change’ (2nd mark). In addition, Gidon states this in a high pitch and fast pace, demonstrating that he is pleased and satisfied with the reduction in hospital parking fees (3rd mark).

---
I hope you found this guide handy! For further tips and tricks on tackling the EAL Listening Exam, check out How To ACE the EAL Listening Exam.