crucible dressmaker comparison essay

An Ultimate Guide to Comparing The Crucible and The Dressmaker

Whilst Arthur Miller’s The Crucible and Rosalind Ham’s The Dressmaker diverge in their structure, form, setting and focus, they share a thematic exploration of social oppression, hypocrisy and power. Miller’s allegorical play satirises the imposition of power of authoritarian regimes, namely, the theocracy governing Salem and the McCarthy government. Oppression in Dungatar, in contrast, is not institutionalised. Social conventions and customs are set by community members; the punishment for social deviants is usually marginalisation and ostracisation in Ham’s world, whereas sanctions for violations in Miller’s world manifest more violently - in the forms of execution and corporal punishment. Ham’s focus is therefore on the socially repressive world of Dungatar, together with the role of religious bigotry and prejudice in coercing disenfranchised individuals.

Both texts criticise the disproportionate maltreatment of outcasts, who are more susceptible to institutionalised and social execution. The experiences of marginalised characters are depicted vividly in both The Crucible and The Dressmaker , with some characterised by a lack of agency. However, the authors do not see them as mere victims defeated by society, but empowered individuals with the power to change. Miller’s protagonist, John Proctor, and Ham’s eponymous ‘Dressmaker’, Tilly Dunnage, both contribute to the disintegration of their respective corrupt societies. Both Salem and Dungatar, despite the differences in the endings, become purified, with the courts losing their power in the former case and the town burnt to the ground in the latter.

Notes: If you enjoy this blog, don't miss out on our upcoming $5 Crucible & Dressmaker lecture by Tara Niemes (50 in English) to learn how to write a perfect scorer in the exam. See bottom corner of this page!

Both Dungatar, in Ham’s The Dressmaker , and Salem, in Miller’s The Crucible , are insular communities governed by strict systems of values and norms. These rigid societies are challenged by unexpected external forces: the arrival of witchcraft in The Crucible and Tilly Dunnage’s return in The Dressmaker. Yet, these external events do not catalyse social disintegration themselves but test these communities' strength and unity.

Religion and Superstition:

Religion serves as a critical plot device in both The Crucible and The Dressmaker , yet the texts depict the impact of faith and superstition in distinct ways. Miller refers to the witch hunt in Salem as a "perverse manifestation" of "panic," stemming from the town's stringent religious laws, which create a stark dichotomy - one is either with the church or against it. This dichotomous religious framework underscores the hollowness of such religious tenets. In contrast, Ham explores the perils of blind reliance on religion. Ham illustrates this through Mr Almanac, who staunchly believes that “all that’s needed is God’s forgiveness,” refusing to seek medical help for his ailing wife, Irma. This tragic blindness to the practical needs of life underscores the pernicious impact of unquestioning faith.

Notes: Religion also impacts characters’ internalisation of guilt.

In the maelstrom of mass hysteria and fear where "vengeance walks Salem," Miller focuses on the burden of guilt experienced by those with true humanity and conscience. This internal guilt and shame have a greater impact on a person than external judgments. Characters who cannot forgive themselves often suffer more, as they must wrestle with their conscience. Miller exemplifies this through the character of John Proctor, a man tormented by internal guilt due to his affair with Abigail. His guilt is so immense that he declares he will “cut off [his] hand before [he’ll] reach for [her] again”. His internal struggle manifests in denial, as he attempts to convince himself that he and Abigail “never touched”. However, his guilt only leads to heightened tension in his relationship with his wife, Elizabeth. Proctor's self-judgment eventually pushes him to blame Elizabeth, unable to recognise that the “magistrate sits in [his] heart that judges [him]”. This powerful self-realization eventually drives him to public confession, and in doing so, he finds emancipation from his guilt and shame, transforming his pain into altruistic action.

Miller's The Crucible contrasts with Ham's The Dressmaker , where religion and superstition become conduits for self-blame. The protagonist, Tilly, becomes a character consumed by internal guilt following the tragic death of her son, Pablo. This guilt is manifested through physical ailments, a “feverish nausea” which “churn[s] in her stomach”. Tilly endures the “sour people” of Dungatar as a form of self-inflicted “penance”. But unlike Proctor, who is guilty of his sin, Tilly imposes unwarranted blame upon herself. However, she eventually realizes her innocence, symbolised through a heartfelt confession shared with Molly, her mother. This realisation leads to Tilly's liberation from her guilt, metaphorically represented by the fire that obliterates Dungatar, thereby rejecting the unwarranted guilt that dominated her life. 

While Proctor's redemption comes from acknowledging his sin, Tilly's freedom comes from recognising her innocence, highlighting the different approaches to guilt in both texts. Thus, both Miller and Ham explore the conflicting attitudes towards internal guilt which pervade human nature. They celebrate the freedom that comes with the cleansing of guilt, albeit achieved through distinct narrative routes.

Gender Roles:

Both Miller and Ham unpack stereotypical gender roles within their narratives, although the focus on gender may be more explicit in The Dressmaker than it is in The Crucible.

In The Crucible , the era's Puritanical ideals uphold patriarchal expectations, resulting in men, like John Proctor, being celebrated despite their flawed behaviours. Proctor is revered and even feared, despite his acts of lechery, gaslighting, and relations with a young employee, violence, and threats. These potentially misogynistic undertones could be influenced by Miller's personal context, as he had an affair in the 1950s, and Proctor might reflect some aspects of his own life. Likewise, Evan Pettyman, a figure of authority, enjoys the societal perks of his gender. Despite not being the primary breadwinner, he maintains dominance over the women in his life. Lesley Muncan similarly fits the heteronormative mould by marrying Mona and suppressing his self-expression. Sergeant Farrat initially conforms to societal expectations, concealing his cross-dressing habits, but eventually discloses his true self, symbolising the "clock set wrong".

Women like Elizabeth, who conform, suffer silently in the face of societal expectations. She blames herself for the "wintry house," implying the belief that women are their husband's property and are responsible for their happiness. She is depicted as a dutiful wife, her minimal responses to Proctor's conversation illustrating the societal expectation for women to suppress their feelings and opinions. Similarly, Mona's marriage to Lesley reflects her conformity to societal norms, as does her tendency to partake in gossip and slut-shaming.

However, women who defy societal norms experience liberation and empowerment. Abigail is portrayed as seductive and deceitful, with an “endless capacity for dissembling” facilitated by her feminine beauty. She subverts the expectations of her gender by leveraging her beauty and manipulative skills to rise to the position of power – where the crowd “parts like the sea for Israel” as she walks past. She openly defies societal norms through her lies, sexual behaviour, and occult practices in the forest, using these transgressions to expose the pretence of Salem. This parallels Tilly's refusal to conform to societal norms allowing her to navigate her own destiny, underlining Ham's subversion of traditional gender roles.

Ham further challenges heteronormative expectations through the secret lesbian relationship of Nancy and Ruth, hidden due to societal pressures. Their plight represents the silent struggle of those who could not conform to heteronormative norms during this era. In sum, Miller's work demonstrates the patriarchal norms of the Puritan era while Ham uses her narrative to challenge and subvert traditional gender roles.

Social Status & Injustices:

Both texts delve into the profound influence of social roles, underscoring the vulnerability of society's 'easy targets' such as women, people of colour, and those with mental illnesses. Ham demonstrates this societal injustice through the character Molly, who discerns that "it's open slather on outcasts". Similarly, the McSwineys, living near a rubbish tip, are metaphorically positioned as the town's outcasts.

Parallel to Ham's portrayal, Miller showcases the character of Tituba, a woman of colour and a slave, who faces discrimination and mistreatment. Parris dismissively orders, "Out of my sight!", highlighting her low social standing. The narrator notes how "her slave sense has warned her that, as always, trouble in this house eventually lands on her back", further demonstrating the disproportionate blame and punishment she receives. Sarah Goody, an older, impoverished woman, also endures societal persecution due to her vulnerable position.

The protagonists, Proctor and Tilly, serve as the paradox within their societies. Proctor remains rooted in his Christian ideals, in contrast to the hypocritical society that claims to uphold the same virtues. He becomes the sacrificial lamb, bearing the brunt of societal injustice to expose the flawed system. Tilly, an outcast in her community, follows a similar trajectory.

The roles of Danforth and Farrat provide a juxtaposition of how those tasked with upholding justice can fail to do so. Danforth subverts his duty by actively encouraging injustice, while Farrat, though passive in his neglect, offers some support to Tilly when she falls victim to social injustice.

However, not all perpetrators face justice. The narrative depicts a concerning impunity: Reverend Parris and Danforth maintain their powerful positions despite their actions. Yet, this is not absolute. There are instances where justice catches up with those evading it, like Evan Pettyman who, after evading punishment for his misdeeds for decades, is eventually killed by Marigold. Similarly, Parris experiences a fall from grace, losing his wealth and reputation.

Moreover, the citizens of Dungatar face collective retribution when their houses are burned down, leaving them uninsured. This contrasts with the reality of The Crucible , where not everyone faces justice, reflecting the difference between the fictional nature of both The Dressmaker and the historical realism of The Crucible . Hence, both texts offer incisive critiques of societal norms, exploring the unjust consequences of societal roles and the varying degrees of justice served.

Hysteria and Reputation:

Both Dungatar and Salem are insular communities, governed by a strict system of values and norms. The creation of chaos in both texts is contemporaneous with the intrusion of unexpected external forces: the arrival of witchcraft in The Crucible and Tilly’s arrival in The Dressmaker . However, these events do not catalyse social disintegration themselves but merely put the community's strength and unity to a test. 

Betty’s affliction, caused by the “Devil’s touch”, causes paranoia and prompts irrational responses. As Salem’s social order is founded upon religious bigotry, the court resorted to dogmatic approaches in resolving the matter. Miller shows that the community is very susceptible to deceit, especially if the false remarks align with their beliefs, and how such a tendency paves way for opportunism. The truthful words of social outcasts are disregarded, whereas the malignant accusations of conformists are valued by the court. Division is created as a result of Salem’s mob mentality.

Tilly’s trauma is caused by the Pettymans’ baseless accusations and attribution of blame. Her arrival reminds them of their mistreatment of an innocent child, a past characterised by bullying, abuse and corruption. When the “bastard” returns, the community’s true self emerges, as exemplified through the prejudice, and at a later part, jealousy manifested.

Miller’s didactic American realist style allows him to depict the parallels between the contagious spreads of unfounded accusations in the repressive system of Salem’s theocracy and McCarthyism. 

Conclusion:

"The Crucible" and "The Dressmaker" offer profound insights into societal norms, power dynamics, and the role of religion and gender. Through their vivid narratives, they expose the pervasive influence of hysteria and reputation in shaping societal behaviors. Importantly, they depict the experiences of marginalized characters not as victims defeated by society, but as empowered individuals capable of instigating social change.

TLDR & FAQs:

How does The Dressmaker relate to The Crucible?

The Dressmaker by Rosalie Ham and The Crucible by Arthur Miller, though distinct in their settings and plots, share numerous thematic similarities.

• Social Hierarchy and Marginalisation: Both novels depict close-knit communities characterized by stringent social hierarchies, where nonconformity is met with hostility. In The Dressmaker , Tilly is ostracized due to her mother's reputation and her own accused crime. Similarly, in The Crucible , characters such as Tituba and Sarah Good are marginalised due to their race and socioeconomic status.
• Abuse of Power: Power dynamics play a significant role in both narratives. Figures like Judge Danforth misuse their authority, leading to wrongful executions in the Salem witch trials. Likewise, characters like Evan Pettyman in Ham's text exploit their positions for personal gain, resulting in an oppressive and unjust environment.
• Guilt and Vengeance: These novels also delve into the human experiences of guilt, vengeance, and redemption. John Proctor grapples with his guilt over his affair with Abigail, leading to a tragic end. Tilly in The Dressmaker , on the other hand, deals with guilt over her supposed crime in childhood, ultimately finding a form of redemption through her fiery vengeance on the town that ostracized her.
• Hypocrisy: Both Miller and Ham criticize the hypocrisy prevalent within their societies. The puritanical society of Salem, despite its claims of piety, is depicted as deeply flawed and hypocritical. Similarly, the outwardly respectable community of Dungatar is revealed to be morally corrupt underneath its facade.

What is the key message of The Dressmaker?

• Critique of Small-town Hypocrisy: The novel harshly critiques small-town mentality and the dangerous consequences of unchecked gossip and hypocrisy. Dungatar, the setting of the book, appears charming and simple on the surface but is ridden with secrets, lies, and injustice.
• Power of Redemption and Self-discovery: The protagonist, Tilly, returns to her hometown seeking personal redemption for a crime she was accused of in her childhood. In the process, she embarks on a journey of self-discovery, realizing her worth and skill, which she uses to transform the town's women and later to exact her revenge.
• Consequences of Prejudice: The narrative underlines the lasting impact of discrimination and unjust treatment on individuals. Tilly's ostracization has deep psychological effects, which she only begins to resolve after many years.
• Power of Female Empowerment: Despite being set in a patriarchal society, the book emphasizes the power of female resilience. Tilly's character is a symbol of defiance against gender norms and expectations.
• Cycle of Vengeance: The novel also explores the destructive cycle of vengeance. Tilly's quest for justice leads to the devastation of Dungatar. This suggests that revenge, while cathartic, can have harmful consequences.

What is the key message of The Crucible?

• Hysteria and Fear Can Lead to Destruction: A central message of the play is that mass hysteria, when fueled by fear and suspicion, can lead to irrational behaviors, false accusations, and ultimately devastating consequences. The witch trials, in this case, serve as a symbol of how societal panic can destruct a community.
• Importance of Reputation: The play heavily emphasizes the importance people place on their reputations in a society. Characters like John Proctor and Rebecca Nurse are overly concerned about their public image, which significantly influences their decisions. However, the message is that the truth and moral integrity should be valued over public reputation.
• Integrity and Personal Honor: Perhaps the most potent message is the emphasis on personal integrity. John Proctor chooses to die rather than sign a false confession, showing that he values his personal honor over his life. This act illustrates the theme that maintaining one's integrity is more important than preserving one's life.
• Critique of McCarthyism: The Crucible was also written as an allegory for the anti-communist hysteria during the McCarthy era in America, drawing parallels between the Salem witch trials and the Red Scare. Miller's play carries a warning about the dangers of allowing fear to override reason and justice.

Related posts

Writing About Protest

An Ultimate Guide to False Claims of Colonial Thieves 

An Ultimate Guide to Oedipus The King

An Ultimate Guide to Chronicle of a Death Foretold

VCE Study Tips

English Language

Private Tutoring

Only one more step to getting your FREE text response mini-guide!

Simply fill in the form below, and the download will start straight away

English & EAL

Understanding Context in The Crucible and The Dressmaker

August 3, 2022

Want insider tips? Sign up here!

Go ahead and tilt your mobile the right way (portrait). the kool kids don't use landscape....

For a detailed guide on Comparative, check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative.

Why Is the Context Important?

Understanding the context of the texts you are studying is essential if you are to satisfactorily respond to any prompt ( learn about the 5 types of prompts here ). Not only does it provide an insight into the society of the time and their views and values , it also allows for greater awareness of the characters’ motivations, resulting in a richer discussion in your essays. Discussing the context of the texts also makes for an ideal comparison which can be incorporated in the introduction as well as the body paragraphs. Moreover, context paragraphs are a great tool to have up your sleeves, as they can easily be adapted to almost every essay question, a real asset when attempting to write an essay in an hour. 

In this blog post, I will be giving a brief overview of the contexts of the play The Crucible by Arthur Miller and Rosalie Ham’s The Dressmaker . Further down , I have also provided a sample paragraph as an example of a way in which I would go about writing a context paragraph in response to an essay prompt concerning the two texts. Both of these texts are set in fascinating and significant eras of human history so I invite you to conduct your own research after reading this! 

At first glance, the town of Salem, Massachusetts in 1692 and Dungatar, Victoria in 1950s Australia have little in common; however, both towns exist in stifling geographical isolation, allow myopic and parochial outlooks to flourish, and maintain an irrational but overwhelming fear of ‘the other.’ 

The Crucible, Arthur Miller

The Crucible is set in 1692 in Salem. The provincial, conservative town was established by English Puritans who, fearing persecution, fled from a Britain dominated by The Church of England. The first Puritans to arrive in Salem faced brutal conditions, including 'marauding Indians' and living on a 'barbaric frontier' that lay close to the 'dark and threatening…virgin forest' that they believed to be the 'devil’s last preserve'. In order to overcome these challenges, the people of Salem were forced to unify and remain diligent. In order to ensure efficiency, a strict and rigid way of life was adopted, where work and prayer were championed and individual freedoms and pleasures abhorred. Though this harsh way of life did allow the Salemites to stay alive, it forced them to suppress various natural human emotions such as joy and anger, so as to not detract from work and prayer. Further, the town had limited their interaction with the outside world, compelling them to instead be constantly surrounded by each other. This hazardous combination of repression of emotions and interaction with only a small pool of people spurred private jealousies and vengeance within the townspeople, and it is here that the play commences.

The Dressmaker, Rosalie Ham

In contrast, Ham’s novel takes place in 1950s rural Australia, in the fictional town of Dungatar. Despite being set centuries after The Crucible , Dungatar is rife with the same parochialism (great word to use for both texts, referring to a limited/ narrow outlook), resentment and gossip as Salem. The town’s physical isolation - it is surrounded by 'wheat, yellow plains' and seems to be a 'dark blot shimmering on the edge of flatness' - corresponded with their metaphoric isolation from global events, creating an intense fear of ‘the other’. Further, similarly to The Crucible , the stark physical isolation ensures that each individual’s social interactions are limited to the town’s small population, fostering a breeding ground for narrow-mindedness and prejudice. Ham’s description of the way 'the crowd screamed with lust, revenge, joy, hate and elation' after a local football match win reveals the underlying emotions of the town, repressed behind a veneer of respectability and perceived moral propriety. All it takes is a stimulus, which arrives in the form of outcast Tilly Dunnage, to uncover the malicious undertones of the provincial town. 

Example Context Paragraph

During VCE, I tended to use my first paragraph (in response to an essay prompt) as a way to explore the context of the texts I was studying, and relate the context to the essay prompt being addressed ( learn more about the different types of essay prompts here ). In this case, the prompt I have responded to is:

‍ Compare the ways in which The Crucible and The Dressmaker portray divided societies. 

I was able to adapt much of this paragraph below to whatever essay prompts I came across. 

The geographical isolation of rural, parochial towns can breed a kind of myopia amongst inhabitants and promote binary thinking. Salem is situated on the 'edge of wilderness’, with the 'American continent stretching endlessly West’. The 'dark and threatening' forest which ominously surrounds the town is believed to be 'the last place on earth not paying homage to God’, inciting the irrational fear that 'the virgin’s forest was the Devil’s last preserve' (1) . To combat the imminent threat of the 'marauding Indians' upon their arrival in Salem, the Salemites maintained that 'in unity…lay the best promise of safety’, and hence were governed as 'an autocracy by consent' (2) . Similarly, in The Dressmaker , the town of Dungatar 'stretches as far as the silos' and is described as a 'dark blot shimmering on the edge of flatness’. 'The green eye of the oval' is a physical representation of the town’s predilection for prejudice and endorsement of slyly watching others (3) . The stifling insularity experienced by both towns perpetuates a paucity of culture and 'parochial snobbery’, as well as fostering austere social expectations (4) . The totalitarian regime that governed Salem and their 'strict and sombre way of life' conditioned the people of Salem to repress natural human emotions so as to conform to the conservative and rigid values of society. Indeed, Miller’s description of the 'small windowed dark houses struggling against the raw Massachusetts winter' alludes to the Salemites’ dogmatically narrow-minded outlook and their repression of any individuality. Hence, despite the veneer of propriety upheld by Salem’s 'sect of fanatics’, the town is rife with hidden resentments and 'long-held hatreds of neighbours' (5) . Whilst moral respectability and piety conceal the true sentiments of the people of Salem, clothing is the mask for the 'liars, sinners and hypocrites' of Dungatar (6) . Though on the surface the town appears respectable, the true desires of 'the sour people of Dungatar' are revealed through their desire 'to look better than everybody else’. Their lack of connection with the outside world forces their constant interaction with one another and means that 'everybody knows everything about everyone' (7) . Thus, Miller and Ham postulate that geographical isolation inevitably forges unyielding social norms that repress human emotions and pits individuals against each other (8) .

‍ Annotations (1) In these two sentences, I’ve provided the geographical context of Salem.   ‍ (2) My description of the geographical location is followed quickly by describing the town’s beliefs and values, which have a large impact on the social context.  ‍ (3) Here, I’ve used the geographical context as a metaphor to explain the social context of Dungatar. ‍ (4) I’ve described a similarity between the two towns - remember to use lots of meaningful comparisons in all paragraphs ( LSG’s CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy is a useful strategy for this).  ‍ (5) I’ve detailed how the societal expectations and values of the Salemites (the people of Salem) can impact the behaviour of the characters.  ‍ (6) Here, I’ve outlined a subtle difference (or divergence ) between Dungatar and Salem.  ‍ (7) Once again, I’ve related the townspeople’s values and beliefs, as well as the physical context, to their behaviour. ‍ (8) I’ve ended with a meaningful comparison between the intent of the two authors. 

Looking for more? Check out our other blog posts on The Crucible and The Dressmaker :

The Crucible by Arthur Miller

The Dressmaker by Rosalie Ham

Comparing The Crucible and The Dressmaker

Get our FREE VCE English Text Response mini-guide

Now quite sure how to nail your text response essays? Then download our free mini-guide, where we break down the art of writing the perfect text-response essay into three comprehensive steps. Click below to get your own copy today!

Access a FREE sample of our The Crucible & The Dressmaker study guide

Written by Jordan Bassilious who achieved a perfect study score of 50, English Premier's Award and a 99.5 ATAR:

• Learn unique points of comparison through LSG'S CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy and stand out from the rest of the Victorian cohort
• Sample A+ essays, with EVERY essay annotated and broken down on HOW and WHY these essays achieved A+
• Advanced discussions like structural feature analysis, views and values and critical readings.

Reckoning & The Namesake are studied as part of VCE English's Comparative. For one of our most popular posts on Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing), check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative .

• Inheritance of Trauma 
• Identity and Naming
• Memory and Retrospect

Magda Szubanski’s memoir, Reckoning, and Jhumpa Lahiri’s bildungsroman, The Namesake, follow misguided protagonists as they attempt to reconcile and ‘reckon’ with complicated family histories. Magda is burdened by her father’s legacy, whilst Ashoke’s distressing train accident lays the foundation for Gogol’s uncertainty, exposing the inescapable and often inscrutable marks that trauma leaves on the identities of later generations. With a large focus on inherited trauma , identity and memory , we’ll be breaking down some crucial quotes from each of these texts to better understand these key themes. 

For a deeper look into some of the themes in Reckoning and The Namesake , check out this earlier post . And, if you need a refresher on how to properly embed quotes in your writing, take a look at How To Embed Quotes in Your Essay Like a Boss . 

1. Inheritance of Trauma

Whether it be the hardships of war or the adversity of misfortune, both texts observe family timelines steeped in history and trauma. Magda and Gogol are inadvertently burdened by their parents’ experiences, which remain obscure and confusing to the two protagonists and only complicate their identities. 

We were tugboats in the river of history, my father and I, pulling in opposite directions. He needed to forget. I need to remember. For him, only the present moment would set him free. For me, the key lies buried in the past. The only way forward is back. (p. 13)

This quote is intrinsic to the authorial intent behind Szubanski writing her cathartic memoir. The experiences of Magda’s father in war-torn Poland are, as Magda expresses, ‘passed on genetically’. Yet, with Zbigniew’s instinct to ‘[clamp] down tight on all feeling’, his trauma remains unrevealed and unexamined during much of Magda’s life. This impenetrable history impresses onto Magda as intergenerational trauma, which leaves her an ‘unregulated mess’, constantly  ‘ricocheting between feeling nothing and feeling everything’. 

As Magda accurately describes, both she and her father are metaphorical ‘tugboats in the river of history’, drawn in completely opposite directions to resolve their traumas. For her, digging into the ‘buried’ past is vital to understanding her father and herself. As she puts it, ‘the only way forward is back’. This is entirely the opposite for Zbigniew, who is unwilling and unable to articulate his trauma in anything other than ‘incoherent…jottings’ and ‘fragments’. Burdened by his past, Zbigniew prefers living in the present moment where he can suppress and avoid the past. However, this difference in how the two approach trauma leads to a strained father-daughter relationship founded upon a lifetime of misunderstandings and secrecy that only deepen their inability to understand one another. 

‘ Even at that young age,’ Mum told me, ‘I knew, I knew I had done something wrong.’ When she told me this her face caved in, stricken with remorse. Actors can never replicate this look. Meg didn’t punish her, but ‘Oh! The look of disappointment on my poor mother’s face.’ Now, today, more than eighty years later, my mother still feels the stinging sense of guilt.  History repeats. That story of how, when I was six, I got blood on my best dress before a trip to take Dad to hospital. Mum slapped my leg in hasty anger. I understand now, of course, that it was herself she was slapping. Her life-loving, disobedient six-year-old self. We are bookends, she and I. (p. 346)

Intergenerational trauma surfaces as ‘patterns’ within the Szubanski family, where regret and resentment are passed down as ‘hand-me-down trinkets of family and trauma’. Magda uses the metaphor of ‘bookends’ to describe her and her mother’s remarkably similar experiences dealing with familial trauma. In other words, both Magda and Margaret are mirror images of each other, both having a shared experience of supporting and living with ill fathers. When Magda gets ‘blood on [her] best dress’ before another trip to the hospital, Margaret ‘slap[s her] leg’. Although Magda initially mistakes this reaction as ‘hasty anger’, hindsight allows her to understand that Margaret was preoccupied with a ‘stinging sense of guilt’, and was reprimanding herself - the ‘disobedient six-year-old self’ who had similarly ruined her own ‘special dress’. This realisation suggests that even though trauma ‘repeats [like]…history’, there is a generational difference in the way individuals are able to process and respond to situations of grief, poverty and war. 

‍ The Namesake

And suddenly the sound of his pet name, uttered by his father as he has been accustomed to hearing it all his life, means something completely new, bound up with a catastrophe he has unwittingly embodied for years. "Is that what you think of when you think of me?" Gogol asks him. "Do I remind you of that night?" "Not at all," his father says eventually, one hand going to his ribs, a habitual gesture that has baffled Gogol until now. "You remind me of everything that followed." (p. 124)

Just as Magda inherits Zbigniew’s harrowing war experience, Ashoke’s own ‘persistent fear’ from the train derailment that cripples him lives on through his son’s name. His chance rescue whilst ‘clutching a single page of ‘The Overcoat’’ is meaningful and life-altering. For Ashoke, naming his child after the ‘Russian writer who had saved his life’ emphasises his profound appreciation for surviving the accident. His son Gogol is a comforting reminder of ‘everything that followed’. In this way, Gogol acts as a symbol of both redemption and hope, representing Ashoke’s optimistic appraisal of his accident and his determination to make the most of his miraculous rescue. 

But for Gogol, the memory of his father’s accident is entirely foreign and lacks any real meaning for him. His childhood pet name ‘Gogol’ - which he has always resented for making him feel out of place around other kids - suddenly becomes ‘something completely new’ when he discovers the truth about Ashoke’s accident. Gogol feels enormous pressure to live up to his father’s expectations as he represents a ‘catastrophe he has unwittingly embodied for years’. This is the source of much of Gogol’s guilt, confusion and resentment (towards his name, father, family and entire culture) and gradually erodes his sense of self. However, this inscrutability of the past only deepens Ashoke’s and Gogol’s similarity, whilst complicating and straining their father-son dynamic. Ashoke is unable to recognise the burden he has placed on his child, whilst Gogol alternatively cannot appreciate or truly understand being a miracle and source of salvation for Ashoke. Like with Magda and Zbigniew, here, father and child are unable to understand each other, creating a schism in their relationship which they are never able to reconcile. In any case, Lahiri conveys that the actions of enduring and processing trauma are intertwined and often leave permanent traces across future generations.

But Gogol is attached to them. For reasons he cannot explain or necessarily understand, these ancient Puritan spirits, these very first immigrants to America, these bearers of unthinkable, obsolete names, have spoken to him, so much so that in spite of his mother’s disgust he refuses to throw the rubbings away. He rolls them up, takes them upstairs, and puts them in his room, behind his chest of drawers, where he knows his mother will never bother to look, and where they will remain, ignored but protected, gathering dust for years to come. (p. 71)

Lahiri also indicates generational similarities in how individuals relate to trauma. As a second-generation migrant who has always felt displaced from his culture, Gogol’s graveyard field trip allows him to experience a semblance of belonging in Massachusetts for the first time and relate to America’s ‘very first immigrants’. While Ashoke profoundly connects to the Russian writer Nikolai Gogol, his son Gogol refuses to get rid of the etchings of archaic names. These ‘ancient Puritan spirits’ with similarly ‘unthinkable, obsolete names’ like his own provide Gogol with a source of relief and offer proof that he is not alone in his differences. He feels protective of them - conveying his own desires to defend himself against childhood bullies, and also providing a way to preserve this first true moment of belonging. 

Just as ‘The Overcoat’ resonates with Ashoke, Gogol feels connected to the etchings and conceals this single page from his mother Ashima, who is resentful of the peculiar American school excursion. Similarly, Ashoke struggles to convey the deep significance behind his own liberating ‘single page’ from the Russian book. In this way, both pages remain ‘ignored but protected’ and, for both father and son, symbolise the power of literature and storytelling to salvage their profoundly intimate and life-altering moments that are unfathomable to others. 

2. Identity and Naming

Both Reckoning and The Namesake suggest that hasty personal reinventions can only temporarily suppress, rather than truly resolve, trauma. The ‘self-made man’ Gogol strives to be, and the ‘mostly-self created…Little Englishman’ identity that Zbigniew carves for himself, are simply ‘bandaids plastered over’ unresolved grief and hardships. Cut off from family and history, these facades only worsen their inner discontent and complicate identities. 

For my father Australia was love at first sight. The moment we landed he knew he had done the right thing. The blast-furnace heat invigorated him. Only mad dogs and my father would go out in the midday Australian sun. He wouldn’t just go out in it…he would mow the lawn in it. We had a big, bumpy, untamed backyard and when the mercury hit 103 degrees Fahrenheit he’d be out there dragging the lawnmower across every inch of it. Wearing Bombay bloomers and a terry-towelling hat, singing Polish songs over the din of the mower. (p. 44)

Escaping battle-scarred Poland and the origins of his trauma, Zbigniew is a migrant who ‘could not shed his Polishness fast enough’. He ‘crosse[s] the world to get away’ from his destroyed and tarnished home. Zbigniew begins a ‘second life’ as Peter, and like the Polish amber Magda’s cousin gifts her, Zbigniew is ‘transformed by pressure’ (a metaphor for the natural formation of amber) into the ‘Little Englishman’. This persona is a role he takes with grave determination - an echo of the ‘killer instincts’ he suppressed from his abandoned life as a Polish assassin. Bewildering the rest of his family, Zbigniew relishes the ‘invigorat[ing]…blast-furnace heat’ of Australia, and acts the part of a true Aussie in his ‘Bombay bloomers’ and ‘terry-towelling hat’. This characteristically Australian ensemble essentially functions as another battle armour he equips himself with to protect his blemished soul, tainted by a history so ‘bizarrely awful’ that his only way to survive is by ‘clamping down tight’ through an ironclad persona. 

Magda recalls him ‘forever trying to tame th[e] lumpen block’ of ‘untamed’ and ‘unpredictable’ soil in their yard, ‘dragging the lawnmower across every inch’. This crystallises the truth of his life: no matter how committed Zbigniew is to perfecting any project, simply plastering order (trying to tame the lawns by mowing them) over chaos (heat + lumpen, untamed, unpredictable soil) leaves the trauma unresolved.

The rest of it went smoothly and before too long I had my entire sharpie uniform. Only one thing was missing—a Conti. This smart striped cardigan, worn high and tight, was the centrepiece of the ensemble, the definitive wardrobe item of the sharpie. But none was available, not in Croydon anyway. We had to settle for a plain cardie, rolled up at the bottom until it sat under my boobs. I never did get a Conti. I think it was a sign. (p. 126)

Like her father, Magda toys with personas herself. Identity is fluid and inconstant for Magda, often fluctuating between a form Zbigniew would be proud of, one she hopes would trigger any emotional reaction from him, and one desperate to fit within the social climate of Croydon. She cultivates a variety of comic personalities and, like her father, pursues her own ‘tennis madness’ by becoming madly obsessed with the sport and playing competitively. Magda also attempts to embrace the dutiful Catholic ‘good girl’ personality she believes would satisfy her father, but she rebels when he continues to ‘display [no] emotion at all’ and embraces the Sharpie youth gang uprising in her neighbourhood. However, Magda ruefully mocks the contradictory nature of her Sharpie persona, describing her conversion as a hybrid - a ‘convent-school Sharpie’ - rather than the ‘true Sharpie chick’ she aspires to be. But, while all of these personas attempt to unite the ‘disparate, confusing parts’ of her identity, they just suppress the ‘real girl’ behind the mask and leave her more dissociated from herself than ever before. 

Magda goes to great lengths to ‘smoothly’ acquire the perfect Sharpie disguise, but even with the ‘entire Sharpie uniform’, her facade is flawed; she lacks the Conti cardigan, which is the ‘definitive wardrobe item of the sharpie’. Her Sharpie identity becomes a parody of the authentic Australian youth gang. The flaws behind her imitation persona are worsened when Magda tries to replace the Conti ‘centrepiece’ with a simple ‘plain cardie, rolled up at the bottom’. Magda only realises this when she barely avoids a ‘beating’ by a ‘predatory Sharpie’ whilst vulnerable, dressed in her convent-school uniform, and unrecognisable as a fellow gang member. Here, she is finally able to concede that she has only been ‘playing at being a bad girl’ and laments, ‘I never did get a Conti. I think it was a sign’ - wryly foreshadowing the inevitable dissatisfaction of teenage facades. 

The Namesake

"I'm Nikhil now," Gogol says, suddenly depressed by how many more times he will have to say this, asking people to remember, reminding them to forget, feeling as if an errata slip were perpetually pinned to his chest. (p. 119)

Gogol’s place in the world as an ‘American Born Confused Deshi’ (ABCD) is his own ‘awkward [truth]’. Like his own name which he scornfully labels a ‘scratchy tag’, his status as an ‘ABCD’ is another brand he is ‘forced permanently to wear’. He is both ashamed and resentful toward his second-generation migrant identity and feels ‘neither Indian nor American’ whilst mocked for his nickname that is ‘of all things Russian’. Indeed, Gogol’s entire adolescent experience is eclipsed by his confusion about ‘who he is’ as he struggles to obtain any stable foundation for his identity. 

Unlike the costumes and disguises that Magda and Zbigniew embrace, Gogol takes action by solemnly changing his name to Nikhil, the ‘one that should have been’ given to him all those years ago. But even Gogol is acutely aware that this ‘scant’ persona leaves him having to repeatedly reinforce and assure others (and himself) of his identity. Gogol actually rejects the name ‘Nikhil’ on his first day of preschool, foreshadowing the inward dissociation he experiences later in life. He is again ‘afraid to be Nikhil, someone he doesn’t know.’

Similarly, the flask Gogol’s sister Sonia gives to him for his thirtieth birthday, inscribed with his new initials NG, becomes a symbol of his inability to ‘break from that mismatched name’. Lahiri indeed suggests that identities are unavoidably ‘engraved’ with the layered ‘randomness’ of their lives and cannot be easily dissolved. 

And then he returned to New York, to the apartment they’d inhabited together that was now all his. A year later, the shock has worn off, but a sense of failure and shame persists, deep and abiding. There are nights he still falls asleep on the sofa, without deliberation, waking up at three A.M. with the television still on. It is as if a building he’d been responsible for designing has collapsed for all to see. And yet he can’t really blame her. They had both acted on the same impulse, that was their mistake. They had both sought comfort in each other, and in their shared world, perhaps for the sake of novelty, or out of the fear that that world was slowly dying. Still, he wonders how he’s arrived at all this: that he is thirty-two years old, and already married and divorced. His time with her seems like a permanent part of him that no longer has any relevance, or currency. As if that time were a name he’d ceased to use. (pp. 283-284)

For the majority of his life, Gogol alternates between feeling irritation and resentment for his Bengali heritage, and profoundly longing to be truly Indian. Gogol has several failed relationships and romantic encounters: Kim, with whom he introduces himself as Nikhil ‘for the first time in his life’, then Maxine, who attracted him with the ‘gift of accepting her life’. But, like his indulgence of and immersion in the Ratliff’s self-satisfied American life, the interactions with these women feel like a ‘betrayal of his own’ culture, family and identity. 

It is ‘familiarity’ that draws him to Moushumi, a childhood Bengali family friend with whom he ’s[eeks] comfort’ in their shared culture. For Gogol, his relationship with Moushumi represents the possibility of salvaging a childhood he spent disliking, but for Moushumi it’s a betrayal of her principles of independence. She has ‘turn[ed] her back’ her Indian and American ties to embrace a third culture in France, a country with ‘no claim’ on her and none of the cultural pressures of her heritage. 

Gogol longs - ironically - for stability and ‘fall[s] in love with Gothic architecture’; he equates his failed marriage with Moushumi to a ‘building he’d been responsible for designing’. This is essentially Gogol’s way of dealing with the trauma of his divorce, translated into a form he can understand and process. And yet, even a year after their separation, a ‘sense of failure and shame persists, deep and abiding’ - Lahiri suggests that trauma, grief and heartbreak are embedded into our identities and we don’t require a set length of time to accept them. 

Both Moushumi and Gogol come to realise that they were sustained merely by ‘the same impulse’ to erase discomfort, their marriage ‘collaps[ing] for all to see’. Their relationship becomes meaningless and their time together dissolves like a ‘name [Gogol had] ceased to use’. Lahiri conveys that re-entering and recreating a life once discarded (as harshly as Gogol discards his own name) is impossible, even irrational. 

3. Memory and Retrospect

It is no surprise that retrospect and remembrance emerge as central themes in both Reckoning and The Namesake . Gogol’s resented ‘namesake’ itself is a conduit for redemptive memory, whilst Magda ascertains the value of history to ‘salvage’ the present.

I wanted to know; I didn’t want to know. Without realising it I plotted a course somewhere between the two. My father, unable to get any further with his own attempts at a reckoning, had simply closed the door on the past. And now I was about to open that door. (p. 290)

Retrospect specifically becomes a vital motif in Reckoning as Szubanski uses her memoir to ‘join up the dots of [her]self’ and gain perspective on her father’s ‘unresolved and unexamined feelings’. Through her adult perspective, she reflects on her early doubts as she is finally able to appreciate and understand her heritage, reading ‘ Dni Powstania ’ and ‘Exodus’ on the Poles’ shame. Although Magda and Zbigniew ‘[pull] in opposite directions’ for most of her life, only by becoming the ‘collector of [Zbigniew’s]…stories’ and taping his ‘confession’ are the two brought to some level of understanding. Magda is finally able to ‘ rozumiesz ’ (to understand) that her father had ‘never helped the Nazis’, and on some level, ‘feel the feelings [her] father could not allow himself’. Perhaps more importantly, Zbigniew is able to share the paradoxical nature of his guilt - ‘what he had done in the name of good’ - feeling neither ‘ashamed’ nor ‘proud’ of his past. His reflection through the outlook of a ‘half old, half young’ version of himself mirrors Magda’s own introspection - in this sense, the ways in which Magda and Zbigniew are resolving (or at least learning to accept) trauma are ‘repeat[ing like]…history’ in their family. 

I was never told anything much about Luke. But my mother’s eyes—beneath the humour—were haunted by a deep, fretting sadness. Behind the querulous hypervigilance, the nitpicking, the irritability, there cowered a terrified child. A child full of panicky uncertainty about everything. I wanted to reach back and grab her hand and pull her through time and…what? I wanted to hug my mother when she was a child, to tell her everything was all right. (p. 336)

Szubanski observes how generations of poverty and war have shaped her mother’s ‘flinty’, unyielding determination to ‘just…get on with it’ and move on from adversity. Her ‘deep, fretting sadness’ hidden ‘beneath [her] humour’ is compassion and grief for her father, Luke, who ‘woke every night screaming’ after the war. This resonates strongly with Magda because her own father’s war experience mirrors Luke’s. The two families (Magda’s family, and her mother’s family) are forced to ‘[walk] on eggshells for fear of detonating [them]’. 

However, Magda is able to understand that her mother’s capricious tendency to ‘cling like a python then turn and snap like a crocodile’ is a product of her trauma, which allows Magda to understand Margaret’s character on a more intimate and genuine level. Magda, as a neglected and ‘terrified child’ with ‘panicky uncertainty’ herself, empathising with Margaret’s own troubled childhood allows Magda to offer her mother the comfort and support she craved when struggling alone beneath Zbigniew’s ‘exacting…standards’. Through this, Szubanski seems to suggest that although the legacy of trauma is an ongoing and deeply complex process, ‘reach[ing] back’ to process unresolved traumas together becomes a precious and vital way to ‘salvage’ bruised relationships. 

There is no question of skipping this meal; on the contrary, for ten evenings the three of them are strangely hungry, eager to taste the blandness on their plates. It is the one thing that structures their days: the sound of the food being warmed in the microwave, three plates lowered from the cupboard, three glasses filled. The rest of it—the calls, the flowers that are everywhere, the visitors, the hours they spend sitting together in the living room unable to say a word, mean nothing. Without articulating it to one another, they draw comfort from the fact that it is the only time in the day that they are alone, isolated, as a family; even if there are visitors lingering in the house, only the three of them partake of this meal. And only for its duration is their grief slightly abated, the enforced absence of certain foods on their plates conjuring his father's presence somehow. (pp. 180-181)

Even in death, Ashoke’s spirit is able to heal his fractured, grief-ridden family - truly and ultimately ‘transcend[ing] grief’, fulfilling the destiny his name’s meaning set out for him. Surrounded by meaningless condolences and forced sympathy - the ‘calls’, the ‘flowers’ and the ‘visitors’ - the Ganguli family is left ‘unable to say a word’ or process their loss in a safe and judgement-free space. The ‘mourner’s diet’ that sustains them, even in all its ‘blandness’, is able to ‘slightly [abate]’ their grief; it ‘conjur[es Ashoke’s] presence’ and unites the ‘isolated’ Gangulis ‘as a family’. Ironically, these cultural traditions that young Gogol so adamantly refused become the ‘only thing that seems to make sense’. Preserving and honouring Ashoke’s memory, this forsaken custom becomes an unanticipated lifeline for a family torn apart by cultural expectations, irreconcilable differences and shared tragedy. 

"Try to remember it always," he said once Gogol had reached him, leading him slowly back across the breakwater, to where his mother and Sonia stood waiting. "Remember that you and I made this journey, that we went together to a place where there was nowhere left to go." (p. 187)

Unlike Magda and Zbigniew who are able to reconnect in life, Gogol’s own poignant flashbacks with his father are cherished only after his death. However, it is only with this hindsight that Gogol is truly able to appreciate these initially resented, perhaps forgotten, moments as meaningful connections to his family. Gogol’s relationship with his father is tragically underpinned by a lifetime of misinterpretations and misunderstood trauma, the two unable to understand each other’s disparate outlooks on life and culture. However, when they visit Cape Cod both Gogol and Ashoke are, if only momentarily, pioneers. They are exposed to the world, just as Ashoke had been when he migrated to America; the two travelling ‘together to a place where there was nowhere left to go’. 

Gogol indeed grapples with a desire for stability and meaning throughout his entire life, bewildered by the ‘unintended’ series of ‘defining and distressing’ events. However, family indeed becomes the source of true security for Gogol. ‘Remember[ing]…always’, he preserves the memory of his father, and resistant to time and change, it remains a comforting constant amidst the ‘randomness’ that characterises and complicates his family’s life.

Tracks and Into The Wild are studied as part of VCE English's Comparative. For one of most popular posts on Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing), check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative.

INTRODUCTIONS

Into the Wild (2007) is a non-linear survival film directed by Sean Penn, which is based on Jon Krauker’s 1996 novel of the same name. It recollects the final few months of the life of Christopher McCandless as he departs from society in both an act of resistance as well as a means of self-discovery. A bright young college student in the 1990s, McCandless abandons his family and affluent lifestyle to embark on a frontier-style journey into the Alaskan wilderness. Troubled by a dysfunctional family and disenchanted with the materialistic excesses of 1980s America, McCandless seeks a radical engagement with nature, in the style of his literary heroes Henry David Thoreau and Jack London. After 113 days in the wilderness, he suffers from starvation and dies. The true story of McCandless’ journey renders the film an important depiction of self-reliance, isolation, and the unparalleled power of nature.

Whilst the film is of a biographical nature, it is important to understand that it is heavily subject to the interpretations and opinions of Penn. The story is informed by McCandless’ writings, and interviews with those who knew him, but is ultimately a work of artistic interpretation. Nonetheless, Penn’s film offers strong commentary regarding the materialistic, consumerist nature of modern living, whilst also ultimately emphasising the more humanistic importance of family and love.

Tracks is Robyn Davidson’s 1980 memoir detailing her perilous journey through 1700 miles of Australian outback and the remarkable character transformations that take place throughout. The events of the story begin in 1973, when a young Robyn Davidson arrives in Alice Springs with an outlandish plan to train wild camels to accompany her through the Australian desert. When, after two years of gruelling training, she receives a sponsorship from National Geographic, her journey can finally go ahead- on the condition that a photographer accompany her and document parts of the journey. This compromise weighs heavily on Robyn, as photographer Rick Smolan intrudes on her solitude and compromises everything the trip means to her. As Robyn delves deeper into the journey, each day brings new discoveries about the camels, the landscape, the people of Australia, and ultimately, her self. Tracks  emerges as a candid and compelling story of one woman’s odyssey of discovery and transformation.

Whilst Tracks is mostly a personal account, it also presents a co-existent dichotomy between modernistic libertarianism and conventionalism, which serves as a reflection of the changing political views and ideological turbulence of the time, as Davidson notes ‘you could choose not to participate in politics, but you could not avoid politics’. Thus, in many ways Davidson’s journey can be seen as a firm statement that challenges the inherent sexism, racism, and ‘status quo’, whilst also simultaneously embracing the notion of freedom, independence, and escape from conventionalism and ‘self-indulgent negativity’.

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

CHARACTER ANALYSIS

Both Robyn Davidson and Christopher McCandless are products of the time period in which they live, and reject the concept of adhering to a predetermined notion of who they should be and how they should behave. Both embark on their journey because they reject the expectations of their class and gender.

AUTHORS VIEWS/VALUES

Women’s rights in 1970s australia .

Tracks is set in the late 1970s, an era of intense social and political change in Australia. The second wave feminist movements of the 1960s and 70s were enormously influential in Australia, as women began to dismantle the sexist structures inherent in Australian society at this time. Davidson describes Alice Springs as hopelessly in the grips of a ‘cult of misogyny’. She rejects the archetype of the passive, docile woman. She is passionately determined to shed her own sense of herself as traditionally “feminine,” a quality she sees as arising from being trained from birth to be “door-mattish”.

Davidson acknowledges her gender has played a central part in the media’s fascination with her journey. The character of the ‘camel lady’ that emerges suggests the significance of her trip, as a woman travelling alone in the 1970s through intensely difficult terrain. Davidson describes the late sixties and early seventies as a time of radical social time, when “anything and everything seemed possible, and when the status quo of the developed world was under radical scrutiny by its youth”. Thus Davidson’s actions must be considered in the context of this time, at the peak of the second wave feminist movement.

There are many explicit examples of Robyn facing misogyny and embodying feminist principles. One such example is when an Alice Springs local suggests she’s the “next town rape case”. This statement reveals the position of a woman in this misogynistic society, wherein a single woman travelling alone through the bush was synonymous with danger and irresponsibility. Davidson rejects this ideology and refuses to succumb to the violent sexism she encounters, or compromise her journey.

Tracks  is not an explicitly feminist text, but it clearly echoes the philosophies of feminism. In the years since the trek, Robyn Davidson has become a feminist symbol of defiance, endurance and strength. Thus to consider Tracks  from a feminist perspective is important when studying this text, Davidson’s criticisms of Australian misogyny inform our understanding of this historical context, and the significance of her actions.

Some example sentences:

• Davidson exposes the realities of misogynistic Australian culture in the 1970s.
• Davidson’s journey emerges as a defiant example of women’s strength and independence.
• Davidson’s friendship with Gladdy Posel suggests the injustices of women’s financial dependence on abusive men and condemns the limited options for women, particularly for those in rural settings.
• Tracks challenges the constraints of gender through a narrator that cannot be defined by stereotypical images of the domestic and passive female.

Indigenous Rights in Australia

The 1970s saw the first attempts to improve the lives and rights of indigenous Australians. In 1971 Indigenous people were counted in the census, and in 1976, the Aboriginal Land Rights Act was established. Davidson’s time with Mr Eddie exposes her to the harsh reality of the living conditions of Indigenous Australian’s throughout the 1970s, as well as inspiring a deep appreciation for the culture and connection with the land. Davidson is frustrated with the mistreatment of Indigenous people in Australia, and feels ambivalent about her status as a white, privileged, outsider in their community. Davidson confronts the racist and discriminatory stereotypes and attitudes towards Indigenous Australians, and experiences first hand the realities of the issues these people face. Davidson encounters intense generosity and friendship in the Indigenous community that she admires and presents as a stark contrast to the intolerant attitudes of white Australians in Alice Springs.

• “The blacks were unequivocally the enemy – dirty, lazy, dangerous”
• “Aborigines. Warm, friendly, laughing, excited, tired Pitjantjara Aborigines...” (p. 155)
• “Ceremonies are the visible link between Aboriginal people and their land. Once dispossessed of this 
land, ceremonial life deteriorates, people lose their strength, meaning and identity.” (p. 167) 

• Davidson renegotiates her identity and relationship with the land after learning from the Indigenous Australians.
• Davidson condemns the racist attitudes of white Australians towards the aboriginal people.
• Davidson embodies the changing attitudes of young Australians towards aboriginal Australians, endorsing a respectful relationship with the traditional land owners.

INTO THE WILD

Social criticism of materialistic excess.

While Into the Wild is set in the 1990s, McCandless’ formative years were the 1980s – a decade characterised by the consumerism, extravagance, and materialism of President Reagan’s America. The reverberating effects of this time period inform McCandless’ general outlook and disdain for American society. Whilst this contempt for consumerism is one motivation for McCandless’ actions, he is equally troubled by the family violence and dysfunction he experienced as a young man. This traumatic past informs his extreme actions and outlook.

Example sentences:

• Penn exposes the effects of materialistic society on young impressionable people.
• Penn explores the consequences of experiencing childhood trauma, and how this manifests in adult actions.
• Penn condemns the expectations of 21 st century nuclear families.
• Penn endorses the liberating power of familial love and relationships.

Depiction of the unparalleled power of nature and man’s inability to contend with it

Inspired by Thoreau and London, Chris seeks enlightenment in the wild. Despite a philosophical understanding of the power of nature, Chris believes he can survive the untamed wilderness of Alaska. Although nature is the locus for self-realisation and growth for Chris, it is also what destroys him. As the viewer watches him slowly deteriorate, we come to fully comprehend the force of nature – suggesting man’s inability to control it.

• Penn’s depiction of McCandless’ deterioration suggests human’s inability to control nature.
• Penn endorses the liberating power of literature, but cautions the idealism contained within romantic depictions of nature.

LITERARY TECHNIQUES

Narrative voice.

An important aspect of Into the Wild to consider is that McCandless’ story, while true, is told through Sean Penn’s directorial lens, which is in turn based on Jon Krakeur’s book. The story is informed by McCandless’ writings, and interviews with those who knew him, but is ultimately a work of artistic interpretation. Consider how this affect’s a viewer’s perception of Chris, does this raise questions around representation and identity? This is in direct contrast to Tracks , which is a first person, linear past tense, autobiographical account of the writer’s experience. Where Robyn is completely in control of her narrative, McCandless’ is subject to the artistic interpretation of others.

Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism is defined as the attribution of human characteristics or behaviour to a god, animal, or object. Robyn repeatedly personifies the animals she encounters. The camels in particular take on their own human personalities in her life. This technique, called anthropomorphism, can be used to complement a discussion of the theme of isolation. Robyn attributes distinct characteristics to each camel, suggesting her need for companionship and the powerful absence of human connection in prolonged periods of isolation.

Davidson’s depiction of her dependence on animals reveals deeper meanings about her inability to depend on, and communicate with, humans in the same way. Robyn’s reliance on her dog, Dookie, becomes more intense as the journey continues. Upon Dookie’s death, both the reader and Robyn experience the dog’s death as a powerful blow.

• “I am quite sure Diggity was more than a dog, or rather other than dog. (p. 207)”
• “But I said goodbye to a creature I had loved unconditionally, without question. ... I walked out into the morning and felt nothing. I was numb, empty. All I knew was I mustn‟t stop walking. (p. 223)
”
• “Diggity had become a cherished friend rather than simply a pet. (p. 227)”
• Kate: “remembered humans and hated them”
• Zeleika: “had a lovely gentle nature” “the street-smart, crafty, unfazable, self-possessed leader”
• Dookie: “nominally king, but if anything untoward happened he was the first to hide behind Zeleika’s skirts”
• Goliath: “cheeky, pushy, self-centred, demanding, petulant, arrogant, spoilt and delightful”

SAMPLE PARAGRAPHS

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

Introduction: In forging connections with the environment and people around us, humans end up inadvertently discovering themselves. It is this notion that resonates throughout both Robyn Davidson’s 1970 memoir, Tracks , and Sean Penn’s 2007 film, Into the Wild , where the relationships that the protagonists form throughout their journeys leads to intense self- discovery and growth. Both Davidson and McCandless seek knowledge and guidance through both the individuals they meet and, specifically to McCandless, the books he reads, citing it as a means of grappling with the fundamental stages of self-discovery. Whilst Davidson and McCandless experience different relationships with their immediate family, it is ultimately the concept of family that underpins their motivations and inspires them to pursue their journeys – both physical and psychological. Further, the respective temporal environments in which both protagonists are immersed in emerge as a distinct theme that facilitates each stage of self- discovery in the climatic lead up to the ultimate self-realisation.

Body Paragraph 1: Both Into the Wild  and Tracks endorse the guiding power of influential figures on both protagonists, as a catalyst for their growth. Davidson commences her self-described ‘lunatic’ journey with little knowledge of the wild to substantiate her mammoth ambition. That her drive outweighs her preparation manifests in the early moments of the text, wherein Davidson endures a grueling internship with the impulsive ‘maniac’ Kurt Posel. This man appears the epitome of the ‘biased, bigoted, boring and above all, brutal’ man she describes as the stereotypical ‘Aussie male’. Kurt is abusive to both Davidson and his wife, but his eccentric and impulsive ways expose her to the harsh realities of bush living. Ultimately, Kurt’s guidance allows Davidson to gain the fundamental skills she needs to train camels, whose dispositions reflect the erratic nature of Kurt himself. In direct contrast to this tense, exploitative relationship, is Davidson’s nuanced and spiritually rewarding relationship with Mr. Eddie, an aboriginal elder whom she describes as a “sheer pleasure to be with”.  Despite an ostensible language barrier, Eddie’s instruction of the Indigenous Arts and Culture leave an impressionable impact on Davidson’s character and personality. By accepting Eddie’s guidance at a pivotal point in her journey, Davidson’s ambivalent sense of self, the overwhelming feeling of being an imposter, is diminished. Davidson becomes more grounded and connected to her environment; the knowledge that she derives from key characters contributes to a distinct conformational change in her personality and thus critically assists her in developing a strong sense of one self.  A similar theme resonates in Into the Wild , where Chris McCandless heavily relies upon the guidance of various prominent figures he meets throughout his journey as well as ‘the characters of the books he loved from writers like Tolstoy, Jack London and Thoreau’ whose words he could and often would ‘summon….to suit any occasion’. The fact that McCandless readily referred to the words of the likes of Tolstoy, London, and Thoreau amidst times of mental angst and challenge, is a significant reflection of not only the quintessential teacher and student relationship he shares with them, but also the level of impact they have had in shaping in the ideological processes that define Chris’s values and sense of oneself. This very idea is furthered by Sean Penn when he depicts Christopher McCandless quoting soviet Russian poet, Boris Pasternak, suggesting that humans ‘ought to call each thing by it’s right name’, following which he acts impulsively and with great haste, engineered with rapid and distorted camera movements. In doing so, Penn illustrates the importance that Chris places upon the words of such idealists to the stage where he acts upon their advice without giving them proper consideration within his literal, temporal context. The protagonists of both Into the Wild and Tracks , both rely upon the knowledge and guidance of individuals, be they physical or via literature, as a means of grappling with their fundamental understanding of the human spirit and in doing so their intricate understanding of themselves.

Body Paragraph 2: Both texts demonstrate a degree of discontentment and resent towards the institutionalized, '20th century convention' of family. Davidson describes the notion of family as “invisible ropes and chains” of guilt, she comments that families lack for the most part, a true sense of love. This sentiment is starkly contrasted with Davidson’s intense engagement with the wild, which she describes in the language of love and connection. “I love you. i love you sky, bird, wind, desert, desert, desert’ proclaims Davidson, as she describes having “no more loved ones to care about” and “no more ties” to bind her to material existence. Davidson laments the distortion of her journey for public consumption, stating “so far people had said that i wanted to commit suicide, that i wanted to do penance for my mother’s death…” this comment is one of the only references to her mother’s suicide, which can be interpreted as a catalyst for her ambivalence about the notion of family. This experience evidently informs Davidsons’s somewhat impenetrable exterior and suggests a deeper complexity to her resistance of 20th century societal expectations. Similarly, Christopher McCandless articulates a powerful contempt for family. McCandless feels impeded in his personal motivations by the familial concepts of ‘graduating college’ and ‘getting a job’ which he describes as “20th century inventions” inextricably linked with “this world of material excess”. McCandless expands on this point, commenting that his pursuit for self-discovery has ultimately resulted in ‘the killing of the false being within’, the ‘false being’ that was bound to the societal expectations and the material conventions of the time. Chris’ departure into the wild is as much of an act of punishment for his family, as it is about Chris discovering true freedom and metaphysical spirituality. It is this idea of ‘telling the world’ of his family’s misdeeds that continually motivates Chris to continue on with his journey, which is depicted by Penn through the countless solo enactments and impersonation of both Chris’ mother and father, often depicting a negative experience which has quite evidently scarred his ‘crystal like’ mind. Family is thus, a primary motivation for both key characters within Tracks and Into the Wild to firstly partake on their journey, but more significantly to discover an uncorrupted, unbiased ‘true’ version of them that had been lost amidst ‘this world of material excess’.

Conclusion: Both Tracks and Into the Wild explore the inextricable link between ones environment and their personal growth. Nature is emphasised as a world removed from the materialistic excess of modern urban life, in which one can engage with an alternative, radical set of values. Both Davidson and McCandless escape from the confinements of their lives and experience profound transformations over the course of their journeys. Thus, both Davidson and Penn comment on the omniscient, multifaceted nature of the environment around a person being instrumental in moulding each stage of the journey of self-discovery and transformation.

*A big shout out to Suraj Hari, 2017 graduate and currently studying Medicine in Tasmania, who is a contributing author of this blog post.

• Plot Summaries
• Themes, Motifs and Key Ideas
• LSG’s Bubble Tea (BBT) Strategy for Unique Strategies
• Structural Features Analysis
• Sample Essay Breakdown

1. Plot Summaries

Summary - the hate race .

Maxine Beneba Clarke’s seminal novel, The Hate Race, follows the childhood and adolescence of its author, who is the main protagonist. The book is a memoir, meaning that it is based around a recollection of her life and filtered through her psyche and experiences. The book begins with Clarke’s family, British citizens of Afro-Carribean descent, moving to Sydney, New South Wales. They settle in the town of Kellyville, which is known as a ‘white picket’ community. Although these communities largely don't exist anymore, what they once described was suburban environments where only Anglo-Australians lived. As you can probably imagine, this immediately caused problems for Clarke’s family, with suspicion from neighbours and racist interactions with other kids in the neighbourhood. Clarke initially focuses on her experiences in kindergarten, revealing how prejudice and discrimination can be inculcated (meaning, ‘taught to’) in children even from such a tender age. Clarke meets her first tormenter - Carlita Allen. Carlita makes every effort to exclude Clarke from participation in usual preschool activities, hurling insults across playgrounds and calling her ‘dirty’. Literally, of course, Carlita is referring to Clarke’s black skin colour, but, metaphorically, it reflects the deeply hateful implication that anyone with a dark complexion is inherently inferior and lesser than white Australians. The bullying doesn’t stop by the time Clarke reaches primary school. In fact, it intensifies, aided and abetted by teachers who consistently turn a blind eye to the constant, gut-wrenching racial abuse. One of the most salient (meaning, ‘important’) scenes arises when Clarke is asked by a teacher what her parents do for a living. Upon informing the teacher that her mother is an actor, and her father is a Mathematics Professor - the first British citizen of Afro-Carribean descent to attend a British university - she is met with the patronising assumption that she must be lying. Surely black people wouldn’t have the emotional and intellectual intelligence to perform such high-powered jobs? Clarke also develops eczema during her primary school years, leaving patches of lighter-coloured skin covering her face, and a newfound hope that, bit by bit, God is answering her prayers and making her white. In high school, the racist rot sets in even further. Clarke develops a new habit for scratching her skin at night to the point of bleeding and bruising. Looking back at this experience, Clarke theorises that this was her body’s way of expressing her extreme discomfort with being black. It gives us a picture of how horrific racism can truly be, and the ways in which it forces minorities into believing that there’s something wrong with them, instead of there being something wrong with the people hurling abuse in the first instance!

It is this stage of her life when Clarke deals with one of the most difficult parts of being a minority in a majority white country. Through her interactions with teachers, friends and boyfriends alike, she becomes deeply angry at those people who abhor racism themselves, but seem unable to step in when racist events are actually occurring. Clarke also deals with more nuanced experiences of racism - people who don’t intend to be racist, but end up making insensitive comments anyway. Whether intentional or not, these comments still hurt, and are still part of the challenges of growing up black in a white country. Nonetheless, Clarke continues to rise above the odds, becoming a prolific high school debater, maintaining her position at the top of the academic cohort, and forming a small but tight-knit group of friends whom she can trust. 

Clarke’s recollection of her childhood ends on a relatively abrupt note, with Clarke returning home to realise that her father has left the family for another woman. In a note to the family, he provides no explanation other than that he had a secret affair for many years. Suddenly, Clarke, her brothers, sisters and mother are left to pick up the pieces. In the epilogue, Clarke is now an adult with a child of her own. Walking down Melbourne’s North Road, she reflects on the challenges and opportunities to which her child will be witness. Clarke portrays it as the dual sadness and happiness of knowing that, in Australia, her children will surely have access to more opportunity than in most parts of the world - but it will come at a cost. Namely, they will also have to contend with the remaining undercurrent of racism that, even now, still seeps through Australian society. The unsatisfying end to the novel reflects the nature of racism and the experience of a minority growing up in a white country itself: there is no happy ending. Rather, life becomes a series of painful incidents interspersed with minor victories; those who stand up against racism, those who fail to do so and the hundreds of thousands of Australians who will forever grapple with a society that sees them as ‘ lesser than’ due to the colour of their skin. 

Summary - Charlie’s Country

Charlie’s Country , an Australian movie directed by Dutch-Australian Rolf De Heer, follows the story of Charlie, a First Nations man living in late-2000s Australia.

The movie is set in the wake of the 2007 Northern Territory Intervention. As a bit of quick context, this was an action taken by the Commonwealth Government under Coalition Prime Minister John Howard to send Australian Defence Force troops into the Northern Territory. It came in response to the ‘Little Children are Sacred’ report , which raised allegations of child sexual abuse and neglect of children in Aboriginal communities. The intervention also involved restricting alcohol consumption, quarantining a portion of welfare payments to Indigenous residents (with the justification that this would prevent it being spent on alcohol, pornography, cigarettes, etc.) and hefty fines as well as jail sentences for those forced to comply. It is important to note that, throughout the whole intervention, not a single person was prosecuted for child sexual abuse or any related offence. Nonetheless, this intervention had real world, drastic consequences - and that’s exactly what Charlie’s Country explores. At the time of de Heer’s film, Charlie lives in a remote Indigenous community. Signs of the intervention are all around - alcohol is banned from most communities, many individuals face personal bans on procuring alcohol, police officers dot the streets and citizens live under constant watch. Charlie, on a surface level, is a fairly happy-go-lucky individual; he exchanges jokes with police, is friendly with other elders and people in his community and doesn’t seem to do much else. As always with a movie like this - there’s a bigger story behind this all! Rolf de Heer takes us through an increasingly concerning image of Aboriginal communities in the wake of the intervention. Charlie visits his local housing officer and is unable to obtain a house. Here, we see that Charlie is willing to work and wants stable accommodation, but the government is unwilling to provide.

Going on a hunting trip with his friend, ‘Black Pete’, the two are stopped by police and have their guns, as well as the water buffalo they killed, confiscated. Yet again, two Indigenous men try to provide for themselves - but are stopped by a legal system more concerned with rules and procedure than listening to First Nations communities themselves. Charlie decides he’s had enough of having his every move and action monitored, and takes a stolen police car into the bush. Abandoning the car, he tries to live amongst nature for an unidentified amount of time. Cooking fish, performing traditional First Nations dances, painting on the bark and looking for shelter, Charlie finally appears to be home . Yet, as usual, it’s too good to be true - the extreme cold makes Charlie incredibly sick, and, before we know it, he wakes up in a Darwin hospital. After refusing further treatment from the white doctors who fail to understand Charlie’s situation and why he is so angry at what’s happened to him, the predictable cycle begins again: Charlie returns to his community, they all share alcohol as a way of coping with their current situation and flee when the police come running to confiscate the liquor. Charlie isn’t civil with the police this time. In a fit of anger - an outburst of emotion after decades upon decades of control and being denied access to any opportunity - he picks up a bat and smashes the police officer’s car window. Brutally beaten into submission, Charlie is imprisoned as the police officer remarks that he should never have 'gone soft on a blackfella’. 

Dragged before the courts, Charlie is imprisoned for assault. When the judge asks him to make a comment, he gives a lengthy speech in his native language. For de Heer, this acts as a symbolic assertion of the First Nations’ rights to their own culture, and a proud statement against the many governments that have continually placed barriers in the way of Indigenous Australians having the same opportunities as any one of us. Eventually, Charlie is released on parole. He expresses a deep desire to go home - but also a sense of defeat . He resolves, in the end, to believe that even if he will always live under the watchful eyes of the Australian Government, he can at least fight back and contribute by doing his bit to maintain the many cultures of our First Nations Peoples. Charlie teaches young Indigenous boys traditional dances, speaking proudly of when he performed a dancing ceremony for Queen Elizabeth in 1973 at the Sydney Opera House. The movie ends with Charlie staring mournfully into the camera, almost looking at the audience themselves. There seems to be no happiness in his eyes - nothing left but a sense of sadness and resignation. I know that, upon approaching the end of the film, I started to feel the same sadness that Charlie so evidently shows us. It’s a different type of emotion; one centered around the pain of knowing that we live in a country that still has not made peace with its past, and refuses to listen to the First Nations Peoples who know it best. Charlie’s Country exposes to us that Australia is a country where, even today, our First Nations citizens are not treated as equals. As such, de Heer’s film is a stark reminder that this state of affairs is not good enough - and that the responsibility for change doesn’t just lie with politicians and decision-makers . It’s our job too: and failure is not an option .

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 include 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. We’ll be adhering to the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy. While we don’t go into detail into how to use LSG’s CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy in this guide, I’d highly recommend you get familiar with it by reading How To Write A Killer Comparative .

Connection to Culture (CONVERGENT)

Both de Heer and Clarke offer a unified idea around culture: that being connected to one’s culture is inherently good and positive, and should be encouraged. Let’s break this down. The Hate Race and Charlie’s Country are both works that explore the challenges of individuals maintaining their culture in surroundings which would otherwise see them revert to the ‘standard’. In this case, because we’re talking about Australia, de Heer and Clarke take us through the same story of an overarching, implicit acceptance that the Christian, Anglo way of life is the norm. This standard has deep roots in the colonisation of Australia, and the resulting claim of sovereignty by the Crown. Even as this country has evolved into a multicultural land, it still bears the marks of a ‘European’ country; whether that be our British legal system, Anglo-American democracy or any of the other institutions we have taken from the Western world.

It is in this context that de Heer and Clarke go to special lengths to explain why people should be empowered to connect to their culture. To our author and director, culture is an essential element of who you are, and it is this identity which carries people through life . For Maxine, the shock of realising that she may be the descendant of African slaves, and had lived so many years without having any idea this may be the case, is drawn from the fact that she, as a child, feels incredibly disconnected to who she is. Clarke’s memoir thus reminds us that ‘growing up black in a white country’ is an experience that often results in minority children not truly learning about who they are. Travelling through life, Maxine is continually disconnected from her culture, to the point where performing ‘African tribal dances’ to the school is nothing more than a joke. Even in her own estimation, Maxine has internalised (meaning, she’s adopted it herself) the view that her culture is irrelevant, and there’s no real reason for her to properly engage with all its complexity and beauty.

If we consider Charlie’s perspective, his involuntary burst of tears at the hospital stems from a recognition that his people have been denied the free opportunity to embrace the world’s longest-surviving culture; the First Nations traditions that date back 40,000 years. With his friend slowly dying of lung cancer, at that moment, the old man is more connected to the cigarettes that slowly sapped his life away than he is to the First Nations way of living. Unable to hunt, gather as a community, work the lands as the First Nations traditionally would or embark on any other activity that would keep them connected to their culture, this country’s first inhabitants are instead told to abandon ‘the old ways’ and embrace Anglocentric standards of life.

It is a shocking reminder that, without culture, people are left like driftwood swimming through a vast ocean. By that, I mean that people are left without an anchor through which they can independently experience the world. Instead, their understanding of themselves, their sense of self and their actions in life are all filtered through the preferences of the dominant majority.

Intergenerational Disadvantage (DIVERGENT)

Whilst Charlie’s Country and The Hate Race share many similarities in terms of the negative impacts of racism and prejudice, the texts carry different connotations when it comes to the notion of intergenerational disadvantage. 

To explain this idea, let’s first define and unpack ‘intergenerational disadvantage’. We could spend days talking about this, but, simply, intergenerational disadvantage refers to cycles of poverty and criminality that pass from generation to generation, worsening with time. Think of it this way: assume you’re a teenager - or at least still financially reliant on your parents. If your parents were to lose everything they owned today in a massive financial crisis, you’d be in big trouble too, right? Suddenly, that part-time job you had that was helping you save money might be the only income for the entire family. You might even have to drop out of school, TAFE or university to care for everyone, denying you a higher paying job in the future. 

You’ll have to work your tail off for years on end. Since you’re supporting an entire family, say goodbye to saving up for a house or to pay for your kid’s education in future. Your kids now have to start from square one with less opportunity than the people around them, meaning it’ll be harder for them to succeed in life.

When we apply this to Charlie’s Country, the analogy becomes quite clear. Charlie lives in a community where there is no opportunity. Because there are no jobs - and no real way to gain steady, meaningful employment - people fall into alcoholism, marijuana and anything else that’ll help them cope. Lung cancer and alcoholism shorten lifespans for people like the old man with failing kidneys, while no employer is going to waste a chance on those still living. There is simply no ability to ‘succeed’ here, because the local residents don’t see that there’s anything worth working towards. Hopeless, unheard and disillusioned, it becomes easier for Charlie’s community to just accept their sorry lot in life than futilely work towards changing it.

We aren’t made witness to this same cycle in The Hate Race. Instead, Bordeaux Clarke is the epitome of someone who has broken the cycle of intergenerational disadvantage; becoming the first individual in his community to attend a British university. Marrying a high-powered Guyanese actress in Cleopatra, the married couple represent success and a defiance of racist stereotypes, not the grinding poverty and disadvantage we see in Charlie’s Country. Although Maxine experiences terrible discrimination and prejudice as a child, there is always a sense that she will academically remain on top. Maxine uses the prejudice with which she’s faced as a motivator, giving her the impetus to consistently emerge successful; whether that be in her schooling, cross-country running, as a debater or any other academic endeavour. Sure, she faces racism that inhibits her from always succeeding - the Lions Club competition is a great example of such - but this isn’t so much about intergenerational disadvantage as it is about racism, plain and simple.

Ultimately, the difference between the two is a matter of emphasis. It’s not that intergenerational disadvantage doesn’t exist in The Hate Race, but more so that Clarke is choosing to focus on how even the most successful individuals can suffer from prejudice and racism. This in turn helps us to understand that racism impacts everyone , and we should never pretend it isn’t a massive problem. Conversely, Charlie’s Country is all about social disadvantage, and explores how prejudice can prevent oppressed individuals from becoming successful in the first place. 

3. LSG’s Bubble Tea (BBT) Strategy for Unique Strategies

Why is an interpretation important.

Your interpretation is what English is all about; it’s about getting you to think critically about the essay topic at hand, to formulate a contention (agree, disagree, or sit on the fence) and argue each of your points with the best pieces of evidence you can find - and it’s something you might already be starting to do naturally.

In this section, we aim to help you develop your own interpretation of the text, rather than relying on your teacher, tutor or even a study guide (including this one) author’s interpretation. By developing your own interpretation, you become a better English student by:

• Writing with meaning. For a text to be interpreted, you need a text and an interpreter (i.e. you!). Whenever we read a new text, our interpretation of a text is shaped by our pre-existing beliefs, knowledge and expectations. This should be reassuring because it means that you can leverage your own life experiences in developing a unique interpretation of the text! We’ll show you how this works in the next point.
• Remembering evidence (quotes or literary devices) more easily. If you know you admire a character for example (which is in itself an interpretation 😉), you can probably remember why you admire them. Perhaps the character’s selflessness reminds you of your Dad (see how you’re using real life experiences mentioned in Point 1 to develop an interpretation of the text?). You will then more easily recall something the character said or did in the text (i.e. evidence) that made you admire them.
• Having an analysis ready to use alongside the evidence. As a result of Point 2 , you’ll be able to write a few sentences based on your own interpretation. Rather than memorising entire essays ( we’ve talked about this before ) and regurgitating information from teachers, tutors, study guides and other resources - which can be labour intensive and actually detract from the originality of your essay - you’re approaching the essay with your own thoughts and opinions (which you can reuse over and over again across different essay topics).

Let’s look on the flip side. What happens when you don’t have your own interpretation?

When you don’t take the time to actively think for yourself - i.e. to think through your own interpretations (we’ve talked about the importance of THINK in the THINK and EXECUTE strategy here ) - when it finally comes to writing an essay, you may find it difficult:

a) to get started - formulating a contention in response to the essay topic is challenging because you have no strong opinion about the text ,

b) complete the essay - writing up arguments and using evidence in paragraphs becomes challenging because you have no strong opinion about the text ,

c) to score higher marks - ultimately, you end up regurgitating other people’s ideas (your teacher’s, tutor’s or from study guides) because you have (you guessed it) no strong opinion on the text .

Having your own interpretation means that you’ll eliminate issues a, b and c from above. Overall, you’ll have opinions (and therefore contentions) ready for any prompt when you go into your SACs or exams, which means it’ll be easier not only to write a full essay, but an original and insightful one as well.

To overcome the issues above, you need to be confident with your own interpretation of the text. This doesn’t come naturally to a lot of students, and it makes sense why. After all, so many subjects reward specific answers (2 + 2 = 4), whereas English is tricky because there’s so much more flexibility in what constitutes a ‘correct answer’. It’s scary treading the sea of different possible interpretations because you’ll ask yourself questions like:

• How do I know if my interpretation is correct?
• How do I know if my evidence actually backs up what I’m arguing?
• What if I disagree with my teacher, and they mark me down for a differing opinion?
• Or worse - I’m not smart enough to come up with my own interpretation!

Let me say that you are absolutely smart enough to develop your own interpretation, and I’ll show you how to do so in A Killer Comparative Guide: The Hate Race & Charlie’s Country with LSG’s unique strategy - the BUBBLE TEA (BBT) strategy . By following our step-by-step framework, you can be confident that your interpretation is valid, that it backs up your argument, and that most importantly, you won’t lose marks for it!

4. Structural Features Analysis

In How To Write A Killer Text Response , we cover Metalanguage . A Structural Features Analysis and Comparison goes over a lot of the same material, and will help elevate your essays to the next level. Knowing quotes and themes is essential, but being able to pair that with analysis of the title, setting, narrator and overall structure - we'll cover title here - shows the examiner that you really know exactly what you’re talking about. This section will be especially crucial for metalanguage topics that are all about how Charlie’s Country and The Hate Race are structured , so, enjoy!

The title of a text is always significant - and this text pairing is no different. First, of course, please do keep in mind that there is no universally accurate interpretation of what a title means. I’m giving you my assessment, but the author and director could very well disagree themselves! That’s okay, because as long as we back it up properly, your interpretation is as valid as any. As always, that’s the beauty of English. Let’s first unpack The Hate Race. What this title signifies is that, for minorities in Australia, life is constantly akin to a race. There is no rest, no comfort and no sense of home when your mind is preoccupied with all the ways you don’t belong. Australia, as a colonial outpost representing the Crown in a region that is overwhelmingly non-white, was once proud of its discriminatory stances; holding itself as the 'White Man’s Paradise'. It is in this context that racism, for Clarke, is not just a reality that lurks beneath the surface, but rather, a guiding tenet of Australia since 1788. With this overarching narrative, it is also important to acknowledge that the mere experience of racism is immensely emotionally, physically and mentally taxing for Clarke, and all people of colour. Being denied a firm sense of self, and constantly being forced to justify one’s own existence isn’t easy, and becomes a ‘race against time’ to see who can cope and rise above, and who will be swept away along with the tide. This sorrowful reality is what engenders the never ending race against being consumed by such hatred, because, for non-white Australians, there simply is no other choice. If they stop running, they run the risk of being consumed by the hatred themselves and becoming so cynical and disillusioned that they forget their culture and accede to the Anglocentric, white majority. 

Moving to de Heer’s film, Charlie’s Country, the title reflects a simple reality: this is Charlie’s country. However, when de Heer speaks of ‘country’, he is really talking about ‘Country’; the Indigenous notion of connection to and respect for one’s traditional lands. Nurturing this connection is a sacred responsibility, and the film reminds us that, despite Charlie’s many trials and tribulations, the land on which he lives is truly his own. Throughout the film, Charlie maintains a keen awareness that what is happening to him is unjust, and, unlike Maxine, he doesn’t need someone to convince him that he belongs. Whatever Anglo Australia does, it cannot change the continuing legacy of his people and their sovereignty. To Charlie, it is laughable to think that his Country - which the First Nations have nurtured and kept in common use for 40,000 years - could suddenly become someone else’s property in less than 200 years. He may not have any legal authority under the Crown, and his people may be dispossessed of their sovereignty and authority, but this cannot and will not change the remaining truth of First Nations sovereignty. De Heer’s film title thus challenges us to confront our own perceptions of Australia and remember that we all live on stolen land.

Essay Topic Breakdown

As with all our essay topic breakdowns, we'll follow LSG's THINK and EXECUTE strategy , as taught in our How To Write A Killer Text Response study guide. The LSG's THINK and EXECUTE strategy follows three steps in the THINK phase - A nalyse, B rainstorm, and C reate a Plan. Learn more about this technique in this video:

'I’m free now!' ( Charlie’s Country ) 'My children are the descendants of the unbroken.' ( The Hate Race ) Compare the characters’ understanding of freedom in the two texts.

Step 1: Analyse

Let’s break down the prompt. This is a quote-based prompt, meaning the quote must feature somewhere in your essay . Ensure that you have a good understanding of the place from which the quote is drawn. In this case, Charlie’s exclamation of joy features when he escapes to the wilderness and is able to cook, dance and provide for himself. The quote from The Hate Race is the last line of the memoir, with Clarke expressing the sentiment that her children belong in Australia and will be as strong as their parents.

Step 2: Brainstorm

The next part is to establish the link between the quote and the topic. The essay topic at hand asks us how 'freedom' is understood, so we need to actually understand freedom itself in relation to the quotes provided. For de Heer and Clarke, freedom isn’t an abstract concept relating to rights, liberties and responsibilities. Rather, freedom is found when people have the ability to be themselves, own their culture and live their truth. For Charlie, that mainly relates to his right to live in his country and maintain the traditional ways of the First Nations Peoples. Clarke, however, is more focused on the balancing act of finding freedom through a multicultural society that includes all, and in doing so celebrates the contribution that all cultures make into the melting pot that is Australia.

Step 3: Create a Plan

There’s no one correct way to structure your paragraphs for Charlie’s Country and The Hate Race . However, I find it consistently helpful to follow a chronological structure. This refers to going through events of the memoir and film in the order they actually occur, and finding unique points of analysis based around these chronological groupings.  

We also need to think of examples and points of comparison. Base these around the themes we’ve gone through, so you can easily identify DIVERGENT and CONVERGENT points of comparison. I’ll walk you through my thinking.

Paragraph 1 – unable to experience freedom because systems exist to stop individuals from embracing their own culture

• Kellyville and Alice Springs are immediately established as communities where rules and standards of association are both made and enforced by white authorities. The types of authorities and the prevalence of this overarching system of control differs between The Hate Race and Charlie’s Country , but are not any less harmful.

Paragraph 2 – attempts at pushback are rebuffed, resulting in further punishment for the simple crime of failing to conform

• Anglo Australia maintains its dominance through an assumption that minority Australians and First Nations Peoples will not question their place. Thus, when there is even the smallest semblance of resistance, punishment is the only solution. 
• The difference here is that while Charlie wages an active resistance against white authorities, Maxine is moreso placed into submission by the repeated failure of her pleas to be heard by anyone in a position to change what is occurring. At the centre of both situations, though, is a desire to break free of white Australia’s chains.

Paragraph 3 – finding cultural freedom is a slow process of change, but one that begins with self acceptance

• There is no happy ending to either The Hate Race or Charlie’s Country. Freedom does not suddenly spring forth. Instead, our author and director elucidate that cultivating freedom is a slow process. For Charlie, that begins with embracing his culture again and seeking to keep it alive. On Maxine’s part, it is about refusing to be broken by her past, and instead using her trauma as a motivator to build a better future.

If you'd like to see the sample A+ essay we wrote up for this essay topic, then you might want to check out our A Killer Comparative Guide: The Hate Race & Charlie's Country study guide !

Photograph 51 & The Penelopiad are studied as part of VCE English's Comparative. For one of our most popular posts on Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing), check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative .

We've explored themes, characters and literary devices amongst other things over on our Comparing The Penelopiad and Photograph 51 blog post. If you need a quick refresher or you’re new to studying this text pair, I highly recommend checking it out!

Here, we’ll be breaking down a Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad comparative essay topic using LSG’s THINK and EXECUTE strategy , a technique to help you write better VCE essays. If you’re unfamiliar with this strategy, you can learn about it in our How To Write A Killer Text Response study guide.

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

Step 1: A nalyse

Step 2: B rainstorm

Step 3: C reate a Plan

Without further ado, let’s get into it!

The Prompt:

‘You heard what you wanted to hear.’ ( Photograph 51 ) 

‘Now that all the others have run out of air, it’s my turn to do a little story-making.’ ( The Penelopiad ) 

Compare the ways in which both texts suggest there is power in storytelling. 

The first step is to deduce what type(s) the essay question is (for a refresher on the 5 types of essay prompts, check out this blog ). I usually find that a process of elimination is the easiest way to determine this. The prompt doesn’t explicitly include the keyword ‘How’, so it isn’t how-based. There are also no characters mentioned in the prompt, so we can rule out character-based. There’s no metalanguage included, so it isn’t metalanguage-based either. However, the prompt does mention the themes of ‘power’ and ‘storytelling’, so yes, it is theme-based. There are also two quotes (one from each text) included as part of the prompt, so it’s also quote-based.

Now that we’ve determined what types of essay prompt are relevant here, the next step is to identify its keywords: ‘the ways’ , ‘both texts ’, ‘power ’ and ‘storytelling’ . 

The inclusion of ‘the ways’ tells us that we must consider different examples from ‘both texts’ where Ziegler and Atwood show us there is ‘power in storytelling’ . The thematic words ‘power ’ and ‘storytelling’ are especially important in your selection of evidence and also your three distinct paragraph ideas, as singling out the thematic keywords will make sure you do not go off-topic. 

Let’s look at the common themes of ‘power’ and ‘storytelling’ that are central to the essay topic, and more specifically, how there is power WITHIN storytelling. In the case of Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad , a common representation of storytelling that is present in both texts is that truthful storytelling is subjective. This means that both Atwood and Ziegler posit that those in power throughout history have been afforded the ability to shape the historical narrative to best fit their interests. Both texts are also set within patriarchal societies - 1950s Britain and Ancient Greece. Therefore, our overall contention in response to this topic can be: 

Both texts suggest that the ability to control the subjective nature of storytelling is a power that has predominantly been afforded to men throughout history .

This opening line addresses ‘power in storytelling’ in a specific way that brings in the contexts of both texts. Each of your paragraphs should fall somewhere under this umbrella of thought - exploring the dynamics of the patriarchal systems within both texts in relation to storytelling. Who tells the story? How does it benefit them? Why not others? 

It is now time to develop the three main ideas that will form your essay structure. It is important to remember that each paragraph should include a discussion of converging and diverging ideas. Try to only use one or two examples from each text in a paragraph, as this way, you will have more time and space in your paragraphs to analyse your literary techniques and quotes. As the old saying goes, show don’t tell! 

P1: Both texts give women a voice through the retelling of their stories from a different perspective. 

Convergent Ideas: 

• Photograph 51 serves as a correction to the history of the discovery of the helix structure. 
• The Penelopiad inserts the female perspective into the famous myth of The Odyssey , giving reasoning and depth to the female voice.

Divergent Ideas: 

• Rosalind’s story is primarily told by the male scientists as the play retells the events, injected with commentary from the male scientists.
• The Penelopiad is a first-person recount from Penelope herself, therefore she is given more agency and control of the narrative.

P2: However, women still lack authority in the shaping of their own narratives as their subjective truth and perspective is often undermined.

Convergent Ideas:

• Predominantly, the narration is told from the male perspective as male scientists narrate Rosalind’s life. Her story is still subject to male opinion.
• The Maids interrupt Penelope’s first-person narrative through the 10 interludes from the maids’ perspective. In doing so, they cast doubt on Penelope’s retelling of the narrative and offer a more truthful perspective.
• Rosalind’s story is often interrupted by other male scientists, therefore more directly illustrating that men have more control over the subjective truth. Despite Rosalind’s story being central to the novel, Ziegler still demonstrates the difficulty women face in being believed and accredited for their contribution to history.
• Penelope’s story is not interrupted by men like Rosalind’s is. Therefore, there is a lack of male dominance in this aspect of the tale. However, the theme of patriarchal dominance is instead illustrated through the lack of authority that the maids have. Despite their account of the events in the tale being the most accurate, their low social status limits the power of their voice in a patriarchal society.

P3: In patriarchal societies, the men ultimately control their own narrative and how they are remembered, amplifying their own greatness by omitting the potential blemishes on their character.

• The male scientists deflect the blame for discrediting Rosalind by instead blaming her cold personality instead of their own deception and inability to cooperate with a woman.
• The execution of the maids is dismissed in the trial of Odysseus as Odysseus’ actions are justified in the patriarchal society of Ancient Greece.

Divergent Ideas:

• The male scientists’ reputations remain untarnished at the conclusion of the narrative, aside from personal guilt and shame. They achieved the scientific success they set out to achieve and were remembered as heroes.
• Unlike the untarnished reputation of the male scientists, the maids curse Odysseus at the conclusion of the narrative.

The ability to control the subjective nature of storytelling is a power that has predominantly been afforded to men throughout the retelling of history (1) . This is a result of the dominance of patriarchal systems, which inherently give men more agency in society to dictate the narrative for the next generations to remember (2) . Both Atwood’s The Penelopiad and Ziegler’s Photograph 51 criticise this power imbalance in historical storytelling and deliver the female perspective in two different eras of history. Each text recognises that the lack of voice women are granted in society undermines and suppresses their contribution to history (3) . Ultimately, both authors question the objectivity of the legacies that men have left behind, casting doubt on the narratives that they have shaped by introducing the underrepresented female perspective (4).

Annotations (1) A ‘universal truth’ or broad thematic statement is a great way to start an essay. This is your overall contention that does not mention the specifics of the texts - it purely deals with the themes of the topic. 

(2) As seen here, your second sentence can be used to back up the universal truth in a way that is more specific to the texts and the ideas you’re going to discuss. In my second sentence, I’ve included more information about the societal power structures that are present within the texts and how men have more power to dictate historical narratives. 

(3) Then, you signpost the three ideas that you’re going to discuss within your essay in a clear, precise and summarised way. Here is where you can mention textual details such as the titles, authors, forms and setting (i.e. 1950s Britain and Ancient Greece).

(4) I have finished off my introduction with an ‘Ultimately’ sentence that discusses the authorial intent of both authors. This offers a broader in-depth look at the topic as a whole, as it acknowledges the author’s intentional decisions about the text. 

By writing narratives that focus on the female perspective in history, both texts afford the female protagonists power through the representation of their voice. Atwood and Ziegler address the imbalance of female input in history and aim to rectify that through representing the contributions women made in both narratives. Photograph 51 , through the form of a play that retrospectively reenacts the events leading up to the discovery of the helix structure, cements Rosalind Franklin as the true genius behind the 'secret of life'. This honour has been credited to Watson and Crick solely throughout history, with them being given recognition of the 'Nobel' and having their names 'in textbooks'. Ziegler firmly details how the key to their success is the 'photograph she took of B', which Watson exploits to eventually win the race to construct the model. Similarly, The Penelopiad is also a societal correction to the lack of female representation in the narratives presented (4) . Written as a first-person narration, Penelope’s aim as a narrator is to be given the opportunity 'to do a little story-making' in this retrospective novel, inserting her perspective into the well-known myth of Odysseus and The Odyssey (5) . The characterisation of Penelope is subverted in Penelope’s retelling, as the generalisation of her character being only recognised for her 'smart[s]', '[her] weaving', and '[her] devotion to [her] husband' is challenged. Atwood contends that Penelope is also determined, self-sufficient and tactile through the narrative voice she grants Penelope as the main protagonist of the text. Rosalind in Photograph 51 is not the narrator of her story, which limits her agency in the telling of her truth in comparison to Penelope, who is able to shape her story the way she wishes (6). Underpinning both of these texts is Atwood and Ziegler’s authorial intention to contend that there is an underrepresentation of female contribution to history, and therefore utilise their texts to give power to female characters in patriarchal systems (7) .

Annotations (4) The transitional sentence between texts can be less jarring and clunky if you introduce your example from Text B in a similar vein to the discussion of Text A. As seen here, I have used my discussion of how Ziegler represents Rosalind in a manner that is seen as a historical correction to then transition into how Penelope also serves the same purpose.

(5) The explicit stating of the first-person narration style in The Penelopiad directly addresses the keywords of 'the ways' from the essay question. By incorporating different textual examples like narration and characterisation (as seen in the following sentence), I’m able to analyse multiple ways that the authors suggest there is power in storytelling.

(6) It makes it easier to discuss your divergent idea if it is directly linked to the converging ideas you’ve already mentioned, just as I have here in pointing out the difference in protagonists and narration. This means you don’t have to waste time re-explaining things from the texts!

(7) I conclude with a more broad statement that references the authors’ intentions in order to finish with a more in-depth exploration, just like the end of the introduction.

Women still lack authority in the shaping of their own narratives as their version of the truth is often undermined. Despite the main motivator for the texts being to empower the women by giving them a voice, both texts also recognise the limitations of a patriarchal society by illustrating the challenges the protagonists face in having their voices heard. By viewing the past through a retrospective lens in The Penelopiad , Penelope is finally able to deliver her perspective, encapsulated in the opening line of 'now that I’m dead I know everything'. (8) The notion that Penelope had to be dead and free of the restraints placed on her voice whilst she was alive in patriarchal Ancient Greece demonstrates the complete lack of authority the voices of women have in establishing themselves in history. This is echoed in the same retrospective retelling of Rosalind’s story in Photograph 51 , as the play begins with Rosalind stating that 'this is what it was like', establishing that the events that follow this initial line are a snapshot into the limitations she had to face as a woman in the male-dominated scientific field. It also references that the interjections of the male scientists as they commentate on her life were 'what it was like', as male opinion majorly shaped the suppression of Rosalind’s success throughout the play. On the contrary, (9) Penelope’s recount of the story is less interrupted by interjections of other characters, specifically those from men. However, the maids deliver ten interludes throughout The Penelopiad . These interludes are another example of female voice being represented in the text, but often being dismissed due to their crudeness or sarcastic nature in their casting of doubt over both Penelope and Odysseus, as they taunt Penelope’s decision to 'blame it on the [...] poxy little sluts!' and blemish Odysseus’ name by characterising him as the 'artfullest dodger' or 'blithe lodger', in reference to his infidelity. Despite the maids being the most authoritative in terms of true Greek theatre, (10) as they deliver the truest and most objective judgement of events, they are 'forgotten' and are not served true justice as a result of their low social status and gender that limits their voice in a patriarchal society. The female perspectives in the texts are truer representations of history in both contexts, yet because of limitations regarding their gender in the two patriarchal systems, they are overshadowed by the male recounts of history.

Annotations (8) To strengthen your essay, it is important to also use evidence that is not strictly dialogue or themes from inside the text. In this line, I use a literary device - retrospective storytelling - to back up the analysis I am talking about.

(9) Starting your discussion of the divergent ideas is easy with the use of phrases such as ‘on the contrary’, ‘unlike this…’ and ‘however’. You don’t want to spend unnecessary time on filler sentences. Be efficient!

(10) By further strengthening my analysis with a range of examples (e.g. mentioning the historical importance of genre, such as Greek theatre in this instance), I’m able to demonstrate a deeper knowledge of not only the texts and their context . 

In patriarchal societies, the men ultimately have more control over their own narratives and shape them for their own personal glorification of character. The omission of immorality and emphasis on male achievement by the men narrating the story is a clear indication that despite the selfish choices they make, men are still able to shape their legacies in their favour. Watson and Crick in Photograph 51 are depicted as 'arrogant' and duplicitous as they extort their 'old friend[ship]' with Wilkins for personal gain, pressuring him into 'talking about his work' to further progress towards notoriety. The conclusion of the play, with Watson and Crick accepting the honour of the Nobel Prize and claiming it as the 'finest moment' of their lives, illustrates that the motivation of personal success justifies the immoral actions of men as they are remembered fondly as scientific heroes without the blemishes of their characters. Similarly in The Penelopiad , Odysseus is revered as a hero through the intertextual reference of The Odyssey, a myth detailing the legend of Odysseus and his 'cleverness'. Penelope’s recounting of the 'myth of Penelope and Odysseus' sheds light on her ingenuity in the tales of Odysseus, showing that she 'set the whole thing up on purpose', referring to the deceiving plan that Odysseus had been awarded all the credit for in the original retelling of their story. Additionally, in the 'trial of Odysseus', Odysseus’ character is evaluated in the setting of a court, as the maids have demanded justice for Odysseus’ unjust execution of them. However, the judge overturns this decision as it would serve as a 'blot on an otherwise exceedingly distinguished career', encapsulating the idea that men in a patriarchal society will omit personal errors in favour of presenting themselves and other men as heroes of their narratives. However, unlike the untarnished male success of Photograph 51 , the maids curse Odysseus so he would 'never be at rest' in the conclusion of the narrative, as Atwood makes the final statement that men throughout history should be held accountable for the immoral actions they make (11) .

‍ Annotations (11) By concluding with a specific reference to the authorial intent of this specific idea explored throughout the paragraph, you ‘zoom’ back out and show your reader the bigger picture. 

At the end of each text it is evident that, regardless of the representation and voice that is given to the female characters, the deeply entrenched patriarchal systems in both timelines negate this power in favour of the male voice (12) . Ziegler’s play asserts that Rosalind’s 'groundbreaking work' should 'cement her place in history', and aims to give her recognition from a relatively more progressive, feminist society. Atwood’s conclusion also is representative of giving women more recognition for their achievements, like giving credit for Penelope’s 'intelligence' as an esteemed character trait in contemporary society. Both characters cast doubt over the previously revered male heroes in both texts, and further criticise the lack of female representation in those heroic stories. In conveying both Penelope and Rosalind’s stories, the authors call for a further critique of past and future accounts of human achievement. 

‍ Annotations (12) In this conclusion, I have chosen to focus on comparing the authorial intentions of Atwood and Ziegler in relation to the topic. In doing so, it can summarise my contention that I introduced earlier in the essay. By starting my conclusion with an overall statement regarding the ending of the two texts, I draw on the readers’ preexisting ideas of how they felt at the end of each narrative.

If you’re studying Photograph 51 and My Brilliant Career, check out our Killer Comparative Guide to learn everything you need to know to ace this assessment.

This blog was updated on 23/10/2020.

1. Introductions

2. Characters

4. Literary Devices

5. Important Quotes

6. Comparing Penelopiad and Photograph 51 Video Transcription

7. Sample Essay Topics

8. Essay Breakdown

Introductions 

The Penelopiad by Margaret Atwood retells the story of the Odyssey by Homer from the perspective of Penelope, a half mortal and half divine princess who also happened to be the wife of Odysseus, and her Twelve Maids. A retrospective narrative, Atwood opens her mythological tale with Penelope and the Maids in the afterlife reflecting on the events that occurred centuries before. Told in chronological order from her birth, the Maids serve as a traditional part of greek theatre in their purpose of a Chorus as they make commentary on their life.  

Anna Ziegler’s play, Photograph 51 , is set during the 1950s in the age of scientific discovery as researchers are scrambling to be the first to unlock the mysteries of DNA. Its protagonist, scientist Rosalind Franklin is an under-appreciated genius working as the only female in her respective field. As one of her photographs uncover the truth of DNA, her competitors' ambition leads the men around her to success. 

The Penelopiad 

Major characters.

• The Suitors
• The Twelve Maids 
• King Icarius of Sparta
• Penelope’s Mother (The Naiad) 
• Uncle Tyndareous
• Melantho of the Pretty Cheeks 

Minor Characters

• Theseus and Peirithous
• Piraeus and Theoclymenus

Photograph 51

• Rosalind Franklin 
• Maurice Wilkins 
• James Watson 
• Francis Crick 
• Don Caspar 
• Ray Gosling 

Both texts explore the use and demonstration of power in its various forms of physical displays of strength to the patriarchal forces that govern each texts respective world. Indeed, the power of men prevailing atop the social hierarchy while displacing those below them is a common theme within both texts. The authority associated with Icarius’ title of King allows his drunken and rude behaviour to go by unquestioned while in Photograph 51 Wilikins embodies the power possessed by white men. The patriarchal power that men possess within each of the respective texts becomes closely linked to fragile masculinity in their exertion of physical strength or intellectual superiority; Odysseus self-proclaimed superhuman strength is equated to Wilkins need for intellectual dominance, especially over the brilliant Rosalind. 

While the men within each text exert their inherent power of supposed supremacy, the women within each world draw are shown to draw on their physical appearance as a source of power or is shown to be disempowered by it. In The Penelopiad , Helens is known for her legendary beauty which she uses to relentlessly taunt Penelope, the proverbial ugly duckling, through which Atwood demonstrates how, like other forms of power, can be used to oppress others. Conversely, Photograph 51 examines how Rosalind is disempowered by her perceived lack of traditional physical beauty. Many of the men around her using her unflattering appearance to ridicule and minimise her and her work. 

While the time periods in which the two texts are set may greatly differ, the notion of identity is still a prevailing theme that is explored. Indeed, the role others perceptions play in each character's construction of their own self-worth and values provides both authors a basis for the examination of how societies enforce conformity while punishing uniqueness. In The Penelopiad, it can be seen that the glowing perceptions of Odysseus from his mother and his nurse nurture and grow Odysseus’ egocentric view of himself as a hero. In contrast Photograph 51 demonstrates the negative effects these perceptions can have on one’s self-identity, as the negative views that surround Rosalind ultimately make her question herself and her actions. 

Not only do others perceptions shape one's personality, but the expectations enforced by Society. Both protagonists within each text feels pressure from those around them to live up to certain expectations; Penelope feels she must constantly encourage Odysseus’ self glorifying tales of heroism, while Rosalind feels similar pressure to follow her father's advice to consistently be right which eventually leads to her unfavourable reputation for being difficult to work with. 

Both Ziegler and Atwood suggest that in order to overcome the pressures and external expectations of society each which of these women must have a positive and strong sense of self. In the case of Photograph 51, Rosalind must adopt a strong self-belief in her work in order to survive the hostile masculine environment around her. By contrast, Odysseus constantly boasts and exaggerates his stories of heroism and the cleverness of his actions. While both Odysseus and Rosalind have a strong self-belief, Odysseus’ is guided by ego while Rosalind’s is guided by intelligence

Women and Misogyny

The feminine figure and roles are depicted in contrasting ways between the texts, but both show how the construction of characters who either adhere to or reject the social constructs of femininity during their era are forced to grapple with the harsh realities of being a woman in both ancient and modern times. One of the biggest examples of femininity shown within each text is the value the patriarchal system places on motherhood and the high expectations they have for mothers and mother figures. Some mother figures in the The Penelopiad demonstrate the gentle and protective qualities associated with typical feminine attributes; the two contrasting figures within the same text, Odysseus’ nurse and mother demonstrate the two extremes of femininity relating to motherhood. Eurycleia is presented as benevolent and dedicated to the mother figure ideal as she is shown to snatch Penelope's newborn son and envision him as her own. In contrast, Penelope's mother an elusive and neglectful Naiad leaves her child to swim around unsupervised. 

In Photograph 51 mothers are depicted as primarily concerned with the needs of their children and husbands as they are shown to identify themselves with their attributes and successes. It can be seen that such characters as Gosling's mother's interest in his PhD suggests that like Penelope she judges her own worth by her child's success. Indeed, while these mothers are shown to be nurturing and caring most of it emphasises their need to control and guide their child's life.

Not only mothers, but wives become another primary source of femininity that is examined within both texts. The Penelopiad’s notion of wives becomes closely related to the idea that within a patriarchal system women are associated with being a possession rather than an equal. Regardless of class and social standing every woman on some level is shown to be oppressed by this traditional and conventional idea of womanhood. Penelope is encouraged to be a doting wife to her husband Odysseus, while in contrast, the Maids remain unmarried yet are still subjects of oppressive mistreatment. Unlike The Penelopiad, wives have little to no significance within Photograph 51, a text heavily focused on the scientific discovery of DNA, Indeed, the woman or the wife is seen as irrelevant in the scientific field while any mention of women outside of Rosalind is confined to the wives of men contained within the domestic sphere. 

Storytelling and The Narrative 

The notion of storytelling and the power of narrative becomes closely linked to such ideas as femininity and womanhood within each text as each closely revolves around women taking back control of their own narratives and stories. The Penelopiad is a story about other stories as it is based off retelling an already famous story. The Odyssey becomes a vessel for Penelope to share her own insights and feelings while her actions of retelling the well-known work is a source of empowerment for her as she is able to negate stories about herself that she would prefer not to hear. This frees her from the burden of being a legend or a myth as she urges women not to follow her example of keeping their mouths shut. In contrast, Rosalind Franklin does speak out initially but gained an unfortunate reputation as a difficult woman in stories about her that are circulated by men. 

Through this, it can be said that the aim of both Ziegler and Atwood is to challenge the historical invisibility of women throughout time. While Ziegler's play attempts to highlight the ways in which stories told by men have worked to minimise or downplay the roles and contributions of women, The Penelopiad attempts to offer new perspective of already well-known stories that intend to give insight into the woman's understanding of life.

Literary Devices

• Dramatic Irony 
• Dramatic Monologue 
• Genre, literary form and its construction 
• Authorship 
• Narrative structure 
• Style and language 

Important Quotes 

“And what did I amount to, once the official version gained ground? An edifying legend. A stick used to beat other women with.” (ch.1) 

“We were told we were dirty. We were dirty. Dirt was our concern, dirt was our business, dirt was our specialty, dirt was our fault. We were the dirty girls. If our owners or the sons of our owners or a visiting nobleman or the sons of a visiting nobleman wanted to sleep with us, we could not refuse.” (ch.4) 

“Water does not resist. Water flows. When you plunge your hand into it, all you feel is a caress. Water is not a solid wall, it will not stop you. But water always goes where it wants to go, and nothing in the end can stand against it.” (ch.7) 

“Oh gods and oh prophets, please alter my life,

And let a young hero take me for his wife! 

But no hero comes to me, early or late—

Hard work is my destiny, death is my fate!” (ch.8) 

“The more outrageous versions have it that I slept with all of the Suitors, one after another—over a hundred of them—and then gave birth to the Great God Pan. Who could believe such a monstrous tale?” (ch. 20)

Photograph 51 

“Dr Wilkins, I will not be anyone’s assistant” (Rosalind pg.13)

“It’s for men only” (Wilkins pg.17) 

“But those are precisely the conversations i need to have. Scientists make discoveries over lunch.” (Rosalind pg. 17) 

“...You don’t have to try and wing me over. In fact, you shouldn’t try to win me over because you won’t succeed. I’m not that kind of person.” (Rosalind pg.35) 

“To Watson and Crick, the shape of something suggested the most detailed analysis of its interior workings” (Casper pg.41)

Comparing Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad

[Video Transcript]

 background.

The play Photograph 51 by Anna Ziegler invites us to revisit the events surrounding the discovery of DNA’s double helix structure. While the DNA double helix structure is common knowledge now, in the 1950s many scientists were racing to claim its discovery. Ziegler's title, Photograph 51 is simply named after the X-ray photograph taken of the hydrated B form of DNA, which was crucial in the consequent events that eventually led to the identification of DNA's structure. However, much controversy has surrounded exactly who deserves credit for the discovery, particularly because the Nobel Prize was awarded to James Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Wilkins - 3 people who did not actually take Photograph 51 itself. Instead, people have argued that Rosalind Franklin should have been one to be award the prize, or at least share the prize as it was her work that led to Photograph 51 and without it, Watson, Crick and Wilkins may not have discovered the DNA structure. Yet what makes this situation even more complicated is that Franklin’s work was shared with Watson without her knowledge in addition to the fact that Franklin died of ovarian cancer 4 years before the prize was awarded. Since the Nobel Prize does not generally make posthumous awards, Rosalind’s work has never shared in the glory along with the other men. Ziegler takes this opportunity to explore Rosalind’s perspective, and gives the audience a chance to peer into her experiences, interactions with others, and strong mindset. The question now begs: if Rosalind’s data had not been leaked, would she have gone on to discover the structure of DNA on her own? If Watson and Crick had not seen Photograph 51 , would they have gone on to discover the structure of DNA on their own?

The Penelopiad is similar to Photograph 51 in that it is written from a women's perspective previously never explored in literature. While in Photograph 51 , Ziegler allows us to be privy to Rosalind’s thoughts - a perspective unknown to media and publications because of her death, Margaret Atwood chooses to write from Penelope’s perspective, a view also previously never explored in Greek literature. Penelope’s reminisces about her life from her deathbed in Hades, the underworld. We learn of Penelope’s key life moments from childhood through to adulthood, such as the psychological damage inflicted upon her when her father attempts to drown her as a child, to her pretending to weave a shroud so that she can delay the decision to choose a Suitor who undoubtedly only wants to marry her so they could take up the throne and treasure. Her narrative is occasionally interrupted by the 12 maids who were killed by Odysseus, Penelope’s husband, upon his return. These maids were wrongly murdered and their presence in Atwood’s story brings attention to their plight as not only females, but as slaves during Ancient Greece. When studying The Penelopiad , I would strongly encourage you to be familiar with its historical context - mainly, you should have a good understanding of the story ‘The Odyssey’, the Trojan War, and the roles of the Gods mentioned in the novel. I’ve created a playlist I’ll link below for you with some videos I believe will be helpful for your studies. 

Common Themes

Women’s reactions to misogyny.

Misogyny is widespread in both Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad, and both writers explore the ways in which females deal with such an environment. Penelope is more graceful in her response, as she is accepting of her place as a woman, as poignantly expressed: "I kept my mouth shut; or, if I opened it, I sang [Odysseus] praises. I didn’t contradict, I didn’t ask awkward questions, I didn’t dig deep.” Meanwhile, Rosalind reacts with snark hostility, "I don’t suppose it matters whether or not it suits me, does it?”. Rosalind refuses to let her womanhood impede her career as a scientist, to the extent that her stubbornness is self-defeating and her being constantly on guard only causes further misunderstandings and tension with Wilkins: “You know…I think there must come a point in life when you realise you can’t begin again. That you’ve made the decisions you’ve made and then you live with them or you spend your whole life in regret."

Misogyny from a male lens

In The Penelopiad, even Telemachus shows a lack of understanding and empathy for his own mother, and wants her to find a Suitor quickly because she is "responsible for the fact that his inheritance was being literally gobbled up." He disobeys Penelope’s wishes and resents being “under the thumbs of women, who as usual were being overemotional and showing no reasonableness and judgement”. Like Telemachus, the men in Photograph 51 have NO sense of what it means to be a woman. They is frustratingly presumptuous in the female psyche, as seen when Crick boasts: "See, women expect men to fall upon them like unrestrained beasts.” The viewpoints of the males in both texts highlight misogyny that is deeply rooted in society, and a demonstration of how far we can be from the truth when we formulate our own assumptions.

Women’s undervalued abilities 

Penelope is clever, but it’s only beauty and sex appeal that is valued in society as so clearly shown by all men charmed by Helen of Troy. Penelope's intelligence, and more widely, all women’s intelligence is seen as a threat to men as she says, 'cleverness is a quality a man likes to have in his wife as long as she is some distance away from him". Unlike Penelope’s era where women usually didn’t actively or overtly fight for their rights, the 1950s sees more agency in women. While Rosalind’s intelligence secures her a job and career, she still faces a hostile, sexist environment. Her fellow male scientists dismiss her credentials. From the get go, Rosalind is expected to ‘assist’ Wilkins, and is disparagingly referred to as ‘Miss Franklin’, rather than as ‘Dr Franklin’ as she is rightfully entitled to. Moreover, her methodical approach to her work drives the frustrated Wilkins to share her confidential research with Crick and Watson, displaying the men's inherent distrust and disrespect of women.

Here’s a tip for you. You may have noticed that the common themes I mentioned aren’t just one-worded themes, like ‘misogyny’. Yes, I could’ve lumped my themes together under the umbrella of ‘misogyny’ but I wanted to go that extra mile. By breaking it down further, I am better able to showcase my detailed understanding of the texts, and you’ll find that adopting this specificity in writing is rewarded in VCE. 

Here’s another tip. At the Year 12 level, and particularly in Reading and Comparing, your assessor expects you to not only understand the text itself, but to understand the real-life implications explored. Here we’re looking at human reactions and responses to our world and experiences. So when you start comparing Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad think about the human condition. For example, on a textual level, you’d be asking yourself: what factors drive Rosalind to act with such hostility towards men? Why is the way she deals with misogyny so different to that of Penelope? Now if we zoom out and look at the bigger picture, you need to start asking yourself: What do these texts say about us as people? What can we learn from these stories?

Obviously there’s so much more you can extract from these books and compare, but I hope this has given you something to think about!

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

Sample Essay Topics

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. If you’re unfamiliar with this strategy, then check it out in How To Write A Killer Text Response .

Character-based Prompt:

While Rosalind and Penelope are examples of strong female characters, they are both severely flawed. Discuss. 

Theme-based Prompt: 

In what ways do misogyny and expectations impact individuals identity within each text?

Structure-based Prompt:

What structural elements help convey the strength of women within The Penelopiad and Photograph 51 ?

Quote-based Prompt:

“We were told we were dirty. We were dirty. Dirt was our concern, dirt was our business, dirt was our specialty, dirt was our fault. We were the dirty girls.” (The Penelopiad) 

Authorial message-based Prompt: 

What comments do the authors make about the corrupting force of power?

Make sure you watch the video below for extra tips and advice on how to break down this essay prompt!

Essay Topic: The authors of Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad give voice to the women in their stories. Discuss. 

• ‘Authors’ - means I should talk about their intention and what message they want us to hear
• ‘Voice’ - power to speak, to story-tell, to share their side of the story
• ‘Women’ - be sure not to only talk about the main characters such as Penelope and Rosalind but other women in the books
• ‘Discuss’ - a word like ‘discuss’ gives you a lot of flexibility to discuss any ideas that are relevant to the topic, whereas a ‘do you agree’ style of question is a bit more limiting. With so much more flexibility to ‘discuss’ various ideas, I’m going to touch on topics that most interest me . I feel that this is a great way to get yourself in tune with the book, especially as you start writing. The more you can make the writing interesting for yourself, the more interesting it will be for your reader. 

Contention : 

By giving voice to the women in their stories, atwood and ziegler reveal stories of those previously silenced, and showcase how storytelling empowers women marginalised by misogynistic social constructs. , body paragraph 1: in giving a voice to the females, both atwood and ziegler offer a new, previously unseen perspective on misogyny. .

• In The Odyssey, the maids are constructed as unfaithful and disrespectful of queen Penelope, Telemachus and other staff. Their own story is silenced and instead, is observed through others, whereas in The Penelopiad, the maids tell their own version of events - mainly that their actions were under Penelope’s instruction.
• The patriarchal rule is accentuated through their lack of status and rape, which is considered to be a “deplorable but common feature of palace life”.
• Moreover, we feel sympathy for these three-dimensional characters, as they ’toil and slave/ And hoist [their] skirts at [men’s] command’. 
• Likewise Rosalind Franklin's version of events has never been revealed because of her early death. In Photograph 51, we learn of the misogyny Rosalind faced as a female scientist "My name is Rosalind. But you can call me Miss Franklin. Everyone else does."

Body paragraph 2: By offering these women a voice, the authors reject social conventions of femininity. 

• Penelope is cunning and intelligent, foiling the Suitor’s plans to marry her by delaying her decision with the endless weaving of her ‘shroud’. The juxtaposition of unsuspecting men and strategic Penelope thwarts traditional gender roles where women are viewed as inferior.  "They were very angry, not least because they’d been fooled by a woman."
• Meanwhile, Rosalind is stubborn and resilient nature rebuffs the narrow-minded beliefs of her fellow coworkers who believe that “kindness always works with women” and that "women expect men to fall upon them like unrestrained beasts."

Body paragraph 3: Most importantly, both authors showcase the importance of giving women a voice as a means to control their own narrative. 

• Penelope opens her reflection with an emphasis on how she “owe[s] it to [herself]” to “spin a thread of [her] own”. She shares how she now has the opportunity to share her side of the story, whereas allowing others to speak of her from their perspective means that “they were turning me into a story…not the kind of stories I’d prefer to hear about myself”.
• While Penelope is empowered to reveal her story and invites us to an alternate version of historical events, this is not afforded to Rosalind in Photograph 51 . Rosalind is literally sidelined, “…we just hear her lines - a recording, or she speaks from offstage' and therefore unable to control her narrative. The stage direction (/) indicates that the men of past and present talk over her, reducing her opinion and overriding her speech with their own “self-aggrandisement."

To see another essay prompt breakdown for this text pair and a full sample A+ essay with annotations, check out this blog post .

Useful Resources

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

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

Master Reading and Creating

‍ ‍ A Guide to Structuring a Reading and Comparing Essay

Reading and Comparing Essays

I am Malala and Made in Dagenham is usually studied in the Australian curriculum under Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing). For a detailed guide on Comparative , check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative .

• Compare the importance and role of idols and role models in I am Malala and Made in Dagenham.
• Describe the role of fear and obligation as an obstacle to progress by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• ‘As we change the things around us, the things around us change us’. Discuss the extent to which this is true by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Discuss the benefit of adversity in strengthening one’s will to persevere by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Resilience is more important than success. Discuss whether this is true within the texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Compare the role and importance of family within the texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Compare both I am Malala and Made in Dagenham in relation to the importance of language as a device (spoken and written).
• Compare the forms of resistance displayed by protagonists Malala Yousafzai and Rita O’Grady in texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham and decide why they chose these methods.
• Analyse the effectiveness of small triumphs creating ripple effects in wider communities by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Discuss whether support networks are intrinsic for a single figure to create positive change by comparing I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• The main protagonists are galvanized by the people they wish not to be like rather than their role models. Discuss to what extent this is true by comparing the texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham.
• Made in Dagenham and I am Malala explore the vices of deceit, appeasement and scapegoating. Discuss these by comparing both texts, commenting on how they pose a threat to the causes of both protagonists.
• What role do interpersonal relationships play in the texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham? Can these relationships be both positive and negative? Discuss.
• Change cannot be immediate but gradual. To what extent is this true in texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham .
• Examine the role of the media in driving social change by comparing texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham ‍
• A patriarchal society is invariably one that is repressive. Discuss this statement and its truths or falsities by comparing texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham. ‍
• Discuss solidarity in relation to social, historical and cultural progress and whether it can be both positive and negative by comparing texts I am Malala and Made in Dagenham.

Anna Funder’s Stasiland and Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go bring together two complex, poignant worlds of “personal stories” and subjective narration of what once was, an individual's place in history and its aftermath, especially when the world attempts to move on.

Establishing a literary allusion to Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland in the title, Funder’s narrator of Anna fills the role of Alice as she stumbles upon and explores the absurd and unjust world of the German Democratic Republic (GDR). Driven by an almost naive curiosity, akin to Alice herself, Funder conducts extensive interviewing to uncover not only the stories and experiences of the victims of the regime, but also of the Stasi, the “internal army by which the government kept control”. Through her literary journalism, Funder creates an intimate and sensory experience for the reader, extending beyond factual occurrences to capture the “horror-romance” of East Germany, “a country which no longer exists” but its inhabitants, victims and perpetrators continue to live on.

TIP - Research the history of the German Democratic Republic, the rise and fall of the Berlin Wall and the influence of the Soviet Union within East Germany, in contrast to West Germany. Understanding the backbone of “this land gone wrong” in which Funder delves into gives much greater context for the significance of her work and ideas in which you can explore in your writing.

Never let me go.

Ishiguro delves into human mortality through the platform of a science fiction world, where the focus is ultimately on the prospect of an existence where one’s life is knowingly shortened, and what becomes important with such a backdrop. Readers are introduced to the concept of ‘clones’, existing as live incubators of organs that will be later harvested for others. Perceived by society as less than humans, Ishiguro’s narrative focuses on clones who spent time at Hailsham, a boarding school ‘experiment’ in England which attempted to provide a more ‘humane’ education and upbringing for clones, and their sheltered perspectives on their existence, their mortality and purpose.

Authors’ views and values

Why have Funder and Ishiguro written what they have written?

Funder’s dogged pursuit to uncover and reveal the “portraits” of individuals who lived through the GDR was prompted by West Germany’s dismissal of, and use of stereotypes when these individuals were concerned, and the assumption that “no-one is interested in these people”. She discovers that “things have been put behind glass”, in the forms of museums and metaphorical mausoleums, “but they are not yet over”. Stasiland therefore acts as a work that champions the importance of memory, of remembering and of history, as Sisyphean of a task as this inevitably is because it is “working… against time”. In addition, Funder’s purposeful choice to include the perspectives of the Stasi themselves opens up another realm of understanding to the reader. It allows the audience to examine the Stasi's motives and justifications, their humanity or lack thereof, of the lessons learnt and unlearnt, as a means of framing the entire regime and of framing the spectrum of humanity.

Whilst Ishiguro’s universe differs greatly when placed alongside Stasiland , his characters also belong to a world that no longer exists, as their Hailsham upbringing evolves into a historical artefact, reflective of a world that “wanted [the clones] back in the shadows” and which remained oblivious to the reality of the clones’ existence. Ishiguro gives voice to the clones; the “poor creatures” who otherwise possessed no voice or recognised humanity in this world, and no purpose apart from their utility as organ donors. These individuals are shown to be no less human than you and I, and it is in their sheltered lives, headed towards “wherever it was [they were] supposed to be”, which permits the reader to examine their own life purpose and meaning, and how a clone’s existence is ultimately reduced in not only length, but also ability and capacity.  

Both texts confront uncomfortable truths about humanity and reality, the treatment that certain individuals were unfortunately subjected to which resulted in their dehumanising, and which “broke” them, sooner or later.

TIP - Reframe this question for any text you are studying - including text response! There is intent and purpose underlying each and every text that is definitely worthy of thorough unpacking and consideration; the thinking you will do will help to further your analysis and comparison considerably.

Themes and comparison.

What are the big ideas underpinning the texts? How are they explored? What sorts of comparisons can be drawn between the two texts?

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

Dystopian reality

Stasiland : As prompted by the VCAA 2015 exam, the GDR is indeed ‘cruel and absurd’, especially in the methods the nation constructed and enforced this society, as this ultimately broke the souls of innocent individuals, and left questions unanswered and scars unhealed for many. It showcases how what could potentially be described as 'idealistic' in terms of government control can become grotesque, how otherworldly and Orwellian this recent history seems, and how the perspectives of victim, perpetrator, outsider and more are not restricted to the land of the GDR, but to today as well. In addition, as Funder discovers, these perspectives are closely intertwined, in which certain individuals of the Stasi were victimised too, and could not remain in the "group in the know [as] one of the unmolested".

Never Let Me Go : The novel’s context of clones is removed from the reality that readers are familiar with, and as Ishiguro focuses on the clones’ perspectives throughout, there always remains an element that feels 'off' and ’not quite right’ about who they are and the purpose of their existence. Whilst the context of Never Let Me Go differs greatly from a regime with "the most perfected surveillance state of all time", it highlights an unsettling reality, in which scientific advancement has resulted in a society benefitting from the clones' existence and from organ harvesting, but who are also rejecting of the possibility of their humanity. The clones may never be able to perceive and fully understand this cruelty or absurdity themselves, but this does not mean they are not victims of this, for a fate that they could not choose.

Possible points for comparison : The victimisation of individuals in both texts, whether it was internalised or ushered into oblivion is central to the absurd worlds of Stasiland and Never Let Me Go . The clones are in a way, victims from birth, and unable to avoid their shortened existence and purpose, whereas those in the GDR who were subjected to surveillance, interrogation, torture, etc. became ensnared and damaged beyond repair; the aftermath of which they were unable to escape from. However, the closing of Hailsham and the falling of the Berlin Wall spell out different fates in the two texts - those in Stasiland may be "fettered" by their past that is "not ever, really, over", but are provided a future in which there is hope for rebirth in the "green", "lush" city of Berlin and beyond. On the contrary, the clones are only able to move toward their fate, towards "wherever it was [they are] supposed to be" and towards completion. Coupled with the naivety accompanying the clones' existence, their acceptance of what is ahead and the lack of awareness surrounding their victimisation, readers are prompted to consider the cruelty of such existence, and whether there is greater tragedy in having your "soul buckled out of shape, forever", or in never knowing who you really are.

The act of remembering

Stasiland : In discussing and unearthing a recent history of a "bygone world" that many individuals wish to "pretend it was never there", Funder's attempt to create and immortalise "portraits" of East Germans raises questions about how events and lives are remembered and forgotten. Especially when elements of this past in the GDR could not be "pinned down by facts, or documents", the detrimental impact of a lack of recognition and acknowledgement of one's past, especially one filled with trauma, is thereby highlighted by Funder. When the rest of the world deems the GDR and the Stasi to only belong "behind glass" in museums and yet it is "not yet over" for those who are still suffering and carrying scars, physical and psychological, the purpose of Stasiland rings clear and true. Whilst it is a Sisyphean attempt, "working against forgetting, and against time", through Stasiland , Funder ultimately gives a voice to the "personal stories" comprising history, before there are "none left".

Never Let Me Go : Through the lens of Kathy H's narration and the recollection of her memories surrounding her upbringing, readers uncover the pieces of her existence as moments of her past begin "tugging at [her] mind". Memory itself can be fickle, recording and preserving certain experiences but not others, and as time passes, "fading surprisingly quickly" before being lost in the ether of one's past. Ishiguro's continual mention of Kathy's memories of an event, of her years at Hailsham and beyond almost lulls the reader into overlooking this element of the narration - in which the reader's understanding is built upon an uncertain and incomplete foundation of facts; similar to how the clones' "sheltered" understanding of their world came to be. After Hailsham closes, its existence recedes into the memories of the clones, and although Kathy declares that the memories will be retained "safely in [her] head", upon her completion, this will also be lost, and Hailsham will be further diminished in history as a 'failed experiment' and one day forgotten.

Possible points for comparison : The valiant efforts to remember and preserve the once-was is woven into the fabric of both texts, despite the inevitability of forgetting as death and 'completion' claims those who lived through East Germany and Hailsham respectively. When the recent history of the GDR becomes a "lost world", and the importance of remembering what transpired is being superseded by the innovation and process of the present, it opens up room for the same mistakes of the past to be made again. Hailsham was an attempt to create a more idealised and humane upbringing for the clones, and to showcase their humanity in a society which rejected this, and the boarding school's closure reflects a failure in which any previous successes will never be acknowledged. Memory, and by extension, one's understanding of the past is what enables change in the future; in attitude, in approach, in the treatment of others, in decisions, in growth, as an individual and as a whole. With its gradual loss, it may also be ineluctable that history repeats itself in one way or another.

Subjective narration, stories and lives

Stasiland : Stasiland itself is comprised of the stories of human lives, and includes various individuals' tenacity, strength and courage to their vices, cruelty and cowardice. By seeking out not only those who were victims of the regime but also perpetrators, Funder examines the many complex facets of human nature and the irreversible impact of the GDR on East Germans and who they became or were broken into. However, the personal involvement of Anna as a narrator and most importantly, as an outsider to the GDR provides a subjective perspective of this history. Whilst this has received criticism, it is important to consider how the human experience itself is subjective, as is never being able to truly understand another individual's story as the exact experience is theirs alone to hold and perhaps be "fettered" to; both of which are evident in Stasiland .

Never Let Me Go : Ishiguro constructs a narrative in which Kathy H and the clones are assumed human individuals from the text’s introduction, and it is only as the clones uncover how they may be "troubling and strange" that the reader gains a sense of how they are perceived in society as sub-human. However, the pre-determined fate and mortality of these "poor creatures", especially as they are born and 'complete' seemingly without a scope of awareness beyond their exposure during their upbringing and their sole purpose as organ donors - renders their lives even more heart wrenching and tragic - and human. The simplicity with which Ishiguro details the musings and reflections of Kathy H, and in the concluding moment of her imagined fantasy of Tommy, as not "out of control" as she may felt, readers cannot ignore the stark juxtaposition with the circumstances of her existence, in which she ultimately has no control over her identity as a clone. To grasp autonomy, to defy and deviate from being "wherever it was [she] was supposed to be", even for a moment, Ishiguro portrays a courage which is undoubtedly human.  

Possible points for comparison : When faced with the stories of lives not our own, but each individual possessing elements which resonate and resemble us, it is much more possible to understand their struggles, their intentions and their experiences. Consider the story behind each face, each character, each name, not only in these two texts but also other texts and even our lives, as we are fundamentally more similar than different when compared to each other, even in the face of separation and distinction.

Ultimately, Funder and Ishiguro's texts probe the existential question of what it means to be human and what defines one's identity, and how it is shaped by experience, fate, intentions and actions. Question the texts, question the characters, question yourselves, and you'll discover worlds and perspectives closer to home than the GDR or Hailsham may initially seem.

Authorial intent is without a doubt one of the most important parts of any analytical essay in VCE English because talking about it is what offers the deepest level of analysis and shows the examiners that you have thought deeply about the text at hand. If you can discuss authorial intent effectively, you’ll be able to show that you have a solid understanding of what you are talking about and that you’re not working exclusively with surface-level ideas.

What Is Authorial Intent?

When we talk about authorial intent, what is really being referenced is the author’s reason for writing their piece in the way that they have and what messages they are trying to convey. Essentially, it’s what your teacher wants you to think about when they ask you things like “why is the door red?”. More generally speaking, why has the author made a point of telling us as readers the weather at that time? Why has that character been given that particular line of dialogue? Why have they brought in that specific tone for this part of the text? These are all the kinds of questions that you should be asking yourself when you’re reading through material that you have to analyse.

You might also hear authorial intent talked about as the writer’s ‘views and values’ . If you’re unsure what views and values actually mean, you can kind of think of it as though the ‘views’ are how the author sees something and the ‘values’ are how the author thinks about something. Essentially, their opinions and perspectives are their views, whereas their morals and principles are their values. These two elements will often be central to the overall intention behind writing their text.  

Why Is Authorial Intent Important?

Authorial intent plays a major role in your interpretation of the text; if you can’t figure out what the intent is, you will often miss out on key points and messages throughout the text. If you are lucky, the author will make it really clear to you as a reader what their intent is; however, this often is not the case. That being said, whether their intent is stated or implied doesn’t matter - there will always be something there for you to talk about.

How To ‘Find’ Authorial Intent in the Text: Key Identifiers To Look Out For

If you come across a text that makes it a little bit more difficult to discern what the author is actually trying to say, a good place to start is to look at the context behind the piece of writing. 

The time period the novel/movie/play is set in is often a good indicator of what the author is saying. The author will often be using their text as a means by which they can comment on or critique one or more elements of that society, or perhaps as a metaphor for events that are occurring at the time the text is/was written. Alternatively, they may be portraying their view about the events that actually occurred during that time. For example, if you have a text that is set in the Georgian era, it is likely that the author’s message has something to do with colonialism or imperialist mindsets (zeitgeists) because this was a very dominant theme in that society. 

Some other reasons you might consider an author having could include: 

• to highlight the importance of something
• to criticise a behaviour or mindset
• to ridicule certain actions
• to warn against something
• to discourage people from doing something
• to convey certain political messages or controversial opinions

Realistically there is a broad range of things that the author could be saying, it's your job to pinpoint what that really is. 

Once you’ve determined what it is the author is generally talking about, you then need to start thinking about the way that this has been represented. This is where you start to bring in the characters, the events, the dialogue, the inner monologues. Basically, you start looking for the elements that the author has added, not necessarily for a story-telling purpose but, more so, to convey their views and values through the text. This isn’t always going to jump right out at you so there may be a bit of deeper thinking involved. 

Another good place to start is to try to identify the central themes of a text. This might be something like ‘Judgement’, ‘Redemption’, ‘Guilt’, etc. The author wouldn't have made these themes so relevant if they didn't have anything to say about them. Once again, this is where you look at the quotes, the setting, the characters and other features (as mentioned before) just with a more theme-focused approach. 

Useful Vocabulary & Sentence Examples 

When you come to actually putting together a paragraph, it is really important that you don’t forget to include authorial intent at some stage (at least once per paragraph). If you work with a TEEL structure (watch from 05:10) as the baseline, these kinds of comments about the author’s intent would usually be located within the ‘explanation’ section. A good way to double-check that you’ve incorporated authorial intent is to go back through your paragraph and make sure that the author’s name is in there somewhere. If you’ve talked about authorial intent you likely will have said something like:

‍ ‘In doing so, (Author) condones the (whatever it is they condone).’

Sentence Templates

Below are some sample sentence structures that you might think about using throughout your essays. Obviously, the particular vocabulary will vary depending on what your text is and which message you are talking about, but these are good as a guide.

• Through (example from text) AUTHOR (offers, provides, asserts) a (condemnation, evaluation…) of (idea, theme, concept, action…)

E.g. Through emphasising the internal struggle faced by Rooke during the floggings, Grenville offers a condemnation of the Empire’s heinous approach to loyalty, as the threat of ‘wirling at the end of the rope’ essentially forces individuals to value duty over conscience. (The Lieutenant)

• In doing so, AUTHOR (establishes, condemns, reveals…)

E.g. In doing so, Miller reveals the self-destructive nature of religious extremism in breeding instability and conflict. (The Crucible)

• (scene, event…) allows AUTHOR to (suggest, convey, assert,…) that 

E.g. Her sorrowful pleas that ‘she beg me to make charm’, fraught with grammatical errors, allow Miller to saliently illustrate the gulf that exists between the vulnerable outcasts such as Tituba and more privileged individuals within a community, in this case, Reverend Parris. (The Crucible)

• AUTHOR’s depiction of (character) as (courageous, morally conscious, selfish…) emphasises their belief that…

E.g. Ham’s depiction of Teddy as a morally conscious and genuine individual emphasises her belief that it is possible to transcend the social codes enforced by one’s community. (The Dressmaker)

• AUTHOR’s suggestion that… (serves as a reminder, highlights, emphasises the importance of…)

E.g. Euripides’ blatant suggestion that the fate of most of these women is in servitude and sexual slavery is a damning reminder that the victims of war are not just those killed during the conflict. (Women of Troy)

• (Hence, thus, as a result…) AUTHOR asserts that… 

E.g. Thus, Euripides asserts that victory in war ultimately proves futile as loss will inevitably be suffered somewhat equally by both sides. (Women of Troy)

• Evident through AUTHOR’s (characters’ actions/dialogue/section of text…) is the idea that…

E.g. Evident through Miller’s depiction of the struggles faced by Goody Osburn and Goody Good is the idea that where geographical isolation and strict moral codes render a community intolerant, the marginalisation and ostracisation of those who do not fit the societal mould is inevitable. (The Crucible)

• Through (action, quote, scene…) AUTHOR seeks to…

E.g. Through highlighting the harm which can result from individuals utilising their power to manipulate situations, Ham seeks to expose the damages caused by ignoring the truth, particularly when done so for personal benefit. (The Dressmaker)

If you’ve gotten to this point then hopefully that means that you are starting to get a better understanding of what authorial intent actually is, the thought processes that go into finding it and why it is such a useful and important element to analyse. Most importantly, I hope that you can at least start recognising the way that the author’s voice comes through in the particular texts that you are studying, and that you can start looking at including some of those observations and ideas when you're writing your responses.

Authorial Intent is an aspect that's going to be relevant to Text Response & Comparative for the most part, but it's also handy to understand for Language Analysis !

For a step-by-step explanation of everything you need to know to ace your SAC or exam, check out our How To Write A Killer Language Analysis ebook.

For many students, Language Analysis is their downfall. Here is the main reason why: Lots of students don’t think about  how language is used to persuade , instead they rely on lists of language techniques to tell them the answer. These sheets are usually distributed by teachers when you first start language analysis – see below.

Whether or not you’ve seen that particular document before, you’ve probably got something similar. You’ve also probably thought, ‘this sheet is absolutely amazing – it has everything I need  and  it tells me how language persuades!’ – I know I did. Unfortunately, this mindset is wrong. Don’t fall into the trap like so many other students have over the years. For a detailed guide on Language Analysis including how to prepare for your SAC and exam, check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Language Analysis .

The following comes from VCAA 2009 English Assessment Report:

…some students presented a simple summary [when analysing]…with little development. These responses did not score well as they did not fulfil the task as required.

The ‘simple summary’ refers to students who rely on those technique sheets to paraphrase the explanations regarding how language persuades. There is ‘little development’ because copying the explanations provided on these sheets doesn’t demonstrate enough insight into the article you’re analysing. Let’s have a look at the VCAA English Practice Exam published in 2009, ‘Chickens Range Free’ so that we can demonstrate this point. We will look at two students, both analysing the same technique. Compare the two and determine who you believe provides the better analysis.

Student 1:  Emotive language such as “abominably cruel” and “dire plight” is intended to stimulate strong emotional reactions that manipulate readers’ responses.

Student 2:  The use of emotive language such as “abominably cruel” and “dire plight” intends to appeal to people’s instinctive compassion for the chickens by describing their dreadful treatment, hence causing readers to agree with Smith that urgent action is required to save these animals.

It should be clear that Student 2’s example is best. Let’s see why.

Student 1 has determined the correct language technique and found suitable evidence from the article. This is a good start. However, Student 1 goes on to merely reiterate the explanations provided by language technique sheets and as a result, their analysis is too broad and non-specific to the article.

Student 2 conversely, understands that this last step – the analysing part – is the most important and vital component that will distinguish themselves from others. Instead of merely quoting that the article ‘manipulates the reader response’ like student 1, they provide an in-depth analysis of  how   and why  reader feelings are manipulated because of this technique. Student 2 was able to use the information to illustrate the author’s contention that we should feel sorry for these caged chickens – and we do because of our ‘instinctive compassion.’ They explain that the sympathy expressed from readers encourages them to agree that some action needs to be taken to help the chickens. As you can see, Student 2 has gone beyond identifying that ‘strong emotional reactions’ will be displayed by readers, to  establishing  what emotions are involved, and the consequences of those emotions.

This is why it’s best to avoid paraphrasing language technique sheets. By all means, don’t totally disregard them altogether. They’re definitely great for learning new language techniques – just be mindful of the explanations given. The part regarding  how the author persuades  is the downfall of many students because even though teachers tell you to analyse more, they often don’t show you the difference between what you’re doing wrong and what you should be doing right.

If you are anything like me, the thought of standing up in front of a classroom, or even a small panel of teachers, having to hold the floor for five minutes, and being assessed on your performance is just about as terrifying as it gets. Where other students thrived on the oral presentation SAC, embracing its change of pace in comparison to the other written tasks, I dreaded it. I knew the feeling all too well: legs jelly-like and quivering, breath short and rapid, palms sweating, tongue uncomfortably heavy as the words tumble out too fast to keep up with…essentially (as I, a true master of the English language, would put it) the absolute worst. 

Fast forward to the present day and, I hate to break it to you, I am still not a fan of public speaking. But guess what? I did my oral presentation and I’m still alive to tell the tale. Plus, as a bonus, it did not involve me passing out, and as a double bonus, I still ended up with a great result. So I am here, my fellow members of the ‘Might Go Ahead and Drop Out of VCE so I Don’t Have To Do My Oral’ club, as proof that it can be done and to help you get through it. 

What Do We Mean by ‘Overcoming’?

As I have already mentioned, emerging triumphant from your oral does not require you to magically become a public speaking fanatic. Let me manage your expectations right now: that probably isn’t going to happen overnight, and likely never will. But you can still be good at public speaking, perhaps great at it, even if it scares you. Trying to figure out a magical formula of preparation that will have you breezing through the oral in total zen-mode is not only going to waste your time, but will likely also make you more frightened when you realise that you can’t completely shake the nerves. So, by accepting the reality that the fear probably isn’t going to go away any time soon we can start to learn how to manage it, at least succeed in spite of it, and hopefully even use it to our advantage. 

Selecting a ‘WOW’ Topic

Arguably the best way to improve the delivery, and overall quality, of your oral presentation is to choose a topic and contention that you actually care about. In our eBook How to Write a Killer Oral Presentation we cite the first pillar of the process as being to choose a ‘WOW’ topic and contention . As Lisa says,

“an inherently interesting topic means that you’ll showcase your opinions in an authentic way, which is incredibly important when it comes to presentation time.”

This becomes particularly significant for someone dealing with a fear of public speaking because of this basic principle: when you care about something it is easier to talk about, even in front of other people. This means that you don’t just need to choose a topic that will engage your audience, but also one that you yourself find engaging. 

Fear is an intense emotional response to a situation, and as we know it can easily consume us in the moment. If your oral topic is boring and does not interest you on a personal level then what is going to be the strongest emotion you feel when delivering it? Fear. However, passion is another intense emotional response, and so if you are passionate about the arguments you are making then, although your fear will still be there, you will feel another strong emotion that can balance it out. 

So how do you find a contention that you care about? Often the best place to start is to think about the things that affect your life. We know that your topic has to have been in the media since September of last year, but lots of things are on the news and they don’t only matter to the older generations. Think about issues that relate to schools, jobs, climate change, animals, drug-taking, fashion – these are all aspects of our lives that you might be able to form a personal connection to, and that personal connection will help you find the passion you need to get through the speech, and also get through to your audience. Check out our 2021 Oral Presentation Topics for some topic inspiration, and then learn how to create a killer contention here . 

More About the Voice, Less About the Words

It is quite likely that if you know you struggle with the delivery of oral presentations, you might try to compensate by overreaching with your script. For someone who feels more comfortable with written assessments, it can be easy to try to make the oral as close to one as possible by writing it almost as you would an essay – using lots of impressive vocabulary, complex sentences and a formal structure. This approach is all well and good until you try to say it all out loud. This isn’t to say that your command of language isn’t important to the oral, but by trying to craft a safety net of eloquent, written words you are simply distracting yourself from what makes this SAC unique; you can’t avoid the fear by avoiding the task altogether. So, you need to write a speech that you can say, not just one that sounds good on paper. Writing with the wrong sense of tone is one of the points we touch on in 5 Common Oral Presentation Mistakes.

During the writing process, you need to make your speech work for you rather than make yourself work for it. This means constantly thinking about what the words will sound like in front of an audience, and not making the performance unnecessarily hard for yourself before you even start practicing. When you’re already nervous about speaking in front of other people, the last thing you want to have to worry about is tripping over difficult language to make convoluted arguments. So, simplicity and punch is always better than verbosity and pretence. Here are some ideas of how to use this strategy:

• Make your arguments short, sharp, and to the point. Avoid going off on any tangents, and just stick to the main points you need to get across. You are trying to persuade your audience, not confuse them. 
• Use a mixture of long and short sentences, because a script that uses varied sentence structures is easier to say out loud without stumbling due to nerves. Short, bold statements are both less prone to being mangled by nerves and more memorable for your listeners – just make sure you don’t only use short sentences and prevent your oral from flowing. 
• Think about where you can schedule in pauses for emphasis, because these will give you space to stop and catch your breath without revealing your nervousness. 
• Write like you speak! Of course you want your tone to be assertive and intelligent, but it is possible to maintain this whilst also incorporating some relaxed language. You are allowed to use the first person in this task, so take the opportunity to personalise what you say, which will help you appear more comfortable and also form a personal connection with your audience. Remember that an oral is essentially a conversation with your audience, even if they don’t get to speak back, and this means that as long as you don’t use slang you can have some fun with your delivery. 
• Don’t rely on an essay-like structure. Your audience won’t know when a paragraph ends, so the way the script looks on the page is largely irrelevant. Make it easy for yourself to follow. 

Remember, when you struggle with a fear of public speaking it is difficult to make what you say in the spotlight sound natural. To overcome this, you want to prepare yourself to almost sound unscripted (as ironic as that sounds). Without slipping into an overly casual or informal voice, it is best if you sound comfortable and relaxed when addressing your audience. This is of course the exact opposite of how you might feel going into the assessment, so you write a speech that will make you seem like you aren’t worried about passing out. The ancient adage ‘fake it ‘til you make it baby’ definitely rings true here. However, that said, really believing what you are saying and caring that the audience believes it too, as we advised earlier, will also help you avoid sounding forced and uncomfortable. 

Preparation and Memorisation

Another mistake often made when attempting to compensate for a fear of public speaking is to rely too heavily on cue cards in the oral. Having your entire speech on hand when you complete the assessment just in case you get lost might seem like a good idea, but it is most likely actually going to hold you back from giving your best performance. Ideally, you want to have done enough preparation so that you do not need to look at your notes at all. As we discussed earlier, having a script that is as simple as possible, and that mimics your speech patterns, will help you sound less fearful – and will also be easier to memorise.

Memorise your speech by practicing it as much as possible. Make sure to get your script written as far in advance as you can, so you have plenty of time to practice without stressing yourself out further. When you do practice, do so standing up, envision an audience in front of you (or practice in front of friends or family), and rehearse how you might move around the space as you talk. You can start by having your whole script with you, but eventually you should work up to only needing a few dot points for each section that can jog your memory if you forget. This strategy might seem to make the speech even scarier, but in reality not reading off a script will help you relax into the performance, and allow you to focus on your movements and voice. Practicing enough to have the speech memorised will also help build your confidence. 

Making the Most of Your Nerves

As much as I would love to tell you that you can be ‘cured’ of your fear of public speaking, it is best to accept that the nerves are going to be there and learn how to succeed in tandem with them, rather than just hoping that they go away. Instead of being convinced that fear is going to be your downfall, try to think about how, as impossible as it sounds, you can use the nerves to your advantage. Apart from making you jittery and uncomfortable, nerves also boost your energy and adrenaline, and with the right attitude you can turn this energy into confidence. Instead of letting your nerves cause you to close up, you can use them to help you open up. Often those of us who fear feeling exposed in front of a crowd have quiet, reserved personalities that we might think of as preventing us from being able to perform. However, when our bodies are flooded with nerves this ‘wired’ feeling can be used to help us project our voices and to take up space, therefore driving us to appear more outgoing. Instead of just making you feel ‘on edge’, a manageable amount of nervous energy can give you an edge that will amp up your performance. 

Even if all of this sounds completely different to your experience of fear, what I am trying to communicate is that the way you frame the oral, and the nerves that come with it, in your mind makes all the difference. If you convince yourself that you are too scared of public speaking to ever succeed with this task, you are severely limiting your chances of achieving a positive outcome. So, focussing on retraining your mindset in the lead up to delivering your speech is very important. Try not to think of this one assessment task as being a make or break five minutes, and instead view it as a learning experience that you can use to your advantage. After all, public speaking is something most of us will have to deal with multiple times over the course of our lives, so you may as well work on getting better at it. That said, my number one piece of advice about the oral presentation is to…*drumroll please*...not take it too seriously! This might sound unrealistic, and I am definitely not telling you to put in less effort, but the more pressure you put on yourself the more nervous you are going to be. Choose a topic that interests you, believe in your contention, make use of humour and personal anecdotes, and just have fun with what you say! Your fear is probably going to be your biggest obstacle, so make it as easy as you can on yourself and the rest should fall into place…as long as you put in the work. 

Finally, our Ultimate Guide to Oral Presentations is a must-read for anybody who is doing an Oral Presentation!

Just when you thought you had finally become accustomed to the complicated art of essay writing, VCE decides to throw you a curveball in the form of a reading and comparing essay that addresses not just one, but two texts. Being introduced to a comparative essay for the first time, it is not surprising that many students encounter difficulties in structuring their writing. For one of most popular posts on Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing), check out our Ultimate Guide to VCE Comparative.

(An accurate representation of the common VCE English student attempting to write a comparative essay)

Luckily, there are quite a few tips and tricks out there that will help you on the journey to a well-structured essay!

What is reading and comparing?

This area of study relates to comparing and contrasting two texts in order to unearth  the common themes, ideas, motifs and issues explored. By drawing upon similarities and differences, we are enabled to gain a more profound comprehension of both texts. However, aside from merely comparing what is presented on the surface of a text, (symbols, characters, motifs, themes etc) it is also imperative that you delve a little deeper. Some questions you might want to ask yourself as you are planning a comparative essay are:

- What message are the authors trying to convey?

- What is the significance of symbols, themes, characterisation and motifs in relation to the texts as a whole?

- What was the setting/context in which the authors wrote their texts?

- Why did the authors choose to write about a specific setting/context? Were they directly involved in the social/political issues explored in the texts themselves?

- What are the main similarities and differences and how can I link them together?

Congratulations! Once you have thoughtfully considered these questions, you are one step closer to piecing together your essay!

Because there's such an emphasis on drawing insightful text connections in this area of study, in the LSG Comparative study guide we show you how to use the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy to identify unique points of comparison. In the study guide, which has been written by 45+ study scorers, we also explain how to strengthen your comparative discussion through Advanced Essay Paragraph Structures which truly showcase the power of the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy. I don't discuss the strategy in detail here, but you can check it out in How To Write Killer Comparative. ‍

How to structure your essay

Since the purpose of this task is to evaluate the similarities and differences between two texts, (unless you’ve royally misinterpreted the nature of reading and comparing! ) your body paragraphs will need to address both text A and text B. As with all exceptional VCE essays, I would stress that you DO NOT disregard the significance of beginning your essay with an introduction that neatly and briefly outlines your arguments in relation to the essay topic. You SHOULD also have a conclusion to close your essay, which functions as a summary to the ideas you have conveyed in your body paragraphs.

Although there are a few ways in which to structure a comparative essay, with students generally opting for whichever approach works best for them, I will focus upon two different methods, which I find to be the easiest and most concise.

You can choose to address one text per paragraph and alternate between them, for example:

Introduction

BP1: Text A (theme/idea 1)

BP2: Text B (theme/idea 1)

BP3: Text A (theme/idea 2)

BP4: Text B (theme/idea 2)

As you can see from the structure above, you would need to refer in your first two paragraphs to a common theme or idea prevalent in both texts, comparing how the texts explore such ideas and drawing upon any similarities or differences, before repeating this pattern in the next two paragraphs. In this structure, it is easiest to solely focus upon text A in body paragraph one and then in body paragraph two to put most of the attention on text B, whilst also comparing it to the elements of text A examined in paragraph 1.

- Easy for the assessor to recognise which text is being discussed since this is a very straightforward structure

- Whilst writing the essay, you won’t be confused about which text you are focusing on in each paragraph

- Limited capacity to go in depth when comparing and contrasting the texts, which may lead the assessor to believe you haven’t really grasped the core concepts of either text

This approach is a bit more complicated than the first and will definitely take practice, patience and perseverance to master.

BP1: Text A and Text B (theme/idea 1)

BP2: Text A and Text B (theme/idea 2)

BP3: Text A and Text B (theme/idea 3)

In the body paragraphs of this structure, the writer will constantly alternate between the texts and a good essay of this form will make it clear which text is being referred to, even if the discussion constantly changes from text A to text B. Within each paragraph, the writer will consistently use comparative language to contrast both texts. Typically, each paragraph will place emphasis on a different theme or idea.

- This is a more sophisticated structure than the former; if it is done well, it will highlight to the assessor that you are able to utilise complex structures in a concise way that goes into minute detail when comparing the texts

- Capacity to implement more comparative language

- As you are writing an essay of this form, you might momentarily become sidetracked and confused as you will be constantly changing between referring to text A and text B, thus, it is easier for your ideas to become convoluted, rendering it difficult for the assessor to follow your line of thought.

For more information on essay structures, watch this video:

Useful vocabulary

A key component of structure is not just the layout, but also your choice of vocabulary. Assessors will be looking for key words that prove you are not merely discussing the texts separately in relation to the prompt, but that you are actually able to compare the texts. Some useful terms and expressions include:

Whereas/while/whilst

These texts are dissimilar in that…

These texts are not dissimilar in that…

Alternately…

On the contrary…

Contrarily…

Text A contrasts text B as…

On the other hand…

In a similar fashion to text A, text B…

Both texts…

Both authors…

However, this text takes a different approach…

(This text) parallels/mirrors (the other text) in the sense that…

These texts are alike in the respect that…

Both texts are related as they…

Finally, you have completed that tedious reading and comparing response and I strongly believe that that deserves a sweet treat and a pat on the back.

Although it may have been super challenging, I can assure you that as with everything, the more you practice, the easier it becomes! Consistency is key!

Alfred Hitchcock’s classic thriller Rear Window was released nearly 65 years ago. Back then, Hitchcock was a controversial filmmaker just starting to make waves and build his influence in Hollywood; now, he is one of the most widely celebrated directors of the 20th century. At the time of its 1954 release, Rear Window emerged into a world freshly shaken by World War II. The fear of communism riddled American society and Cold War tensions were escalating between the two global superpowers, the USSR and USA. Traditional gender stereotypes and marital roles were beginning to be challenged, yet the ‘old way’ continued to prevail. The culture of the 1950s could hardly be more different to what it is today. Within the Western world, the birth of the 21st century has marked the decline of cemented expectations and since been replaced by social equality regardless of gender, sexual preference and age. So why , six decades after its original release and in a world where much of its content appears superficially outdated , do we still analyse the film Rear Window ?

Rear Window is a film primarily concerned with the events which L.B. (Jeff) Jefferies, a photographer incapacitated by an accident which broke his leg, observes from the window of his apartment. He spends his days watching the happenings of the Greenwich Village courtyard, which enables Jeff to peer into the apartments and lives of local residents. The curiosities which exist in such an intimate setting fulfil Jeff’s instinctual need to watch. The act of observing events from a secure distance is as tempting as reality television and magazines. To this day, these mediums provide entertainment tailored to popular culture. At its roots, Jeff’s role as a voyeur within Rear Window is designed to satisfy his intense boredom in a state of injury. As the film is seen through Jeff’s voyeuristic eyes, the audience become voyeurs within their own right. Until relations between Thorwald and his wife simmer into territory fraught with danger, Jeff’s actions are the harmless activities of a man searching for entertainment.

So, if Rear Window teaches us that voyeurism is a dangerous yet natural desire , does the film comment on the individuals who consent to being watched? Within Greenwich Village, Jeff’s chance to act as an observer is propelled by the indifference of those he observes. Almost without exception, his neighbours inadvertently permit Jeff’s eyes wandering into their apartments by leaving their blinds up. The private elements of others’ lives, including their domestic duties, marital relations and indecencies, are paraded before Jeff. Greenwich Village is his picture show and its residents willingly raise the stage’s curtains . This presentation of Hitchcock’s 1954 statement remains relevant today. Jeff’s neighbours’ consent to his intrusion into their lives bears striking similarities to current indifference. The prevalence of social media enables information to be gathered as soon as its users click the ‘Accept Terms & Conditions’ button. Rear Window is a commentary on social values and provokes its audience to examine habits of their own, especially in a world where sensitive information is at our fingertips. Just as Hitchcock’s 1954 characters invite perversive eyes to inspect their lives, society today is guilty of the same apathy .

The characters of Hitchcock’s thriller are a pivotal element of the film’s construction. They add layers of depth to the text and fulfil roles central to the plot’s development. One of Hitchcock’s fundamental directorial decisions was leaving multiple characters unnamed – within Greenwich Village alone, we meet Miss Lonelyhearts, Miss Torso and Miss Hearing Aid. The stereotypical nature of these labels, based on superficial traits that Jeff observes from his window, exemplifies the sexism prevalent in the 1950s. Jeff’s knowledge of these women is limited to such an extent that he does not know their names, yet considers himself qualified enough to develop labels for each of them. The historical background of stereotypes is imbedded within Rear Window and shares vast similarities with the stereotypes we recognise today.

Hitchcock’s 1954 thriller Rear Window portrays a little world that represents the larger one . Its themes, primarily voyeurism, and character profiles illustrate Hitchcock’s societal messages and provide a running commentary on issues which govern America during the 1950s. In the six decades since the film’s release, the Western world has undergone significant developments both socially and culturally. L.B (Jeff) Jefferies’ perception of women and married life is inconsistent with the relations between men and women that we observe today. Regardless, the timeless views that Hitchcock’s conveys through Rear Window continue to speak volumes about our society. Jeff’s voyeurism, which comprises much of the film’s major plotline, is a channel for Hitchcock to comment about the instinctual desire for individuals to observe others. Additionally, Hitchcock delves into the flip side of this matter, presenting the theory that those he watches are just as guilty of allowing his intrusion into their private lives. Apathetic mindsets in today’s digital world are responsible for the same indifference that Hitchcock explores within his film. Let’s not forget the sexist stereotypes that Jeff develops to label certain women within Greenwich Village. Miss Lonelyhearts, Miss Torso and Miss Hearing Aid are all victims of Jeff’s narrow mindset towards women, emphasised by these superficial and demeaning names. Stereotypes remain as apparent within society today as they were within the world of Rear Window and can be identified within the media’s diverse presentation of social issues. It is easy to assume that Hitchcock’s 1954 thriller, Rear Window , lacks the relevancy we expect from films. Contrary to this perception, its ingrained messages are fundamentally true to this day.

Get exclusive weekly advice from Lisa, only available via email.

Power-up your learning with free essay topics, downloadable word banks, and updates on the latest VCE strategies.

latest articles

Check out our latest thought leadership on enterprise innovation., how to write an emotional creative response for vce english.

Walkthrough of a Full Scoring VCE Oral Presentation

How To Incorporate Sunset Boulevard's Cinematic Features Into Your VCE Essay

Keep in touch

Have questions? Get in touch with us here - we usually reply in 24 business hours.

Unfortunately, we won't be able to answer any emails here requesting personal help with your study or homework here!

Copyright © Lisa's Study Guides. All Rights Reserved. The VCAA does not endorse and is not affiliated with Lisa's Study Guides or vcestudyguides.com. The VCAA provides the only official, up to date versions of VCAA publications and information about courses including the VCE. VCE® is a registered trademark of the VCAA.

03 9028 5603 Call us: Monday to Friday between 3pm - 6pm or leave us a message and we'll call you back! Address: Level 2 Little Collins St Melbourne 3000 VIC

• Essay Prompts

The Crucible and The Dressmaker

Fear/mass hysteria.

Hysteria is often devalued as a temper-tantrum but the medical term refers to a serious functional disturbance of the entire nervous system, often activated by severe stress or conflicting impulses. Mary Warren describes the classic onset of symptoms that mark her first hysterical episode in court: ‘a misty coldness’ (Act 2), crawling flesh, a choking sensation, dissociation, ‘a screaming voice’ (Act 2) and then the realisation that the voice was her own. Unlike Mary, who can’t even pretend to faint on order, Abigail calculates the most effective moment to stage her hysterical visions of persecution. She manages to hold power over the community and as Elizabeth observes ‘where she [Abigail] walks the crowd will part for her like the sea for Israel’ (Act 2) – the sudden power that the girls have gained from their antics are surely motivation enough for them to continue the ordeal for as long as the township believe them. Mary Warren confirms the notion that the girls are enjoying their newfound power when she speaks of the ‘weighty work’ (Act 2) that the girls do in court as they claim to be hunting the ‘Devil [that is] loose in Salem’ (Act 2). Her impression that ‘four judges and the King’s deputy sat to dinner with us [the girls] but an hour ago’ (Act 2) instils that she feels she has the right to be spoken to civilly from now on by the Proctors, her employers.

Strategically, Abby and the other girls use this power to their advantage, ‘scream[ing] and fall[ing] to the floor’ (Act 2) when the accused are brought before them. In the same way, Abby and the others point with fear into the rafters of the courthouse during the final court scene, screaming with fright in the belief that Mary Warren has conjured herself as a small yellow bird that Abby wails ‘want[s] to tear my [her] face’ (Act 3). Naturally, the use of spectral evidence within the courtroom (evidence that the accused spirit or spectre appeared to the victim and hurt or threatened them, despite the actual accused person being elsewhere and accounted for) condemns Mary Warren in this instance and others are likewise accused by the same means. It is madness that George Jacobs is condemned for attacking the young Ruth Putnam and Martha Corey is questioned why she ‘hurt these children’ (Act 3) without even being in the same room when the victims were afflicted, and in real life the use of spectral evidence was dismissed when officials cited the ridiculous nature of the Salem trials as evidence of the absurdity.

In the same way, the town of Dungatar become madly enthralled with the dressmaker Tilly after it becomes evident at Gertrude and William’s wedding that she is ‘an absolute wizard with fabric and scissors’ (Part 2) and the right creation for the bride-to-be was magnificent enough to make her feel ‘safe’ (Part 2) and secure that her groom would not stray from her. Tilly’s bespoke creations become much sought after as women begin to see the power that the seductive gowns designed specifically for them are able to do; making them feel confident whilst also bewitching the men. Elsbeth and Gertrude’s appearance wearing ridiculously unsuitable dresses ‘huge and domed in yards and yards of taffeta’ (Part 2) coincides with Gertrude announcing that she be hereon known as Trudy, in a chameleon like shift from the mousy daughter of a store owner to fashion extraordinaire.

The women’s obsession with the ‘exquisite’ (Part 2) new gowns that they believe will ‘set[s] women back ten years’ (Part 2) grows into a mania to acquire the same exact look and in some situations, the same lifestyle as the super models in Tilly’s fashion magazines – she [Nancy] ‘held the January edition of Vogue up in front of her and pointed to a model in an elegant tapered trouser suit in bright swirling colours. “See her? That’s what I want.”‘ In this instance, the impressionable Nancy Pickett, who is in a secret lesbian relationship with Ruth Dimm, associates fashion with her desire for women.

The repercussions of Tilly’s creations filter through and become a mad competition between the women as they exclaim their sole reason for purchasing such extravagant gowns to be that they ‘have to look better than everyone else’ (Part 2) and whilst the Pratts’ haberdashery counter expanded with new materials to cater for a more couture crowd, so did the citizens’ rivalry of one another.

This intense hysteria culminates in the final part of the novel; when tensions reach an all-time high as the performance evening for the Eisteddfod play rapidly approaches. The cast go from ‘progressing slowly’ (Part 4) through the rehearsals to ‘looked[ing] increasingly stressed and tired’ and finding little joy in the practice that has become a laborious task, often causing ‘someone… any other lousy actor here… [to have] a bit of a bawl’ (Part 4) and the fractious crew bicker constantly. The deterioration of Trudy throughout the rehearsals seems fitting but nonetheless is a jarring incident to occur to someone so young and over something as trivial as a county play; but connections can be drawn between the ‘screeching and pounding’ (Part 4) Trudy who claims that the glory is ‘MINE, MINE’ (Part 4) and the heinous Lady Macbeth, the character Trudy was originally intended to portray in the play.

Likewise, the intense hysteria that plagues the people of Salem is given way over reason, and any reliable cross-examination that consistently casts doubt on the accusers is dismissed in favour of rooting out the devil and cleansing the village. The deposition signed by many that the women (Martha Corey, Rebecca Nurse and Elizabeth Proctor) are women of good character is not only unheeded by Danforth but he issues warrants for each of the signatures, dismissing the argument that ‘so many of the women have lived with such upright reputations’ (Act 3) in favour of accumulating more suspects. Likewise, when Proctor casts his good name aside and admits to adultery with Abigail, Elizabeth lies to protect his reputation and instead of seeing the logic in this ‘natural lie’ (Act 3), Danforth becomes swept up in the hysteria and believes Proctor and his wife to be ‘combined with Anti-Christ’ (Act 4).

The village’s prodigious fear of the devil and the ‘black allegiance’ (Act 4) that they so readily believed could overrun them is acute. Although Hale’s visitation to the town eases concerns momentarily as he refers to the Devil being ‘stripped of all his brute disguises’ (Act 1) by his skill set in detecting those afflicted, his sensibility is soon cast aside for the more frenzied ‘thundering wrath’ (Act 2) that Hale warns has been drawn down from heaven on the village; Hale becomes irrelevant and becomes akin to the livestock that wander the roads abandoned, sporting a ‘mad look’ (Act 4), as he makes his way from one accused to the next seeking a confession that will save their lives. The hysteria has gripped the town entirely and Hale notes that there are ‘orphans wandering from house to house, abandoned cattle bellow on the highroads, the stink of rotting crops hangs everywhere…’ (Act 4); Salem is in disarray and the last remaining few that possess logic and sense are set to be executed that very morning.

Similarly, Dungatar’s suspicious notions about Tilly’s return to their quaint town are completely unfounded but nevertheless, cause havoc. Their constant gossiping and snide comments ostracize Tilly and by proxy, her mother Molly, as the townspeople venomously believe that ‘she’s [Tilly’s] up to no good that one, worse than her mother’ (Part 2) and that she ‘can never make up for it’ (Part 1) when referring to the accidental death of Stewart Pettyman. The women are in hysterics that the ‘daughter of Mad Molly is back – the murderess!’ (Part 3) and quake at the sight of Tilly when she and her mother venture down to town for supplies – ‘The nerve of that girl… not natural…’ (Part 1). Despite Teddy teasing Tilly that ‘I’m [he’s] the one that should be frightened of you [her]’ (Part 1), Tilly’s notion that bad luck follows her is cemented as the residents of Dungatar begin dying and Tilly fears their wrath more than ever when Teddy passes and irrespective of Farrat’s attempts to re direct the blame, Tilly is in their sights – ‘Tilly feared football defeat would send the people to her, that they would spill wet and dripping from the gateway of the oval to stream up The Hill with clenched fists for revenge blood.’ (Part 4)

Fear and Mass Hysteria Quotes

Edward always remembered the look on Evan’s face at that moment… when he realised fully what it all meant, what it had come to. (Edward McSwiney reflects on when he told the town how Stewart Pettyman had died) Part 3

‘Abby, we’ve got to tell, Witchery’s a hangin’ error, a hangin’ like they done in Boston two year ago! We must tell the truth, Abby! You’ll only be whipped for dancin’ and the other things!’ (Mary Warren is frightened about keeping the truth from the courts) Act 1

‘Nonsense! Mister, I have myself examined Tituba, Sarah Good and numerous others that have confessed to dealing with the Devil. They have confessed it!’ ‘And why not, if they must hang for denying it? There are them that will swear to anything before they’ll hang; have you ever thought of that?’ (Hale and Proctor arguing about the accused) Act 2

Judgement and Justice

In a small rural town in Outback Australia in the 1950s, residents will do almost anything to protect their reputations. In addition, people’s reputations follow them around for decades and even remain long after those with them have left the town.

Tilly’s reputation as a murderess resonates in the small-minded residents of Dungatar, and even her hiatus to Europe where she trained under the prestigious fashion magnates of Paris was not enough to erase the memory of her association with Stewart Pettyman’s death. The judgement upon Tilly is so acute that William uses it as leverage to marry Gertrude when his mother sees through the young girls ploy to trick him into marriage using sex. Knowing that Gertrude would be his mother’s preference, he threatens Elsbeth that ‘it’s either her [Gertrude] or Tilly Dunnage’ (Part 2) to which she resigns.

This notion doesn’t escape Molly, who reminds her daughter that ‘everybody knows everything about everyone’ (Part 1) but the townsfolk have learnt not to gossip about one another, lest ‘some [one] else’ll tell of them’ (Part 1). This perpetual tit-for-tat speaks of childishness in the dynamic characters of Dungatar who lack the intelligence to understand the social politics of living in a small town. It is not only the outcasts of the town that are victims of the ‘open slather’ (Part 1) but anyone who seems to have stepped out of line. The morning after the dance, the local ladies natter between themselves excitedly with ‘you’ll never guess what she wore… or almost wore’ (Part 2) and don’t hesitate in openly condemning Tilly and assuming ‘she’s up to no good again, that one’ (Part 2) in an effort to keep the hatred and distrust for Tilly alive. It seems that Gertrude’s paranoia about ‘my [her] reputation’ (Part 2) is well founded when they move on from Tilly and begin to attack Trudy – ‘and guess who Gertrude was with, all night’ (Part 2). Ham’s skills in storytelling give us the sense that the vicious rumours are spreading like wildfire through the town when a few pages later Irma and Lois stipulate that although they are ‘not gossipin’ or anythink…’ (Part 2), they retell the story of Tilly’s scandalous frock and Gertrude’s relationship status with extra assumption.

When Gertrude and William finally appear as a couple together, the sniggers of the townspeople who has already been privy to the rumour that a hasty marriage was on horizon after the two lovebirds ‘spent the whole night wif each other…’ (Part 2) is reason enough for them to make remarks to each other on the snide.

In the same way, judging yourself and judging one another is ubiquitous in Miller’s play and the narrative pivots on how one person might judge another. Naturally, in the strict Puritan community, the looming judgment from God sees the citizens of Salem living under constant threat of condemnation. Despite Hale’s keenness to apply theological arguments and collect confessions peaceably, he soon comes to realise that the Salem courtroom is not interested in dispensing justice but instead, prides itself on imposing it. In this society, the Bible is the basis for the law and as Danforth subscribes in his soliloquy to the girls, ‘the law, based upon the Bible, and the Bible, writ by Almighty God, forbid the practice of witchcraft, and describe death as the penalty thereof. By likewise, children, the law and the Bible damn all bearers of false witness’ (Act 3). From this, we can see that it is his single motive that he should hunt down all those that are afflicted and not ‘flounder’ (Act 4) in his quest for them. The justice that the supreme government of the province intends for the citizens of Salem is a ‘hot fire [here]…[that] melts down all concealment’ (Act 3) and his solution to the situation in Act 4 is to place pressure on the weakest person and break a confession from them, tells us that he (representative of the judicial system) has lost his way and in an effort to protect himself, will damn the prisoners regardless – ‘which of these in your [Parris] opinion may be brought to God? I will myself strive with them till dawn’ (Act 4).

In Dungatar, Ham reminds us that the citizens value others’ opinions of them in preference to most other things; and their attempts to improve their standing amongst the community is not only reflected on a larger scale by the women who have been ‘renovated’ (Part 2) by Tilly’s creations, but also in the minute changes the citizens conduct in order to elevate themselves to a higher social class. Whilst the ‘couturiered ladies of Dungatar… enter[ed] the halls at three minute intervals, poised, their noses aimed at the lights… slowly down the centre if the hall through the gaping guests from Winyerp’ (Part 2) symbolises the superficiality of their aspirations, the sudden notion to use euphemisms such as the porch, ‘now being called the back patio’ (Part 3), speaks of a deeper need to be seen as something they are not by others around them. But it seems there’s a lesson for those that meddle and judge others – when Beula Harridene sneaks up to The Hill and overhears Tilly and Farrat drunkenly singing about their woes she is hit by a radiogram that Tilly throws out in her stupor and the wound festers in her face, becoming a ‘raw flesh cavity’ (Part 4) that oozes, a fitting symbol indicative of what happens to those that judge others unfairly.

Judging one another, and oneself, is seen as equally as burdensome. Proctor’s aversion to Elizabeth’s suspicion is infuriating and although in his eyes, he has earned such suspicion, he believes he has tolerated it for too long and no exception has been made for his behaviour in the last seven months where he has ‘gone tiptoe in this house… since she [Abby] is gone’ (Act 2). Elizabeth acknowledges the truth that John judges himself in his actions more then any other and this can be seen in the little respect he has for himself. When Francis Nurse refuses to believe John’s confession of having an affair with Abby, Proctor ‘wish[es] you [Francis] had some evil in you [him] that you [he] might know me [him]’ (Act 3) for the man that he truly is and has kept secret for seven months gone. Similarly, in his final act of redemption Proctor himself is stunned by the ability he has to stand strong under scrutiny and mount the scaffold as a truthful man, in possession of his good name – Hale: ‘Man, you will hang! You cannot!’ Proctor: ‘I can. And there’s your first marvel that I can. You have made your magic now; for now I do think I see some shred of goodness in John Proctor. Not enough to weave a banner with, but white enough to keep it from such dogs.’ Act 4

Much like Proctor, Tilly’s final appearance is met with admiration as she rises out of the mire of rumour and segregation and seeks revenge in a manner mirroring the early dramatical climax of ‘Deas Ex Machina’; whereas a complicated and seemingly hopeless plot is resolved neatly as the protagonist escapes the scene unscathed. In the case of The Dressmaker, the train that stops briefly at the Dungatar station provides the rapid getaway and Tilly’s future, although uncertain, is victorious over the villains of her hometown.

Judgement and Justice Quotes

William was slumped in a battered deckchair on what was now called ‘the back patio’, formerly the porch. Part 3

‘You can’t keep anything secret here,’ said the old woman [Molly]. ‘Everybody knows everything about everyone but no one ever tittle-tattles because then some else’ll tell of them. But you don’t matter – it’s open slather on outcasts.’ Part 2

‘The others were happy to let you die. I saved you. It’s me they’ll try to kill now.’ (Tilly to Molly) Part 1

‘He spoke of love and hate and the power of both and he reminded them how much they loved Teddy McSwiney. He said that Teddy McSwiney was, by the natural order of the town, an outcast who lived by the tip.’ Part 3

‘They drove up The Hill to throw rocks onto the cottage roof in the middle of the night, driving around and around, revving, calling ‘Murderers! Witches!’ Part 3

‘My name is good in the village! I will not have it said my name is soiled! Goody Proctor is a gossiping liar!’ (Abby defending herself to Parris) Act 1

‘Spare me! You forget nothin’ and forgive nothin’. Learn charity, woman. I have gone tiptoe in this house all seven month since she is gone. I have not moved from there to there without I think to please you, and still an everlasting funeral marches round your heart. I cannot speak but I am doubted, every moment judged for lies, as though I come into court when I come into this house!’ (Proctor to Elizabeth) Act 2

‘I see now your spirit twists around the single error of my life, and I will never tear it free!’ (Proctor to Elizabeth) Act 2

‘Now believe me, Proctor, how heavy be the law, all its tonnage I do carry on my back tonight.’ (Cheever is made to arrest many people for questioning, including Elizabeth) Act 2

‘I have confessed myself! Is there not good penitence but it be made public? God does not need my name nailed upon the church! God sees my name; God knows how black my sins are!’ (Proctor when the court decided his false confession should be hung publicly) Act 4

Belonging and Diversity

It is a natural human instinct shared by many other living creatures, to belong to a group, herd or tribe of some kind. There is safety in numbers; but belonging to a group has its obligations as well as benefits and depending on the group dynamics, sometimes the drawbacks of belonging to a group outweigh the advantages. The play is set in the tight Christian community network bound by strict moral, legal and religious beliefs and practices in a recently established pioneer settlement. People conform more or less to the agreed rules – they want to feel the security of belonging and they also fear the repercussions of straying from the Puritan way of life. There are however, all kinds of personal conflicts between individuals and families simmering beneath the surface that are easily stirred up when a threat to the community is perceived.

Miller himself noted that by virtue of being Puritan, a religion based on maintaining Christian goodness and unity of purpose, it is inevitable that the society must exclude and prohibit anything that appeared to undermine that cohesion. An example of this within the text is that of Sarah Osburn, the ‘drunk and half-witted’ (Act 2) citizen that is accused simply because she is different; likewise Sarah Good, an old beggar woman who was called into the court for questioning when Mary Warren believed that she had rendered her unwell when she had come begging at the door of the Proctors and she refused her charity. Notably, Mary made mention that she ‘say [said] to myself [herself], I [she] must not accuse this woman, for she sleep in ditches, and so very old and poor’ (Act 2), an admittance by proxy that Sarah Good was excluded in the community and therefore a convenient target. That she and Osburn were named by Tituba, signified that according to the hierarchy of Salem’s peer groups, these three (Tituba, Sarah Good and Sarah Osburn) are at the bottom. Tituba is the minority in Salem. Miller’s stage notes take heed of the ‘colour of her skin and consequent low standing’ (stage notes) which inevitably lower her in society’s eyes and when she is placed under scrutiny in the bedroom of the afflicted Betty, notably not in a courthouse where all other accusers are given their trial, she is threatened to be ‘whip[ped] to [your] death’ (Act 1) by the village minister Parris. By openly acknowledging the race distinction when she cries out that the devil boasted ‘I [he] have white people belong to me [him]’ (Act 1), she contributes to the larger debate within the Salem township – one must either belong to the rest of the community or be on the outer and therefore, in peril.

Proctor reticence to attend Church, although a bone of contention for Hale as he visits the accused to ascertain the ‘Christian character of this [the Proctors’] house’ (Act 2), sets him up as an outsider. His reluctance to attend court is remarked upon by Hale, as though his aversion speaks of a more sinister issue – Proctor: ‘I had not reckoned with goin’ into court. But if I must, I will.’ Hale: ‘Do you falter here?’ Proctor: ‘I falter nothing…’ Act 2

The decade of the 1950s is often looked back on as the halcyon days of morality and the nuclear family, but Ham’s novel reveals what remains when the veneer is striped back and we see ordinary citizens for what they are. Although Ham avoids the subjects such as race, there is segregation from the community nonetheless. The McSwiney family were ‘by natural order of the town’ (Part 3) outcasts and despite the fact that Mae McSwiney ‘did what was expected of her from the people of Dungatar’ (Part 3) and her husband Edward ‘worked hard…fixed people’s pipes… trimmed their tree and delivered their waste to the tip’ (Part 3) they were and would always remain on the outer circle of society. It is assumed that their proximity to the tip, the presence of slow-witted Barney and their affiliation with the Dunnage women were the reasons for this but as is so often in small rural towns, sometimes there is no concrete reason and it is more a matter of demoting one group so as to elevate another. Despite this example it seems that diversity in Dungatar is hardly a reason to be considered an outsider; Nancy and Ruth’s taboo relationship doesn’t exclude them from society, and in the same way, Mr Almanac’s crippled body and pious manner does not secure him a position on the outer circle of society. It seems people of necessity, such as Ruth who runs the town post and telegraph office and Almanac who concocts remedies for those that fall ill, are kept on the periphery of the inner circle for convenience. In contrast to Tituba, from Miller’s play, those that are allowed to belong to the society serve some purpose and are therefore, tolerated. However, it is those who are considerably less deserving that incur the scathing judgement of the town – such as Molly who ‘wished for herself’ (Part 4) a ‘life of love and acceptance’ (Part 4) and failed to find that sense of belonging she so longed for.

The McSwiney family help bridge the gap between the lower and middle classes; Teddy is known for his congeniality to the broader townsfolk and is similarly kind and charismatic with Tilly and her mother. Despite Sergeant Farrat reminding the citizens at the funeral of Teddy that ‘if you [they] had included her [Tilly], Teddy would have always been with us [them]’ (Part 3), the message falls on deaf ears and the Dungatar residents failed to see what their prejudice and bigotry had done to the town’s ‘cheeky boy’ (Part 3). In the end, the McSwineys leave Dungatar in a line of ‘sad, rag dolls’ (Part 3), resigned that they will never belong. Ham works to highlight this separation with the formation of the ‘Progressive Minded Ladies of Dungatah’ (Part 2) by Elsbeth and Trudy, who begin organising a variety of town events including ‘functions… fund raisers, tea parties, croquet games, dances…’ (Part 2) and who later induct Ruth and Pru Dimm, Nancy and Lois Pickett, Beula Harridene, Irma Almanac and Marigold Pettyman. But instead of visiting The Hill to invite Molly and Tilly, the newly formed Dungatar Social Club, who had coincidentally ‘acquired an accent overnight – an enunciated Dungatar interpretation of queenly English’ (Part 3) insist she make them dresses to rival the others in their group. When this same social group plans to hold a play, being directly involved in the proceedings becomes essential to each of the residents and as they ‘queued on the tiny stage like extras from a Hollywood film’ (Part 4), the resident’s personalities meld together and readers begin to observe them as a collective enemy, neither one more forgivable than the other.

The fitting punishment for a the group who ostracized those around them was to suffer their fate together, and as they ‘walked in a pack’ (Part 4) back to their town and the fire had claimed everything, once more Ham writes about them in the collective as they ‘all started to cry… they groaned and rocked, bawled and howled… they were homeless and heartbroken… a motley bunch…’ (Part 4).

Despite the numerous couples and romantic dalliances in The Dressmaker , Ham promotes the idea of pure, true love with the classic couple, Tilly and Teddy. In juxtaposition to Lesley and Mona, and William and Gertrude, whose partnerships were a result of succumbing to the pressures of society, Tilly and Teddy share a deep and real love. As the novel sees William and Gertrude marry and merely exist in a loveless marriage with one another, Tilly and Teddy ‘made love over and over again and were made one person in their intentions’ (Part 3). The resignation that is shared by Lesley and Mona after the marry that they’ll ‘do the best we [they] can together’ (Part 3) is a suffocating prospect when we consider the endless possibilities of real love as Teddy and Tilly begin to plan a full life together.

Moreover, as much as Tilly tries to fool herself that she is not bothered by what others think of her, she is acutely concerned that ‘they’ll [the townsfolk] hate me [her] even more’ (Part 2) and is hounded by their hate of her, dreaming that the men of the town ‘stood shaking their fingers at her’ (Part 4) and that the residents will crawl up The Hill, armed with ‘firewood and flames, stakes and chains’ (Part 4) in a twisted amalgamation of a witch-hunt. Her fears bloom just as Teddy is buried and she fears the ‘football defeat’ (Part 3) will bring people to the house baying for her blood because she’d killed their star full forward.

After the loss of her mother, Tilly is no longer comforted by the promise Molly made to her that ‘it’s me and you; there is only you and you have only me’ (Part 3) – her isolation is confirmed when very few people attend Molly’s funeral and Tilly’s blames the rain.

Belonging and Diversity Quotes

Tilly stood alone in her brilliant magenta Lys Noir gown, then wrapped her shawl tight about her and reached for the handle. (after being spat at by Evan and called names by Beula at the social gathering) Part 2

T. Dunnage was printed lightly beneath T. McSwiney but it had been scribbled out.’ Part 2

… tragedy includes everyone… wasn’t everyone else in the town different, yet included? (at Teddy’s funeral) Part 3

‘Now, look you. All of you. We danced. And Tituba conjured Ruth Putnam’s dead sisters. And that is all.’ (Abby threatening the girls) Act 1

‘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.’ (Rebecca Nurse is concerned that Hale’s appearance in the town will cause mischief) Act 1

‘Your soul alone is the issue here, Mister, and you will prove its whiteness or you cannot live in a Christian country.’ (Danforth to Proctor) Act 4

Truth and Lies

In Ham’s The Dressmaker , the truth has little value; instead the citizens are embroiled in malicious gossip and snide falsifications that serve only to elevate their selfish needs. By the time Tilly returns to her hometown, the manner in which young Stewart Pettyman died had far become the thing of legend. The fact that small Tilly was ‘cornered beside the library… just trying to save herself’ (Part 3) became irrelevant and all that was remembered was the grotesque image of the ‘boy… with his neck broken and his round podgy body at right angles to his head’ (Part 3) and as such, Tilly had been sent away from the town. Such is the insidious nature of the lies told, the fateful incident caused by a barbaric child attacking another became a by-product of Tilly’s curse. Similarly, Ham’s writing in the latter half of the novel strips back the façade and the once ‘couturiered ladies of Dungatar’ (Part 2) become ‘snobby old Elsbeth… puny Mona… putrid gossiping Lois, leathery old sticky-beak Ruth, venomous Beula’ (Part 3) as Tilly (and inadvertently, the reader) become aware of the true nature of these women. After their behaviour has been disclosed, Ham begins to morph the descriptions of these dynamic characters in an animalistic manner, likening them to lumbering livestock that mindlessly ‘traipse[ing]’ and ‘amble[d]’ (Part 4) wherever the crowd is going; failing to think for themselves until their behaviours and words are indistinguishable from the rest of the flock.

The animalistic association is also included as Ham courageously addresses the theme of sex within the novel. The characters of Dungatar are besotted with their carnal instincts – Mona’s ‘quiet, evening orgasm’ (Part 1), Trudy and William’s inability to remain chaste until a proper marriage is conducted and Evan Pettyman’s libidinous inclinations both toward his wife, whom he frequently drugs and rapes, or the countless women he either has affairs with or harasses, the citizens of Dungatar are presented as beasts unable to rise above their most base bodily needs. The revealing nature of Dungatar’s auspicious Councillor Pettyman whose inability to get an arousal suspiciously coincides with Tilly’s vengeful concoction foreshadows his demasculinasation both literally and figuratively as his wife later learns of his affair and not only exposes his filthy collection of pornography but also slices his ankle tendon which hobbles him like ‘tortured elephant’ (Part 4), like the beast he is.

Although the truth behind the heinous Evan Pettyman is exposed, it does little to assuage the hatred the citizens feel toward the Dunnage family and Sergeant Farrat’s honest eulogy at Molly’s funeral captures the desperate attempts she had gone to in order to avoid the ‘full glare of scrutiny and torment’ (Part 4). The ‘grey, crying sky’ (Part 4) during Molly’s burial cements to Tilly that she is alone; the end of her family line. In the end, Farrat is her last remaining friend and suggests that they ‘drink laced tea until we [they] feel some understanding’ (Part 4) in an effort to disguise their grief and avoid facing the truth.

In contrast, the truth can prove to a liberation to some; the moral idyll of the 50s era proved overwhelmingly stifling for some characters and hence, breaking away from societal expectations proved cathartic. Sergeant Farrat’s penchant for women’s clothing works in direct contrast to the reliable law enforcement model typical in small rural towns scattered across the Australian outback. Not only does he harbour the secret passion for haberdashery and artistic flair, his insight when it comes to those around him is flooring. Delivering the eulogy at both Teddy and Molly’s funerals, he berates the citizens for their piety and espouses forgiveness and an understanding that Tilly was not to blame for the death of Teddy, even if it means bending the truth when he assures them that he ‘instead [he] wrote the Teddy McSwiney had slipped and that it was his own terrible mistake’ (Part 3). In addition, his suspicions about the ‘new seamstress in town’ (Part 3) not being well travelled and not having ‘received any sophisticated training’ (Part 3) suggests that he is perhaps still tainted by the same judgemental affliction that the other residents have. However, Farrat’s sensitivity to the affects of his actions, such as when Tilly was sent away after the death of Stewart, awards him an element of retrospection that is acutely lacking in so many of the other characters. His duality within the novel is complete when he attends Molly’s funeral dressed in a ‘black knee-length wool-crepe frock with a draped neck… black stockings and sensible black pumps’ (Part 3) in an effort to both aggravate the deceased Molly whilst also paying homage to her unconventionality.

The seventeenth-century Puritan worldview saw the battle between God and the Devil for Christian souls as a titanic reality, made apparent as an ever-present spiritual conflict between good and evil. Danforth is a constant reminder throughout the text of the vast quest Puritans undertook in order to expose the lies within their community when he observes the witch-trials have unearthed a ‘precise time’ (Act 3) where the townsfolk are no longer ‘in the dusky afternoon when evil mixed itself with good and befuddled the world’ (Act 3); Salem has moved under the eye of the Puritan men that would see it cleansed.

In an effort to assuage humanity, Miller condones some of the lies told within the play, if they are for the betterment of others. This notion connects well with the historical context of when Miller wrote the play, when much like Salem, accusers were pressed to name others and the temptation to alleviate some of the focus by mentioning another name was great. Like the HUAC trials, citizens were placed in situations where lies were the only viable option and as Proctor notes, the truth is not as appealing when it is only a lie that will save someone from the rope. Ironically, the only lie Elizabeth has ever told condemned the man she was trying to protect. Her reputation as a woman that ‘cannot lie’ (Act 3) sees her and her husband arrested and Abby set free, in a monstrous display of the inefficacy of the justice system. Likewise, Proctor’s inclination to ‘sign myself [himself] to lies’ (Act 4) and sign his name to a document stating that he trafficked with the devil is done in an effort to save his neck. He, like Mary Warren in the earlier court scene, wrestles with inner conflict – a moral conundrum that sees their truths condemning them to hang but their lies saving them.

In contrast to this, holding onto the truth is seen through the character of Giles Corey, who was pressed to death in an effort to force him to name an informant. The ‘great stones’ (Act 4) that were placed upon his chest are metaphoric of the weight of ‘stand[ing] mute’ (Act 4) and lying in order to save others. In this way, Miller not only excuses lies but often celebrates them as a noble way to conduct oneself if the truth will be prove to be more damaging.

Furthermore, ‘pleading the belly’ is a term used to describe the practice of women, who were condemned to be executed, and informed their captors that they were pregnant in an attempt to stall the sentence. The claim that Goody Good requested a delay on her execution because she was pregnant foreshadows Elizabeth’s later claim that she is with child as well, and despite being examined and there being ‘no sign of it’ (Act 3), Danforth observes that it ‘too convenient to be credited’ (Act 3). Without solid proof, he informs Proctor that Elizabeth will be spared another year until she is delivered and audiences are left guessing whether this is a lie Elizabeth has devised to stall or if Proctor’s summation of her being unable to lie is correct and she is with child.

Truth and Lies Quotes

Ruth stood by her electric kettle steaming open a fat letter addressed to Tilly Dunnage. Part 1

Sergeant Farrat’s secret wardrobe hung in a locked cupboard next to the front door. Part 4

‘It’s all very hazy now, but you left I seem to remember, because your mother became unwell?’ (Marigold discusses her confusion with Tilly) Part 4

‘Some people don’t think they have to honour their marriage vows either,’ said Nancy. ‘At least I have a preference for men, some sick people in this town…’ (Lois and Nancy are arguing during rehearsals) Part 4

‘You are not wintry man. I know you, John… I look for John Proctor that took me from my sleep and put knowledge in my heart! I never knew what pretense Salem was, I never knew the lying lessons I was taught by all these Christian women and their covenanted men! And now you bid me tear the light out of my eyes?’ (Abby pleads with Proctor) Act 1

‘Aye, sir. She [Mary Warren] swears now that she never saw Satan; nor any spirit, vague or clear, that Satan may have sent to hurt her. And she declares her friends are lying now.’ (Proctor to Danforth) Act 3

‘It does not escape me that this deposition may be devised to blind us… but if she speaks true, I bid you now drop your guile and confess your pretense, for a quick confession will go easier with you. Abigail Williams… is there any truth in this?’ (Danforth questions Abby one final time) Act 3

‘Let him [Proctor] give his lie. Quail not before God’s judgement in this, for it may well be that God damns a liar less that he that throws his life away for pride.’ (Hale to Elizabeth) Act 4

‘Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang!’ (Proctor as he is signing his false confession) Act 4

• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy

©2024 Green Bee Study Guides

Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details.