[Video Transcription]

Most people commonly mistake Comparative (also known as Reading and Comparing, and an array of other names) as just two Text Responses rolled into one essay. They think that Comparative is Text Response, except that instead of writing about one text, you’re writing about two.

And boy are they wrong.

Most people are also aware that the main difference is that Comparative looks at similarities and differences between the two texts. However, this is where the challenge begins.

As you study your texts in detail, you’ll come to realise that the majority of students keep using the same old examples – example X for similarities, and example Y for differences.

To stand out from hundreds of other students studying the same texts, you need a strategy. You need something that will wow your examiners and will catapult you to the top of the VCE cohort.

*Drum roll*

Introducing you to my golden rule, the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT STRATEGY!

This strategy is simple. It’s simple to understand and it’s simple to incorporate into your essays. Its beauty is that despite its simplicity, it’ll advance your essay beyond the average English student. All my students who have applied this strategy have seen their English scores improve by at least one grade (from B+ to an A, or from an A to A+).

Let me explain.

PART 1 – CONVERGENT 

The word, ‘convergent’ means coming closer together. When we start looking for similarities in Comparative, keep this word CONVERGENT in mind. Having CONVERGENT at the forefront of your mind will ensure that you are always aware of the fact that your examples are never the same. Notice how the blue arrows never touch:

Sometimes, students fall into the trap of referring to examples in each text as the ‘same,’ but this won’t ever happen to you if you keep CONVERGENT in mind. No two texts are ever exactly the same, no two examples are exactly the same, so avoid falling into this trap. 

Instead, you’ll be using phrases like: "similarly to Text 1, Text 2 also…" or "likewise, in Text 2….’"

Awesome! So this is the simple part done. Let’s move onto the most powerful part of this strategy - DIVERGENT.

PART 2 – DIVERGENT

The word ‘divergent’ means developing in different directions. We can use the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy for any example you include in your essay. Since no examples from two texts are exactly the same, this means there is always an opportunity for you to first compare the similarities, then compare the differences.

Rather than just a simple ‘on the other hand’ or ‘however’, which you probably have written a dozen times, and felt like you’re repeating yourself, we show you advanced ways to DIVERGE as in this example for Photograph 51 and The Penelopiad:

In The Penelopiad, the resigned way in which Penelope confides in the reader alludes definitively to the ‘overlooked woman’ stereotype being, in fact, a very well-used one. Atwood (the author of The Penelopiad) does, however, accord some power to Penelope by ensuring that she alone tells her own story, a privilege which is not given to Rosalind in Photograph 51.

See how in this example, we don’t even use the overused comparative words such as ‘however’ or ‘on the other hand’ which can make a comparative feel simple. Instead, we show you unique ways to compare the two texts so that your essay stands out amongst all the others that are just using the same old words and methods to compare.

If you’ve ever received feedback that you needed to ‘elaborate,’ ‘go into more detail,’ or needed ‘more analysis’ in your essays, this strategy will help eliminate those criticisms. It will also show your teacher that you are comfortable writing an in-depth analysis using fewer examples (because you’ll be spending more time on each example - firstly by discussing a similarity, then a difference), rather than swamping your essay with as many examples as possible because you barely have anything to say about each one.

Too many students miss out on the opportunity to elaborate or expand on an example because they only write about either the similarity or the difference. But with the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy, we can see that no matter what example you choose from each text, there is always an opportunity to discuss both similarities and differences. This is an extremely powerful approach to comparative because it enables you to spend time comparing, rather than getting lots of examples of for one text in the first half of your body paragraph, slapping in an ‘on the other hand’ in the middle, then lots of examples for the second text in the second half of the body. I see students doing this all the time, pretending to compare these examples when they’re not - you know what I mean right? We’ve all been there once or twice - so you’re not alone in doing this if you’ve tried in the past. The thing is, with examiners, in particular, they’re really good at noticing when a paragraph looks like it’s a comparison, rather than a truly in-depth comparison between the two texts.

That’s why in my How To Write A Killer Comparative, I show you how to use CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT in multiple essay examples across many text pairs. It’s not just about one way of comparing similarities too, it’s all the different ways to can discuss ‘similarities’ - what I mean is, it can be easy to slip into a template of ‘similarly to text A, text B does this by…’ but in this study guide, written by myself, and study scorers who have achieved 50 in English, we show you how to unique discuss comparisons. We also show you how to advance your comparative discussion through Advanced Essay Paragraph Structures which truly showcase the power of the CONVERGENT and DIVERGENT strategy.

‍

COMPARATIVE GUIDES

How to Write a Killer Comparative Ebook

A Killer Comparative Guide: The Crucible and The Dressmaker

A Killer Comparative Guide: I am Malala and Pride

A Killer Comparative Guide: The 7 Stages of Grieving and The Longest Memory

A Killer Comparative Guide: Ransom and The Queen

USEFUL RESOURCES

The Ultimate Guide To VCE Comparative

‍Reading and Comparing essays

‍How to get A+ in Reading and Comparing

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

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

Summary

Grenville’s novel follows the life of protagonist, Lieutenant Daniel Rooke in his journey with the first fleet. Rooke’s primary conflict is his choice between his moral conscience and duty as a soldier. Because he is aware from an early age that he is out of step with the world, he tends to be more reasonable in his way of dealing with conflict. His final response to his inner conflict is to stand strongly by what he believes.

The Lieutenant at its core is a journey of self-discovery as Daniel Rooke navigates the immoral waters of British imperialism and its impact on the indigenous Australians. Becoming closer to Tagaran, Rooke attempts to bridge cultural barriers through the transformative power of language. Rooke observes the scissions created by violence and the perhaps misplaced Western superiority and is perpetually torn between his moral intuitions and his obligations and duty as a Lieutenant.

TIP: Have an understanding of the historical context behind The Lieutenant as well as the real life people that Grenville loosely based her novel off of. This means having a grasp on the first fleet, the British colonisation of Australia and important figures such as Bennelong.

Themes

TIP: I have included some examples from the text but this list is by no means exhaustive, occasionally there is a repetition of examples. It’s important to remember that examples are versatile and can be applied to many different themes and ideas. Feel free to add and explore how other examples might enhance these themes.

Language

Language dictates commonality and communication, yet to Rooke he discovers that central to the power of language is the willingness to cooperate, patience and respect. Throughout Grenville’s novel, however, it is clear that language can not only dispel the lasting vestiges of misunderstanding but it can also form the basis for racism and violence. It is through our language itself that reveals our biases.

The language of racism

• Weymark refers to the Indigenous men during their first encounter as “mister darkie” etc. each a patronising euphemism concealing his arrogant notions of superiority

The limitation of language to accurately portray and convey a moment

• “what had passed between Tagaran and himself had gone far beyond vocabulary or grammatical forms” (pg186)

The language of violence

• “what it said was I can kill you. He did not want her to learn that language. Certainly not from him” (pg224)
• “Violence had an enlivening effect. As long as someone else was the victim it made the blood pump, gave the world an edge of glamour” (pg239)
• “Gamekeeper. He wondered whether that word had killed Brugden” (pg240)
• “The gun is the only language the buggers will understand” (pg241)
• “war was a species of conversation” (pg108)
  

Assumed cultural superiority of British empire

The hierarchical nature of British Society stands in diametric opposition to the community-oriented system employed by the Indigenous Australians. This hierarchy defines their people by their contributions to “Her Majesty” and shames and “punish[es]” all those who fail to comply with the loose morals and violence condoned by the British colonists. This notion is elucidated through the exploitation of the natives and the nations reliance on oppression and servitude to maintain its imperial status, put simply: their strength is an accident arising from the weakness of others. It is on this foundation that Grenville explores the violent treatment of the natives by the British and even their treatment of their own people.

• “In the world of Church Street, Benjamin Rooke was a man of education and standing and a father to be proud of. At the Portsmouth Naval Academy a mile away, he was an embarrassment” (pg6)

• “So we punish…. Every man is the same. If he steals, he is punished… It was interesting to hear that magnificent idea – the product of hundreds of years of British civilisation – spelled out so plain”(pg195)
• This was justice: impartial, blind, noble. The horror of the punishment was the proof of its impartiality. If it did not hurt, it was not justice.” (pg197)
• “By god they are savage… Dirty too, look at the filth on them”
• “they may be savages, we call them savages. But their feelings are no different from ours”
• Weymark resorts to derogatory name calling, urging on “my black friend” and “Mister Darkie” in his base supplications

Power of conscience

The morality that is ingrained in Rooke from the onset aligns quite naturally with our own moral standards. Yet Grenville encourages readers to explore the difficult choice between morals and disobedience. Rooke faces such a choice. To obey an order to accompany an expedition to capture or kill six indigenous men, this forms the central conflict of Grenville’s novel. As elucidated through both Rooke and Gardiner, moral acts that defy the expectations and “orders of Her Majesty” are deeply frowned upon.

• “But Rooke, think: this is not a request, it is an order” (pg246)
• “…spell out the consequences of refusal.” (pg248)
• “… the service of humanity and the service of His Majesty were not congruent” (pg249)
• “I am sorry to have been persuaded to comply with the order. I would not for any reason ever obey a similar order” (pg285)
• “your orders were a most gravely wrong thing, I regret beyond my words my part in the business” (pg285)
  
  

Violence

Violence is central to the operation of imperialists as the British tightens its grip on the Indigenous Australians. Grenville emphasises that the power sought out by the British empire will always come at the expense of the natives. Violence and force are used to assert power, confirm boundaries around usurped land, promulgate fear and discourage resistance. The gun becomes a symbol of the violence and force of the settle and they show little intention of relinquishing the dominant position that the gun affords them.

• The punishment for the mutineers of the Renegade reinforces Rooke’s understanding of institutional power and violence as one lieutenant is hanged in a gruesome spectacle and the others dispatched into a nameless void.
• Weymark is determined to affirm his dominance and establish the white man as a powerful force
• Brugden’s increased freedom with a weapon results in violence towards the natives which culminates in the kidnapping of the two native men who are “grabbed” against their will
• Brugden’s unchecked brutality, and Gilbert’s excessive use of force, highlights the colonialists’ use of violence as a means of achieving their goal

Duty, service, obedience and the military life

Conforming to the pressures of the British Empire, Rooke joins the marines and complicitly serves without attempting to question the morality behind his actions. Importantly, he joins the marines not out of patriotic pride, but because he believes it will aid him to pursue his academic curiosities and steer away from violence. Yet it only brings him closer to the reality that lurks behind the ostensibly moral quest of British imperialism.

Character Analysis

TIP: Whilst The Lieutenant focusses on Rooke’s experiences, you can’t neglect the minor characters in the novel, they are there for a reason! Think about how these characters are similar or different, how their stories contribute to Grenville’s overall message and their relationship with the central protagonist Rooke. ‍

Daniel Rooke

Analysis

• Lieutenant on the first fleet
• Awkward
• Struggles to articulate his thoughts and emotions as he is afraid of being “out of step with the world”
• From a young age, Rooke’s interactions with others has made it clear to him that he is different. As such this dictates his response to conflict: blaming himself or withdrawing. His connection to Tagaran through mutual empathy demonstrates his ability to overcome conflict through mutual respect
• Rooke is bound by duty to Her Majesty yet finds his missions in conflict with his innate instinct for moral righteousness

Supporting quotes

• “quiet, moody, a man of few words”
• “he had no memories other than of being an outsider”
  

Silk

Analysis

• Captain on the first fleet
• Stands in contrast to Rooke in every respect
• Storyteller that is obsessed with his narrative
• Ignores the cruelty and violence of the Imperialist expedition in favour of an interesting story
• Blinding opportunism that undermines his integrity
• His tendency to gloss over the violence committed in the name of Her Majesty reflects his loyalty to the expedition

Supporting quotes

• “man whose narrative was so important to him”
• “a storyteller who could turn the most commonplace event into something entertaining”

Tagaran

Analysis

• Connects with Rooke through their mutual love for learning and language
• Tagaran voluntarily engages with Rooke in his quest to understand their language, this surpasses the clumsy and mandatory lessons imposed on Boinbar and Warungin.

Supporting quotes‍

• “Forthright, ferless, sure of herself, she looked to him like a girl who had already mastered whatever social skills her world might demand”
• “a clever child like Tagaran was the perfect choice: quick to learn, but innocent. Curious, full of questions but only a child”

Gardiner

Analysis

• Gardiner acts as a foil character to both Silk and Rooke, sharing the same trials and tribulations as Rooke however responding differently than Silk
• Rooke’s friendship with Gardiner establishes the grounds for their later discussions on language, the treatment of the natives and the imperialist machine as Gardiner sets an example of the consequences of going against the duties required of him
  

Brugden

Analysis

• Brugden is portrayed as an essential element of colonising and the survival of the British fleet. As an embodiment of violence, Grenville suggests that integral to the operation of imperialism is crude and unwavering violence

• “Brugden, out there in the woods, that powerful chest… He would be an efficient killer”

Supporting quotes

• “Something had happened out there in the woods about which Brudgen was remaining silent”

• “The prisoner, taller than anyone else, his powerful frame half bursting out of its thread bare check shirt…”  

Lancelot Percival James

Analysis

• Family of slave owners, product of the empire
• Rooke’s inability to understand James is symbolic of his values not aligning with that of the British empire. It foreshadows his later conflict with the value of the empire
• James symbolises the derision of the British hierarchy
  

Supporting quotes

• “Gamekeeper! The word suggested the society that Lancelot Percival James had boasted of at the Academy… But New South Wales was no gentleman’s estate… and the gamekeeper was a criminal who had been given a gun” (pg91)
  

Interesting Points of Analysis

Silk’s Narrative

• Why is Silk obsessed with documenting the first fleet? What does he seek when he writes?

Rooke’s job as an astronomer

• Initially signing up for the first fleet as an astronomer, Rooke’s job is supposed to be observing comets and stars yet when he arrives he is tasked with a multitude of laborious tasks that hinder his astronomical work. In what ways does this act as a microcosm for the imperialist mission in Australia?

VOCAB: microcosm - a situation or event that encapsulates in miniature the characteristics of something much larger.

Rooke’s life in Antigua

• Why did Grenville include this section? What does it add to Rooke’s journey? Why does Rooke choose to do this?

Third Person Omniscient Narration

• Written from Rooke’s perspective, whose opinion do we hear the least of? And what unique perspective does Grenville’s choice of narrative perspective offer us?

Language

• Grenville’s language reflects Rooke’s love for language. Her choice of imagery reveals Rooke’s way of seeing the world. For example, “crescent of yellow sand like a punctuation mark” accentuates Rooke’s tendency to observe his world as a linguist might and  highlights Rooke’s deep connection with language. Likewise, Rooke’s perception of a gun that speaks a language that “does not require listeners” emphasises his natural tendency to think as a linguist. Grenville does not write in an overly complex, dense or poetic way in order to mirror Rooke’s tendency to view things logically

Setting

How does the setting that Rooke finds himself in mirror or parallel the emotions that he experiences?

• Naval Academy (Portsmouth)

• “just another world that wrenched him out of shape”
• “sucked out of his spirit and left a shell being”
• “closed in on itself”, “narrow”, “squeezed tightly”

• Sydney Cove

• “There is nowhere in the world that I would rather be”(pg97)
• "On the northern shore, high dark prows of headlands hung over the water, the sombre woods pressing down into their own reflections. To the south the land was lower, each bay and promontory shining with the glossy leaves of mangroves. Now and then between them a crescent of yellow sand was like a punctuation mark” (pg89)
  

TIP: Just like the minor characters I mentioned before, meaning and themes come from all aspects of a novel not just plot points and major characters. By including niche examples such as the setting or the narrative perspective, you can demonstrate that you have a really thorough understanding of the text!

‍

Video Transcription

‍

This video’s takeaway message focuses on tackling essay prompts that include quotations. The extra quote with the prompt can seem superfluous, but often, they can provide hints about how to tackle or challenge the essay topic. It is there for a reason, and if you are familiar with the quote, I would recommend that you try to incorporate it into your essay!

Before we unpack today’s essay topic, let’s have a look at background information.

Kate Grenville’s The Lieutenant explores the commonality of the human spirit amidst tumultuous conflict during the First Fleet’s arrival in Australia in 1788. Drawing upon the true experiences of William Dawes, a British astronomer and one of the lieutenants to travel with the First Fleet, Grenville crafts a work of fiction inspired by Dawes’ “two little blue notebooks” detailing his growing understanding of the Aboriginal language Gadigal and his conversations and connection with Patyegarang, a young Aboriginal girl.

The ability for two individuals from completely different worlds to transcend their differences in order to share cherished moments and understandings together is exemplified in The Lieutenant, alongside the rife external and internal conflicts which threaten such relationship.

Today’s prompt is:

“But a man could not travel along two different paths.”

How does Grenville explore Rooke’s conflict of conscience in The Lieutenant?

Start off with focusing on the keywords in this prompt, especially the phrases that resonate with you for Steps 1 and 2 of brainstorming (which I have previously covered in other essay topic breakdowns.)

In particular, let’s have a look at the phrase “conflict of conscience” as this captures the essence of the prompt and what you will need to discuss in your essay.  

Conflict of conscience suggests internal conflict, which implies that we will need to consider morality and the concepts of right and wrong, especially when a difficult decision must be made and ‘sides’ need to be taken.  

Conflict itself is a central theme of The Lieutenant, however, it is important to recognise that this topic considers conflict through the narrower lens of ‘conflict of conscience’. This means that in your discussion, the relevance to the prompt is crucial to keep in mind to ensure you are actually answering the question!  

But first, let’s analyse the quote:

“But a man could not travel along two different paths”

This quote alludes to Rooke’s realisation regarding the reality of his identity, not only as Tagaran’s friend or “kamara” but also as a soldier or “Berewalgal". The resignation and recognition of the impossible – that is, for Rooke to continue attempting to appease both ‘sides’ without making critical decisions about who and what he ultimately valued more - is evident in this quote. Hence, this quote refers to the conflict of conscience he experiences and provides us with an insight into not only his character but also conflict itself.

Why is it not possible for a man to travel along two different paths?

What would happen if he tried?  

Why was this realisation important for Rooke, especially for his character and development?

These are the kinds of questions coming to mind upon seeing that quote alone, which all provide hints as to how I might tackle this prompt.  

Now that we have looked at a few ideas related to the question, we’ll now move into potential paragraphs for this essay.

Paragraph 1: Grenville’s utilisation of Rooke’s perspective in detailing his thought processes, observations and realisations reveals the facets of Rooke’s character contributing to his internal conflicts.

Remembering this is a ‘how’ prompt, we want to be analysing ways in which Grenville explores Rooke’s conflict of conscience. In this paragraph, I have chosen to focus on the raw and intimate expression of his inner thoughts and consciousness as the ‘how’ aspect.  

The detailed perspective reveals Rooke’s naivety in assuming the possibility of maintaining a peaceful connection with Tagaran and the Aboriginal community amidst turbulent and violent times. Consequently, it highlights his realisations regarding the morality of the conflicts he is involved in, and how despite one’s admirable intentions, “a man could not travel along two different paths” without facing dire consequences for their actions.  

Questions I might ask myself here include: why does Rooke initially try to deny the reality of his situation? What does his preference for a peaceful and accepting approach towards the Indigenous Australians suggest about his approach to conflict?

This cognitive dissonance ultimately contributes to his internal conflict between the value he places in his connections with Tagaran and her community and in his duties and obligations as a lieutenant. As readers, we come to realise the duality of this conflict in Rooke’s mind through the limited omniscient third person perspective, which provides us with an insight into Rooke’s shifting understandings of Indigenous people, conflict and even himself.  

I would then continue unpacking these changing understandings, especially ones relevant to his character which reveal his internal conflicts further. ‍

Paragraph 2: In addition, the stark contrast between Rooke’s approach to his conflict of conscience and other soldiers’ approaches underscores the rationale behind his actions and the stakes ineluctably linked with his choices and morality.  

This paragraph’s analysis revolves around Grenville’s inclusion of a host of different characters and outlooks - from Indigenous Australians to intransigent Colonial perspectives. I would emphasise the importance of juxtaposition between these different perspectives as it elucidates the values and beliefs underpinning each individual’s choices, especially during conflict.  

Although the core of the essay discusses internal conflicts, highlighting the connection between internal and external conflict would add another layer of complexity to your essay. Rooke’s conflict of conscience results in his permanent departure from Australia, and fleshing out the ramifications of dissent and opposition towards other Colonials is key in demonstrating your understanding of the complex and intertwined nature of conflict.

Paragraph 3: Through the detrimental implications of Rooke’s initial conflict avoidance, Grenville’s focus on his subsequent self-awareness to unite his morals and his actions highlights the strength of his character to resolve his internal conflicts to prevent further perpetration of injustice towards the Aboriginal population.  

Here, I am having a closer look at how Rooke's encounters with his conflicts of conscience and the repercussions of his actions in attempting to take a ‘middle-ground’ stance catalyse his development as an individual - in particular, how it solidifies his moral stance and his decision to act in a manner that reflects his beliefs.  

By showing Tagaran how to load the gun but not how to fire it, or by accepting the navigator role but distancing oneself from the group, he endeavours to avoid conflict with either ‘side’. However, passivity is a stance within itself, and in the case of the treatment towards Indigenous Australians, Rooke’s silence in not rejecting the actions of other “Berewalgal” inevitably enables injustice to continue.  

It is only through his understanding that non-committal actions also incriminate him as a perpetrator that his choice to sacrifice his Colonial obligations for taking an active stance to fulfil his moral obligations comes to light. This reveals the role that internal conflicts may have in inciting powerful change and realisations in an individual.  

The complexity of internal conflict can be difficult to discuss, but by using the quote provided in the prompt and asking yourself questions about the implications of the quote, we are able to delve into and construct a sophisticated understanding of The Lieutenant and of conflict itself.

LSG-curated sample essay topics for The Lieutenant

Now it's your turn! Here's a list of essay topics for your studies:

1. The Lieutenant demonstrates how an individual's true self emerges in the face of conflict.' Discuss.
   ‍
2. 'The Lieutenant shows the catalysts for miscommunication and misunderstanding between the First Fleet and the local Aboriginal population.'
   Discuss.
   ‍
3. 'The Lieutenant presents a society where sustained, amicable relations between the "Berewalgal" and the Aboriginal population were impossible.'
   Do you agree?
   ‍
4. “But a man could not travel along two different paths.”
   How is Rooke's conflict of conscience explored in The Lieutenant?
   ‍
5. 'Rooke's own differences furthered his understanding of and connection with Tagaran.' Discuss.
   ‍
6. "You did not learn a language without entering into a relationship with the people who spoke it with you."
   How is this concept explored in The Lieutenant?
   ‍
7. "The intention of evil was there which is all that God see when he looks into our hearts." 'Grenville explores the importance of intention over action in The Lieutenant.'
   Discuss.
   ‍
8. Why are Rooke's realisations about and outlook on the world an anomaly?
   ‍
9. 'The Lieutenant explores how social change can only happen with dissent and non-conformity.'
   To what extent do you agree?
   ‍
10. How does Grenville construct morality in The Lieutenant?
    ‍
11. 'Rooke discovers that exploration of the self is crucial in shaping one's sense of identity.' Discuss.
    ‍
12. 'It is easier to resist change than to enable it.' How does The Lieutenant demonstrate this idea?
    ‍
13. 'In The Lieutenant, it is the individual who determines what is possible and what is impossible.' Discuss.
    ‍
14. "If he were to go back to that night on the sand of Botany Bay, would he make the same choice again, knowing that this was where it would lead him...?"
    How does Grenville explore how and why difficult choices are made?
    ‍
15. 'Intransigence and a sense of superiority ultimately prevent unity in New South Wales.' Do you agree?
    

Ransom and Invictus 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

Invictus

Clint Eastwood’s 2009 film ‘Invictus’ centers on the events following the election of Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s first black President in the post-apartheid era. The film follows President Mandela’s attempt to infuse a deeply divided country with new energy, by supporting the South African rugby team’s victorious 1995 World Cup Campaign. The unlikely bond formed between President Mandela and Francois Pienarr, the captain of the rugby team, illustrates themes of unity and reconciliation in a divided nation. The film begins with the image of a deeply divided society in 1990, as Mandela is released from 27 years of incarceration. A poignant opening scene sees Mandela drive along a long dirt road that runs between two playing fields, on one side, young black children shout excitedly as Mandela passes. On the other side, immaculately dressed white boys stare vacantly, as their coach proclaims, “This is the day our country went to the dogs.” This tumultuous period in South African history is of central concern to ‘Invictus’, as Eastwood portrays the lingering racial prejudices imbedded in this society. The film portrays the tension between the bitter resentment of black South Africans towards their former oppressors, with the fear and uncertainty of white Afrikaners under Mandela’s political leadership. Eastwood masterfully depicts the true story of the moment when Nelson Mandela harnessed the power of sports to unite a deeply divided South Africa.

Ransom

Set during the Trojan War, one of the most famous events in Greek mythology, David Malouf’s historical fiction ‘Ransom’ seeks to explore the overwhelming destruction caused by war, and the immense power of reconciliation. Drawing on the Iliad, the epic poem by Homer, Malouf focuses on the events of one day and night, in which King Priam of Troy travels to the enemy Greek encampment to plead with the warrior Achilles to release the body of his son, Hector. Maddened by grief at the murder of his friend Patroclus, Achilles desecrates the body of Hector as revenge. Despite Achilles refusal to give up Hector’s body, Priam is convinced there must be a way of reclaiming the body – of pitting new ways against the old, and forcing the hand of fate. Malouf’s fable reflects the epic themes of the Trojan war, as fatherhood, love, grief and pride are expertly recast for our times.

Malouf and Eastwood both depict societies on the brink: Troy faces annihilation by the Greeks, while South Africa faces an uncertain future as it emerges from the injustices of the apartheid era, both worlds are in dire need of true heroes to bridge the great divide. Together, these two texts echo the significance of hope in the enactment of change. To learn more, head over to our full Ransom Study Guide (covers themes, characters, chapter summaries, quotes and more).

Themes

The power of shared human experiences

Both texts are centrally concerned with the significance of the universal experiences of love, loss, grief and hope to unite a divided people. Both Invictus and Ransom explore how societal forces divide people into different, often conflicting groups – whether this be race, history, culture, or war. Each text appeals to the universal experiences that define the human condition, and emphasise the significance of opportunities to cross-cultural divides.

In ‘Ransom’, Malouf is centrally concerned with the theme of fatherhood. This concept links the mortal and godly realms, which King Priam straddles over the course of his journey. The relationship between Priam and Somax illustrates this complex theme most clearly. The two men, despite being deeply separated by their class, education and power, share their common familial experiences. Priam confronts the poignancy of their shared experience of losing sons, questioning whether it “meant the same for him as it did for the driver”. Malouf thus presents Priam as initially lacking in terms of his understanding, Somax’s friendship and stories are the catalyst for Priam to engage in deeper, empathetic understanding. Somax’s trivial yet symbolically significant story about the griddle-cakes represents a moment of anagnorisis for Priam, wherein the shared bond of humanity in fatherhood allows Priam to obtain insight, and progressively grow as a human and as a leader. This incident fuels the journey to appeal to Achilles “man to man”, Priam’s insight into the power of empathy allows him to appeal to their shared bond as suffering fathers.

Just as Priam goes to Achilles “as a father”, using their common quality, fatherhood, to further understand each other, Mandela, too, emphasises the point that you must “know [your] enemy before [you] c[an] prevail against him” and thus he “learned their language, read their books, their poetry”. Mandela attempts to unite Black and white South Africans, despite the mutual animosity and distrust fostered by decades of apartheid. Black and White South Africans share almost nothing in common, with significant cultural and societal barriers to their reconciliation, including different dialects. Rugby emerges as the most poignant manifestation of this divide as the White South Africans support their national team, but the black south Africans barrack for the opposing side. The scene wherein Pienarr and Mandela meet over tea is symbolic of this sentiment of fostering unity amongst deep divisions. President Mandela literally hunches over to pour the tea for Pienaar, this inversion of status demonstrates his willingness to reduce his dignity as a superior and speak with Pienarr, and by extension, white south Africans, on an equal level, modelling an example of how race relations in his nation should be carried out. This equality is also symbolised by the passing of the tea to Pienaar, the close up shot where both arms of the individuals are depicted on an equal level reinforces this sense of mutual equality and respect, extolling the virtues of empathy and integrity as a uniting force.

Leadership and Sacrifice

Mandela and Priam symbolise how leadership must inevitably entail familial sacrifices. Both leaders self-identify with their nation and people. Priam embodies Troy itself, his body is the ‘living map’ of the kingdom.  The ‘royal sphere’ he embodies is constrained by customs and tradition, full of symbolic acts that separate him from the mortal world. To an extent, these royal obligations and ritual suffocate Priam’s individuality and he is unable to show his true nature, or connect with his family in the way he would desire to. He regards intimate relationships with his children as “women’s talk” that “unnerves him” as it is not “his sphere”. This articulation of the disassociation of the “royal sphere” with natural human bonds of family reveals the secondary role that family and love must take when one’s role as a leader is paramount. Similarly, Mandela claims “I have a very big family. Forty-two million people”. Unlike Priam, Mandela seeks human connection, predicating his leadership on democratic ideals. This takes a physical and emotional toll, as shown by Mandela’s collapse in his driveway. The cost of leadership here is evident, as Mandela has effectively sacrificed his family for the good of his nation. His strained relationship with his daughter Zindzi further reinforces this, as she disapproves of Mandela reaching out to Pienarr, likening him to one of the white “policeman who forced (her) out of her home”, showing the disconnect between father and daughter due to the sacrifices necessitated by Mandela’s life of leadership, including his 27 year imprisonment.

Fatherhood and Masculinity

In ‘Ransom’ Malouf presents an enclosed, limited and unemotional masculine world, with particularly stringent expectations for men’s behaviour. This is a world characterised by war, wherein the expectations of violent masculinity are paramount. In presenting Achilles inside of “a membrane stretched to a fine transparency”, Malouf reveals the constant tension between the emotional, domestic human nature inside Achilles and the hierarchical violent external society that he is expected to abide by, revealing the constricting nature that the society has on defining men’s actions. Malouf uses words like “knotted” and “rope-like” when describing Achilles’ muscles, implying that his conventional great strength, the source of his fearsome reputation, represents a confinement that the society enforces on him and other men. Further, through a degree of compassion, Priam is able to touch the “sore spot whose ache he has long repressed” in Achilles, a symbol of the emotions that have been supressed by the dominant patriarchal nature of this society.

Whilst the world of ‘Invictus’ is less overtly masculine and patriarchal, the narrative of the film is primarily focused on the male experiences, with female characters assuming a largely secondary role. Zindzi’s strained relationship with her father exemplifies the sacrifices involved in leadership. Whilst Mandela is seen to have sacrificed a close connection with his daughter, this is suggested to be in service of the nation, “I have a big family. Forty two million people”.

Character analysis and comparison

Character analysis/Comparison

Priam

- aging king of troy

- individuality has been subsumed by the ceremonial functions of his high position

- self-identifies with nation

- life of obligation

- foregoes convention and embraces chance with his proposal to offer ransom for his son’s body

- becomes more attuned to the natural world

- gains a greater appreciation of his true self as a man, rather than a symbolic figurehead

Mandela

- historic figure, symbol of peace

- spent 27 years in prison for sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the government while he was trying to gain civil rights for all south Africans

- tackled institutionalised racism, poverty and inequality

- suffered under apartheid

- pursues reconciliation, prepared to face down calls for retribution

- in his speech to the sports council, he defends the traditions of the people who persecuted him

- interacts easily with people of all social standings

- charismatic, in touch with the people

 Comparison

- embody essential role that leadership plays in achieving just resolutions to conflict

- sacrifice family for leadership

- illustrate that effective leadership takes a toll on the individual

- exemplify that reconciliation requires unexpected and difficult acts. Such as Mandela’s embrace of the Springboks and Priam’s appeal to Achilles “man to man”

- both show effective leadership involves expressing empathy and understanding the humanity of your enemies

Literary and cinematic techniques

Invictus

- In one of the first scenes in Mandela’s office after he is elected President, Eastwood strategically frames the racial segregation and tension between the two groups via the mise-en-scene; they stand on separate sides of the room, wearing distinctly different clothing and calling Mandela either “Mr President” or “Madiba”, representative of their own identity. The lingering tension between the two groups permeates the entirety of the film, and the microcosm of the bodyguards acts as a symbol of the chasm within the wider nation.

- The deeply symbolic scene wherein Mandela and Pienaar have tea, Eastwood strategically uses a close up shot to frame the passing of the tea cup so that both arms of the individuals are depicted on the same level, reinforcing this sense of mutual equality and respect. It is this sharing of hope that ignites Pienaar to reciprocate Mandela’s egalitarian actions. As Pienaar brings a ticket for Eunice, recognising that “there’s a fourth” family member, he mimics Mandela’s value that “no one is invisible”. Consequently, it is demonstrated that regardless of skin colour, characters reciprocate Mandela’s empathy and compassion, revealing the limitless power such human qualities to reach across the boundaries of division.

- The wide shot of the passing of the trophy from Mandela to Pienaar is framed against the large crowd, metaphorically representing South Africa’s support with the unity of the black and whites, reflecting Mandela’s desire to “meet black aspirations and quell white fears”. Their diegetic cheers work to create the idyllic depiction of the lasting power of this change, implying the true limitless nature of hope in their society.

‍

Learn more through Caleb (English study score 47) about Invictus Film Technique Analysis - How Can I Write About It?

Ransom

- Priam’s moment of anagnorisis in which he discovers the concept of “chance”, marks the beginning of his enactment of change through the power of hope. Despite his family who wishes that he would “spare [himself of] this ordeal”, Priam’s vision guides him to overcome familial and societal obstacles in pursuit of reconciliation.

- Symbol: Griddlecakes – represent pleasure in common things, but also the growing realisation within Priam of his distance from such pleasures. The love and care with with Somax’s daughter cooked the cakes has a value that surpasses the conventional riches associated with the ruling elite. This is a catalyst for a moment of realisation for Priam.

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

Background

Arthur Miller’s disturbing play The Crucible, bluntly comments on the horrors of a society infiltrated with mass fear and hysteria. Written as a parallel to the late 17th century Salem witch trials in Massachusetts, Miller illustrates how conflict can tear a community apart and leave dire consequences upon its people.  In 1692, Salem was a puritan society that viewed witchcraft as a taboo. When a group of young girls fell ill, each with symptoms of hallucinations and bizarre behaviour, Salem was driven to a state of panic believing that witchcraft was the culprit. A frantic search began to determine who was to blame for performing witchcraft, which lead to a series of accusations from one Salem citizen to another.

Driven by fear, the conflict worsened when the authorities began searching for the perpetrator. Miller highlights the dangers that arise when a theocracy reacts to such fear with its own extreme religious beliefs. Government officials treated several people with intimidation and coercion to confess to crimes regardless of insufficient or questionable evidence. This societal conflict developed into personal conflicts as many of these baseless accusations resulted in innocent people being incarcerated and punished with the death sentence. Ironically, in order to avoid imprisonment, many of the innocent obliged with the government’s terms and confessed to crimes they had never committed. They were then excused from sentence, as it was believed that their ‘confession’ displayed they were no longer under the influence of the devil and possessed an awareness of the sins they had committed.

The Salem situation is starkly linked to McCarthyism, a term inspired by U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy during an anti-communist scare in mid 20th century. His actions effectively led thousands of Americans to be subjected to interrogation and various forms of punishment, although in many cases evidence against these Americans was less than substantial. Even those who merely hinted sympathy towards pro-communists would be treated as traitors. Much alike Salem, a picture of frenzy and paranoia lasted in America for a number of years, resulting in over a hundred peoples’ conviction.

The play highlights how a society so quickly gripped with hysteria can disintergrate – a timeless demonstration warning us of the frailties of any society.

Setting/Time

Salem, Massachusetts from 1692 when initial accusations surfaced to the release of the convicted in 1693.

Act 1

Plot

The play begins with Reverend Parris’s daughter Betty, who lies sick in bed presumably unconscious. Parris is overwhelmed with worry, waiting to hear of Betty’s diagnosis from Doctor Griggs. When Grigg’s messenger Susanna Walcott delivers the message that there are ‘no medications in [Grigg’s] books’ [pg 18] to cure her symptoms, a distressed Parris refuses to believe the suggestion that Betty’s illness may be the cause of ‘unnatural things.’ Despite his adamant denial in front of Susanna, the moment after she departs he questions his niece Abigail, about her and Betty dancing in the woods last night. Abigail plays innocent and rejects his allegations of any involvement in witchcraft. Parris inquires if Abigail’s reputation is indeed, unblemished. Abigail was under town residents, John and Elizabeth Proctor’s service as a servant for some time. However, Abigail was released due to a conflict undisclosed to the public, yet rumours are present that at church Elizabeth will no longer ‘sit so close to something soiled.’ [pg 20] Abigail’s excuse for her discharge is due to Elizabeth’s bitter hatred towards her because she won’t work like a slave. Parris interrogation of Abigail is focused on preserving his reputation rather than the forbidden actions of the young girls. He believes that ‘surely my enemies will…drive me from my pulpit’ [pg 19] if they discovered his connection with the suspected witchcraft that caused his Betty’s illness. He has asked Reverend Hale, a specialist in the field of ascertaining witchcraft, to drop by Salem and inspect for the Devil’s presence.

Talk of witchcraft infiltrating the town leads to a group of gatherers outside Parris’s home. Mrs. Putnam enters with her husband Thomas declaring that her child Ruth, like Betty is inanimate. She explains that seven of her babies would die ‘the very night of their birth’ [pg 23] and that there must be a supernatural cause. She explains that her suspicions of someone cursing her children led her to visit Tituba, Parris’s slave, who can ‘speak to the dead.’ Abigail, aware that Mrs. Putnam’s story has risen suspicions in Parris that the girls may have in fact conjured spirits the night before, confesses that Tituba and Ruth performed a summon in the woods, however avoids implicating herself. Mercy Lewis, Putnam’s servant enters and declares that Ruth gave a ‘powerful sneeze,’ [pg 24] a strong sign of life returning to her. In order to alleviate fear from the crowd downstairs, Parris leaves to begin a psalm. The Putnam’s depart to join the psalm as well.

With only Mercy present, Abigail’s innocent façade disappears, revealing that along with Tituba and Betty, both girls likewise participated in witchcraft. Another young girl, Mary Warren, who is now the new servant for the Proctor’s, enters with considerable apprehension and pleads to Abigail that they must admit to their wrongdoings. It is apparent that there were multiple girls who were a part of the ‘klatch.’ [pg 39] Abigail explains that she already confessed to Parris all their activities last night. Betty however, coincidentally springs into life screaming that Abigail didn’t divulge to Parris that she had cursed to kill Elizabeth Proctor. The room evolves into chaos, with Betty crying for her dead mother and wishing to fly. She then tearfully collapses in bed. Abigail consequently composes herself and threatens the girls not to express another word about what happened the night before or she will personally ’make [them] wish [they] had never seen the sun go down.’ [pg 27]

Proctor’s entrance to Parris’s home is coupled with disbelief when he sees Mary present. He rebukes her for disobeying his orders since he has explicitly forbidden her to leave his house while she has work to complete. Ashamed, Mary departs and Mercy soon after excuses herself, leaving Abigail alone with him.

Abigail shares with Proctor the frivolity of Betty’s sickness, ‘she took fright, is all.’ [pg 28] Devilishly, she reveals that she engaged with witchcraft in the woods. The conversation between the two unveils a past love affair, ‘you clutched my back…and sweated like a stallion.’ [pg 29] From Abigail’s now seductive and mischievous behaviour towards Proctor, it is evident she still desires his company. Tempting Proctor, Abigail states that she’s has been ‘waitin’ for [him] every night.’ [pg 28] However, he stands strong and refuses to reignite their affair since he is burdened with guilty for betraying his beloved wife.

The voices from the psalm led by Parris travel upstairs. The words, ‘going up to Jesus’ [pg 30] triggers Betty into a wild state – screaming and crying. This prompts Parris, Mercy Lewis and the Putnam’s to come rushing in. A frantic Parris orders Mercy to call for the doctor. Mrs. Putnam believes that Betty’s terror -stricken behaviour is a result of her being possessed by the supernatural, as she cannot ‘bear to hear the Lord’s’ [pg 31] name.

Rebecca Nurse enters, an elderly lady highly respected in the community. Parris turns to her for help, unsure how to aid Betty. Giles Corey, another senior neighbour drops by, interested in Betty’s supernatural ‘flying’, a rumour which has spread around town. Through her tenderness, Rebecca calms Betty merely by standing over the child. Her diagnosis for Betty and Ruth’s change in behaviour is merely due to their ‘silly seasons.’ [pg 32] Parris comments on the belief that the ‘Devil may be among us’ in the community, eliciting a response from Rebecca that Reverend Hale’s visit is unnecessary and a Doctor is quite adequate in caring for the children.

Parris’s apparent lack of judgment when deciding to call Hale provokes a dispute amongst the men regarding Parris’s ‘sixty-six pound’ [pg 34] salary. Proctor questions if it is really necessary for six pounds worth of wood be sent to Parris’s home, especially since he is the first preacher in Salem to demand so. Due to Proctor’s clear resentment towards him, Parris furiously proclaims that Proctor’s ‘followers’ [pg 35] should be told that they are not ‘Quakers.’ Proctor’s response, ‘I must find [these followers] and join it’ astounds the room.

The quarrel over money initiates another argument between Proctor and Giles. While Proctor contends his lumber is gathered on his grounds, Giles opposes his notion, asserting that his grandfather willed that land to him. Proctor laughs off Giles theory, amused that Giles grandfather declared ownership of land that ‘never belonged to him.’ [pg 36]

Hale arrives at Parris’s home carrying a heavy stack of books that will assist his investigation in seeking out the devil. Mrs. Putman begins sharing her story of the seven dead newborns to Hale. With the belief that Hale’s duty in Salem is redundant, Rebecca leaves with a ‘note of moral superiority.’ [pg 43] Giles comments on his inability to pray while his wife, Martha reads ‘strange books’ at night. He inquires to Hale why this is so since the moment Martha finishes reading and leaves their home, he can resume his prayers. Hale asserts to Giles that Martha’s behaviour is odd and he will investigate it further.

Meanwhile, Hale attempts to extract information from spiritless Betty. In order to awake her, he recites a Latin prayer; presumably from his intellectual books with no prevail. Hale turns to question Abigail about the dancing in the words. When questioned if there was a frog cooked during the dance Abigail, caught of guard deflects the blame onto Tituba, ‘she made me do it!’ [pg 45] Tituba enters with Mrs. Putnam. Hearing Abigail blame her, Tituba denies these accusations declaring that Abigail ‘beg me to conjour!’ [pg 46] The group’s reaction, ‘this women must be hanged’ assumes Tituba as the perpetrator. Tituba is subject to a wave of questions about her ‘alliance’ with the Devil. In religious spirit, Hale demands whether or not Tituba is a ‘good Christian woman.’ [pg 47] She desperately cries that she is a good woman, and confesses with submissive answers to Hale. She avows Sarah Good also accompanied the Devil. Mrs. Putnam sees ‘truth’ in this since Sarah was a midwife to her dead newborns on three occasions. Abigail also begins to surrender names of other women in Salem, realising that Tituba has saved herself from the repercussions of her sins merely by confessing. Betty likewise catches on, and Act I concludes with the girls denouncing several residents of Salem as accomplices with the Devil.

Analysis

The play begins with a commentary on social values and the strong influence religious beliefs carry in the Salem community. The puritans lead an extremely conservative life as ‘nothing broke into [their] strict and somber’ daily activities. Their accordance with a strict moral code included eschewing from ‘vain enjoyment’ such as attending the theatre and celebrating Christmas, to spending their holiday time praying. They also believe that participation in witchcraft or consorting with the Devil is a dire sin. This strong adherence to Christianity resulted in the puritans having a meticulously controlled way of life, void of any involvement with the supernatural. Thus, when rumours of witchcraft surged into Salem, their stable lives were thrown into chaos since they had neither previous exposure nor experience in dealing with the conflict. Instead of using reason and sensibility, their naivety in the situation resulted in an overall reaction of fear and madness.

The puritans’ inability to handle the conflict is demonstrated through the crowd gathered at Parris’s home, in search of answers from a higher power. Blinded by their trepidation, people begin to believe unrealistic things that they would normally disregard. When the girls were ‘bewitched,’ people assumed that it was a fact because it was easier to indulge in their fears, rather than confront the truth that perhaps there was no supernatural cause. Using Betty’s bewitchment as an excuse, Mrs. Putnam fed her own fears by convincing herself that it was the supernatural that had murdered her babies. In the presence of a conflict, the people’s hysteria only helped in perpetrating the problem to the point where countless people were being accused of committing crimes.

The mass societal and religious conflict also generated many personal conflicts for the people in Salem. Reputation has a highly significant influence in the puritan’s lives. As part of a small town, where everyone hears and sees everyone else’s affairs, the slightest criticism can ruin any reputation. Threatened by his daughter’s association with the supernatural, Parris possesses a protective attitude towards his status because he believes that his enemies will use the incriminating information against him. His inner conflict stems from his history, where he ‘cut a villianious path.’ [pg 13] However, he has now gained the respect to position himself as the reverend in Salem. His apprehension is apparently more prominent than his concern for Betty, since he illustrates greater interest in interrogating Abigail about her supernatural activities in the woods. His self-preservation is motivated by his paranoia that the presence of evil is there to destroy him. Being in a position of authority, his paranoia is instilled in parishioners by leading a psalm during the fear, rather than urging calmness from the community. He is also easily convinced by Tituba’s testimony, as seen when he appeals her to confess her sins, which further escalates the conflict. His obsession with damnation helps instigate the Salem witch hunts as he believes that without a doubt, there is a supernatural existence in town.

Although challenged with identical circumstances, people often react and behave differently than others. While Parris’s encounter with conflict results in him desperately calling for Hale, Rebecca Nurse represents a respectable character who maintains her rationality during conflict. Her diagnosis of Betty in her ‘silly season’, [pg 32] meaning that the child is merely suffering from a hysterical fit rather than being bewitched ultimately proves to be true. Likewise, Proctor sees no reason why Hale should be recruited, especially since Parris failed to consult the wardens. In the identical situation where both men are faced with conflict, Parris exaggerates the frightening situation by declaring that ‘children dyin’ in the village,’ [pg 33] hence the reason for Hale’s visit. Proctor on the other hand, blatantly points out that no children have died in town and that Parris is without substantiation, blaming hell for Betty’s state.

Inner conflict is inescapable for John Proctor who is introduced as a ‘sinner…against his own vision of decent conduct.’ [pg 27] His extramarital affair with Abigail has left him burdened with guilt and shame since he has betrayed his wife, as well as himself in the process. Regardless of the fact that he has successfully hidden his indiscretion from the public, Proctor views himself as ‘a kind of fraud,’ because his moral consciousness prevents him from holding his head high in the town. Even when Abigail seductively flatters and humours Proctor, his admirable strength in maintaining his emotional and physical distance from Abigail demonstrates his determination to save his marriage with Elizabeth.

Conversely, Abigail appears to possess no sense of remorse for her part in the affair. Her disregard towards Proctor’s marriage by attempting to seduce him even after their affair has ended highlights her self-interest and lack of consideration for others. Abigail’s open hatred towards Elizabeth, ‘she is a cold, sniveling woman’ [pg 30] illustrates her attempts to manipulate Proctor by portraying herself as a victim to gain his affection. Her conniving behaviour is also used on the young girls who were also present in the woods. Much of the hysterical conflict that develops in Salem can be traced back to Abigail. Her dominance over the other girls coerces them to follow her actions, especially when she begins to denounce the women of Salem. In a town where people viewed children as being ‘thankful for being permitted to walk straight….mouths shut until bidden to speak,’ [pg 13] the girl’s deceptions were without hesitation considered to be truthful. Since Abigail is only a child, her characterisation of herself as a victim of witchcraft fools many in Salem, especially Hale who is invited to the town to seek out the Devil.

Conflict can cause people to act in a desperate manner in order to protect themselves. When criticised for being involved with witchcraft, Abigail, Tituba and Betty accuse many women in the Salem community for affiliating with the Devil. By deflecting blame onto others, this protects them from condemnation since they helped to expose others engaged with the supernatural. As seen in later parts of the play, the girls’ action in turn triggered numerous personal conflicts, for even the innocent are denounced.

Act I signifies a mass societal conflict in Salem gaining momentum due to the community’s manifestation of fear.

Act 2

Plot

Eight weeks has passed since the girls’ frantic confessions. Proctor returns from the farm for dinner.  His dull conversation topics with Elizabeth about food and flowers are awkward, demonstrating that their relationship still suffers from the repercussions of Proctor and Abigail’s affair seven months ago. Proctor is vexed when he learns of Mary going to Salem, yet again defying his direct orders forbidding her to go into town. He cannot understand why Elizabeth, as Mary’s employer, lacks the courage to enforce the rules of the home. She defends herself, explaining that Mary is now an ‘official of the court.’ [pg 53] In the two months, Salem has constructed a court with ‘weighty magistrates’ with the Deputy Governor of the Province at the head. Fourteen people have been incarcerated for their association with the Devil. Unlike people who insist on their innocence, those who confess their crimes to the court and denounce others in the process ironically avoid the death sentence. Abigail is now treated like a ‘saint’ during hearings. The accused are brought before Abigail and other girls, with their future sentence based on whether or not the girls break out into hysteric cries of ‘witch’. Proctor calls this ‘black mischief’ since it is evident that Abigail is manipulating the court. Elizabeth begs Proctor to visit Salem and instill some sense of reason to its people. His hesitation sparks an argument between the two. While Elizabeth believes his reaction is due to his affection for Abigail, a weary Proctor argues that he merely has no proof that Abigail is a fraud.

Their dispute halts when Mary Warren enters. Proctor, furious at her transgression threatens her with a whipping if she ever dares to leave the house again. Her docile behaviour is odd, especially when she hands Elizabeth a doll as a gift. Mary declares, ‘we must all love each other now’ [pg 56] and starts for her room. Proctor questions Mary concerning the validity of fourteen people’s sentences. Breaking down, she responds that number has now reached thirty-nine. She cries that one of those sentenced to death is Goody Osburn. When asked by the Deputy Governor to recite the Ten Commandments, Osburn was unable to express even one of the Commandments. Sarah Good was also accused but has avoided death sentence because she confessed to a compact with Lucifer. Proctor wonders how this could be true, knowing the good nature of Sarah Good. However Mary says it is so, since Sarah sent her evil spirit out and almost choked the people of the court to death.

Proctor, still irate towards Mary, demands her obedience in the household. Mary retaliates, revealing that she saved Elizabeth’s life in court. Her defense for Elizabeth, saying that she ‘never see no sign [Elizabeth] ever sent [her] spirit out’ [pg 59] prevented Elizabeth from incarceration. This revelation shocks the Proctors. Mary exhausted and ‘dissatisfied’ heads to her room.

Elizabeth deduces that the emergence of her name in court is the work of Abigail who ‘wants me dead’ so she can become Proctor’s wife. Elizabeth questions why Proctor has never shown Abigail some form of contempt in order to discourage her desires for him. Proctor defends himself, contending that he shouldn’t need to if Elizabeth were to trust him.

Suddenly, they realize that Hale is at the doorway. Unlike the first impressions of a headstrong and confident man, eight weeks later Hale’s stance has changed to ‘deference’ and ‘even guilt.’ [pg 61] Hale explains to the couple that his appearance is not on behalf of the court but of his own accord. He feels this is necessary because he is new to the town, and wishes to familiarise himself with its people. Proctor has a damaged record for the courts since he has been absent from church, ploughed on Sundays and has one child that is yet to be baptised. In an attempt to gain understanding of Proctor’s devotion to Christianity, Hale asks him to recite the Ten Commandments. Although nervous and hesitantly, Proctor pronounces nine of ten. Elizabeth helps him with the tenth commandment, ‘thou shalt not commit adultery.’ [pg 64] Aware that he has failed to establish a positive impression to Hale, Proctor asserts that ‘there be no love for Satan in this house.’ [pg 65] Hale prepares to leave, and due to Elizabeth’s appeals, Proctor reveals that Abigail confided in him that the girls participated in witchcraft one night in the woods. Hale, shocked at Proctor’s words but less surprised at this possibility, asks Proctor to testify in court. Proctor agrees.

Giles Corey and Francis Nurse appear announcing that both of their wives have been taken. Francis reveals that Rebecca’s sentence was due to claims of a  ‘supernatural murder of Goody Putnam’s babies.’ [pg 67] Giles’s wife, Martha was sentence due to Walcott’s charge against her that he was unable to keep his newly bought pig alive due to her supernatural influences.

Ezekiel Cheever and Marshal Herrick arrive on behalf of the court with a warrant to arrest Elizabeth. The charge came from Abigail, who had two needles struck deep into her stomach. Cheever asks if Elizabeth owns any poppets, and Elizabeth brings over the poppet Mary sewed her. Cheever draws a long needle from the poppet and concludes that Elizabeth’s spirit must have stabbed Abigail. Due to this outrageous accusation Proctor demands that Mary is bought down to prove his wife innocent. Mary confesses that the poppet was a gift to Elizabeth, and that Susanna Walcott and Abigail are witnesses since she sewed it in court. Proctor rips the warrant, furiously refusing to let his wife be taken away. Herrick explains that there is no other alternative as he is bound by law. There are nine men waiting outside to arrest her. Elizabeth yielding to their requests walks out the door with her head held high. Proctor turns his anger on Hale, disgusted that his cowardice towards the court is allowing many innocent people being imprisoned. Proctor orders everyone out of his home, leaving only Mary. Proctor peremptorily insists that Mary comes with him to court in order to tell the truth. Mary cries that she cannot do so, since Abigail threatened that if she did, Proctor would be charged with lechery. The act ends with Proctor hopeless against the truth, which is ‘naked now.’ [pg 75]

Analysis

Proctor and Elizabeth’s relationship is clearly strained. The uncomfortable small talk between husband and wife highlights how both are conflicted towards one another. Proctor’s guilty conscience drives him to behave carefully around Elizabeth. He attempts to please her by commenting on her good cooking skills. He also refrains from ‘full condemnation’ [pg 53] of her when he learns that Mary Warren has yet again returned to Salem under her watch. Meanwhile, Elizbaeth has developed a sense of coldness towards her husband. When he kisses her, she merely ‘receives it’, [pg 52] unable to demonstrate any affection. Her suspicions of Proctor still longing for Abigail appear to be omnipresent since she has reached the point where ‘she… has lost all faith in him.’ [pg 54] In what would normally be a minor mistake, a lengthy feud is sparked between the two when Proctor mentions that he and Abigail were in a room alone, and not with a crowd as stated earlier. Through their retorts to one another, it is clear that an argument is the only avenue through which they are able to express their true emotions and thoughts. Although both endeavour to amend their relationship, their suffering prevents them from sealing their gulf of separation.

Conflict can often change a person’s perspective; such is the case with Hale. His entrance depicts a ‘deferent’ [pg 61] man, which is starkly different from the proud and pompous man first introduced to the play. Although regarded as a specialist in the field of uncovering the supernatural, Hale had never encountered a witch prior to his visit to Salem. In the prose describing Hale, it is mentioned that his closest experience to a witch was a woman that appeared to be casting spells upon a young child. Nevertheless, the witch turned out to be a ‘mere pest’ [pg 37] with no supernatural powers. His assurance when meeting with Parris that ‘we cannot look to superstition in this. The Devil is precise’ [pg 41] is a factor that drives the town to paranoia. However, his first real exposure to the insanity formed amongst the puritans when attempting to find witches causes him to change his demeanour since things are not as ‘precise’ as he believed his job to be. The action of the courts conflicts with his moral judgment, as multiple respectable women are being charged with possessing occult powers. This has widened his perspective, as seen when he visits the Proctor’s home on his behalf and not the court, in order to gain an understanding of the Proctors. Over the past eight weeks, his exposure to mayhem has ultimately altered his perspective.

In such a tightly-knitted community, where nowadays, their town which would barely be considered a village, everybody minded ‘other people’s business.’ [pg 14] Yet due to their conservative nature, people acted politely and respectfully towards one another. This lead to years of growing jealously and personal grudges buried and kept quiet amongst the people in Salem. Therefore, when the supernatural conflict spread throughout town, people’s resentment for others also surfaced since the people were looking for someone to blame. People began to accuse those they despised so that they would achieve personal revenge. Walcott’s charge against Martha Corey is evidently powered with malevolence. Due to his inability to obtain his money back when a pig, which he bought from Martha, had died, his obtains vengeance by declaring that she used her supernatural powers to kill the pig. Rebecca Nurse’s incarceration also highlights the absurdity the Putnam’s claims since she is ‘the very brick and mortar of the church.’ Many of the people in Salem use to assert their own personal attacks upon others. This fuels the hysteria in Salem even further, and only the people of Salem can be blamed.

Act 3

Plot

At the Salem meeting house, which is used as the General Court, Martha Corey pleads her innocence to Judge Hathorne. Giles interrupts the prosecution exclaiming that Thomas Putnam is accusing anyone who has large tract of land so that he can purchase it for himself when the owner is imprisoned. Extremely displeased with Giles’s disrespect for court proceedings, Hathorne orders his arrest; Giles yells he has proof. This causes excitement and chatter in the courtroom.

Hathorne, Deputy Governor Danforth, Hale and Parris meet with Giles and Francis in the anteroom to deal with the controversy. Giles explains that he only questioned why his wife read so many books, not to insinuate her as a witch. Danforth dismisses Giles’s ‘proof’ since only ‘evidence in proper affidavit’ [pg 79] are be accepted. Francis asserts that the girls are frauds who manipulate the court, but this only offends Danforth due to his confidence in personally bringing justice to Salem by sentencing seventy-two people.

Proctor enters the anteroom with Mary who is close to fainting. Mary weakly admits that all the girls have fabricated their stories. Bewildered at this confession, Danforth warns Proctor that if he officially carries through with this allegation, it will ‘burn a hot fire’. [pg 81] Proctor is aware of this, and contends that he is here to save his innocent wife by unveiling the truth. Parris attempts to mislead Danforth into believing that Proctor’s true intentions are to ‘overthrow the court,’ and have nothing to do with justice. Cheever obliged as an official of the court, notifies Danforth that Proctor ripped the warrant for Elizabeth, and has been absent from church. Hale supports Proctor by stating that one cannot judge a man based on such details.

Danforth reveals to Proctor that Elizabeth is pregnant. He proposes that she will live to deliver her baby if Proctor drops his charges. Although this is tempting, knowing that Giles and Francis are in an identical situation as himself, he refuses the compromise. He shows Danforth a testament of ninety-one signatures attesting to the good nature of Rebecca, Martha and Elizabeth. Danforth demands that all ninety-one people be summoned, however a frustrated Francis maintains that he promised those people that their signatures would do them no harm. Danforth orders the arrest of all ninety-one people who signed the document.

Horrified at Danforth’s reaction, the men move on to their next objection. Proctor hands Danforth a document written by Giles, contending that Putnam purposely denounced George Jacobs so that he could take Jacob’s land. Along with it is a witness’s signature. Danforth orders Putnam to come out from the court. Upon questioning, Putnam bluntly denies Giles’s allegation. Danforth asks Giles for the name of the man who witnessed Putnam saying that he had been ‘given a fair gift of land.’ [pg 87] Knowing that the witness would be sent to jail, Giles refuses. Danforth orders for Giles arrest for contempt of the court. Hale protests Danforth’s actions, highlighting that people are too scared to stand up for the innocent because they will most likely be incarcerated as well. Danforth believes that is nonsense, since those people should have no fear if they are indeed, ‘uncorrupted.’ [pg 88]

Proctor presents a disposition on Mary’s behalf. On Hale’s behest, Danforth reads the document. Signed by Mary, it states that she lied in court. Parris interjects again in an attempt to undermine Proctor’s purpose, yet Danforth demands Parris’s silence and orders Cheever to summon the girls. Susanna Walcott, Mercy Lewis, Betty Parris and Abigail enter. Danforth asks Abigail whether or not she has been lying and as expected, Abigail says she has not. Proctor informs Danforth about Abigail dancing in the woods. Danforth, unaware of this fact, incredulously asks if this is true. Hale says it is, since Parris told him so the first night he arrived in Salem. Reluctantly, Parris mumbles that she did dance.

Danforth returns his attention to Mary, and once again asks her if her accusations of people choking her and causing her to faint was fabricated. A frightened Mary replies that it ‘were a pretence.’ [pg 94] Hathorne asks if she can faint now, in order to demonstrate her deception. Mary claims that she cannot, since she isn’t in the right time and place to do so. Danforth, clearly unsure of who is the manipulator, suggests to Abigail that perhaps ‘the spirits you have seen are illusion only, some deception that may cross your mind.’ [pg 96] Abigail angrily retorts that she has ‘done my duty pointing out the Devil’s people – and this is my reward?’

Suddenly, Abigail looks around and wraps her arms around herself, claiming that a cold wind has come. The other girls follow in suit, all crying that they’re freezing cold. They yell and scream at Mary to stop her spirit from harming them. Desperately, Mary cries for them to stop pretending. Proctor, disgusted at Abigail’s pretences attacks her, yelling that she is a whore. He reveals to Danforth his affair with Abigail explaining why Abigail has reason to murder his wife. Danforth, still uncertain asks Abigail if this is true. She refuses to reply and instead, tries to flee the room but is stopped by Herrick. Danforth orders to bring Elizabeth in for questioning and instructs everyone to be silent. Proctor and Abigail are told to turn their backs away from the entrance. Herrick brings Elizabeth in. Danforth asks her why she released Abigail from her service. Elizabeth, glancing at Proctor’s back is unsure of what to say. Danforth asks her whether or not Abigail and her husband had an affair. Elizabeth hesitantly denies the incident. The room evolves into chaos. Proctor yells to Elizabeth that he has revealed the truth however the damage is done. Mary starts to hysterically yell that Proctor forced her every night to sign the Devil’s document. She runs to the other girls and together, they enter a state of hysteria. Proctor, overwhelmed with anger cries that he hears Lucifer. Danforth, bewildered and disturbed, orders both Proctor and Giles to be imprisoned. Hale in the midst of the screaming, condemns the proceedings and yells that he quits the court.

Analysis

Salem has reached a point where the distinction between innocent and guilty is obscure. Even those who are clearly innocent, for example Rebecca Nurse, are labeled guilty. The mass prosecutions over such a short period of time has left the citizens and even authorities of the court in a state of confusion as to who has in fact, committed an offence. Danforth, as the head of the court is expected to who possess good judgment even at the face of conflict. Ironically, his judgment is easily clouded by the hysteria encapsulating the town. Even though Abigail is an essential part of the trials, when Proctor asserts that she is a fraud who is manipulating the court to pursue her own motives, Danforth’s following interrogation of Abigail demonstrates his uncertainty of the truth. It is clear he is in a state of ambiguity since he attempts to obtain the truth from Proctor, Abigail and Mary. This state of doubt only perpetrates the conflict further, since denial and revile is the only form of protection under Salem’s theocracy.

Contrastingly, Hale’s growing coherence propels him to aid those suffering from the pain and loss they have endured during the trials. When Danforth dismisses Giles’s testimony, Hale objects in an attempt to explain why Giles refuses to name his informant. Although snubbed by Danforth, Hale later insists that Danforth listen to Proctor. At the start of the play, Hale was quick to condemn civilians to incarceration, however he now ‘dares not take a life without there be a proof so immaculate no slightest qualm of conscience may doubt it.’ [pg 89] The new reason and clarity in his vision demonstrates how conflict has altered his perspective. When Proctor is arrested for condemning himself, ‘I hear the boot of Lucifer, I see his filthy face!’, [pg 105] Out of shame of the terror he has helped to create, Hale’s animosity towards the court is evident as he quits the court.

While Hale intends to repair the damage he has inflicted, Abigail’s clarity drives her to exploit the town. Her unscrupulous construction of Mary’s supernatural ‘bird’ demonstrates her ability to take advantage of people’s frenzied state; knowing that the court will believe her because she is just a child. Her cunning ability to easily convince Danforth that the girls are victims of the situation highlights her callousness towards the distress she has created throughout Salem.

During the conflict, others apart from Abigail also behave in their best interest. While there are hints that Danforth can see through his unfounded sentences, he is unwilling to acknowledge his mistake by trusting the girls. In order to maintain authority, Danforth continues with his barbaric court proceedings since he recognizes that admitting a failure on behalf of the court will cause a substantial backlash. His desperation in protecting the court and himself is shown when he questions Proctor on his religious devotion in order to find some excuse to dismiss Proctor’s objection to court proceedings. Parris likewise, is still concerned about his reputation in Salem amidst the conflict. His attempts to undermine Proctor’s evidence demonstrate his interest in defending the theocracy.

If you’ve been studying John Donne’s metaphysical poetry, you’ve probably noticed that his works are riddled with different symbols and motifs. Embedded throughout his poetry, these literary devices may seem slightly abstruse to the reader. You may find yourself asking: What do they mean? And in relation to what? Even Donne’s contemporaries failed to appreciate his poetry. The neoclassical poet John Dryden rejected Donne’s works because it “affects the metaphysics” and “perplexes the minds of the fair sex with nice speculations of philosophy, when he should engage their hearts, and entertain them with the softnesses of love”.

One thing that you should understand about Donne’s romantic poetry, is that while his stark images of compasses and spheres may seem foreign to you, they were also alien to his predecessors too. So, if you’re struggling to comprehend his enigmatic poetry, not to fear! Because John Donne’s poetic peers didn’t initially get it either.

The reason for this is because Donne refused to conform to the poetic conventions of the time. The poet emerged as an idiosyncratic in the Elizabethan era, the Renaissance. Unlike his contemporaries, he didn’t employ elaborate descriptions of symbol natural landscapes, classical myths and female beauty. The reason for this was because Donne did not believe in the one-sided love and emotional frustrations that his contemporaries tried so hard to convey in such imagery.

Donne’s poetry was so different because he rejected and even openly mocked the idea of such a high-minded religious worship in literary romance. In “A Valediction Forbidding Mourning,” Donne criticises the “tear-floods” and “sigh-tempests” of the “dull sublunary lovers.”. In a similar vein, Donne satirises the “sighs” and “tears” (The Canonisation) so prevalent in Petrarchan works.

Instead, Donne advocated for a different kind of love. He espoused a love that comprised of the Body and the Soul, which was a dominant intellectual issue in the literary treatment of love in the 1590s. More specifically, Donne embraced the balance between Platonic love and the Ovidian love.

Platonic: Platonic love is essentially love that surpasses the mere sensual and physical. It is a very spiritual concept and is based on reason, affection, respect, intellect and compatibility.

Ovidian: Ovidian love

The idea of balance derived from discoveries being made about the human body during the Elizabethan era. The Renaissance was fundamentally a time of discovery (particularly in the area of science). Elizabethans believed that elements in the body needed to be balanced,

Top Tip: When you’re analysing John Donne’s poetry and writing essays, be aware of Donne’s overarching message in his romantic poetry. Most explanations about his use transcendent relationship with his lover is thus determined by obtaining a balance between the spiritual and earthly pleasures. Most examination questions will leave room for to discuss the connection between the material and the divine world! Make sure to understand this, because this is a huge component to his poetry.

Good luck!

‍

Whether you consider yourself a Frankenstein expert, or someone who is a bit taken back by the density of the novel and Shelley’s writing, do not fret! Below I will outline 3 tips which, will hopefully give you a clearer perspective on how to approach writing on Frankenstein! Let’s get started!

1. ALWAYS TRY TO TALK ABOUT SHELLEY’S CONCERNS

Since the book was set during the Age of Enlightenment and the Romantic era, Shelley essentially used Frankenstein as a vessel to criticise and warn readers against many of the values upheld during her era. It’s therefore crucial that you address this!

The late 18th century and the first decades of the 19th century were exciting times for science and exploration. Shelley’s two main protagonists, Walton and Frankenstein, both passionately sough to discover what had previously been hidden. Walton wanted to be the first to find a passage through the Arctic Circle; Frankenstein wanted to be the first to create manmade life, to uncover the mysteries of Nature.  Both men claimed to be desirous of benefitting humankind but both wanted glory more. This obsession to win accolades for their discoveries will destroy Victor, and turn Walton for a while into a hard taskmaster over his crew.

Juxtaposed against these two characters is Henry Clerval. Clerval, too, has an inquiring mind but he also cares about humanity, family and friends. He represents the balanced human being who is sociable, compassionate, intelligent and loyal to his friends. Victor’s ability to reanimate the dead, to bring to life his gigantic Creature using the newly discovered electricity, makes him a genius but also a monster. In his inexperience he botches the work producing a hideous and terrifying creature with, ironically, initially all the virtues of the ideal man of he world. Repulsed by his amateurish handiwork, Victor abandons his creation, setting in place the vengeance that will unfold later.

Try to ground any response to Shelley’s text in the enormous enthusiasm for new discoveries and new geographic phenomena that attracted lavish praise for those who went where others feared to tread. It was this praise that drove Walton and Frankenstein to exceed reasonable expectations becoming reckless and careless of the consequences of their actions.

2. ALWAYS TRY TO DRAWS LINKS AND CONTRAST DIFFERENT CHARACTERS AND THEMES!

Walton, Frankenstein and the Creature are interconnected in so many ways – whether it be their isolation, ambition, desire for companionship, desire for vengeance or the Romantic values they share. I’ve also noted that it is also really easy to connect themes in Frankenstein as the tragic story-arc of the novel is built upon many different causes. What I mean by this is that there is a clearly define relationship between isolation, ambition and vengeance (and ultimately tragedy) in the sense that isolation is what led to the brewing of unchecked ambition which essentially causes the resultant tragedy.

Take Frankenstein for example: having left his loving family and friends, who provided him with love and companionship for Ingolstadt, there was no one to hold him back from his natural tendencies towards unchecked ambitions, leading him to creating the monster who out of spite towards society kills all of Frankenstein’s loved ones, leading them towards the desire for mutual destruction. Being able to see these links and draw them together will not only add depth to your writing but it also arms you with the ability to be able to deal with a wider array of prompts.

‍

3. ALWAYS TRY TO LOOK FOR MORE NUANCED EXAMPLES AND DISCUSSIONS!

While Walton, Frankenstein and the Creature can be discussed incredibly thoroughly (and by all means go ahead and do it), but it is also very important to consider the novel as a whole and talk about, if not more thoroughly, on the minor characters. While characters such as the De Laceys, villagers and the rustic in the forest can be used to highlight the injustices brought upon the creature and people’s natural instincts of self preservation and prejudice, innocent characters such as Elizabeth and Justine can be used to emphasise the injustice of society and the consequences of unchecked ambition and isolation.

Henry Clerval (like previously mentioned) can be contrasted against Walton and his best friend Frankenstein to show that as long as we have a balanced lifestyle and companionship, ambition will not lead us to ruin. Characters such as the Turkish merchant can also have parallels drawn with Frankenstein in telling how our selfish desire and actions, born out of inconsideration for their consequences, can backfire with great intensity. Lastly the character of Safie (someone I used a lot in my discussions) can be compared and contrasted with the Creature to show the different treatment they receive despite both being “outsiders” to the De Laceys due to their starkly different appearances.

Mentioning these characters and utilising these contrasts can be monumental in showing your understanding of the novel and by extension, your English analytical ability.

[Video Transcription]

‍
Hey guys, I'm Lisa, welcome back to Lisa's Study Guides. Today, we're going to be talking about Frankenstein and breaking down an essay topic for it. So in the past, I've done plenty of videos looking at different types of essay topics and breaking them down by looking at keywords and then going into the body paragraphs and looking at those ideas. This time round, the takeaway message that I want you to leave with is understanding what types of evidence you should be using inside your body paragraphs. Specifically, I wanted to talk about literary devices or metalanguage. Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein uses so many literary devices that it's impossible to ignore. If you are somebody who is studying this text or other texts that you use and are heavily embedded with literary techniques, then it's really important that you don't just use dialogue as part of your quotes, but actually reading between the lines. I'll teach you on how it's not just about finding dialogue, which you include as quotes inside your body paragraphs, but reading between the lines, so looking at literary devices like metaphors, symbols, imagery, so let's get started.

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein constitutes escaping critique of the prioritization of scientific advancement over human welfare and relationship. Dr. Frankenstein is fascinated with science and discovery, he is consumed with the idea of a new and more noble race by stitching up dead body parts from a cemetery. He feverishly works away at his experiment until one day the creature is born. Frankenstein is horrified at the living thing he has made and completely rejects the creature, leaving it without a parental figure. The creature is left alone to look after himself. He educates himself and on repeated occasions tries to approach people in society, however, is rejected every time because of his monstrous appearance. As a result, the creature becomes enraged at humanity and Frankenstein's unfair treatment towards him and consequently exacts revenge on Frankenstein and his family.


The essay topic we'll be looking at today is, Our sympathies in this novel ultimately lie with the creature. Discuss. So in previous videos, we've looked at keywords, how to identify them and how to define them. Since it's pretty straightforward for this essay topic, I thought I would skip that part and then go into the more nitty gritty with the body paragraphs. But, if you are unfamiliar with these steps, then I'll link them in the card above and also in the description below so you can have a look at how I went ahead and did the keyword section in my planning, now back to the prompt. Unequivocally within Frankenstein, Shelley portrays sympathy as spread throughout the text through depicting the creature as innately human through his desire for relationship and the challenges he faces at the hands of the prejudice enlightenment society he's born into, Shelley elicits sympathy for his situation. However, through the notable absence of the female gender throughout the text, Shelley portrays those silent within society as most deserving of sympathy.


So, with this in mind, here are the potential paragraphs in response to this prompt. Paragraph one, Shelley's depiction of the creature as innately human motivates support for his challenges at the hands of a prejudice society. The action of the creature to open his dull yellow eye, symbolic of his nature as a human being alongside a green wrinkled on his cheeks, with one hand stretched out, indicates his simple desire for paternal connection. Through constructing the creature's actions as innately human Shelley acts proleptically of the inequitable experiences the creature will experience throughout the structural architecture of the text. And through doing so, depicts his character as worthy of support.


Similarly, through the metaphor of fire, Shelley explores the duality of progress and innovation of which the creature desires. The fire, one that gives light as well as heat, yet also causes a cry of pain, indicates the hardships of the creature in his isolation, whereby, his forced to withdraw from his desire for education. Upon viewing himself in a pool, the creature becomes "fully convinced that I was in reality [a] monster" with the consequent sensations of despondency and mortification granting the reader the opportunity to sympathize with the creature in order to indicate the intensely negative social prejudices that are inflicted upon the creature.


So you can see that we've looked at symbols of the creature's nature and the metaphor of fire to support our topic sentence. Using literary techniques is what's going to make the difference between you and another student who might be saying the same thing. Why? Because when you look at literary devices, it means that you're reading just beyond the lines, just beyond what's in front of you. You're now introducing your own interpretation, so you're looking at fire and thinking about what that means in connection to the text, and why Mary Shelley would use the term of a fire and revolve her discussion around that. So let's see how we keep doing this in the next body paragraph.


Paragraph two, Shelley indicates the significance of relationships as a key element of human nature that the creature is denied, motivating affinity from readers. In replacement of human relationships, the creature rather seeks comfort within the natural world. The metaphorical huge cloak that the creature takes refuge within indicates this, illustrative of an ecosystem, the forest allows the creator to surround himself with life. The subsequent attempts to "imitate the pleasant songs of the birds" reveals the desperate urge of the creature for companionship as he is abandoned by the paternal relationship represented by Victor Frankenstein, which forms a core of human relationships. Again, here we've discussed the metaphorical huge cloak and its connection with the forest, I strongly encourage you to have the goal of discussing at least one literary device per body paragraph. And no, there is no such thing as talking about too many literary devices because it's really just about whether or not your argument is concise and whether or not you're backing that up with evidence.


Paragraph three. However, it is Shelley's depiction of the submissive female sex within Frankenstein that becomes most deserving of sympathy. Each female character is characterized as passive, disposable, and they're serving a utilitarian function, namely as a channel of action for the male characters within the text. Notably, the complete lack of absence of Margaret Saville, functioning only as an audience for Walton's letters exemplifies this. Margaret's role within the text is simply to enable Walton to relay the story of Frankenstein and as such were the most necessary character of the texts whilst the most distant. This ironic dichotomy enables Shelley to exemplify the difficult role of the female within society, arising sympathy from the readership. Here, even the purposeful emission of a character is discussed as a language technique. So, this type of literary device definitely tops the cake because you're literally looking at what's not even there. That's definitely reading between the lines.


Frankenstein is a very complex novel, and sometimes that's what makes it a difficult text to study. But, it lends itself to many unique interpretations and it's heavily dressed with heaps of literary devices or metalanguage, however you want to call it. So, that's what makes it an absolutely fantastic text for high school students to study. If you wanted to find out more on how to nail a Frankenstein essay, then I'll link you to my blog just down below, because there are definitely more tips there to help you excel in this particular text. Thank you so much for watching, and especially even if you're not studying this text, I hope you've been able to take something away from this video. And I'm confident that you have because talking about literary devices is definitely a topic that isn't necessarily the fore front of discussion in classrooms, and it's something that a lot of people struggle with. So, I hope you are able to walk away with a new goal in sight in order to improve your English essays. So, I will see you guys next time, thank you so much for joining me, see you guys soon. Bye!