CONFLICTING PERSPECTIVES Conflicting perspectives arise due to subjective human experiences, resulting in alternative perceptions of situations, events and

personalities. In Ted Hughes anthology of Birthday Letters, poetry is utilised as an emotive medium to express the ephemeral nature of perspectives by reflecting on his turbulent relationship with Sylvia Plath concurrently revealing how composers can manipulate the preconceived ideas of responders to protect public identity. Ted Hughes utilises the poetic form and his reflection on his turbulent relationship with Sylvia Plath as a means to express the X nature of conflicting perspectives, ultimately revealing how composers can manipulate the preconceived ideas of responders to protect their public identity. (Hughes poem Full BrightFulbright Scholars discusses how memories are subjective, and may change with time, whilst Red is positioned to question the conflict regarding Plaths personality.) Alternatively, both Sidney Lumets 12 Angry Men and Sarah Curchwells essay Secret and Lies explore how perspectives are coloured by interpretation and personal biases. These varying perspectives are necessary for audiences to better discern the truth from through an understanding of why conflicting perspectives occur.
Comment [MM5]: Thisisnice! Comment [MM6]: Avoidtoomuch certaintyclearlyalsoyoujustsaidsense ofuncertainty,andyetheclearly remembers Comment [MM7]: Needtoexplain Comment [MM8]: Hmm,perhaps,but probablynotthemosteffective explanationofthisallusion/technique. VeronicaLakewasknownforherroleas thefemmefatalearolewherebasically thewomanseducesthemantohis downfall.Yes,itkindofisaninnuendoto thefactthatshe,too,hasapersonal agenda,butthepointofthatinnuendois tosuggestthatPlathisultimatelytoblame, i.e.castherinanegativelightasopposed tohimself,reversingpreconceivedideas thatitwasactuallyhisfaultasobviously thefemmefataleisseenasbeingatfault forleadingthemalecharactertohis downfall. Comment [MM9]: Information?The termseemstooobjectivehowcanyoube surethisisinformationandnota purposefulmisportrayal?Also,wouldyou regardhindsightasavalueorafallibility? ThequestionhereisthequestionofCP,its natureandhowtheyarisevalueof hindsightisultimatelyirrelevantunlessyou canlinkitbacktoCP(whenIsaidfallibility, fallibilityinthesensethatitdistortsthe truememoryhedidnot,atthetime, noticeherexaggeratedgrinorher numerousflaws.Yet,inhindsight,heis.Is thisreallyavaluewhenwearelookingin termsofthetruth?(yourtopicsentence) Comment [MM2]: Orperhapsjust revealingtheroleofpersonalagendain manipulatingpublicperception Comment [MM3]: Toolong,toowordy, toomanyideasintheonesentence.Also, poetryisthetextualform,notthemedium theyrefertointherubricifyoure referringtomediuminanothersenseof theword,findanotherwaytoexpressit Comment [MM4]: Er,Iwouldntreally introducetheseintheintroduction preferablyleaveuntilthebody Comment [MM1]: ?Areyousureyou wanttosayperspectivesareephemeral? Youdoknowthatmeanstemporary,or shortlivedright?

The interplay between memory and hindsight rarely tessellate with the truth, as memories are inherently dependant on subjective human experience. This subjectivity is seen through the sense of uncertainty which permeates Full BrightFulbright Scholars, with the rhetorical question in where was it, in the strand? and repetition of the speculative tone in maybe and or revealing the inner conflict between real events and memory. The older nostalgic Hughes presents an irony in that he clearly appears to remember the negative aspects of Plath at that time, with the layering effect and negative connotation in her exaggerated American grin for the cameras, the judges, the strangers reinforcing her as superficialher superficiality/her public faade. Further, the allusion to an actress famed for her role as the femme fatale, her in Veronica Lake bang is an innuendo about her multiple masks disguising her true personality. This reveals the value of hindsight, as the additional information of Plath allows a better understanding of a past situation. Similarly, in The Shot, Hughes argues through an extended metaphor that the vague mist of her superficiality prevented him from detecting her true intent. The He utilises the recurring visual imagery of the gun is to suggest that the truth had always existed, and yet Hughes commenting that the truth was always there, yet his emotions influenced his perceptions, as he metaphorically did not even know [he] had been hit. This These ideas reveals that memories are

subjectivethe subjectivity of nature, and that hindsight can be a more objective tool which can be used to reveal the truth.

Comment [MM10]: Ihighlydisagree, anddonotthinkyoushouldarguethis. Refertotheabovecomment. Comment [MM11]: Arguably,thetruth isthetruthofthesituation,notthereality ofthesituationasitisin50years.Youwill eitherneedtodefineyourversionofthe truth(thetruthasthememoryitself,of himlookingatPlath,orthetruthasinthe truenatureofaperson,posthaving experienceswiththem).Isthetruththatat thetime,Ipunishedthedogforbitingthe catatthetime(fact),oristhetruththatI waswrong?(opinion/matter).Also,you havesuggestedinyourintroductionthat personalagendaandmanipulationaffects perspectives.Yetyouappeartorandomly argueherethatdespitetheVeronica allusionanddespitetheexaggerated Americangrin(cleartechniquesusedto castPlathinanegativelight),thisisinfact revealingthetruth.Isittheactualtruth,or whatHughesatleastwantsustobelieveas thetruth?

Conflicting perspectives arise from the conflict of personal agenda, as composers attempt to manipulate responders attitudes. This is conveyed in Hughes poem, Red, where Conflicting perspectives often occur when individuals contend with each other in order to persuade responders on their correct views, as occurs in Red. Hughes he personifies Plaths rage and passion through the extended metaphor of Red,, with the The alliterative tone in you revelled in red suggesting suggests that Plaths life was dominated by images of blood. This violent imagery and recurring motif of the blood, as seen in the carpet of blood patterned with darkenings and congealments reveals Plaths victimisation of Hughes, through the violent imagery how Plath victimized Hughes. When considering this in context of her life being a throbbing cell. Aztec alter-temple, the visual imagery alludes to a blood sacrifice to the gods, symbolically revealing how Plath idolised her father, to the point of obsession, and ultimately how in a pit of red, you hid. However, when Hughes metaphorically states in a singular line only the bookshelves escaped into whiteness, Hughes insinuates that Plath saw death, as symbolised by the colour white, as a solace from life everything you painted, you painted white. Thus, Hughes attempts to challenge false perceptions of Plaths personality as conveyed through her poetry. states that responders seem to have a false perception of Plaths personality through her poetry. This is similarly seen in Your Paris where the conflicting perspective within Plaths character is elucidated through the use of personal pronouns which accentuate the contrast between the extended metaphor of Your Paris and My Paris. Through this, Hughes suggests that responders sympathetic interpretations of Plaths Paris, as a misinterpretation of her true private life, are skewed. By extension responders interpretations of Plaths Paris are seen as incorrect, as it differs from her true private life. This reveals that composers can use emotive techniques to mislead audiences. When Hughes informs responders that Plath has more than one side, he is forcing responders to ask themselves if they know the real Plath.

Comment [MM12]: Howisthis relevanttoanythingatallinrelationtoCP? Greatanalysisofthelineitself,butIfailto seeitsrelevance. Comment [MM13]: Needtoexplaina quoteornameatechnique/effect. Otherwiserephrasewithoutusingthe quote Comment [MM14]: Ilikethefirst sentence,butImnotsosureaboutyour explanationofthecomposerspurpose. Howdoesthefactthatshesawpoetryasa solacefromlifereflectafalsepersonality? Comment [MM15]: States?StatingisI haveabookadirectstatement. Comment [MM16]: ???Within?Doyou meanthemultipleconflictingperspectives ofPlathscharacter,orPlathsown conflictingnatures? Comment [MM17]: Youneedtotry andbemoresubtle,incorrectisfartoo confident/harshaterm

Contrastingly, interpretations of texts are often found to be conflictingconflict due to responders presumptions regarding events. In the scholarly essay Secrets and Lies, Churchwell adopts a feminist viewpoint to critique Hughes perspective regarding Plaths suicide when she states I dont believe in this kind of determinism. I dont believe she was doomed to die. I dont believe that for one minute. The repetition of the I dont

Comment [MM18]: Firstly,thisistoo simplistic.Secondly,Iamconfusedbyyour argument.Areyousympathisingwith PlathssituationorHughes?Itappears herethatyouaresympathisingwithPlath, andyetwhenyoumentionher victimisationofHughes+saythatHughes statesrespondershaveafalseperception ofherpersonality(withoutactually explicitlycriticisingthis),youappearto sympathisewithHughes.Youshouldtake onesideortheother.

emphasises her strong belief that Hughes caused Plaths suicide, thus opposing Hughes implicit accusation ss view in Fulbright Scholars and Red regarding his accusatory tone. Churchwell further disagrees that Hughes was devoid of blame and a positive effect on Plath. Through the use of intense emotive language and hyperbole she presents her view that Hughes was a monster who forced his wife into a life of domestic drudgery, with the bestial imagery of monster further emphasising her distaste of Hughes. Thus, when Churchwell presents her feminist view that Plath became a martyr, she is disagreeing with Hughes belief that her trajectory perfect, as in The shot. Thus, Churchwell utilises persuasive language and the essay structure as a seemingly intellectual and unbiased form to enhance a tone of authority and position responders to agree with Churchwellher. This is a nicely written paragraph, but much too short. Further, quite a bit of it is simply stating/discussing her view. To move with certainty into the B6 range, you need to actually analyse it in relation to the nature of conflicting perspectives what does whatever the composer say implicitly show? (Her manipulation, her personal agenda, her personal bias) you need to do more than state her view, and actually position yourself as an objective third party, analysing her influences and so on. She is clearly strongly biased against Hughes, and you need to say this what you basically say is that she is disgusted with Hughes, yes, but this reveals her personal bias. She does not attempt to view both sides of the situation. In fact, did she even know either of them personally? (Uncertain) Either way, she is merely another biased and speculative third party somewhat ironic. Similarly to Churchwell, Sidney Lumets 12 Angry Men discusses how stigmas and preconceived ideas can result in a misappropriation of the truth. Juror 4s stigma is seen as he generalises and externalises his hate of the lower socioeconomic class, stating that children of slum backgrounds are potential menaces with a close-up of his forceful exterior revealing the strength of his belief. However, the deadpan silence which follows the shrill non-diegetic music of Juror 4s statement is the utility of the film medium to break the fourth wall and forces audiences to consider the error of this, as films allow audiences to understand both perspectives. Hughes similarly identifies his own bias with the juxtaposition of Plaths aestheticized city with the admission that my perspectives were veiled ironically presented to inform audiences of Hughes truths despite utilising a medium where emotive language is paramount. Thus, when a low angle shot accompanies Juror 11s forceful tone when he uses juxtaposes both inclusive and exclusive language to say assert that were right and hes wrong, the audience understands that it is impossible for two parties with opposing
Comment [MM22]: Needtomention poem.Also,thelinktoHughesseems forced,andsomewhatunnecessary, particularlyasyouarelowonwordsinthe related. Comment [MM20]: Thisphrasing doesntmakesense. Comment [MM21]: How???Thisistoo vagueandgeneral Comment [MM19]: Youjumptoofast intoanalysis,youneedtoeasethemarker in.Whatisthetextevenabout?(Explainin relationtoCP)

ideologies to come to a mutual understanding. Both Hughes and Lumet comment on the value of audiences understanding that their own stigma may result in them having differing perceptions to others, with the value of conflicting perspectives being able to ascertain the stigmas of oneself and others, and subsequently make an objective or less subjective opinion. Much too little on this text. Need more effective and sophisticated filmic devices. You need to talk more about the text as a whole. The marker will read this and be like Great, so this person has watched two scenes, knows nothing about the texts or the actual meaning behind them show them more knowledge and critical analysis. Module C is very much about explanation and critical analysis.

Comment [MM23]: Impossibleistoo strongafterall,theyagreeattheend.

Comment [MM24]: Definitelytoolong alinkshouldbeeffective,perhaps2030 words.

These conflicting perspectives between Hughes and Churchwell arise as a result of the difference in representations and mediations which consistently interfere with the reality of direct, private, inner access to reality in Hughes relationship to Plath, with Lumet further attributing this to personal biases and stigmas This representation of a subjective event to reveal a more serious issue regarding Plaths suicide and Juror 4s bias are the composers informing responders to critically evaluate all information, and attempt to identity and disregard their own stigmas when considering potentially biased information.

Comment [MM25]: Okaybutyour essayshouldbeonthegeneralnatureof conflictingperspectives,justlikeyour belongingessayshouldbeonthegeneral natureofbelongingAcceptancenurtures asenseofidentityvs.H&Chighlight differentideasofacceptancewithintheir texts(somethingtextspecific) Formatted: Font: Bold Comment [MM26]: Wouldntyousay allofthemhavepersonalbias? Formatted: Font: Bold Comment [MM27]: Whatisthemore seriousissue?Shouldyoureallybealmost suggestingthatanythingismoreserious thansuicide? Formatted: Font: Bold Comment [MM28]: Conclusionisfar toolongandineffective.Also,somewhat oddlyunsophisticatedattimes.Aloadof oddgrammaticalerrors.Yetthewhole thingneedstobewrittenagainratherthan rewritingwhatyouhavehere.

GENERAL CONCERNS
OVERALL FEEDBACK
I have major concerns about this essay. It demonstrates a lack of understanding about the texts, and more significantly, a lack of understanding about the module itself. Content is vague, and ideas are not really sophisticated. Sometimes you give the odd line which appears to be an excellent idea, but it is soon overlooked by conflicting or confusing analyses and conclusions. Further, the proportion you dedicate to each text 500 to Hughes, 200 to Churchwell, 200 to Lumet minus the unnecessary link to Hughes is skewed and needs to be readdressed. The essay in its current stage would be a lowmid band 5 at most. The only thing still holding you up is relatively decent techniques/analysis and the condensed nature of analysis that is, techniques, explanation and analysis are appropriately in proportion, and you actually try to do technique explanation of technique analysis . To clarify, I am referring here to textspecific analysis e.g. emotive language distaste, rather than explanation/analysis of ideas in relation to conflicting perspectives, which is poor.

CONFLICTING PERSPECTIVES AND THE RUBRIC

You need to take another look at the rubric. Ideas of representation are critical, and yet youve only really noticeably not in a good way simply tacked on the term to your conclusion, and dont really address it in the body or the introduction. The module is ultimately about how different factors affect the representation of an event, situation or personality, these factors being ideas of your own choice such as personal agenda, prejudice and so on. Ultimately it is the effect of those ideas in influencing the representation of an event, situation or personality, which changes the meaning. That is, if you are biased, perhaps you will purposefully misrepresent a situation to cast yourself in a positive light, hence modifying the actual meaning. A lot of the issues with your essay regarding the texts themselves, Ive already addressed in the comments in the editing section. You need to be talking about the text as a whole in addressing CP, and the composers purpose. Also, note that 12 Angry Men is a very, very common text. You will be placed against many others analysing the text. If you do it poorly, it will stand out. Currently, there is not enough analysis of the text as a whole itself, and really only consideration of two very obvious scenes that dont really shed light on anything. To achieve a midhigh B6 essay, you need to shed some extra light on the major concept belonging, CP, etc. that other people may overlook or not consider. I think perhaps the best way to show you what I mean in regards to conflicting perspectives and how you should be writing is to show you one of my own prepared paragraphs: Composers of a text present attitudes which are shaped by their underlying personal agendas. Ted HughesBirthday Letters, as a collection of poems which piece together his relationship with Sylvia Plath,workstochallengethemediasvilificationofhim.InTheMinotaur,HughesportraysPlathas the aggressor in their relationship by casting himself into the role of the victim. This is conveyed through the deliberate use of familial connotations whilst he describes Plaths smashing of his mothers heirloom sideboard, to evoke the responders sympathy for his plight. The sense of loss, which is furthered in the metaphor mapped with the scars of my whole life, illustrates the significantly damaging impact Plath has made on his past. In the violent imagery and mythical

Comment [MM1]: Adescriptionofthe textasrelatedtoconflictingperspectives demonstrateshisdeliberateattemptto manipulateresponders. Comment [MM2]: Representingher personalityassomethingwhichitisnot (implied) Comment [MM3]: Manipulation Comment [MM4]: Purposeofthe manipulation

allusion of The bloodyend of the skein,Hughes creates a senseof his abandonment andsuffering attheendoftheirrelationship.Throughoutthepoem,destructiveimagesareassociatedwithPlath,inorder to give the responder his own understanding of the situation and her personality. In particular, in the emphatic use of second person in the final stanza Left your motherBrought you your risen father your own corpse Hughes creates an accusatory tone to shift the blame to Plath for the undoingandmetaphoricaldeathofbothherselfandtheirrelationship. Such manipulation of textual form conveys Hughes coloured perspective as he attempts to reverse previously biased attitudes towards Plath, highlighting the way in which personal agenda shapes a composersrepresentation. ^ Concise, sophisticated. Not analysing for the purpose of analysing, but deliberately selecting analysis that are relevant to CP, and will support my ideas. Clear understanding that H skews his representation of events and situations for his own personal benefit, to cast himself in a better light, to shift the blame to Plath, to create sympathy, etc. As you can see, clearly I am arguing against Hughes that his deliberate manipulation of ideas is what creates conflicting perspectives. I do not necessarily feel that way, but it is the way I have chosen to argue. It is also the easier path to argue when writing on Hughes texts. People will agree/disagree on who was at fault, Plath or Hughes, but nevertheless it is quite obvious that whatever Hughes has written is an attempt to reverse public perceptions of him. As an added note, I am not convinced by your hindsight argument. Youve said that memory is inherently a subjective experience okay, but then how can you argue that hindsight will allow memory to become more objective?

Comment [MM5]: Impliedthatthisis deliberate

Comment [MM6]: Anotherkeyideaof therubric Comment [MM7]: General,concise expressionofthekeyidea

Also, if you have any questions about the module, or what Ive said does not really clarify for you certain aspects do feel free to email me and ask me specifically anything at all.

CONCLUSION AND WORD ALLOCATION

Your conclusion is vague and ineffective. Nevertheless, that is an issue with the understanding of the module. In regards to length, I recommend cutting down. Realistically, its highly unlikely that in the exam you will have time to write a proper/lengthy conclusion, and ultimately, the markers dont care as long as it purely exists and isnt just simply All these texts show the influence of representation on meaning although that is better than nothing . They understand that its exam conditions and youre rushed for time, so its not like a handin essay where everything has to be perfect a couple of lapses in sophistication are okay, and a short conclusion is absolutely fine as well as long as its well thought out. You dont even have to mention the texts mentioning the composers is in fact better, as the essay should be focused on the composers purpose as opposed to the specific text. Personally I had a one sentence conclusion for every section/module in trials and the HSC exam, despite whatever I had prepared the best way to go about it is just preparing a great one or twoliner with the option of cutting it to a oneliner if necessary . You can put any nice phrases in the intro to lead them off with a good impression, or throughout your body, but just an effective oneliner at the end will do. Ideally, your allocation should look something like: Intro: ~100120 words

Text 1: ~250 words Text 2: ~200 words Text 1: ~ 250 words Text 2: ~200 words Conclusion: ~2030, 40 words max

Or, for three texts: Intro: ~100120 words Text 1: 350400 words Text 2: 300 words minimum Text 3: 250 words minimum Conclusion: ~2030, 40 words max Your current distribution definitely needs to be addressed. The shortage in R1 and R2 is extremely obvious after reading 500 words on Hughes. In terms of writing a more sophisticated conclusion, you need to consider the distinct differences between an introduction and conclusion. The best way is to think about it as a scientific report or article Intro: what you will examine Body: the examination Conclusion: your findings. The best way perhaps to write the conclusion is to think about the bigger picture. Contrast between the introduction and conclusion: E.g. Introduction: These texts explore conflicting portrayals of character and the role of personal agenda in the manipulation of texts. E.g. Conclusion: The combination of these texts give not only show readers the deliberate acts of manipulation composers utilise in the construction of events and situations, but also the lack of an objective truth and ultimately, the pervading nature of conflicting perspectives Or more simply Through deliberate acts of manipulation and inherently biased perspectives, the combination of these texts ultimately shows the pervading nature of conflicting perspectives within humanity It needs to be on the nature of conflicting perspectives, rather than some textspecific idea.