Hi,
Here are some more resources, this time focused primarily on Cormac McCarthy's prose style:
Next, I'll be posting some final notes and some very useful revision links.
Remember, I highly recommend the Connell's study guide too.
Mr M
Monday, 20 April 2015
The Road: Notes on style
Hi,
Here are some more resources, this time focused primarily on Cormac McCarthy's prose style:
Next, I'll be posting some final notes and some very useful revision links.
Remember, I highly recommend the Connell's study guide too.
Mr M
Revision: Essays on Cormac McCarthy's 'The Road'
Hi,
Now we've reached the end of the novel, I wanted to share various resources, essays and links which you might find useful for revision purposes.
First of all, here are some good articles and essays about The Road:
Now we've reached the end of the novel, I wanted to share various resources, essays and links which you might find useful for revision purposes.
First of all, here are some good articles and essays about The Road:
I'll blog again later with some more useful Road resources.
Mr M
Wednesday, 25 February 2015
September 1st 1939: A Lecture
Oh hi,
Here's a very useful analysis of Auden's September 1st 1939.
Enjoy:
Mr M
Enjoy:
Mr M
Analysis tips
Hi Y12,
Here's that mnemonic to help you think about what to do with your quotes. This is a series of ideas for the E in PEE. The first set of bullets are about analysis (zoom in) and the second set are about interpretation and evaluation (zoom out).
Not sure how I feel about it yet. Might have to adapt.
Remember: don't try to comment on all of these each time - just use whatever suits your quote.
Mr M
Here's that mnemonic to help you think about what to do with your quotes. This is a series of ideas for the E in PEE. The first set of bullets are about analysis (zoom in) and the second set are about interpretation and evaluation (zoom out).
Not sure how I feel about it yet. Might have to adapt.
Remember: don't try to comment on all of these each time - just use whatever suits your quote.
Mr M
Monday, 23 February 2015
The Road - McCarthy's style
Hi folks,
Here are a number of interpretations of the significance of McCarthy's style in The Road.
What do you think?
1. The limited linguistic palette and repetitive techniques echo the monotony of the post-apocalyptic world that is described.
2. The repetitive language echoes the idea of being on the road, constantly travelling.
3. The death of everything living – plants, trees, creatures and most other human beings – is evoked through the bleakness and ‘deadness’ of the language.
4. There is a powerfully poetic effect in the simplicity of the language. By avoiding rhetorical flourishes and elaborate language the writer makes a stronger impact. The pared down language of the narrative reflects the pared down life the characters have to live – essentials only.
5. Avoiding emotionally language and keeping it simple makes the narrative all the more emotionally engaging.
6. The pared down language of the narrative reflects the pared down life the characters have to live.
7. The limited palette makes the story more universal, a fable for all time, rather than pinning it down with lots of elaborate details describing specific places.
8. There’s something rather dull about the style that makes it hard to read and difficult to distinguish one part of the book from the next. All the events seem to merge together.
9. The lack of hyperbolic language highlights the extremity of the situation.
As I said today, you need to be ready to discuss what you know about McCarthy's language (+ structure and form) and relate it to the 'chapter' you are asked about. These general statements might help you to put together an argument about a particular section in your exam.
Mr M
Here are a number of interpretations of the significance of McCarthy's style in The Road.
What do you think?
1. The limited linguistic palette and repetitive techniques echo the monotony of the post-apocalyptic world that is described.
2. The repetitive language echoes the idea of being on the road, constantly travelling.
3. The death of everything living – plants, trees, creatures and most other human beings – is evoked through the bleakness and ‘deadness’ of the language.
4. There is a powerfully poetic effect in the simplicity of the language. By avoiding rhetorical flourishes and elaborate language the writer makes a stronger impact. The pared down language of the narrative reflects the pared down life the characters have to live – essentials only.
5. Avoiding emotionally language and keeping it simple makes the narrative all the more emotionally engaging.
6. The pared down language of the narrative reflects the pared down life the characters have to live.
7. The limited palette makes the story more universal, a fable for all time, rather than pinning it down with lots of elaborate details describing specific places.
8. There’s something rather dull about the style that makes it hard to read and difficult to distinguish one part of the book from the next. All the events seem to merge together.
9. The lack of hyperbolic language highlights the extremity of the situation.
As I said today, you need to be ready to discuss what you know about McCarthy's language (+ structure and form) and relate it to the 'chapter' you are asked about. These general statements might help you to put together an argument about a particular section in your exam.
Mr M
Sunday, 11 January 2015
(Y13) Faustus: A vs B
Hi folks,
As I'm sure you've already gathered, there are two different versions of Doctor Faustus: the A text of 1604 and the B text of 1616.
As I said last lesson, I struggle to read the opening lines of the A text, as I still expect to hear the lines that I still remember from when I studied the B text eighteen (argh!) years ago.
Compare:
A) Not marching now in fields of Thrasimene,
Where Mars did mate the Carthaginians...
B) Not marching in the fields of Thrasymene,
Where Mars did mate the warlike Carthagens...
So, why are there two texts? And what's the difference?
The A text:
The frontispiece of the 1604 quarto attributes the play to "Ch. Marl.". A second edition (A2 - 1609) is merely a reprint of the 1604 text. The text is short for an English Renaissance play, only 1485 lines long. (For comparison, Macbeth is around 2700 lines; Hamlet is over 4000).
The B text:
The 1616 quarto. This second text was reprinted in 1619, 1620, 1624, 1631, and as late as 1663.
The 1616 version omits 36 lines but adds 676 new lines, making it roughly one third longer than the 1604 version. Among the lines shared by both versions, there are some small but significant changes in wording; for example, "Never too late, if Faustus can repent" in the 1604 text becomes "Never too late, if Faustus will repent" in the 1616 text, a change that offers a very different possibility for Faustus's hope and repentance.
Comparison and theories:
A major change between texts A and B is the name of the devil summoned by Faustus. Text A states the name is generally "Mephastophilis", while the version of text B commonly states "Mephostophilis".The name of the devil is in each case a reference to the character in Faustbuch, the source work, which appeared in English translation in about 1588.
The relationship between the texts is uncertain and many modern editions print both. As an Elizabethan playwright, Marlowe had nothing to do with the publication and had no control over the play in performance, so it was possible for scenes to be dropped or shortened, or for new scenes to be added, so that the resulting publications may be modified versions of the original script.
The 1604 version (A) is believed by most scholars to be closer to the play as originally performed in Marlowe's lifetime, and the 1616 version to be a posthumous adaptation by other hands. However, some disagree, seeing the 1604 version as an abbreviation and the 1616 version as Marlowe's original fuller version. Some scholars believe the longer version, with additional scenes added by Samuel Rowley, would have been performed at the Rose Theatre, with the edited version performed when the play was taken out of London on tour - away from the resources of the Rose.
We're unlikely to ever learn the truth.
See here and here for more on the performance history and textual issues.
See the A and B texts side-by-side here.
Mr M
 |
| Arthur Darvill as Mephostopheles (Globe Theatre, 2011) |
As I'm sure you've already gathered, there are two different versions of Doctor Faustus: the A text of 1604 and the B text of 1616.
As I said last lesson, I struggle to read the opening lines of the A text, as I still expect to hear the lines that I still remember from when I studied the B text eighteen (argh!) years ago.
Compare:
A) Not marching now in fields of Thrasimene,
Where Mars did mate the Carthaginians...
B) Not marching in the fields of Thrasymene,
Where Mars did mate the warlike Carthagens...
So, why are there two texts? And what's the difference?
The A text:
The frontispiece of the 1604 quarto attributes the play to "Ch. Marl.". A second edition (A2 - 1609) is merely a reprint of the 1604 text. The text is short for an English Renaissance play, only 1485 lines long. (For comparison, Macbeth is around 2700 lines; Hamlet is over 4000).
The B text:
The 1616 quarto. This second text was reprinted in 1619, 1620, 1624, 1631, and as late as 1663.
The 1616 version omits 36 lines but adds 676 new lines, making it roughly one third longer than the 1604 version. Among the lines shared by both versions, there are some small but significant changes in wording; for example, "Never too late, if Faustus can repent" in the 1604 text becomes "Never too late, if Faustus will repent" in the 1616 text, a change that offers a very different possibility for Faustus's hope and repentance.
Comparison and theories:
A major change between texts A and B is the name of the devil summoned by Faustus. Text A states the name is generally "Mephastophilis", while the version of text B commonly states "Mephostophilis".The name of the devil is in each case a reference to the character in Faustbuch, the source work, which appeared in English translation in about 1588.
The relationship between the texts is uncertain and many modern editions print both. As an Elizabethan playwright, Marlowe had nothing to do with the publication and had no control over the play in performance, so it was possible for scenes to be dropped or shortened, or for new scenes to be added, so that the resulting publications may be modified versions of the original script.
The 1604 version (A) is believed by most scholars to be closer to the play as originally performed in Marlowe's lifetime, and the 1616 version to be a posthumous adaptation by other hands. However, some disagree, seeing the 1604 version as an abbreviation and the 1616 version as Marlowe's original fuller version. Some scholars believe the longer version, with additional scenes added by Samuel Rowley, would have been performed at the Rose Theatre, with the edited version performed when the play was taken out of London on tour - away from the resources of the Rose.
We're unlikely to ever learn the truth.
See here and here for more on the performance history and textual issues.
See the A and B texts side-by-side here.
Mr M
Sunday, 4 January 2015
Introducing The Road...
Hi,
Here's a powerpoint I put together when my Year 13s (last year's) were doing presentations about texts to do for their comparative piece.
There's a bit of info about Cormac McCarthy and some stuff about how it has been interpreted by critics. Think of this as a 'teaser trailer' for what is to come this term...
Mr M
There's a bit of info about Cormac McCarthy and some stuff about how it has been interpreted by critics. Think of this as a 'teaser trailer' for what is to come this term...
Mr M
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)