Whether you’re studying english, literature or even language it’s hard to avoid Shakespeare. So, we’re going to take a broad look at: Shakespeare’s historical context, his language, and of course, what this means for interpreting his plays. Since Shakespeare has so many plays chances are your text will be excluded. Instead I’m going to use Othello as a case study.

Before you start reading, LSG's Ultimate Guide to VCE Text Response is a must-read for anybody studying VCE English.

Background

Othello follows the Moorish general Othello and his relationship with his wife, Desdemona. The antagonist Iago is jealous that Cassio was made Lieutenant instead of him, and seeks vengeance on Othello. Iago attempts to destroy Othello’s reputation, and uses the rich but foolish Roderigo to fund his revenge plot. Through careful manipulation of his Wife Emilia, Roderigo, Cassio, and Othello, Iago convinces Othello that Desdemona is unfaithful, sending him into an obsessive jealousy. When Emilia steals Desdemona’s handkerchief, a token of Othello’s love, and Desdemona cannot produce it, Othello believes he has all the information necessary to condemn Desdemona. He smothers her to death, before Emilia reveals Iago’s involvement. Othello, struck by regret, stabs himself, declaring that he “loved not wisely but too well”

Context

So who is this Shakespeare guy? And more importantly, what kind of a world did he live in?

Shakespeare was born in England in 1564, in the middle of the Renaissance Period. This period of “rebirth” was categorised by the increasing reliance on ancient classical authors for information about the world. This is why Shakespeare plots are famously reinterpretations of Ancient histories and Roman plays. Changes in education resulted in the Elizabethan moral and social customs being questioned. This included the Divine Right of Kings, and notions of gender and identity.

Religion is also significant in this period, and the Protestant Reformation is a subject often alluded to by Shakespeare. It is necessary to contextualise Shakespeare within the Renaissance period, because as you will see, themes, words, and references that make very little sense to us were common knowledge in Shakespeare’s time, and understanding them boosts our appreciation of his work.

The context and intent of the author are important considerations when studying VCE English or Literature. For more on this, read Context and Authorial Intention in VCE English.

The Language

Now that we understand when Shakespeare was writing, let’s look at how.

Starting as broadly as possible, Shakespeare’s difficult-to-read language is actually Early-Modern English, and so many words Shakespeare used are either lost or unused in modern English. Any good copy of Shakespeare will have definitions of these words in the margin or opposite page.

Moving in closer, we have the two types of plays, Tragedy and Comedy.

Comedy is tonally more light-hearted, and has an apparently happy-ending. These are Twelfth Night, Much Ado About Nothing, or As You Like It among others. Despite being made to entertain, they are rarely unsophisticated, and the genre may mask something more sinister. For example, the character of Malvolio in Twelfth Night is entertaining and presented as self-obsessed, but could be used as an example of Shakespeare critiquing masculinity in Elizabethan society, as Malvolio feels entitled to Olivia’s affections.

Tragedies cannot be defined by their tone, however. They are defined by a tragic hero, who has a fatal flaw or Hamartia that results in their downfall. This may be Othello’s Jealousy, Macbeth’s ambition, or Brutus’ naivety in Julius Caesar. These traits all cause the tragic heroes’ demise, as their hamartia leads them to make bad decisions or fail to address the real evil. Tragedies will usually end in the unnecessary loss of lives and an unhappy ending for all involved. Most of Shakespeare’s plays fit into tragedy, including most of those based on historical figures. An analysis considering the conventions of Tragedy--like hamartia and tragic heroes--is a great way to stand out when discussing Shakespeare, and so when interpreting a tragedy you should consider what about it is tragic. For example, is Othello a tragedy because Iago is able to manipulate Othello, or is Othello’s jealousy and mistrust ever-present? Either of these options reveals Othello to be a tragedy, however they both say different things about the characters and plot. If Iago manipulates Othello, the tragedy is because a fundamental good person is corrupted. However if Othello was always mistrusting, the play becomes tragic as the audience must watch an unloving marriage slowly dissolve.

Next, we have the two ways Shakespeare formats his dialogue. Students will often focus on what the characters say without considering how it is said. Knowing the difference between Verse and Prose and how they are used is an easy way to stand out in an essay.

Verse is essentially poetry, where one line follows another. It can rhyme, but often doesn’t. What Shakespeare verse will ALWAYS do, however, is follow the Iambic Pentameter. This is a line of poetry with 10 syllables where every second syllable is stressed. This creates a kind of bounce or flow like a heartbeat. The easiest way to recognise this is to count the syllables in each line: thus / do / i / ev / er / make / my / fool / my / purse. Pay attention to when it is not followed, or when characters are interrupted during the pentameter. When the pentameter is interrupted by another character, look at who is interrupting it. It is likely to reveal a power dynamic between the two characters. Alternatively, a character finishing the pentameter, literally finishing their sentence, could be a symbol of love or affection between them. Using linguistic devices like the iambic pentameter as evidence shows an understanding of the text beyond the words spoken

The alternative format is prose. It’s used quite sparingly so look out for it. Is the way we speak normally in conversation, or how a normal novel is written. You can tell a character is speaking in prose as it’s usually just a big chunk of text. Shakespeare’s prose can reveal different things, so it depends on the context and the character using it. In act 1 scene 3 of Othello, Iago speaks to Roderigo in prose and then transitions to verse once Roderigo leaves. This displays Iago’s ability to code-switch and manipulate those around him with words. Prose is considered more simplistic, so in order to control Roderigo, who is presented as quite dumb, Iago relies on simple language, bringing himself to Roderigo’s level. This is directly contrasted with Iago’s use of the complex verse form, which he uses at all other times.

Interpreting Shakespeare

We’ve now covered Shakespeare’s historical context, his play styles, and his dialogue, but what should we look for when reading Shakespeare that allows us to use this information in a text response or close passage analysis. I’ve already given some examples of how Shakespeare’s language is relevant to his themes, but I’m going to give a rough guide of what themes are common in Shakespeare’s plays, and how they are shown in the language.

Fate versus free-will

This is a theme that can lead to a long discussion and gives you the opportunity to express your own opinion. Are the characters acting with free-will, or is some other force impacting their fate? This isn’t really in Othello, so let’s look quickly at Macbeth; if we consider fate versus free-will with the characteristics of a tragedy in mind, then the tragic hero must act freely even though his ‘fatal flaw’ will lead to his demise. However, the inclusion of the witches in Macbeth subverts the tragic structure and implies Macbeth is being toyed with. Even though Macbeth believes he is in control his fate is met, so is it a coincidence that his decisions fulfill his fate, or was the Witches’ prophecy real?

Appearance versus reality

The different uses of verse and prose are a good way to show when characters are genuine or performing for others. I have already mentioned how Iago ‘code-switches’ by using prose to speak to Roderigo, appearing simple and ‘laid-back,’ but his revelatory soliloquy in verse displays his true nature, both in the content of the speech, and the way it is presented.

Order and disorder

In Othello, disorder could be represented by Iago, destabilising the lives of those around him through his use of rhetoric and manipulation. Order is then returned when Iago is revealed and Othello takes his life, recognising himself as tragically misused. Analysing the theme of order and disorder would support the interpretation that Othello is a good man controlled and abused by disorder and manipulation.

Conclusion

So, hopefully this very brief introduction helps you get into Shakespeare! Even if I didn’t cover your text, the use of tragic heroes, prose, verse, and iambic pentameter are things evident in all Shakespeare plays, so you just have to make it relevant to your text. And remember that in order to read Shakespeare, one must first read Shakespeare. It may take several readings or viewings to grasp what is happening in the play, only after that can you start to analyse in the way I have today.

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.

Updated 19/01/2021

Ah, language analysis. It’s that time of year again, which sees us trade our novels and films for newspapers and blog articles, and our knowledge of characters and themes for the never-ending list of persuasive language devices which we will soon begin to scour our texts in search of.

Once again we must put ourselves in the mind of an author, only this time it’s a little different. No longer are we searching for hidden meanings within the text, instead we search for techniques and appeals to emotions which our daring author uses to persuade us to stand in solidarity with their view. My, how times change. Just when we think we’re getting the hang of something, VCE English throws us a curveball. Typical VCAA.

There's a lot that goes into a strong Analysing Argument response and it can be difficult to know where to start, so here's a specific breakdown of an A+ essay to help you elevate the quality of your own writing! Just before we get started, if you'd like to find out more about Language Analysis, head here for a comprehensive overview of this area of study.

Alright, let's get into it!

The following post refers to two articles, ‘Australia’s offshore detention regime is a brutal and obscene piece of self-delusion,’ by Ben Doherty and Helen Davidson, and ‘Stand in solidarity with people seeking asylum this holiday season,’ by Kon Karapanagiotidis.

Step 1: Planning Your Essay

Now, before you get too deep into this step - and I know how eager you must be to dive into that juicy analysis – you first need to decide on a structure. In this particular case of Language Analysis, we are comparing two articles, meaning we have a couple of different structures to choose from. That is, we now need to decide whether we will be separating the analysis of each article into its own individual paragraph, or rather, integrating the analysis and drawing on similar ideas from each of the texts to compare them within one paragraph. Tough decisions, eh?

While most examiners prefer integrated paragraphs, as it shows a higher level of understanding of the texts, sometimes the articles make implementing this structure a little difficult. For example, maybe one article focuses more on emotional appeals, while the other uses factual evidence such as statistics to persuade the reader. What do we do then? If none of the arguments are similar, but we still want to use that amazing integration technique, what can we do?

Well first of all, remember that we are comparing two articles. Comparisons don’t always have to be about similar things, in fact, the true spirit of comparison should take into account the articles’ differences too. So what does this mean for us? We can still integrate our paragraphs, however, we will be focusing on how two contrasting techniques seek to achieve the same result of persuading the audience.

Next, now that we’ve got structure out of the way, we can work on the actual analysis part of planning. That is, scouring through the articles for those various language devices the author has used to turn this article from an exposition to a persuasive text, and then deciding on how we shall be using this in our essay.

I absolutely cannot stress this enough, but: PLAN YOUR ESSAYS! Yes, I happened to be one of those students who never planned anything and preferred to jump straight into the introduction, hoping all my thoughts would fall into place along the way. Allow me to let you in on a little secret: that was a notoriously bad idea. My essays always turned out as garbled, barely legible messes and I always managed to talk myself into circles. Trust me, planning is crucial to an A+ essay.

It is also crucial that you know what exactly should be going into the planning process. There are two main aspects of planning that you need to focus on for a Language Analysis essay: analysis and implementation. I know that might not make much sense right now, but allow me to explain:

Analysis

This includes reading through your articles and picking out all the pieces that seem like persuasive techniques. For example, you might find a paragraph using inclusive language such as "our problem” to convince the reader that this is an issue that they need to be directly concerned about, or perhaps you may find a sentence describing the “excess of funds” being poured into the initiative that demonstrates to the audience how big of a problem it is. This step typically includes underlining areas of interest in the articles, making arrows between similar arguments which you think should be linked and doodling in the margins of the paper with all your immediate thoughts so you don’t forget them later. This part is the lengthiest and it may take you some time to fully understand all of the article.

Next, comes implementation.

Implementation

This is the part where we make ourselves an actual essay plan, in which we decide how to implement all the new information we’ve collected. That is, deciding which arguments or language devices we will analyse in paragraph 1, paragraph 2 and so on. This part is largely up to you and the way in which you prefer to link various ideas.

Below is an example of how you might choose to plan your introduction and body paragraph. It may seem a bit wordy, but this is the recommended thought process you should consider when mapping out your essay, as explained in the following sections of this blog post. You may want to skip ahead and read those first so you know what we’re talking about when you see CCTAP (explained in Step 2: Introduction) or TEEL (explained in Step 3: Body Paragraphs), but otherwise it’s pretty straight forward. With enough practice you may even be able to remember some of these elements in your head, rather than writing it out in detail during each SAC or exam (it might be a little time consuming).

Sample Introduction Plan

Note: Sentences in quotation marks ('') represent where the information has been implemented in the actual introduction.

Article 1 (by Ben Doherty and Helen Davidson):

Context: Detention of Asylum Seekers is currently a popular topic of discussion, 'issue regarding the treatment and management of asylum seekers'.

Contention: Methods must be revaluated, 'better solution must be sought'.

Tone: Accusatory, 'accusatory tone'.

Audience: Regular readers, 'regular readers of the popular news publication site'.

Purpose: Incite critical conversation, 'persuade readers to be similarly critical of the initiative'.

Article 2 (by Kon Karapanagiotidis):

Context: Detention of Asylum Seekers is currently a popular topic of discussion, 'issue regarding the treatment and management of asylum seekers'.

Contention: Detention of Asylum Seekers is wrong, 'detention as a whole is inhumane'.

Tone: Conviction, 'tone of conviction'.

Audience: Those in favour of Asylum Seekers, 'supporters of his resource centre'.

Purpose: Allow Asylum Seekers into the country, '[barring them from entering the country]…should be ceased immediately'.

Sample Body Paragraph Plan

Topic: Inhumanity of detention

Evidence: Article 1’s Emotive Language

          Example: 'harsh', 'brutal regime', 'needlessly cruel' to invoke discomfort.

Evidence: Article 1’s Expert Opinions

          Example: Amnesty International, UN, etc. 'repeatedly criticised'.

Evidence: Article 1’s Humanisation of Asylum Seekers

          Example: Depicts as individuals who’ve been 'arbitrarily punished'.

Evidence: Article 2’s Invitation to Empathise

          Example: Writes he 'cannot imagine the horrors', inviting readers to try too.

Evidence: Article 2’s Emotive Language

          Example: 'pain', 'suffering', 'deprivation of hope' to invoke sympathy.

Evidence: Article 2’s Placing of Blame

          Example: Blames Australian Government for the 'suffering inflicted'.

Link: Restate topic sentence in relation to entire essay

Step 2: Introduction

Now that you’ve got all the planning out of the way, next comes beginning the essay and writing up your introduction. Having a top notch introduction not only sets the standard for the rest of your language analysis, but it gives you a chance to set yourself apart from the crowd. Your teacher or examiner will be reading heaps of these kinds of essays within a short period of time and no doubt it’ll begin to bore them. Thus, having a punchy introduction is bound to catch their attention.

In addition to having a solid beginning, there are a few other things you need to include in your intro, namely, CCTAP. What does CCTAP stand for and why is it so important, you may ask? Well, the nifty little acronym stands for Context, Contention, Tone, Audience and Purpose, which are the five key pieces of information you need to include about both of your articles within your introduction. In addition to all the various language devices we collected during planning, you will need to scan through the articles to find this information in order to give the reader of your essay the brief gist of your articles without ever having read them.  

For an example on how you would accomplish this all in one paragraph, here’s my introduction:

In recent years, the issue regarding the treatment and management of asylum seekers has become a topic of interest for many Australian citizens, with the debate focusing centrally on the ethics of their indefinite detention, and the reliability of this initiative as a working solution. Many articles intending to weigh-in on the debate depict the Australian Government’s favoured solution in various tones, with two pieces, written by news source, The Guardian, by authors Ben Doherty and Helen Davidson, and activist Kon Karapanagiotidis, respectively, asserting that the initiative is the wrong approach to a growing problem. In their piece, 'Australia’s offshore detention regime is a brutal and obscene piece of self destruction', the former of the authors speaks with an accusatory tone to their audience of regular readers of the popular news publication site and debates the practicality of the 'arbitra[y]' detention of these asylum seekers, as well as calls into question the humanity of the act and assesses whether it is an effective use of Australia’s wealth, intending to persuade readers to be similarly critical of the initiative. Likewise, the author of the open letter, 'Stand in solidarity with people seeking asylum this holiday season', writes to supporters of his resource centre in a tone of conviction, asserting that asylum seekers deserve the safety of asylum within Australia, that detaining or barring them from entering the country is inhumane and the root of much suffering, and that overall, it is morally wrong, and thus should be ceased immediately. Both articles contend that Australia’s current solution to the growing issue is incorrect, with Doherty and Davidson specifically believing that there is a better solution that must be sought, and Karapanagiotidis believing that detention as a whole is inhumane and should not be further employed by the government.‍

‍Step 3: Body Paragraphs‍

And now we reach the meat of your essay - the body paragraphs. A typical essay should have at least three of these, no less, although some people might feel the need to write four or five. While this may seem like a good idea to earn those extra marks, you should never feel pressured to do so if you already have three good paragraphs planned out. You have limited time to write your essay and getting as many words on the page as possible won’t always improve your score, especially if you traded quality for quantity. What your teachers and examiners are really looking for is a comprehensive understanding of the texts and the way in which you organise your ideas into paragraphs. So sure, writing an extra paragraph may be useful if you have the time and technique, but never feel pressured to expend the effort on one if it costs you time to the point where you’re turning in an unfinished essay. You can achieve an A+ essay with only three paragraphs, so don’t stress.

Now, onto writing the actual paragraphs. There are various little acronyms to help you through this process, such as TEEL, PEEL or MEAT. Some of these you may have already heard of before and you might even have a preference as to which one you will use. But regardless of what you choose, it is important that you add all the correct elements, as leaving any of them out may cost you vital marks. Make sure you include a Topic sentence, Evidence, Example and Link (TEEL). Once you have the structure down pat, there’s one other thing you need to consider during a Language Analysis essay: don’t forget to analyse the picture.

Seriously, it’s pretty crucial. A requirement of this kind of essay is to analyse imagery, whether it be the newspaper’s header, a cartoon or an actual photograph. This step may involve analysing the image for what it is, or linking the imagery with an already existing argument within the article. Whatever you deduce it to mean, just make sure you slip it into one of the paragraphs in your essay. [Note: an analysis of imagery is not included in following paragraph].

Here is an example of an integrated paragraph (learn more about integrated vs. bridge vs. block structures here):

While both articles make very different arguments on the same topic, in one particular case they give voice to the same issue, namely, the inhumanity of detaining refugees, in which both articles become advocates for the abolition of offshore detention. Authors for The Guardian write that it is 'needlessly cruel', 'harsh', and a 'brutal regime', using emotive language to give weight to their argument and invoke a sense of discomfort within their readers, particularly towards the government’s chosen solution. They call on the opinions of a number of other sources who have 'repeatedly criticised', the operation, such as the United Nations, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, among other similar experts on the matter. The authors depict Asylum Seekers as individuals who are 'arbitrarily punished offshore', and who 'have been accused of no crime', and are therefore, by the judgement of the authors, being treated immorally. In agreement, Karapanagiotidis writes of the abuse endured by asylum seekers in detention, including their separation from loved ones, their arbitrary incarceration, and stating that he, himself, 'cannot begin to imagine the personal toll detention has had on [them]', implying further damage has been done and inviting his audience to similarly place themselves into the figurative shoes of an asylum seeker. The author writes that the offshore detention of asylum seekers causes 'pain', and 'suffering', as well as the 'depriv[ation] of [their] hope', using emotive language to invoke sympathy and understanding within his readers. Karapanagiotidis hands the blame for such 'suffering inflicted', on the Australian government, a similar tactic which The Guardian employed throughout their piece. Overall, both articles use a range of language devices and expert sources to agree that the act of detention is inhumane, and the root of much suffering.‍‍

If you'd like to see more sample A+ body paragraphs and essays, all with annotations to see exactly what makes them high-scoring, check out our How To Write A Killer Language Analysis ebook for an in-depth guide to nailing your Language Analysis.

Step 4: Conclusion

You’ll be glad to know that this is the final part of your essay, hooray! And some might argue it is in fact the easiest, because now all you need to do is summarise all of those body paragraphs into a concise little one. Simple right?

Conclusions typically don’t even have to be all that long, I mean, you’re only restating what you’ve already written down, so there’s no new thinking involved. Under no circumstances should you be using your conclusion to add in any new information, so just make sure you give a brief description of your previous arguments and you should be good to go!

And one more thing: never start your conclusions with 'In conclusion'. Seriously, that may have worked in Year 8, but we’re writing for a whole different standard these days and starting your conclusions off like that just isn’t going to cut it.

Be sure to check out 5 Tips for a Mic-Drop Worthy Essay Conclusion if conclusions are something you struggle with.

Here’s mine:

The two articles, in their discussion of Australia’s offshore detention initiative, bring light to several key points. Authors for The Guardian use various appeals, emotive phrases and evidence of reported monetary statistics to sway the reader to share their opinion, as well as arguments regarding the lack of reliability the initiative provides in its ability to deter boats, the sheer cost of the program, and the morality of the issue. Similarly, Karapanagiotidis, the author of the open letter, uses a humanising image, appeals to the values of the readers, and employs phrases with pre-existing connotations known to the audience, to assert main contentions: that asylum seekers deserve asylum, that barring them from settling in the country is the root of much suffering, and that their indefinite detention is not only inhumane, but morally wrong.  

Good luck with your own essays!

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. 

Introduction

Not gonna lie, this novel is a bit of a tricky one to introduce. World War II, arguably one of the darkest events of human history, has been the basis of so much writing across so many genres; authors, academics, novelists have all devoted themselves to understanding the tragedies, and make sense of how we managed to do this to one another. Many reflect on the experiences of children and families whose lives were torn apart by the war.

In some ways, Doerr is another author who has attempted this. His novel alludes to the merciless anonymity of death in war, juxtaposes individualism with collective national mindlessness, and seeks out innocence amidst the brutality of war.

What makes this novel difficult to introduce is the way in which Doerr has done this; through the eyes of two children on opposite sides of the war, he explores how both of them struggle with identity, morality and hope, each in their own way. Their storylines converge in the bombing of Saint-Malo, demonstrating that war can be indiscriminate in its victims—that is, it does not care if its victims are children or adults, innocent or guilty, French or German. However, their interaction also speaks to the humanity that lies in all of us, no matter how deeply buried.

A very quick history lesson

Fast Five Facts about World War II:

1. Lasting 1939-1945, the war was fought between the Axis powers (Germany, Japan and Italy) and the Allies (basically everyone else, but mainly England, France, and later the US). Whilst it was Germany who started the war, the intervention of the US at the end of five long years of fighting ultimately helped the Allies win.
2. Various forms of technology were first used, or found new uses, during the war. Aircraft carriers and various planes (fighters, bombers etc.) became more important than ever, while Hitler’s use of tanks allowed him to take over much of Europe very quickly.
3. Other forms of new technology included one of the world’s first electronic computers that was used to codebreak (stop reading now and watch The Imitation Game if you haven’t already! Totally counts as studying, right?), as well as radio and radar, used to communicate and also to detect enemies in the field.
4. World War II is also referred to as the Holocaust, the name given to Hitler’s attempted genocide of the Jewish people. 6 million Jews died in the war, and as many as 15 million others died in total.
5. Germany’s initial conquest of Europe was swift and brutal. Within a month, Poland had already surrendered and within a year, so had France. However, there were also resistance groups all over these countries which sought to undermine the Nazi regime in a number of ways, both big and small.

My best attempt to give a general plot overview of this very long book

‍

Disclaimer: this is a very, very broad overview of the novel and it is absolutely not a substitute for actually reading it (please actually read it).

Chronologically, we start in 1934, five years before the war. Marie-Laure is a French girl who lives with her father Daniel Leblanc, working at the Museum of Natural History in Paris. As she starts to go blind, Daniel teaches her Braille, and makes her wooden models of their neighbourhood to help her navigate. Six years later, the Nazis invade France, and they flee the capital to find Daniel’s uncle Etienne, who lives in the seaside town of Saint-Malo; Daniel was also tasked with safeguarding a precious gem, the Sea of Flames, from the Nazis.

In Saint-Malo, Daniel also builds Marie-Laure a model of the town, hiding the gem inside. Meanwhile, she befriends Etienne, who suffers from agoraphobia as a result of the trauma from the First World War. He is charming and very knowledgeable about science, having made a series of scientific radio broadcasts with his brother Henri (who died in WWI). She also befriends his cook, Madame Manec, who participates in the resistance movement right up until she falls ill and dies.

Her father is also arrested (and would ultimately die in prison), and the loss of their loved ones prompts both Etienne and Marie-Laure to begin fighting back. Marie-Laure is also given a key to a grotto by the seaside which is full of molluscs, her favourite kind of animal.

On the other side of the war, Werner is, in 1934, an 8 year-old German boy growing up in an orphanage with his sister Jutta in the small mining town of Zollverein. They discover a radio, which allows them to listen to a broadcast from miles away (it was Henri and Etienne’s), and Werner learns French to try and understand it. One day, he repairs the radio of a Nazi official, who recruits him to the Hitler Youth on account of his ingenuity (and his very blonde hair and very blue eyes, considered to be desirable traits by the regime). Jutta grows increasingly distant from Werner during this time, as she questions the morality of the Nazis.

Werner is trained to be a soldier along with a cohort of other boys, and additionally learns to use radio to locate enemy soldiers. He befriends Frederick, an innocent kid who was only there because his parents were rich—Frederick would eventually fall victim to the brutality of the instructors, and Werner tries to quit out of solidarity. Unfortunately, he is sent into the army to apply his training to actual warfare. He fights with Frank Volkheimer, a slightly ambiguous character who a tough and cruel soldier, but also displays a capacity to be kind and gentle (including a fondness for classical music). The war eventually takes them to Saint-Malo.

Also around 1943 or so, a Nazi sergeant, Reinhold von Rumpel, begins to track down the Sea of Flames. He would have been successful ultimately had it not been for Werner, who stops him in order to save Marie Laure.

As America begins to turn the war around, Werner is arrested and dies after stepping on a German landmine; Marie-Laure and Etienne move back to Paris. Marie-Laure eventually becomes a scientist specialising in the study of molluscs and has an extensive family of her own by 2014. Phew.

Theme/s

What kind of questions does Doerr raise through this plot? To some degree, the single central question of the novel is one of humanity, and this manifests in a few different ways.

Firstly, to what extent are we in control of our own choices? Do we truly have free will to behave morally? The Nazi regime throws a spanner in the works here, as it makes incredibly inhumane demands on its people. Perhaps they fear punishment and have no choice—Werner, for instance, does go along with everything. At the same time, his own sister manages to demonstrate critical thinking and moral reasoning well beyond her years, and it makes you wonder if there was potential for Werner to be better in this regard. There’s also the question of whether or not he redeemed himself in the end.

That being said, Werner is far from the only character who struggles with this—consider the perfumer, Claude Levitte, who becomes a Nazi informer, or even ordinary French citizens who simply accept the German takeover. Do they actually have free will to resist, or is it even moral for them to do so?

Hannah Arendt famously coined the phrase “the banality of evil,” referring to how broader movements of inhumanity (such as the Holocaust) can be compartmentalised until individual actions feel perfectly banal, commonplace and ordinary. This is what allowed people to do evil things without actually feeling or even being inherently evil—they were just taking orders, after all. Consider the role of free will in this context.

This brings us to the broader ‘theme’ of war in general: in particular, what kinds of acts are  suddenly justifiable in war? Etienne and Madame Manec, for instance, even disagree on the morality of resistance, which can frequently involve murder. Etienne’s pacifist stance is a result of the scale of deaths in the previous world war. At the same time, the climactic event of the novel is an allied bombing of Saint-Malo, a French town, just because it had become a German outpost. Risking lives both French and German, this also highlights the ‘necessity’ of some inhumane actions in times of war.

On a more optimistic note, a human quality that Doerr explores is our natural curiosity towards science. This is abundant in the childhoods of both protagonists, as Werner demonstrates dexterity with the radio at a very young age, and Marie-Laure a keen interest in marine biology. In particular, her blindness pushes her into avenues of science which she can experience without literal sight, such as the tactile sensations of mollusc shells. The title may hint at this—for all the light she cannot see, she seeks enlightenment through knowledge, which in turn gives her hope, optimism and purpose.

At the same time, the human desire to better understand the world can also be used inhumanely—Werner used radio to learn through Etienne and Henri’s broadcasts, but he would later in life also use it to help his compatriots murder enemy soldiers. This alludes to the banality of evil again; by focusing on his very technical role and his unique understanding of the science behind radios, he is able to blind himself to the bigger picture of the evils he is abetting. Science is something that is so innately human, yet can also be used inhumanely as well.

For these reasons, I’d suggest humanity is at the heart of the novel. There is a certain cruel randomness to death in war, but just because so many did perish doesn’t mean that there aren’t human stories worth searching for in the destruction. This is the lens that Doerr brings to the WWII narrative.

Some symbols

To some degree, a lot of these symbols relate to humanity, which I’ve argued is the crux of the novel. I’ll keep this brief so as to not be too repetitive.

One major symbol is the radio, with its potential for good as well as for evil. On one hand, it is undoubtedly used for evil purposes, but it also acts as a source of hope, purpose, conviction and connection in the worst of times. It is what ultimately drives Werner to save Marie-Laure.

Along the same vein, whelks are also a major symbol, particularly for Marie-Laure. While an object of her fascination, they also represent strength for her, as they remain fixed onto rocks and withstand the beaks of birds who try to attack them. In fact, she takes “the Whelk” as a code-name for herself while aiding the resistance movement. It’s also noteworthy that, given the atrocities of war, maybe animals are the only innocent beings left. As Saint-Malo is destroyed and the Sea of Flames discarded, it is the seaside ecosystem that manages to live on, undisturbed. In this sense, the diamond can be seen as a manifestation of human greed, harmless once removed from human society.

Finally, it’s also worth considering the wooden models that Daniel builds for Marie-Laure. They represent his immense love for her, and more broadly the importance of family, but the models also attempt to shrink entire cities into a predictable, easily navigable system. As we’ve seen, this is what causes people to lose sight of the forest for the trees—to hone in on details and lose track of the bigger picture around them. The models are an oversimplification of life, and an illusion of certainty, in a time when life was complicated and not at all certain for anyone.

Conclusion

Identity, morality and hope—these things pretty much shape what it means to be human. Throughout All the Light We Cannot See though, characters sometimes struggle with all three of them at the same time.

And yet they always manage to find something within themselves, some source of strength, some sense of right and wrong, some humanity in trying times. Doerr explores this capacity amply in this novel, and in this sense his novel is not just another story about WWII—it’s a story about the things that connect us, always.

Essay prompt breakdown

Transcription

Through the prompt that we’ll be looking at today, the main message I wanted to highlight was to always try and look for layers of meaning. This could mean really being across all of the symbols, motifs and poetic elements of a text, and it’s especially important for a novel as literary as this one.

You might not have been particularly happy to find out you’re going to have to study All The Light We Cannot See—it is probably the longest text on the entire text list—but it’s also a really beautiful, well-written book that deservedly took out the Pulitzer Prize for fiction in 2015.

In this novel, Anthony Doerr tells the World War 2 story through a unique lens, or rather a unique combination of lenses, as he sets a 16-year-old French girl and a 17-year-old German boy on an unlikely path of convergence. Through the dangers and difficulties that they face, Doerr’s novel is one of growth and self-assuredness in a time when this seemed virtually impossible.

The essay topic we’ll be looking at today is:

All The Light We Cannot See is a literal title for the novel, in that it exposes the darkness, evil and cruelty of which humans are demonstrably capable. Is this an accurate interpretation?

As usual, let’s define some keywords.

I want to leave ‘darkness’ for a little later, but let’s start with ‘evil and cruelty.’ By themselves, they generally just mean immorality or inhumanity, but also keep in mind how they come across in characters’ actions, since those will be the focus of our analysis. The word ‘demonstrably’ highlights this, since it means that any ‘evil’ you discuss needs to be demonstrated or proven.

With ‘darkness’, that’s a bit more of a tricky term because it can mean any number of things. Here, it might be taken to mean bad intentions, corruption or anything like that, because it fits with ‘evil and cruelty’. However, this is where the ‘interpretation’ aspect of the prompt comes in—an interpretation being a way of explaining meaning, how do you explain the meaning of ‘darkness’ in relation to the title? Darkness in this sense could be any number of things.

Now, how should we plan for this topic? Let’s first consider if there’s any room to challenge, since the prompt seems to only focus on the more negative, pessimistic side of the book. I’d argue that with darkness, there is also some light in the form of kindness, charity and hope.  

This all sounds pretty profound, but I’m just trying to link it back to the book’s title! I mean, that’s what the topic is asking about, right?

Let’s break this down into paragraphs.

For our first paragraph, a good starting point might be analysing the literal forms of darkness in the novel, and seeing what other interpretations we can get from those. A character that comes to mind is Marie-Laure, the French girl who cannot see any ‘light’ due to her blindness. The title could be seen as an allusion to her character and by extension, the hopelessness that blindness might cause in the midst of a war. We could compare Marie-Laure’s situation with that of Werner, who faces the industrialization of his childhood town, watching it become more and more enveloped in ‘darkness’ and as such, hopelessness.

For our next paragraph, we might drill down to deeper levels of interpreting darkness, because it’s often used as a metaphor for inhumanity. It isn’t difficult to find inhumanity in the novel. There’s plenty of it peppered throughout Werner’s storyline, particularly at Schulpforta, where the Hitler Youth were ‘trained’, (to put it lightly). He and his peers are routinely drilled to “drive the weakness from the corps” in humiliating exercises led by cruel instructors. They are also sometimes driven to cruelty towards one another, and Frederick, Werner’s bunkmate, is relentlessly bullied for his perceived weakness.

So by now, it’s clear that the novel demonstrates the human capacity for experiencing ‘darkness’ as well as inflicting it upon others. But, across these two layers of meaning, could there perhaps be some room to challenge these interpretations? This is something we should look at for our final paragraph.

Here, I would probably argue that just as Doerr explores various forms of darkness, there is also enough ‘light’ which allows some characters to overcome or escape from the darkness. These manifestations of light also require you to think about the different symbolic layers of the novel. On one level for example, looking at light literally, there’s the message on Werner’s radio that teaches us that, even though the brain is sealed in darkness, “the world it constructs…is full of light.” A deeper level of meaning to this may refer to the sense of scientific wonder and discovery which sometimes brings light to Werner, and also Frederick, his bunkmate at Schulpforta, when their lives there are at their most dark.

Consider how, just as darkness has levels of interpretation and symbolism in this book, so does light and hope and joy, rather than just evil and cruelty.

And that’s it! Always delving deeper for meaning helps you to really make use of the symbols, imagery and motifs in a text, and I hope this novel in particular illustrates that idea.

‍

Updated 24/12/2020

Contents

1. Summary
2. Themes, Motifs and Key Ideas
3. Comparative Essay Prompt Example
4. Sample Essay Topics

1. Summary

The Crucible is a four-act play that portrays the atmosphere of the witch trials in Salem. As an allegory of McCarthyism, the play primarily focuses on criticising the ways in which innocent people are prosecuted without any founded evidence, reflecting the unjust nature of the corrupted authoritarian system that governs Salem. It starts off with the girls dancing in the woods and Betty’s unconsciousness, which causes the people of Salem to look for unnatural causes. People start scapegoating others to escape prosecution and falsely accuse others to gain power and land, facilitating mass hysteria which ultimately leads to the downfall of the Salem theocracy. The protagonist John Proctor is one of those that decides to defy the courts and sacrifices his life towards the end of the play, ending the play on a quiet note in contrast with its frenzied conflict throughout the acts.

The Dressmaker shows the audience the treatment towards Tilly Dunnage upon her return to fictional town Dungatar years after she was wrongly accused of being a murderess. Rosalie Ham critiques the impacts of rumours on Tilly and Molly, also establishing her condemnation of the societal stigma of this isolated town. Tilly starts making haute couture outfits to transform the lives of the women in the town and help them present themselves as more desirable and elevate their ranks. However, the townspeople still see Tilly negatively, except for some individuals who are able to look past the opinions of others and get to know Tilly themselves. Ham’s gothic novel garners the audience’s sympathy towards the outcasts of the town and antagonises those who find pleasure in creating drama and spreading rumours about others.  

2. Themes, Motifs and Key Ideas

Through discussing themes, motifs, and key ideas, we’ll gain a clearer understanding of some super important ideas to bring out in your essays. Remember, that when it comes to themes, there’s a whole host of ways you can express your ideas - but this is what I’d suggest as the most impressive method to blow away the VCAA examiners. Throughout this section, we'll be adhering to 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 How To Write A Killer Comparative. I use this strategy throughout this discussion of themes and in the next section, Comparative Essay Prompt Example.

Similarities and Differences (CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT Ideas)

Social Class 

Both The Crucible and The Dressmaker talk extensively about class. By class, what I mean is the economic and social divisions which determine where people sit in society. For instance, we could say that the British Royals are ‘upper class’, whilst people living paycheck to paycheck and struggling to get by are ‘lower class’.

Ultimately, both The Crucible and The Dressmaker are set in classist societies where there is no opportunity for social advancement. Whilst Thomas Putnam steals the land of poor Salemites accused of witchcraft, the McSwineys are left to live in absolute poverty and never leave the ‘tip’ where they have lived for generations. Dungatar and Salem view this social division as a ‘given’ and reject the idea that there is anything wrong with certain people living a life of suffering so others can have lives of wealth and pleasure. As such, for both Salem and Dungatar, the very idea that anyone could move between the classes and make a better life for themselves is inherently dangerous. What we can see here is that class shapes the way communities deal with crisis. Anything that overturns class is dangerous because it challenges the social order – meaning that individuals such as Reverend Parris in The Crucible, or Councillor Pettyman in The Dressmaker may lose all their power and authority.

For The Crucible, that’s precisely why the witchcraft crisis is so threatening, as the Salemites are prepared to replace Reverend Parris and deny his authority. Although Abigail and the group of girls thus single-handedly overturn Salem’s class structures and replace it with their own tyranny, Parris’ original intention was to use their power to reinforce his authority. In The Dressmaker, Tilly is threatening because she doesn’t neatly fit in to Dungatar’s class structure. Having travelled the outside world, she represents a worldly mindset and breadth of experiences which the townspeople know they cannot match.

For this theme, there’s a DIVERGENCE of ideas too, and this is clear because the way that class is expressed and enforced in both texts is vastly different. For The Crucible, it’s all about religion – Reverend Parris’ assertion that all Christians must be loyal to him ensures the class structure remains intact. More than that, to challenge him would be to challenge God, which also guides Danforth in executing those who don’t follow his will. In the case of The Dressmaker, there’s no central authority who imposes class on Dungatar. Rather, the people do it themselves; putting people back in their place through rumour and suspicion. However, by creating extravagant, expensive dresses for the townspeople, Tilly inadvertently provides people with another way to express class.  

Isolated Communities

CONVERGENT:

The setting forms an essential thematic element of The Crucible and The Dressmaker. Both communities are thoroughly isolated and, in colloquial terms, live in the ‘middle of no-where’.

DIVERGENT:

However, what is starkly different between the texts is how this isolation shapes the respective communities’ self-image. For Salem, its citizens adopt a mindset of religious and cultural superiority – believing that their faith, dedication to hard work and unity under God make them the most blessed people in the world. Individuals as diverse as Rebecca Nurse and Thomas Putnam perceive Salem to be a genuinely incredible place. They see Salem as the first battleground between God and the Devil in the Americas, and as such, construct a grand narrative in which they are God’s soldiers protecting his kingdom. Even the name ‘Salem’ references ‘Jerusalem’, revealing that the Salemites see themselves as the second coming of Christ, and the fulfilment of the Bible’s promises.

Not much of the same can be said for The Dressmaker. Dungatar lacks the same religious context, and the very name of ‘Dungatar’ references ‘dung’, or beetle poop. The next part of the name is 'tar', a sticky substance, creating the impression that Dungatar's people are stuck in their disgusting ways. The townspeople of Dungatar are acutely aware of their own inadequacy, and that is why they fight so hard to remain isolated from the outside world. Tilly is therefore a threat because she challenges their isolation and forces the men and women of Dungatar to reconsider why their community has shunned progress for so long. In short, she makes a once-isolated people realise that fear, paranoia, division and superstition are no way to run a town, and brings them to acknowledge the terribly harmful impacts of their own hatred.

On top of that, because Salem is literally the only Christian, European settlement for miles, it is simply impossible for them to even think about alternatives to their way of life. They are completely isolated and thus, all of their problems come from ‘within’ and are a result of their own division. For Dungatar, it’s a mix of societal issues on the inside being made worse by the arrival of people from the outside. The township is isolated, but unlike Salem, it at least has contact with the outside world. All Tilly does, therefore, is show the people of Dungatar an alternative to their way of life. But, for a community used to the way they have lived for decades, it ultimately contributes to its destruction.

‍

______

By the way, to download a PDF version of this blog for printing or offline use, click here!

______

3. Comparative Essay Prompt Example

The following essay topic breakdown was written by Lindsey Dang. If you'd like to see a completed A+ essay based off this same essay topic, then check out LSG's A Killer Comparative Guide: The Crucible & The Dressmaker, written by 50 study scorer and LSG tutor, Jordan Bassilious!

[Modified Video Transcription]

Compare the ways in which outcasts are treated in The Crucible and The Dressmaker.

Step 1: Analyse

Before writing our topic sentences, we need to look at our key words first. The keywords in this prompt are outcasts and treated.

So, who are considered outcasts in the two texts? Outcasts can be those of traditionally lower classes, they can be characters with physical flaws, those that are different to others or those who do not abide by the standards of their respective societies.

• In The Crucible: Tituba, Abigail, John Proctor or even Martha Giles can be considered as outcasts.
  
• In The Dressmaker: We can consider Tilly, Molly, The McSwineys, etc.
  

We also need to look our second key word ‘treated’. How would we describe the treatment towards these characters? Are they treated nicely or are they mistreated and discriminated against? Do ALL members of that community have that same treatment towards those outcasts or are there exceptions? Remember this point because we might be able to use this to challenge the prompt.

We’re going to skip Step 2: Brainstorm today, but if you’re familiar with LSG teachings, including the THINK and EXECUTE strategy discussed in my How To Write A Killer Text Response ebook, then you’ll be good for this part.

Step 3: Create a Plan

ARGUMENT 1

Both texts portray outcasts as victims of relentless accusations or rumours, seeking to engage the pathos of the audience towards those who are marginalised.

• In The Crucible, Tituba the ‘Negro slave’ is the first person to be accused by witchcraft in Salem. Her ‘consequent low standing’ is also shown through her use of language ‘You beg me to conjure! She beg me make charm’ which is fraught with grammatical errors, compared to Judge Danforth who uses legal jargon and the Putnams who are much more well-spoken.
  
• Similarly, the McSwineys are also those of lower class and are seen as the outcasts of Dungatar. Their names show us their position in the social hierarchy because they are associated with swines which are pigs. This is confirmed by Sergeant Farrat who said ‘Teddy McSwiney was, by the natural order of the town, an outcast who lived by the tip’. Even when Teddy McSwiney died, the townspeople still did not reflect on the impacts that their prejudice and bigotry had on him, eventually forcing the McSwineys to leave the town because they could not find a sense of belonging living there.
  
• Tilly is also poorly treated due to the fact that she is fatherless, being bullied by the kids at school especially Stewart Pettyman and also used by William as a leverage to marry Gertrude, threatening Elsbeth that ‘it’s either her [Gertrude] or Tilly Dunnage’
  
• Also discuss Giles Corey’s death and the significance of his punishment as the stones that are laid on his chest can be argued to symbolise the weight of authority
  

ARGUMENT 2

Miller and Ham also denounce the ways in which outcasts are maltreated due to their position in the social hierarchy through his antagonisation of other townspeople.

• There’s also a quote on this by Molly ‘But you don’t matter – it’s open slather on outcasts'. Herein, she warns the audience of how quickly outcasts can become victims of rumours and accusations as the term ‘slather’ carries negative connotations.
  
• Similarly, the theocracy that governs Salem dictates the rights of their people and children. He specifically states 'children were anything but thankful for being permitted to walk straight, eyes slightly lowered, arms at sides, and mouths shut until bidden to speak', which explains the girls’ extreme fear of being whipped. Salem is very violent to children, slaves and helpers and it can be seen that this is the result of the social hierarchy and the Puritan ideology.
• For The Dressmaker, also discuss the ways in which they name others in this quote ‘daughter of Mad Molly is back – the murderess!’ Likewise discuss how Goody Osbourne the ‘drunkard half-witted’ and Sarah Good an old beggar woman are the first ones to be named. You can talk about Martha who is accused of being a witch just because she has been ‘reading strange books’, and Sarah Good due to the mere act of ‘mumbling’. The normality of these actions underlines the absurdity of the accusations made against these individuals, furthering Miller’s chastisement of the fictitious nature of the trials and also the ways in which outcasts are the first to be scapegoated.
  

ARGUMENT 3

However, there are still characters that are driven by their sense of morality or remorse instead of mistreating the outcasts of their community.

• Both Sergeant Farrat and Proctor are motivated by their remorse to make amends. Proctor’s evasion of ‘tearing the paper’ and finding ‘his goodness’ is motivated by his desire to atone for his sin (having committed adultery with Abigail), and Sergeant regretted sending Tilly away. He, in his eulogy, says ‘if you had included [Tilly], Teddy would have always been with us’, expressing his regret for the ways outcasts are treated in Dungatar. Similarly, Teddy McSwiney also has a pure relationship with Tilly and treats her differently instead of judging her based on the rumours about her being a ‘murderess’.
  
• While those who can sympathise with outcasts in The Dressmaker are either outcasts themselves or are remorseful (or both), there are those in The Crucible that are purely and solely motivated by their moral uprightness. Rebecca Nurse is neither an outcast (as she is highly respected for her wisdom) nor remorseful (as she has remained kind and pure from the beginning of the play). She is always the voice of reason in the play and tries to stop authoritative figures from convicting and prosecuting outcasts. A quote you can use would be ‘I think you best send Reverend Hale back as soon as he come. This will set us all to arguin’ again in the society, and we thought to have peace this year'.
  

4. Sample Essay Topics

1. 'I say—I say—God is dead.' —John Proctor, The Crucible. Explore how communities respond to crisis.

2. People must conform to societal expectations in The Crucible and The Dressmaker. Do you agree?

3. Discuss how The Crucible and The Dressmaker use textual features to convey the author’s perspective.

4. Gender repression is rife in both The Crucible and The Dressmaker. Discuss.

Now it's your turn! Give these essay topics a go. If you're interested in reading a 50 study scorer's completed essays based off these 4 essay topics, along with annotations so you can understand his thinking process, then I would highly recommend checking out LSG's A Killer Comparative Guide: The Crucible & The Dressmaker.

This blog has written contributions from Lindsey Dang.

Resources

Download a PDF version of this blog for printing or offline use

Understanding Context in The Crucible and The Dressmaker

The Crucible by Arthur Miller

The Dressmaker by Rosalie Ham