MAIN CHARACTERS

Margo Channing played by Bette Davis

As the protagonist of the movie, Margo Channing is a genuine and real actress raised by the theatre since the age of three. She is a vulnerable character who openly displays her strengths and weaknesses; Mankiewicz showcasing the life of a true actress through her. Initially, we see Margo as mercurial and witty, an actress with passion and desire (not motivated by fame but the true art of performing). She is the lead in successful plays and with friends like Karen and Lloyd to rely on and a loving partner, Bill, it seems that she has everything.

However, Margo’s insecurities haunt her; with growing concerns towards her identity, longevity in the theatre and most importantly her relationship with Bill. Eventually, in a pivotal monologue, Margo discusses the problems that have been plaguing her. She battles with the idea of reaching the end of her trajectory, the thought that ‘in ten years from now – Margo Channing will have ceased to exist. And what’s left will be… what?’ By the end of the movie, Margo accepts the conclusion of her time in the theatre and understands that family and friends are what matters most, not the fame and success that come with being an acclaimed actress.

Eve Harrington played by Anne Baxter

Antagonist of All About Eve, Eve Harrington (later known as Gertrude Slojinski) is an egotistical and ambitious theatre rookie. With a ‘do-whatever-it-takes’ attitude, Eve is first introduced to the audience as a timid and mousy fan (one with utmost dedication and devotion to Margo). However, as the plot unfolds, Eve’s motive becomes increasingly clear and her actions can be labelled as amoral and cynical, as she uses the people around her to climb the ladder to fame.

Margo is her idealised object of desire and from the subtle imitations of her actions to infiltrating and betraying her close circle of friends, Eve ultimately comes out from the darkness that she was found in and takes Margo’s place in the theatre. Mankiewicz uses Eve’s character to portray the shallow and back-stabbing nature of celebrity culture; Eve’s betrayal extending beyond people as she eventually turns her back on the world of theatre, leaving Broadway for the flashing lights of Hollywood.

Addison DeWitt played by George Sanders

The voice that first introduces the audience to the theatre, Addison DeWitt is a cynical and manipulative theatre critic. Despite being ambitious and acid-tongued, forming a controlling alliance with Eve, Addison is not the villain.

The critic is the mediator and forms a bridge between the audience, the theatre world, and us; he explains cultural codes and conventions whilst also being explicitly in charge of what we see. Ultimately, Addison is ‘essential to the theatre’ and a commentator who makes or breaks careers.

Bill Simpson played by Gary Merill

Bill Simpson is the director All About Eve does not focus on Bill’s professional work but rather places emphasis on his relationship with Margo. He is completely and utterly devoted to her and this is evident when he rejects Eve during an intimate encounter. Despite having a tumultuous relationship with Margo, Bill proves to be the rock; always remaining unchanged in how he feels towards her.

Karen Richards played by Celeste Holmes

Wife of Lloyd Richards and best friend and confidante to Margo Channing, Karen Richards is a character who supports those around her. During conversations she listens and shares her genuine advice, acting as a conciliator for her egocentric friends. Unfortunately, Karen is also betrayed by Eve, used as a stepping stone in her devious journey to fame.

Lloyd Richards played by Hugh Marlowe

Successful playwright and husband to Karen Richards, Lloyd Richards writes the plays that Margo makes so successful. However, as Margo grows older in age, she begins to become irrelevant to the plays that Lloyd writes. Subsequently, this causes friction between the two characters and Mankiewicz uses this to show the audience the struggles of being an actress in the theatre; whilst also adding to the Margo’s growing concern towards her age.

Lloyd is unwilling to change the part for Margo and thus Eve becomes a more attractive match for the part. An unconfirmed romance between the budding actress and Lloyd also adds to the drama within All About Eve.

MINOR CHARACTERS

Birdie played by Thelma Ritter

A former vaudeville actress (which means that she acted in comic stage play which included song and dance), Margo’s dresser and close friend, Birdie is not afraid to speak the truth. Initially she sees right through Eve’s story and she warns Margo to watch her back. Despite not being in much of the movie, Birdie’s critical eye is a foreshadowing for the audience towards what is to come.

Max Fabian played by Gregory Ratoff

Producer in the theatre, Max Fabian is involved in theatre just to ‘make a buck’. He is a hearty character who adds comic relief to a dramatic plot.

Miss Claudia Caswell played by Marilyn Monroe

Aspiring actress, Miss Caswell is seen briefly throughout the movie to show the audience the shallow nature of the world of show business. Unlike Eve, she relies on her appearance to ‘make’ it rather than talent; as seen during her encounter with Max and the unsuccessful audition that followed.   

Phoebe played by Barbara Bates

The next rising star to follow in Eve’s footsteps, Phoebe is featured at the end of the film. In this scene there is a foreshadowing of the future, which suggests a repeat of the past, thus, making Phoebe an interesting character to observe. She is a manufactured construction of an actress and illustrates how replaceable a character is in the world of theatre.

Text Response is seen, often, as ‘bipolar’: weeks of inactivity followed by sharp spikes of panic as you churn out 20,000 words in six days. If not, students fall for the “quantity=quality” trap, pumping out essay after essay as their one form of study.

Don’t get me wrong. Diligence is key. But here’s what many miss: Essays are the END PRODUCT, not the starting point. To begin, foundations are required:

Step 1: Deliberate Reading

Remember: the better and sooner you engage with your text, the easier to write on it. So. Even when first reading, have a pen in hand! At this stage, nothing fancy is needed ---annotate what you can. Circle, highlight and underline anything that catches your attention.

Afterwards, a helpful tip is the “21 words” exercise, which forces you to summarise the text’s messages as early prep for topic sentence construction.

E.g.

“Macbeth, a dark, brooding tragedy, explores the corruptive effects of extreme ambition through the moral decay of a great man.” (21)

“Whilst seemingly about human flaw, Macbeth declares that all mortals are in fact vulnerable to supernatural forces beyond their control.” (21)

LESSON LEARNT: First impressions matter. The author ALWAYS seeks to make readers feel and think a certain way. Even before you write, you should be tapping into these currents as best you can. All early thinking, guaranteed, will turn into priceless essay ammunition because you’ve given time for your thoughts to develop and mature.

Step 2: Understanding Context

VCE English involves the study of some sophisticated literature. Authors/filmmaker have used the written word to comment on past and present society. For a high score, then, you too must understand these contexts.

E.g.

---Joseph Mankiewicz’s 1950s film All About Eve: a satirical jab at the post-war ideal of a traditional nuclear family ---Hannah Kent’s Burial Rites: critiquing the patriarchy of 19th century Iceland

Step 3: Note taking

Now we’ve gained some understanding of the text, time for rigorous and more detailed analysis. There are three tiers involved.

1. Chapter summaries

Basically a timeline of significant moments: what happens and what is said. Note the STRUCTURE of the text: is it chronological or non-linear? Is it a circular narrative? Why is this structure employed, and what is its literary function for the broader story?

2. Event significance

This is where we begin to understand not only WHAT HAPPENS and WHAT IS SAID, but WHY. Go back to each chapter and write down the significance of each defining moment. What does it show about a character or theme? Does it reveal an author’s viewpoint on a certain idea?

Put these thoughts into “essay” sentences. This way, you are constantly practicing how to ANALYSE complex ideas. Come SAC or exam time, you will have already honed your written expression to a far more sophisticated level and what’s more, increased your familiarity with RELEVANT CONCEPTS. This approach is far more efficient than starting off by writing essays on random topic questions. Build up the knowledge base first!

3. Language

Now, it’s time to elevate your analysis to the divine by understanding the text’s CONSTRUCTION: HOW significant events, significant people are portrayed, and what it all means. Go back to each chapter and look for compelling language/filmic devices, including its impact:

Metaphor Juxtaposition Imagery Sentence length Setting Word choices Intertextual references Symbolism/motifs Camera angles Diegetic/non-diegetic sound

Step 4: Themes and Characters

After close reading and closer analysis, we come to the last stage: bringing all the elements together by zooming BACK OUT FOR A BIG PICTURE VIEW OF THE TEXT: its themes and underlying ideas, its central characters, and the lasting messages conveyed as a result.

Notes on Themes

By now, a ‘theme’ no longer has to be a one word affair like in our younger years: “identity” “friendship”, “tragedy”, “ambition”, “evil” etc. Rather, a theme is closely linked to the text’s views and values: put simply, it can express opinion.

E.g. “The struggle for personal identity”

“The unbreakable bonds of childhood friendship”

“The vulnerability of all ordinary men to extraordinary tragedy”

“The harms of excessive ambition”

“The pervasiveness of evil”

Once you’ve identified the themes, use the notes you’ve made on context, plot, significant events and language, to help support your interpretation.

Notes on characters

Using the previous evidence you’ve gathered, you can now also make detailed and insightful character studies. Obviously, a focus on their defining traits, relationships and flaws is important.

However, in Year 12, what is more crucial is understanding what the character represents. After all, an author will never craft someone out of thin air. Just like a theme, a character is used as a vehicle to express opinions on the nature of society and humans in general.

Now you’ve finished the four steps. Using your understanding of 1) big ideas and 2) close evidence, you’re ready to start writing!

Of course, along the way, there are a few extra tricks one can deploy.

1. Read academic/critical/high scoring essays

Exposing yourself to the widest possible range of academic literature---whether it be your friend’s 20/20 essay or a New York Times review on the text----is a sure fire way to juice up vocab.

2. Keep reading the text

Whenever you’ve got spare time, open up the book or film you’re studying and refresh your memory! This way, you’ll really internalise what you’re studying. Quote learning will be easier, you’ll form a genuine attachment to the characters… overall, the insights will flow all the faster. To learn more about studying for Text Response, read our Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response.

Happy studying!

The following is an excerpt from our study guide, I am Malala and Pride, available for purchase here.

Plot overview

I Am Malala by Malala Yousafzai is a memoir of the eponymous Pakistani schoolgirl and activist. Yousafzai grows up in Pakistan’s Swat Valley with parents who were unconditionally supportive of her education. However, Pakistan is strongly under the control of the Taliban, an extremist group who opposes education for girls. On the other hand, Yousafzai’s family practice Islam in a peaceful and egalitarian manner.

Tracing how decades of global, geopolitical movements have produced these conditions, Yousafzai recounts the rise of the Taliban and her increasingly dangerous journey to school each day. The geopolitical histories trace back decades to the military rule of General Zia in the 1980s. Since then, turbulent domestic politics combined with a volatile, ever-evolving relationship with America (which, importantly, is partly America’s fault) has allowed the Taliban to rise to power. The post-9/11 period and the ‘War on Terror’ are important milestones here, since these are the years in which Yousafzai grows up. 

As the Taliban continue to deny women and girls their freedoms, Yousafzai becomes an outspoken activist, made all the more prominent by the BBC and the New York Times. Because of her fame, nationally and internationally, she becomes a target and is shot in the head by Taliban gunmen when she is just 15. The memoir starts here in its prologue, before going back in time to catch us up. Indeed, Yousafzai is now well-known everywhere for this incident. 

The remainder of the book traces her recovery, and reaffirms her commitment to fighting for girls’ education. Even though she now lives in Birmingham, England, she has persevered through many setbacks to keep up the good fight - now on a uniquely far-reaching international platform. 

Pride, directed by Matthew Warchus, is a film exploring the 1984-85 miners’ strike in Britain. In particular, it explored how an unlikely ally, the Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners (LGSM) organisation, was able to provide solidarity and support despite their differences. 

At the time, many members of London’s LGBT community had difficult coming out experiences, made all the more difficult by stigma and dominating views of masculinity - they perceived miners in their hometowns as part of that problem. However, activist Mark Ashton saw an opportunity to help a group in need, and a group that was experiencing similar political pressures as themselves, particularly at the hands of Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. 

While the National Union of Mineworkers is initially reluctant to take LGSM’s money, Mark is able to connect directly with Dai Donovan, who represents miners from the Welsh village Onllwyn. Over time, LSGM is able to build relationships with locals, who gradually warm to their presence as well. Solidarity - the idea that anybody’s fight against injustice is everybody’s fight against injustice - is an important part of what makes this partnership tick. Their campaign culminates in the Pits and Perverts concert, which raises thousands of pounds. 

The ending is a bittersweet one though - the mineworkers’ union finds this too controversial, rejects further support and ultimately loses the strike, while the queer activists return to their own struggles with identity and belonging. However, the campaign forged lasting bonds between these activists and miners, who show up in their own display of solidarity at the next year’s Pride March. 

Themes, Ideas, and Key Messages 

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 above and in the next section, Essay Topic Breakdown.

Similarities (CONVERGENT Ideas)

Identity and Perspective: Before even considering the activism that is featured in each text, it’s worth unpacking the individual identities of the main characters, and the complexities that come with them. Both texts see characters juggle and negotiate tensions within their identity - in particular, other people who share the identity don’t always see eye to eye with them. In I Am Malala, Yousafzai often finds herself at odds with other practitioners of Islam, especially the more extreme Taliban who would oppose her belief in girls’ education. Likewise, queer activists in Pride’s LGSM draw incredulity from their peers, who bristle at the idea of supporting the mineworkers. However, not only are these characters able to overcome these tensions, but their personal identities give them a perspective that feeds back into their activism - they actually draw on their identity in their fight for justice. Yousafzai acknowledges that Muslims “don’t [all] agree” (Chapter 7), but she firmly believes that “education for females not just males is one of our Islamic rights” (Chapter 23). Her fight is informed by, rather than separate from, her faith. In the film, personal identity also acts as a springboard for activism. For example, the collaborative and highly successful Pits and Perverts fundraiser came about as a result of the “long and honourable tradition in the gay community [of] when somebody calls you a name…you take it and you own it”. Queerness is mobilised to fundraise for the miners, rather than silenced or excluded as others might have it. 

Injustice and Activism: As we explored in the context sections (and as we’ve been exploring throughout), a fight for justice is fundamentally at the heart of both texts. In the film and the memoir alike, we see conservative agendas disempowering certain groups. Yousafzai recounts how pre-existing sexism in Pakistan, where girls found “no point in going to school just to end up cooking, cleaning and bringing up children” (Chapter 3), was exacerbated by the Taliban who closed schools altogether. They would even vandalise and destroy schools - “by the end of 2008, around 400 schools had been destroyed” (Chapter 11). Yousafzai’s fight is really about equality and human rights. The miners and LGSM are fighting their own injustices and inequalities in the film - Prime Minister Thatcher had been closing down mines and stripping miners of their livelihoods. Not only that, but she’d used pretty brutal tactics, calling in the police and withholding income support for newly-unemployed miners who struggled to feed their families through the winter. 

Women’s Education: This isn't the principal fight in Pride, but there are moments where it definitely shines through. In particular, we first meet Sian as a young housewife, but by the end of the film Jonathan had encouraged her to return to school, and we know that she goes onto become the first female MP of her district. Through the strike, she discovered her own passion for trade unionism, and education hugely empowered her to take that passion further. This is particularly important given how much the strike affects men and women alike - consider the significance of ‘Bread and Roses’. In the memoir, the importance of women’s education is a much more central element. As Yousafzai points out, “going to school wasn’t just a way of passing time, it was our future” (Chapter 11). In both texts, education helps people (and women in particular) forge relationships and futures for themselves, and for one another. 

Differences (DIVERGENT Ideas)

Now it's your turn! Here are some questions to get you thinking about the differences between the two texts:

• Activism: what forms of activism are there? how effective can activism be? how are these ideas portrayed in the two texts?
• Solidarity: what does solidarity mean? what are the ways in which people can show solidarity? how are these ideas portrayed in the two texts?
  

Essay Topic Breakdown

Whenever you get a new essay topic, you can use LSG’s THINK and EXECUTE strategy, a technique to help you write better VCE essays. This essay topic breakdown will focus on the THINK part of the strategy. If you’re unfamiliar with this strategy, then check it out in How To Write A Killer Text Response. 

Within the THINK strategy, we have 3 steps, or ABC. These ABC components are:

Step 1: Analyse

Step 2: Brainstorm

Step 3: Create a Plan

THINK

Theme-Based Prompt: Compare how the two texts explore injustice.

‍

Step 1: Analyse

This is a theme-based prompt. Both texts have a pretty clear focus on this idea of ‘injustice’, so it’s an important theme to have thought about beforehand. This prompt is quite broad, so you could potentially include a wide range of thoughts and opinions about injustice—you might want to consider angles like who is affected, what its impacts are and what actions can reasonably be taken against it. Also because of how broad this prompt is, try to find answers to these questions from within the texts, but phrase them in a way that doesn’t necessarily refer to a text. This will help you keep your ideas flexible for both texts when the time comes to write. 

Step 2: Brainstorm

I think those angles are a reasonable starting point for brainstorming. In the memoir, Yousafzai and her peers—Pakistani schoolgirls—are the most affected, while the injustices portrayed in the film affect coal miners and the LGBTQ+ community. All of these groups are disempowered and disenfranchised by injustice, and this is an important impact. Note that this is something you can say about both texts, which is exactly how we were trying to phrase our answers.

In terms of taking action against injustice, there’s a wide range of measures across the texts—speaking out, writing for news outlets, organising large-scale fundraisers etc.—and the key takeaway from that might be how diverse these measures are, the different outcomes they generate and whether or not they’re effective. 

Step 3: Create a plan

Because this theme has a lot of rich overlaps between texts, it’s best to integrate discussion of both texts into every paragraph. When we do this for a theme-based prompt, especially a prompt with just one theme, that means every paragraph uncovers a new angle or dimension from both texts about the theme. Learn more about Integrated Text Discussion in How To Write A Killer Comparative.

P1: Injustice is framed as limiting people’s power—we can look at marginalised groups in both texts, from the schoolgirls of Yousafzai’s Pakistan, or the miners and the queer folk from the film.

P2: It’s also something that must be fought. Because it has such a detrimental impact, there is a need for those groups to stand up for themselves and for each other. 

P3: In so doing, injustice may take time to overcome, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t fight it. Not all activism can be instantly, wildly successful—partial successes along the way are usually more frequent.

Our contention will try to string those three ideas together: injustice in any society involves some experiencing marginalisation and powerlessness that others do not experience (P1), and it is something that must be fought (P2), even if this is a time-consuming process (P3). Have a go at writing your own essay now if you’d like, or read a free preview of our I am Malala and Pride study guide below!

Resources

A Killer Comparative Guide: I am Malala and Pride

How to Write a Killer Comparative Ebook

The Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative

A Guide to Structuring a Reading and Comparing Essay

Reading and Comparing Essays

‍How to get A+ in Reading and Comparing

Compare the Pair: A guide to Structuring a Reading and Comparing essay

Updated on 25/12/2020

Being one of the few texts that was added to the text list this year, Euripides’ play Women of Troy is definitely a daunting task for English and EAL students to tackle due to the lack of resources and essay prompts available. In fact, the only materials that can be found on the internet are those analysing the older translation of the play (titled The Trojan Women). That is why we are here to help you as much as we can by offering you a mini-guide for Women of Troy, in the hope that you can get a head start with this play.

Women of Troy is usually studied in the Australian curriculum under Area of Study 1 - Text Response. For a detailed guide on Text Response, check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response.

Contents

1. Summary
2. Historical Context
3. Literary Devices
4. Themes
5. Characters
6. LSG-Curated Essay Topics
7. A+ Essay Topic Breakdown
8. Extra Resources

1. Summary

Women of Troy is a tragedy which takes place in the immediate aftermath of the Trojan war, critiquing the atrocities committed by the Greeks to both people of Melos and Troy. By constructing a play in which women are able to dominate the stage and exude their genuine despair in response to their impending enslavement, Euripides shifts the perspectives from epic tales of Greek and Trojan male heroes to the conversely affected women who suffered at the hands of the heroes, while simultaneously providing both the contemporary and modern audience with a unique insight into the true cost of war. This is especially significant because the society was pervaded by patriarchal values, where women were subordinated to their male counterparts. Euripides’ proto-feminist works were not well received by his peers at the time of writing as women’s personal thoughts and pain were not commonly discussed in the Hellenic repertoire.

2. Historical Context

The Trojan war occurred as a result of the conflict between Greece and Troy and was said to last for over 10 years. According to a tale, during a festival on the Olympus, Athena, Aphrodite and Hera were fighting over a golden apple. They chose a random mortal, which was Paris who would then be the Prince of Troy, to decide who the most beautiful goddess of the three was. As a reward for picking her, Aphrodite promised Paris that he would be married to the most beautiful woman in the world, which was Helen – wife of Menelaus, the Spartan prince. Aphrodite had her son Eros (a cupid) enchant Helen and Paris so that they would fall endlessly in love with each other. Helen then escaped from Menelaus’ palace to be with Paris, starting the war between Greece and Troy. Menelaus was enraged and he convinced his brother Agamemnon to lead an expedition to retrieve Helen. The Greek army was commanded to attack the Trojans. The siege lasted for more than 10 years until the Greeks came up with a strategy to abduct Helen from the palace. The Greek soldiers build a giant wooden horse and hid in there to get in the citadel of Troy, attacking them in the middle of the night and winning the war. After the war, the Greek heroes slowly made their way home, however, the journey home was not easy. Odysseus took 10 years to make the arduous journey home to Ithaca because Poseidon agreed to punish the Greeks for the atrocities committed before and after their victory.

3. Themes

War

Love and Lust

Euripides’ works often warn the audience of the detrimental effects brought on by excessive passion, asserting that it is best to moderate emotions and exhibit sophrosyne (the power of self-control over one’s emotions). He often criticises the goddess of love, Aphrodite, for enchanting mortals and leading them into a life governed by love and lust. In this play, he purports that it is inherently Aphrodite’s fault that the Trojans are fighting against the Greeks, as it is Aphrodite who makes Paris and Helen endlessly fall in love with each other.

Potential Textual Evidence:

In Women of Troy, Euripides presents a particularly acerbic critique on Menelaus’ 'uncontrollable lust' in 'sen[ding] a hunting party to track down Helen' as he juxtaposes the cost of the Trojan war being and the prize that they receive.

• 'tens of thousands dead'  
• 'giving up the pleasure of his family and children'
• 'these Greeks [beginning] to die'

→ All that in exchange for one woman - Helen

His chastisement is further bolstered by Cassandra’s rhetorical question asking 'they kept on dying, for what reason'. This manoeuvres the audience into acknowledging the pointlessness of the Trojan war as it is not worth risking so many lives over Helen or any minor military conflict. In doing so, Euripides once again lambastes the actions of those vindictive and bloodthirsty Greeks.

Cost of War

The play primarily focuses on the loss and pain of the Trojan civilians that survived the war, are sieged in the city after the war and are eventually either killed or enslaved after the fall of Troy. While the Trojan war is the setting of many famous classical works being examined by various different angles, not many focus on the consequences suffered by women. This enables Euripides to raise the question of whether or not such victory is worth fighting for while simultaneously inviting the audience to emulate the playwright’s disapprobation of such a violent and brutal resolution of conflict.

You can also use the evidence from the above to justify your arguments on the cost of war. They all aim to magnify the extent to which the Trojan people, as well as the Greeks, have to suffer as result of this pointless war.

Potential Textual Evidence:

We can also discuss how wars affect beliefs and their people’s faith. In the Hellenic society, gods have always been a significant part of their life as it is believed that mortals’ lives are always under the influence of divine intervention. This is evidenced through the ways in which Hellenic people build temples and make sacrifices to the gods, thanking the gods for allowing them to live prosperous lives and begging for their forgiveness whenever they wrong others. This is why it is significant when Hecuba referred to the gods as 'betrayers' in her lamentation, implying that there is a change in attitude in time of tragedy. Events such as this make people question their fate and belief, galvanising them to wonder 'what good [gods] were to [them].

Integrity and Sense of Duty

Some characters in Women of Troy are also fundamentally driven by their sense of duty and integrity, and act according to their moral code regardless of what the circumstances may be. Hecuba, for instance, sympathises with the Chorus of Troy and acts as a leader even when she loses her title and her home. She is held responsible for her actions but is still governed by her honesty and integrity as Helen makes her plea. Talthybius is also governed by both his sense of duty and integrity. Despite his understanding of Hecuba’s circumstances, he still follows his order and ensures that the Trojan women are allocated to their Greek households. However, he does not disregard her sense of morality and treats Hecuba with understanding and sensitivity.

Helen, on the other hand, does not demonstrate the same degree of moral uprightness. In time of tragedy, she chooses to lie and shift the blame to others to escape her execution. She prioritises her own benefits over everyone else’s and allows thousands of others to suffer from the impacts of her treachery in eloping with Paris.

God/Fate

The prologue of the play opens with a conversation between Poseidon and Athena, foreshadowing their divine retribution against the Greeks. Witnessing the immediate aftermath of the Trojan war, they curse the war which they ironically themselves initiated, thus condemning the horrific injustice of the conflict and the actions of its vengeful and blood thirsty so-called heroes. This is evidenced through the ways in which they punished Odysseus by creating obstacles on his journey home.

However, it can also be argued that the gods in Women of Troy themselves act as a symbol of injustice in a way. From the feminist view, the fall of Troy and the enslavement of Trojan women demonstrate the gods’ lack of care as they disregard the monstrosities that occur to women after the Greeks’ victory. The divine intervention which is promised in the beginning casts the following injustices cursed upon the women of Troy in a different light as it can be argued that the gods caused the war. While their retribution against the Greeks can be seen as a means to punish the heroes, it is evident that that they are more concerned about the sacrilege committed and the disrespect they receive after the Trojan war than the injustices suffered by women. This thereby humanises the gods and fortifies the notion that they also have personal flaws and are governed by their ego and hubris.

The idea that there are forces beyond human control is enhanced, and Poseidon and Athena’s pride proves that humans are just innocent bystanders at the mercy of the gods. It can be argued that the chain of unfortunate events are unpredictable as they are determined by gods, whose emotions and prejudices still control the way they act. On the other hand, the characters in the play do at times make choices that would lead to their downfall and tragic consequences. For instance, it is Menelaus who decided to go after the Trojans just because of one woman and he was not enchanted or under any influence of divine intervention.

Gender Roles

Euripides centres his play on Trojan women, enabling the discussion on the cause and effect of war. Given that females' points of view were not commonly expressed in plays or any forms of art works, Euripides’ decision to have his play focus on women allows the Athenian audience, comprised of mainly male Athenians, to observe a part of the military conflict that was not seen before.

The protagonist Hecuba, for example, is portrayed as the archetypal mother. While this image is presented during the aftermath of the Trojan war, Euripides also uses Hecuba as a representative of contemporary Hellenic women as this archetype is universal for all circumstances. It is evident that Euripides’ play mainly focuses on Hecuba’s grief, with her lamentation dominating the prologue. This implies that the protagonist, in this instance, also acts as a diatribe against the patriarchal society which allows women to suffer greatly as a result of war and military conflict. However, this play differs from other plays written by Euripides in that he also explores a woman’s burden and responsibility as a leader, allowing the audience to understand the difficulties of being a woman of power in time of crisis.

4. Characters

Hecuba

Mother of Troy

Potential Textual Evidence:

• In employing the simile comparing herself to 'a mother bird at her plundered nest', Hecuba reminds the audience of her endless love for the city of Troy, implying that the devastation of her own home also further deepens her pain. In this scene, Hecuba is portrayed as a female leader who rules with her passion and love.  
• The image her (Hecuba) as an empathetic Queen is also exemplified through the ways in which she 'weep[s] for [her] burning home'. As the term 'home' invokes connotations of warmth and affection, Hecuba’s endearment for the city she governs is established, accentuating the portrayal of Hecuba as a leader with a passion for her duties.
• This in turn propels the audience to be more inclined to feel commiseration for her when she is held responsible for her city’s destruction. As the representative of Troy’s leadership that enables such brutality to occur leading to the wars, Hecuba bears the guilt and responsibility for '[giving] birth to all the trouble by giving birth to Paris' and consequently, for the cataclysmic consequences that ramified from Paris’ involvement with Helen (although she is simply an innocent bystander) → Social accountability for war

Mother of Her Children

Potential Textual Evidence:

• From the outset of the play, the former queen of Troy is portrayed as a miserable mother suffering from the loss of her own children and 'howl[ing] for her children dead' (echoed by the Chorus, referred to as 'howl of agony'). By employing animalistic language in describing Hecuba’s act of mourning over Hector’s death, Euripides intensifies the magnitude of her emotional turmoil as it is likened to a loud and doleful cry usually uttered by animals → It is almost not humanly possible to endure so much pain.
• This notion is bolstered by the image of Hecuba drowning in 'her threnody of tears' as it engages the pathos of the audience, establishing her as a victim of war and emphasising the poignant story that is to be unveiled.
• The simile comparing herself to a woman 'dragged as a slave' in her lamentation further fortifies Hecuba’s portrayal as a victim of a play. Here, the juxtaposition between her former title 'by birth [as] Troy’s...Queen' and her current state magnifies the drastic change in life and the loss she suffered, compelling the audience to better sympathise with Hecuba. → Powers can be ephemeral in times of crisis.

Talthybius

Talthybius is sympathetic towards women, establishing himself as a complicated figure with a strong sense of integrity. This is epitomised through the ways in which he employs euphemistic language when announcing the dreadful news to Hecuba. He tries his best to be sensitive and mitigate the impacts of Hecuba’s daughter death to her, announcing that Polyxena 'is to serve Achilles at his tomb' and that 'her fate is settled', 'all her troubles are over'. He was being sensitive and subtle instead of abruptly delivering the news. While he represents an enemy state, he shows that men can also be compassionate, contradicting the Phallocentric belief that men should only be governed by cool logic.

Chorus of Trojan Women

It can be argued that Hecuba acts as the paradigm of the Trojan women as her pain (i.e. the deaths of her children, slavery, the devastation of her city), in a way, represents the suffering of the majority of Hellenic women in times of war, which enhances Euripides’ condemnation of a society where military conflicts can easily be facilitated. The Chorus of the play often echoes her deepest pain, establishing a sense of camaraderie between female characters of the play.

In this play, the Chorus acts as the voice of the 'wretched women of Troy', representing the views of the unspoken who are objectified and mistreated by their male counterparts. After Troy lost the war, women were seen as conquests and were traded as slaves, exposing the unfair ethos of a society that was seen as the cradle of civilisation. By allowing the Trojan women to express their indignation and enmity as a response to their impending slavery, Euripides is able to present a critique on the ways in which women were oppressed in Ancient Greece.

5. Literary Devices

• Simile (e.g. dragged as a slave)
• Euphemism (e.g. serve Achilles at his tomb – euphemism for death)
• Symbolism (e.g. Hector’s shield or Troy’s citadel)
• Animal imagery (e.g. howl of agony)
• Rhetorical question (e.g. for what reason)

Why are these important? Watch how we integrated literary devices as pieces of evidence in this essay topic breakdown:

[Modified Video Transcription]

TIP: See section '7. A+ Essay Topic Breakdown' (below) for an explanation of our ABC approach so that you understand how we've actually tackled this essay prompt.

Staged in a patriarchal society, Women of Troy was set during the immediate aftermath of the Trojan war – a war between the Greeks and the Trojans. Hecuba is the former queen of Troy, who suffered so much loss as the mother of her children as well as the mother of Troy. She lost her son Hector and her husband in the Trojan war, her daughter Polyxena also died and Cassandra was raped. After the Greeks won, women were allocated to Greek households and forced into slavery, including the queen of Troy.  She was also the mother of Paris, the prince of Troy. It was purported that Paris and Helen were responsible for initiating the war as Helen was governed by her lust for Paris and left Menelaus, the Spartan prince, for this young prince of Troy. Consequently, Menelaus was enraged by this elopement and declared that he wanted Helen dead as a punishment for her disloyalty. Helen defended herself and lied that it was against her will, crying that she was kidnapped and blamed Hecuba for the fall of Troy and for the conflict between the two sides. However, Menelaus did not believe what Helen had to say and decided to bring her back to her home on a separate ship.

The play ended with the Greek ships leaving Troy, which was then on fire. The Trojan were singing a sad song together as they left to prepare for their new lives as slaves living in Greek households.

The play’s main focus is on the suffering of women, as exemplified by the way Euripides chose to portray Hecuba’s loss and Cassandra’s helplessness.

So, our essay prompt for today is

'How does Euripides use the structure of the play to explore the role of women and their suffering in time of war?'

This is indeed one of the more challenging prompts that VCAA wouldn’t probably give, the reason being that it is a language/structure-based prompt. It requires you to have a much more profound knowledge of the text, and it is not always easy to spot language features, especially in a poetic sounding play like Women of Troy. There is just so much going on in the text! While it is not super likely that you will get this prompt for the exam, I have seen a lot of schools give language/structure-based prompts to students for SACs as it gives them an opportunity to challenge themselves and look for textual evidence that will distinguish them from their peers. These types of evidence are definitely worth looking for because they can also be used as evidence to back up your arguments for theme-based or character-based prompts (learn more about the different types of prompts in How To Write A Killer Text Response).

Now let’s get started.

Step 1: Analyse

The first thing I always do is to look for keywords. The key words in this prompt are 'structure, 'role of women' and 'suffering'.

With the structure of the play, we can potentially talk about:

• Character-related evidence (e.g. strong female character base)
• Language-related features (metalanguage/literacy devices)
• Plot-related features (order of events) – irony, foreshadowing

Step 2: Brainstorm

In a male-dominated, patriarchal society, women are oftentimes oppressed and seen as inferior. Their roles in the society were limited, they were only seen as domestic housewives and mothers. It is important to look for evidence that either supports or contradicts this statement. Ask yourself:

• Is Euripides trying to support the statement and agree that women are simply creatures of emotions who should only stick with domestic duties?
• Or is he trying to criticise this belief by showing that women are so much more than just those being governed by their emotions?

Since this play primarily focuses on the cost of war and how women, as innocent bystanders, have to suffer as a result of the Trojan war, it should not be difficult finding evidence related to women’s suffering. It might include:

• Hecuba’s loss (she lost her home and children)
• Hecuba’s pain (being blamed for Troy’s ruin)
• Cassandra’s helplessness despite knowing her fate, surrendering and accepting her future
• Andromache’s 'bitter' fate having to give up her child
• The Chorus voicing their opinion – slavery

Once a prompt is carefully broken down, it is no longer that scary because all we have to do now is organise our thoughts and write our topic sentences.

Step 3: Create a Plan

P1: Euripides constructs a strong female character base to contradict the prevailing views of the period that women are inferior to their male counterparts.

It is significant that Euripides chose to have a strong female protagonist, as the character herself acts as a diatribe against the patriarchal society, contradicting any engrained beliefs that pervaded the society at the time. An example of evidence that can support this statement is the way in which Hecuba dominates the stage while giving her opening lamentation. The lengthy nature of the monologue itself enables Euripides to present his proto-feminist ideas and go against the Hellenic gendered prejudice.

We can also talk about Hecuba’s leadership and her interaction with the Chorus of Trojan women. She refers to them as 'my children' and employs the simile 'a mother at her plundered nest'. The way the Greek playwright constructs the relationship between characters is worth mentioning as Hecuba in this play is portrayed as a compassionate and empathetic leader, showing that women are also capable of leading others in a way that engenders a sense of camaraderie between them.

Another good thinking point is to talk about how Helen acts as a paradigm of a group of women who had to turn to deception and go against their integrity to survive in time of tragedy.

P2: Euripides’ selective use of language and literacy devices in portraying women’s pain and suffering further enables him to portray the ways in which women, as innocent bystanders, are oppressed in time of war.

An example of a metalanguage used in this play is the animal imagery the Chorus used to depict Hecuba’s pain. By referring to her pain as a 'howl of agony', they intensify the magnitude of Hecuba’s pain as the term 'howl' is usually used to describe a loud cry usually uttered by animals like wolves. This implies that Hecuba, who acts as representative of Hellenic women, has to suffer from an emotional turmoil that is far beyond bearable, which in turn further fortifies the audience’s sympathy for her, as well as the Trojan women.

Another piece of evidence that I would talk about is the simile 'dragged as a slave'. It was used to describe Hecuba, the former queen of Troy. By likening someone who used to be at a position of power to 'a slave', Euripides underscores the drastic change in circumstances that occurred as a result of the Trojan war, magnifying the tremendous amount of loss Hecuba experienced. Furthermore, the image of the protagonist’s devastated physical state enhances the dramatist’s condemnation of war as it allows him to elucidate the detrimental impacts such violence and dreadfulness impose on innocent bystanders.

There is, of course, plenty of other evidence out there such as the way in which Cassandra is portrayed as a 'poor mad child', her helplessness in surrendering to her 'wretched' fate with Agamemnon who wanted her for himself. We can also talk about the inclusive language positing, 'our misery', 'our home', used by the Chorus in echoing Hecuba’s pain, etc.

The use of symbolism can also be discussed. For instance, the citadel in the city of Troy in the epilogue acts as a metonym for Hecuba’s resistance before entering slavery. The image of it crumbling exemplifies women’s helplessness and enhances the notion that they are still in positions of explicit subjugation.

P3: While Euripides primarily focuses on portraying women’s pain and suffering, he does not completely vilify men or victimise women, maintaining an unbiased view so as to underscore the importance of integrity through his characterisation of both male and female character.

The last body paragraph of our essays is often the one used to challenge the prompt, showing the assessors our wealth of ideas and depth of knowledge. Basically, what we are saying is 'while our playwright is obviously pro-women, he definitely does not condone everything women do and criticise everything men do'.  In this way, we have the opportunity to explore the ways characters are constructed and the ways they are used in the play to convey its meaning.

If I were to write an essay on this, I would talk about Talthybius and Helen, mainly because they are both complex characters that the audience cannot fully love or hate.

Talthybius is surprisingly sympathetic towards women, establishing himself as a complicated figure. This is epitomised by the ways in which he employs euphemistic language when announcing the dreadful news to Hecuba. He tries his best to be sensitive and mitigate the impacts of Hecuba’s daughter's death to her, announcing that Polyxena 'is to serve Achilles at his tomb', that 'her fate is settled' and 'all her troubles are over'. He was being sensitive and subtle instead of abruptly delivering the news. While he represents an enemy state, he shows that men can also be compassionate, contradicting the Phallocentric belief that men should only be governed by cool logic.

Similar to Talthybius, Helen is also a complicated figure as she is both a victim of fate and a selfish character. It is possible for the audience to sympathise with her as she is merely a victim of fortune in that she was bewitched by Aphrodite and governed by her love for Paris, the prince of Troy. However, the ways in which she shifts the blame to Hecuba and makes her pleas preclude the audience from completely sympathising with her they, in a way, render her as a self-absorbed and repugnant character. This notion is further fortified by the fact that she cared so little for the 'tens of thousands' lives taken on her behalf as the phrase quantifies and magnifies the cataclysmic consequences of her lust for Paris.

6. LSG-Curated Women of Troy Essay Topics

1. Euripides’ play Women of Troy mainly focuses on the true cost of war. To what extent do you agree with the statement?
2. Women of Troy demonstrates that there is no real winner in war. Discuss.
3. In the Trojan wars, the Trojans suffered great losses while the Greeks did not suffer. Do you agree?
4. How does Euripides use language to portray the loss and suffering of Hellenic women in Women of Troy?
5. Characters in Women of Troy are all driven and motivated by their sense of duty and obligation. To what extent do you agree with the statement?
6. Hecuba’s greatest pain stems from the deaths of her children. Discuss the statement.
7. While Helen’s selfishness should be condemned, the audience can still condone her actions due to the circumstances she is in. To what extent do you agree with the statement?
8. Women of Troy is a tragedy, rather than a war-play. Do you agree?
9. Euripides argues that fate and fortunes are not preordained, and tragedies do not incriminate. To what extent do you agree with the statement?
10. It is impossible to sympathise with Helen because she is the most mischievous character of the play. Do you agree?
11. Women of Troy explores the ways in which a character’s true self might emerge in times of tragedy. Discuss.
12. In Women of Troy, The Chorus’ only role is to act as the representative of Hellenic women. Do you agree?
13. In the end, the gods are not responsible for the tragedies caused by the Trojan war as it happened as a result of poor choices. Do you agree?
14. Hecuba is the victim of fate. Discuss.
15. Love is a dangerous passion that can lead to tragic consequences. Does Women of Troy support this statement?
16. Hecuba is a tragic hero. Discuss.
17. How is the structure of Women of Troy used to convey its meaning?
18. It is possible for the audience to sympathise with Helen because of her love for Paris. Do you agree?
19. There is no villain in Women of Troy because everyone in the play suffers. Do you agree with the statement?
20. Discuss the role of dishonesty in Euripides’ Women of Troy.

If you'd like to see A+ essays based off some of the essay topics above (written by Mark Yin - our LSG content guru and 50 English study score achiever), complete with annotations on HOW and WHY the essays achieved A+ so that you can emulate this same success, then you'll definitely want to check out our A Killer Text Guide: Women of Troy ebook. In it, we also cover themes, characters, views and values, metalanguage and have 5 sample A+ essays completely annotated so that you can smash your next SAC or exam!

7. A+ Essay Topic Breakdown

Whenever you get a new essay topic, you can use LSG’s THINK and EXECUTE strategy, a technique to help you write better VCE essays. This essay topic breakdown will focus on the THINK part of the strategy. If you’re unfamiliar with this strategy, then check it out in How To Write A Killer Text Response.

Within the THINK strategy, we have 3 steps, or ABC. These ABC components are:

Step 1: Analyse

Step 2: Brainstorm

Step 3: Create a Plan

Quote-Based Prompt:

'Who can forget these sufferings? Time will bring no relief.' There is no villain in Women of Troy because everyone in the play suffers. Do you agree with the statement?

The following comes essay topic breakdown comes from our A Killer Text Guide: Women of Troy ebook:

Step 1: Analyse

The quote mentions long-lasting sufferings, and the prompt seems to ask who suffers, and who is responsible. If you’ve been reading this guide in order, a lot of similar ideas from the last four essays might jump out here - I think that’s okay, because ideally you do get to a point where you can ‘recycle’ some of your quotes and ideas between essays (and the examiner won’t have to read all your practice essays anyway!).

While I’ll be doing a little bit of recycling here, I want the main take-away point from this essay to be around framing. Even if you’re using similar ideas that you’ve already seen, the trick is to explain and frame your analysis in a way that answers every prompt specifically. This is best done through how you thread your arguments together, and how you make those links. We’ll get into this as we plan.

Step 2: Brainstorm

For now, let’s recap these ideas of suffering and responsibility. Hecuba and the Trojan women suffer, and they argue Helen is responsible - but Helen also suffers, and she argues that the gods are responsible. The gods, as we know, are insulated from suffering because of their divine and superhuman status. So, are they the villains?

Step 3: Create a Plan

This is a similar progression of ideas that we have seen before, but I want to ground them in this cycle of suffering-responsibility.

P1: The eponymous women of Troy certainly suffer, and in many of their eyes, Helen is a villain.

P2: However, Helen does not see herself that way - and she is not incorrect. She too seems to suffer, and she sees the gods as the main villains who are responsible.

P3: Euripides may see the gods as careless and negligent beings, but he doesn’t necessarily depict them as cruel; rather, the excessively passionate war itself is depicted as the true enemy, and villains are those who revel in its cruelty.

As you might notice, parts of this plan are recognisable: we’ve started a few of these essays with a first paragraph about the Trojan women’s suffering, developed that in paragraph two by contrasting with Helen, and ending our analysis with the gods. But when reusing some of those ideas, it’s important to make sure they answer the specific question by modifying and adding new ideas as needed - this way, you don’t rewrite essays for new prompts and risk losing relevance, but you do reuse ideas and tailor them to new prompts every time.

The contention for this one will be: the Trojan War undoubtedly has its winners and losers, and few of these characters agree on who the responsible villains are, with some blaming Helen (P1) while she herself blames the gods (P2). However, the gods only form a part of the picture - rather, Euripides depicts war itself as the villain, lambasting those who take pride in inflicting cruelty in the midst of war (P3).

If you'd like to see an A+ essay on the essay topic above check out our A Killer Text Guide: Women of Troy ebook.

8. Extra Resources

The Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response

How To Write A Killer Text Response (ebook)

How To Embed Quotes in Your Essay Like a Boss

How To Turn Text Response Essays From Average to A+

5 Tips for a Mic-Drop Worthy Essay Conclusion

‍With contributions from Mark Yin - 50 study score achiever, and author of our A Killer Text Guide: Women of Troy ebook.

Contention and Topic Sentences

We are well into the second half of Semester 1 and for Year 12 students, the Mt Everest that is the final English examination is approximately 6 months away. Though most students are at this stage comfortable with the text response aspect of English, many tend to struggle with the notion of “answering the prompt”.

When working to correct this issue, it is important to understand the VCAA English Study Design brief for text response which outlines its examination criteria as being:

• detailed knowledge and understanding of the selected text, demonstrated appropriately in response to the task
• development in the writing of a coherent and effective structure in response to the task
• control in the use of expressive and effective language appropriate to the task.

To find out more about how to satisfy the VCAA criteria in your Text Response, as well as a sample essay doing so, check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response.

The importance of answering the prompt is stressed in each of the 3 listed points in the rubric which share the common theme of following the assigned task. In order to construct an essay which successfully answers the prompt, one must be conscious of the relationship between the prompt assigned, their stated contention and the topic sentences they provide.

Prompts for Section A are divided into one of five categories. To learn more about LSG's Five Types Technique, check out our blog.

The first thing one should do when presented with a prompt is analyse it by identifying the keywords of the prompt and clarifying all the key terms. Once this has been done, it is time to formulate a contention. 

A contention is simply your view of the prompt. This is where you challenge the statement presented to you and construct a viewpoint outlining the degree to which you are in agreement or disagreement with the prompt or if you are sitting on the fence. It is vital to do this not by blatantly rewording the prompt to display your stance, instead you must observe the prompt and construct an assessment of the prompt by drawing from the text to confirm your contention. It is through your contention that your points of discussion detailed in your topic sentences are formed.

Points to remember:

• do not explicitly say “I agree” or “I disagree”
• rather demonstrate how you feel (and thus how you are going to write) by using the text to highlight your opinion of the prompt
• use your contention as “umbrella” from which your body paragraph ideas fall under

The next step in developing your essay response is to settle on what points to make in your body paragraphs and write topic sentences. Topic sentences outline the content you will be presenting to your teacher or examiner in the particular body paragraph. A good topic sentence should detail an idea that can be drawn from your contention. A habit some students carry into Year 12 from earlier years of essay writing is to write body paragraphs solely on characters and in turn writing a topic sentence stating which character they will write about in that paragraph. Rather than doing this, focus on the context, themes, symbols and conventions particular character(s) feature in throughout the text.

Points to remember:

• ensure your topic sentence clearly indicates what you will discuss in your paragraph
• check to make sure your topic sentence is an idea that stems from your contention
• avoid character based topic sentences and focus on the themes these characters are utilised to explore

The key to adhering to the prompt presented to you is forming a relationship between the material given to you, your adopted contention and the topic sentences which headline your evidence and justification. Think of the prompt as the avenue through which to form your overall stance. Your contention is the basis of the entirety of your essay. Your topic sentences are opening statements written with the purpose of helping you develop a discussion that follows your contention that is in relation to the prompt. When your text response has evidence of this not only will you present an essay that closely addresses the prompt, but your work will reflect your thoughts, in a manner which efficiently enables you to show off your skills.

Oral Presentations - fun and full-scoring. Bet you’ve never heard those words in the same sentence before! As much as the Oral is a SAC that is often feared by many English students, I managed to come out of my presentation not completely terrified - I was actually able to somehow enjoy myself a little up there, and I might have even had a smile on my face when it was all done. And, what’s even better is that I managed to score full marks! 

In this blog post, I’m going to be guiding you through how I approached the Oral Presentation in Year 12 to achieve full marks. I’ll be breaking down my Oral Presentation script as well as giving some pointers about giving the Oral Presentation on the day.

‍Scroll down to the bottom to read my full Oral Presentation script!

The Topic I Chose and How I Chose It

You’ve probably heard a million times before to choose an issue that you’re passionate about. This can often leave you thinking, I don’t know what I’m passionate about! or I’m not passionate about anything in the media right now! I was one of those students in the beginning, but this is how I chose an issue that I ended up loving.

Taking Inspiration From My Other Year 12 Subjects

The subject I enjoyed the most in Year 12 was Legal Studies, and my love for this subject guided me in choosing an issue that I genuinely wanted to speak about. I was lucky to have a Legal Studies teacher who was a big nerd in everything law-related, and he often liked to update us about recent and ongoing legal cases that he found interesting. One case that he told us about that I became very interested in was the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation case against Nine Entertainment where some journalists called out Ben Roberts-Smith (a war veteran) for committing war crimes. Roberts-Smith sued these journalists, alleging that this wasn’t true. 

I knew I wanted to speak about this case, but I also knew that I had to argue an opinion, and not just provide an overview of the case. So, I began my research into the views of the stakeholders in the case. Something that was very useful to me in my research was news podcasts! In particular, I came across a podcast episode from a podcast called Please Explain (as of 26/02/2024 it seems to have been rebranded and is now called The Morning Edition) by The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald, where the actual journalists that were getting sued in the case talked about their experiences. After listening to this podcast episode on the way home from school, I found myself really sympathising with the journalists and that’s how I knew that I wanted to speak about this defamation case from the journalists’ perspective. 

After some thinking, the contention that I arrived at was this: 

‍More should be done to protect public interest journalism.

So my advice for choosing an Oral Topic that you love is to take inspiration from other subjects you’re studying and enjoying, and to pick up on and research anything that your teachers tell you about that piques your interest!

Breaking Down My Script

The Introduction

A Hook Start

‍Let me take you back in time. Six years ago, in 2017, many of us in this classroom were in Year 6, probably sitting in a primary school classroom, learning what an isosceles triangle is. And obviously, we had all been paying attention because now everyone’s thinking, “Oh yeah, I remember what an isosceles triangle is!” and we’re all imagining a tall triangle that looks like this.

Grabbing the audience’s attention from the very start of your speech is key! To do this, I tried to open up my speech in an interesting way by encouraging the audience to do something - to reflect on what their lives looked like six years ago. Hook starts such as the one I used (which establish a common ground with the audience) were commonly used among my classmates - they quickly grab the audience’s attention and are relatively easy to implement!

In my Statement of Intention*, I wrote that ‘I initially engage[d] my audience with a hook start, encouraging them to cast their minds back to 2017, and through the imagery of a primary school classroom, I aim[ed] to establish relatability and common ground with the audience, positioning them to be more agreeable to my arguments later on.’

‍*Statement of Intention - a written statement accompanying my Oral Presentation, where I explained the choices I made in my presentation. As of 2024 and with the implementation of the new study design, students are no longer required to submit a Statement of Intention with their Oral Presentations. However, if you’re curious to know more about Statements of Intention, check out this blog. 

‍

Providing Context

‍Now, while our Year 6 teachers were providing us with the life-changing information that is the different types of triangles, something bigger was happening on Collins Street. A huge news sausage was in the making. Picture this: a conversation between two passionate and overworked journalists, working for The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. One of which had heard whispers from his contact book of Australian military circles that our most decorated living soldier was not the person that everyone thought he was, and that he had in fact been involved in war crimes like the killing of unarmed civilians. A shared desire to put these rumours to the test, with an open mind, wanting to disprove them as much as to prove them. 

‍This marked the start of a 4-year long legal battle in the form of a defamation lawsuit lodged by decorated war vet Ben Roberts Smith against two investigative journalists, Chris Masters and Nick McKenzie. And, after more than 100 days of hearings, this battle recently ended, with the judge ruling overwhelmingly in favour of Masters and McKenzie that what they had reported about Roberts Smith was substantially true, hence the two had not defamed him.

I spent a fair bit of time explaining the issue of protections around public interest journalism in the context of the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation case because it was a bit of a niche issue and I thought that my audience of Year 12 students were unlikely to have known too much about it. To keep this explanation engaging, I tried to explain the case in a descriptive and dramatic way, as if the events were unfolding in front of their eyes, and I tried not to make it sound like I was just listing background information. To do this, I used phrases like ‘A huge news sausage was in the making’, ‘Picture this’, to really set the scene in a dramatic way!

‍A side note on choosing niche topics for the Oral Presentation: I know it’s often NOT recommended to choose topics that are unlikely to be well-known by your fellow students. This is because it can be disengaging when a student goes on a 5-minute tangent using complicated jargon on a topic that none of the other students know anything about. And… I guess I kind of turned that rule on its head! But this was precisely why I wanted to spend a chunk of my speech explaining the context of my issue - so that my speech would be accessible to my audience, so they wouldn’t be bored, and so we would all be on the same page. 

At the end of the day, it’s all about finding a balance between choosing a topic that you love and a topic that is easy for the audience to understand. So, if the topic that you would love to present to the class might be a bit less well-known, my advice would be to make sure to provide adequate context and spend a bit of time explaining key information at the start so that your speech is more accessible to the audience!

‍

Stating Contention

‍ABC News called it a win for public interest journalism. So why have I brought up this case today to highlight that not enough is being done to protect public interest journalism?

After my explanation section, I smoothly slid into contention territory. Even though I didn’t directly state my contention (i.e. I didn’t say “I believe that more should be done to protect public interest journalism”), through the question, ‘Why have I brought up this case to highlight that not enough is being done to protect public interest journalism?’, I implied that my contention was exactly that - that not enough is being done to protect public interest journalism. 

‍

The Supporting Arguments

I actually only had one supporting argument throughout my whole Oral Presentation, and although this might be an unusual way to do it, it worked well for me since I needed to spend quite a bit of time introducing the issue at the start. My one supporting argument was bulky enough that I had a complete speech with just a long introduction, bulky argument and conclusion. 

Work out what might work best for you in your presentation. If your issue needs a bit of breaking down like mine did, it might be easier to stick to a very simple structure.

‍

Outlining the Supporting Argument and Providing Evidence

‍Legal battles in general are a huge issue for journalism because they can be used as a threat to journalists. This defamation lawsuit was only the tip of the legal iceberg for Masters and McKenzie. They also faced challenges to source protection and Roberts-Smith’s numerous attempts to silence the two and other witnesses by sending them legal letters telling them to shut up, to suppress the truth about his actions from coming to light.

I then went on to explain my supporting argument - that legal battles such as defamation cases put public interest journalism at risk (which is why, going back to my overall contention, more should be done to protect public interest journalism). As you can see, I constantly linked back to the Roberts-Smith defamation case because that’s what I wanted to speak about, but I did not have to do this and you absolutely don’t have to - a general explanation would have gotten the job done just as well.

You might be wondering why I didn’t signpost at the start of my supporting argument - in other words, why I didn’t include a sentence like “My first supporting argument is that legal battles such as defamation cases put public interest journalism at risk”. Some teachers love signposting and encourage students to do so. If your teacher seems to prefer clear signposting, go ahead and do that! 

TIP: Keep in mind that for anything internally marked, it is important that you keep your teacher/school’s preferences and requirements in mind. 

My teacher wasn’t as insistent on signposting, and I personally didn’t like how clear signposting made my speech sound a bit robotic, so to keep the flow of the speech I decided to fluff it out and start my argument the way that I did. You’ll also notice a lack of signposting throughout my speech in general for the same reasons.

The biggest issue about the Ben Roberts Smith defamation case for journalists and news corporations has been costs. Their win has come with a hefty price tag estimated to be around $25 million, and even though the majority of this is to be borne by the loser of the trial, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald newspapers will still end up losing millions of dollars, just for defending themselves and their journalists in court. 

I backed up my supporting argument with some evidence. To quote my Statement of Intention, ‘I went on to use numerical statistics like “4 year[s]” and “100 days of hearings” to emphasise that much of Masters and McKenzie’s time and energy was taken by BRS’s claim, aiming to evoke sympathy for them and positioning readers to agree that more protections are needed to prevent journalists from being involved in these time-consuming legal battles. I also established costs as another major issue using the statistic of “$25 million” to emphasise that not only are these legal battles time-consuming, but also expensive, and through connotations of immensity when describing this as a “hefty price tag”’.’

‍

Explaining the Argument and How It Is Relevant to the Audience

But why exactly is this our issue? It’s not like we’re the ones having to pay millions of dollars.

But it becomes our issue when this financial burden creates a chilling effect on public interest journalism. Fear of bankruptcy or crippling financial strain forces journalists to retreat, self censor or settle for silence. This financial issue for news organisations becomes our issue as the quality of our public interest journalism deteriorates and we are deprived of vital information.

Throughout my speech, I made an effort to constantly tie it back to the audience and explain why exactly this issue was important and relevant to them. This was important for me to do because the issue I chose was relatively niche so I felt like I had to prove to them that this issue was worth presenting. Even if the issue you’re presenting isn’t exactly niche, it’s important to link back to the audience every now and then and to remind them why it’s important to them. In my case, I explained that defamation cases like the Roberts-Smith case against journalists and news corporations were a threat to high school students having access to information that they should be aware of!

Something else that I attempted to do here was to include some persuasive devices! To quote my Statement of Intention, ‘having established costs as a major issue, I segued into the effect that these costs can have on journalists, listing these effects as causing journalists to “retreat, self-censor or settle for silence”, and through listing and sibilance in the latter half of this phrase, I aimed to make these effects memorable to listeners, emphasising the consequences of the costs of legal battles on journalists and public interest journalism.”’

‍

Evidence

Masters and McKenzie talked about the pressure that was put on them to leave the rumours about Ben Roberts Smith be. Chris explained that his colleagues tried to convince him not to fight with Ben Roberts Smith by telling him that it was like shooting Bambi. Well, I guess in that case, he would have been shooting Bambi for shooting unarmed civilians, which sounds pretty fair to me. Nick explained that convincing their bosses to publish the story was an exhaustive process, and even after successfully having their story on Roberts Smith published, Chris said there was a propaganda war waiting for them, with their former colleagues being hired by other news corporations to criticise them and disassemble their work, with their story being put on the cover of a rival newspaper, as an attack on Chris, accusing him of smearing the memories of dead soldiers, and it was designed to intimidate and hurt him and his biding relationships with people in the military who consider him a deep friend. These attempts of BRS to silence the two are not just unfair - as students, we want to grow up in a world where people are held accountable regardless of their connections or wealth.

After explaining my argument, I backed it up with evidence by going back to the defamation case and giving practical, real-life examples of how this case may have worked to hinder the quality of public interest journalism. I took much of the information in this section from the podcast that I talked about earlier (where Masters and McKenzie talked about their firsthand experiences) - for example, the so-called “propaganda war” that Masters faced after having the story published, rival news outlets who were on the side of Roberts-Smith publishing articles attacking Masters - and explained that this was designed to intimidate the two investigative journalists and deter them from exposing controversial stories against prominent figures. I not only told but also showed my audience that legal battles were a very real threat to journalism. I referred to this section of my speech as ‘personal anecdotes’ in my Statement of Intention and I wrote that I hoped to make my speech more convincing by illustrating the consequences of legal battles that Masters and Mckenzie experienced firsthand.

I tried my best to not make this section sound too much like a “he said, she said” situation by slipping in some of my own commentary. My tutor at the time (yes, I also had an LSG English tutor!) gave me the idea of mirroring ‘shooting Bambi’ with ‘shooting unarmed civilians’, and it was so brutal but I liked it so much that I decided to implement it as part of my commentary. In my Statement of Intention, I wrote that this comparison ‘aims to portray Masters and McKenzie as merely holding him accountable for his actions rather than bullying him, encouraging audiences to view journalists as necessary whistleblowers that require protections.’

My final sentence in this section worked to link all of this back to the audience and remind them, again, why all of this was relevant to them! 

‍

The Conclusion

It’s obvious that in the end, it didn’t really matter that, this time, the courts sided with the journalists and news corporations in this legal battle. Because the reality is that the fact that this legal battle existed in the first place has been enough of a threat to public interest journalism, with cover up attempts and pressures to retreat, and may be a sign of many other stories being covered up. If two journalists, working for big news companies, felt the chilling effect of the legal battles that they came across, how much worse is it for smaller news organisations or independent journalists, who don’t have the deep pockets that The Age, Masters and McKenzie had in withstanding these challenges? This is only the tip of the iceberg of other stories that need to be broken and known by the public. We can’t continue to allow the law to be weaponised against journalists and against democracy. Thus, the recent conclusion of the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation case is a sign that more should be done to protect public interest journalism. 

In my concluding paragraph, I did three things: 

1. I wrapped up
2. I aimed to evoke a sense of urgency on the issue (the bolded part)
3. I restated my contention at the very end to seal the deal

I didn’t exactly include a call to action in the part where I evoked a sense of urgency, but you totally could if that would work for your speech! 

It’s optional to restate your contention as your final sentence, and I opted to do this. I wanted to emphasise the point of my speech again so that my conclusion didn’t sound like it was straying away from the actual contention. I’d say do it if it flows well with the rest of your conclusion because when it’s done right, it really is like ending your speech with a bang!

I’ve Finished Writing a Killer Oral Script. What Now?

When you’ve perfected your speech script, it’s practice time! The way you present the speech is arguably as important, if not even more important than the script itself - presenting your speech in an engaging way can really make your script shine while presenting it in a dull way can make even the best script sound unappealing. 

Practice saying your speech out loud as early as possible and work towards having at least 85-95% of your speech committed to memory (especially if you’re paranoid and get anxious about public speaking like me). By the time I presented my Oral, I had memorised about 95% of my speech and the fact that I knew it off by heart gave me confidence and helped me feel less paranoid that I would mess up. This being said, I would definitely recommend having cue cards with dot points of your main ideas or little prompts with you in the presentation (which I also did), just in case you suddenly blank out!

I spent a week memorising my speech, reciting it out loud over and over again in my bedroom. In doing this, I pretty intuitively found the spots where I wanted to include pauses, change up my intonation or emphasise certain words or phrases - I committed these things to my muscle memory. If public speaking doesn’t come naturally to you, it might be a good idea to highlight and annotate your script and physically write in the parts where you want to include pauses or emphasise words. Practice with that script in front of you until you’ve memorised those things.

I also generally focused on my projection making sure to speak loudly, and I paid attention to my speed and diction. I tend to speed up and start rapping my speech when I’m nervous, so I made a conscious effort to speak slower and steadier in my practice runs, trying to engrain the perfect speed in my muscle memory (to varying levels of success haha). I also tried to make sure I was pronouncing everything clearly and that I wasn’t mumbling.

Before I started my presentation, I took a moment to take a deep breath, shake out my nerves and fix my posture. Good posture is the first step to feeling confident or faking confidence (which we all are when we’re up there)! 

What I Wish I Had Done Before I Did My Oral Presentation

If I could go back and give my Year 12 self advice on the Oral, it would be this: 

Practice saying my speech in front of someone.

I was pretty shy about my speech - you might relate - so I was very reluctant to practice my speech in front of my peers and even my friends. Unfortunately, this meant that I never practised it in front of another person at all, not even once. This is something that I really regret because I didn’t get to practice keeping a good balance between holding eye contact and looking at my cue cards. This ended up being a criticism from my teacher when she assessed my presentation! My teacher also criticised the fact that I didn’t hold an equal amount of eye contact throughout the whole classroom - she wrote that the right side of the classroom must have felt left out because I barely looked in their direction, haha! So, if you can, I really recommend getting out of your comfort zone and practising presenting your Oral in front of your friends or family members… and practice holding eye contact!

If you’ve made it to the end of this blog post, I’m assuming you’ll be having your Oral Presentation soon. Good luck, and try to enjoy presenting your speech if you can, because it’s the first and last time you will ever have the opportunity to present it! 

For more help with your Oral, see our Ultimate Guide to VCE Oral Presentations. 

My Full Oral Presentation Script: More Should Be Done To Protect Public Interest Journalism

Let me take you back in time. Six years ago, in 2017, many of us in this classroom were in Year 6, probably sitting in a primary school classroom, learning what an isosceles triangle is. And obviously, we had all been paying attention because now everyone’s thinking, “Oh yeah, I remember what an isosceles triangle is!” and we’re all imagining a tall triangle that looks like this.

Now, while our Year 6 teachers were providing us with the life-changing information that is the different types of triangles, something bigger was happening on Collins Street. A huge news sausage was in the making. Picture this: a conversation between two passionate and overworked journalists, working for The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. One of which had heard whispers from his contact book of Australian military circles that our most decorated living soldier was not the person that everyone thought he was, and that he had in fact been involved in war crimes like the killing of unarmed civilians. A shared desire to put these rumours to the test, with an open mind, wanting to disprove them as much as to prove them. 

This marked the start of a 4-year long legal battle in the form of a defamation lawsuit lodged by decorated war vet Ben Roberts Smith against two investigative journalists, Chris Masters and Nick McKenzie. And, after more than 100 days of hearings, this battle recently ended, with the judge ruling overwhelmingly in favour of Masters and McKenzie that what they had reported about Roberts Smith was substantially true, hence the two had not defamed him.

ABC News called it a win for public interest journalism. So why have I brought up this case today to highlight that not enough is being done to protect public interest journalism?

Legal battles in general are a huge issue for journalism because they can be used as a threat to journalists. This defamation lawsuit was only the tip of the legal iceberg for Masters and McKenzie. They also faced challenges to source protection and Roberts-Smith’s numerous attempts to silence the two and other witnesses by sending them legal letters telling them to shut up, to suppress the truth about his actions from coming to light.

The biggest issue about the Ben Roberts Smith defamation case for journalists and news corporations has been costs. Their win has come with a hefty price tag estimated to be around $25 million, and even though the majority of this is to be borne by the loser of the trial, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald newspapers will still end up losing millions of dollars, just for defending themselves and their journalists in court. 

But why exactly is this our issue? It’s not like we’re the ones having to pay millions of dollars.

But it becomes our issue when this financial burden creates a chilling effect on public interest journalism. Fear of bankruptcy or crippling financial strain forces journalists to retreat, self censor or settle for silence. This financial issue for news organisations becomes our issue as the quality of our public interest journalism deteriorates and we are deprived of vital information.

Masters and McKenzie talked about the pressure that was put on them to leave the rumours about Ben Roberts Smith be. Chris explained that his colleagues tried to convince him not to fight with Ben Roberts Smith by telling him that it was like shooting Bambi. Well, I guess in that case, he would have been shooting Bambi for shooting unarmed civilians, which sounds pretty fair to me. Nick explained that convincing their bosses to publish the story was an exhaustive process, and even after successfully having their story on Roberts Smith published, Chris said there was a propaganda war waiting for them, with their former colleagues being hired by other news corporations to criticise them and disassemble their work, with their story being put on the cover of a rival newspaper, as an attack on Chris, accusing him of smearing the memories of dead soldiers, and it was designed to intimidate and hurt him and his biding relationships with people in the military who consider him a deep friend. These attempts of BRS to silence the two are not just unfair - as students, we want to grow up in a world where people are held accountable regardless of their connections or wealth.

It’s obvious that in the end, it didn’t really matter that, this time, the courts sided with the journalists and news corporations in this legal battle. Because the reality is that the fact that this legal battle existed in the first place has been enough of a threat to public interest journalism, with cover up attempts and pressures to retreat, and may be a sign of many other stories being covered up. If two journalists, working for big news companies, felt the chilling effect of the legal battles that they came across, how much worse is it for smaller news organisations or independent journalists, who don’t have the deep pockets that The Age, Masters and McKenzie had in withstanding these challenges? This is only the tip of the iceberg of other stories that need to be broken and known by the public. We can’t continue to allow the law to be weaponised against journalists and against democracy. Thus, the recent conclusion of the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation case is a sign that more should be done to protect public interest journalism.  

For more help with your Oral, see our Ultimate Guide to VCE Oral Presentations.