# data[].attributes.body
Consider how Priestley develops the character of Sheila through what she SAYS, how she ACTS, how others respond to her.

Priestley develops the character of Sheila in a multitude of ways, specifically in the way she reacts to the news of Eva Smith's death and her role in it. She becomes rather distressed, and feels terribly guilty for what she did, reflecting on her actions and selfishness, whilst her family become quite alarmed at her sudden confession. Her father, Mr Birling, holds un-feminist opinions about women, which is displayed in his response to Sheila's actions. He tries to keep her out of the conversation: what he most likely deemed to be 'unladylike'. "Nothing to do with you Sheila. Run along." His dismissiveness highlights more clearly Sheila's character change, and her rebelliousness that drives her to take part in the situation. This is further illuminated her need to describe her actions without any justification, demonstrating Sheila's increased maturity and less materialism.

List at least 5 adjectives you would use to describe Sheila at the beginning of the play.

Shallow

Materialistic

Naïve

Carefree

Dependent

Teasing

Rebellious (not as much though)

List at least 5 adjectives you would use to describe Sheila at the end of Act One.

Distressed

Guilty

More exposed to the harsher realities of life

Conscious

Ashamed

More mature

More perceptive

# data[].attributes.body
Imagine that you are a director, looking to create your own adaptation of the opening scene of Act 1 up until the inspector enters.

Respond to the questions considering what dramatic devices, stagecraft and literary features you would employ:

Where would you physically set your adaptation? Why?

I would set my adaptation in a wealthy penthouse apartment in the Upper East Side, New York City. This is because, this scene in "An Inspector Calls" is supposed to introduce the reader/ audience to an affluent family who are dining in a “fairly large suburban house”, with expensive crockery and tableware, as well as formal attire. All this contributes to a picture of wealth and high(ish)-middle class, which I believe could be portrayed equally through a penthouse in New York. The main reason behind this change would be to appeal to a more modern audience, who better understand the ways of living in this day and age, rather than 100 or so years ago. The Upper East Side is home to some of the richest, most powerful and influential families in New York City. Combine this with a penthouse, and the setting of prosperity is set.

What props would you adapt/change/keep the same? Why?

I would have them probably sit around, instead of a dining table, a coffee table and sofas on the large upstairs balcony, with expensive wine, with a wine decanter. The characters would be wearing what is considered formal and wealthy-looking nowadays (something from Chanel etc). This is to further accentuate these characters’ riches, yet also keep the distinction and false sense of intimacy between the family.

What elements of stagecraft (lighting/staging) would you adapt/change/keep the same? Why?

The lighting, considering its outside, should be yellow to show the evening light and the light from the terrace, but it should also be sharper, as if there is hardness to the characters’ relationship dynamic.

What characters would you adapt/change/keep the same? Why?

Instead of there being a family, I might want to change it to a group of friends (who are adults) from the Upper East Side, who are not necessarily very close in terms of friendship, but there is a sort of hierarchy in their group. They are celebrating their friend’s engagement to another member of their ‘group’. There will be a maid, or at least a character who demonstrates that the characters are wealthy enough to have someone (or multiple people) waiting on them in their own home. The house (penthouse) they would be dining in belongs to the ‘leader’ of this said group, who acts as the most important person in the room. However, this character has had to work his way up into his wealthy positions, whilst the others have inherited it or have it naturally in the family.

→ Dramatic techniques:

Foreshadowing (possibly more subtle in the way that the lighting is shown and the posture of the people

Maybe even a sentence or two that could give the audience an insight into what has happened, and how that might affect future events

Dialogue: between the characters on stage

# data[].attributes.headline
Homework 14 | 05 | 2024 –> notes on Marxism misconceptions and Marx's connection to literature

# data[].attributes.subject
Homework 14 | 05 | 2024 –> notes on Marxism misconceptions and Marx's connection to literature

# data[].attributes.body
There is the misconception that Marx was a monolithic figure, a dogmatist, grey, rigid monotone character.

However, he had many different sides to his personality based on experience (as a writer, a fighter and a refugee)

Writer:

He was a great lover of literature

Steeped into the entire history of Western literature, from Dante and Shakespeare, to major modern writers such as Gerard Dickens and Balzac

He was also a polyglot: fluent in Latin, Greek, German, French and English

His famous and most important work was Das Kapital - a critique of capitalism

He was aware that capitalism was both a problem of economics and politics, but also a problem of representation

Fighter:

Marx was a drinker and a fighter

He was moved to Berlin by his father although having been enrolled at the University of Bonn to study law

This was because of Marx’s duel between an aristocrat and him, landing him in prison.

He was a pugnacious, courageous, polemical figure

Believed that no true thought without courage was possible

Refugee:

The 1840s was a tumultuous period of series of revolutions across Europe

Marx, in 1848 wrote the Communist Manifesto with Engles

He was constantly being banished from one country to another for his militant revolutionary activity

Marxism consists of a combination of 3 elements: German idealism, british economics and French socialism

German idealism:

He was trained in the philosophy of the German philosopher Hegel

Hegel's theory of history was essentially that history has stages to it, which are characterised by an internal contradiction

The movement through that contradiction and the resolution of that contradiction is the driving force of history.

Hegel criticised by German philosopher Ludwig Feuer

Marx was influenced by both philosophers

British economics:

Theories of economics: David Ricardo and Adam Smith

British bourgeois political economy of the late 18th and sometimes early 19th century

French socialism:

What he picked up on on his travels around Europe

The work of Charles: an important socialist and utopian thinker

Marx thought that Germans excelled at philosophy because it was still semi-feudal, and replaced the historical revolutions that were happening elsewhere in Europe

Britain has been a fairly secure capitalist nation since its revolution in the 17th century

France was constantly from 17 89 onwards, in the midst of revolutions, and in context, political thought was the dominant type of thinking

(1789 is the year of the French Revolution)

The key Marx insight is the links between the material history and the context of the nations, and the types of ideas that develop within them

A basic insight is that there lives an intrinsic connection between material social conditions of any historical period, and the ideas that are made because of these conditions

The ideas are rooted in the social and historical context

# data[].attributes.body
Breakfast at Tiffany's: Truman Capote

# data[].attributes.body
ZPD 5.0-13.0

SS 1223

98% PR

RA 16:06

# data[].attributes.headline
Tracker homework - Theme of revolution, rebellion and corruption

# data[].attributes.subject
Tracker homework - Theme of revolution, rebellion and corruption

# data[].attributes.headline
What role does terror have in a totalitarian regime?

# data[].attributes.subject
What role does terror have in a totalitarian regime?

# data[].attributes.body
- Textual examples:

"guarded at each door by fierce-looking dogs." -pg 75

"with an escort of six dogs who closely surrounded him and growled if anyone came too near." - pg 75

"any animal giving so much as a grain of corn to a hen should be punishable by death." - pg 76

"he came creeping under cover of darkness and performed all kinds of mischief." - pg 77-78 (reference to it being said that "Snowball was secretly frequenting the farm by night"

"With his dogs in attendance... careful tour of inspection..." - pg 78

"at the word "Snowball" all the dogs let out blood-curdling growls and showed their side teeth" - pg 79

"plotting to attack us and take our farm away from us." - pg 79

"For we have reason to believe that some of Snowball's secret agents are lurking among us..." - pg 82

"nine huge dogs... uttering growls that sent shivers down all the animal's spines" .... "cowered silently" - the effect of the totalitarian regime. Loss of voice and terror that forces one to become nothing more than a cowering servant. - pg 82

"the dogs promptly tore their throats out" - pg 84

"They were all slain on the spot." - pg 84 –> with reference to how many other animals confessed, and they were all killed. "..crept away in a body. They were shaken and miserable." - the effect of a terror-laden totalitarian regime, whereby the controlled become terrified to the point of misery.

"with a kind of surprise they remembered that it was their own farm." - pg 86 –> because first Mr Jones and then the pigs had taken complete control over the farm, the other animals are surprise to remember that "every inch of it [was] their own property". They don't realise anymore that anything is theirs anymore because it has been so brutally stripped from them every time.

"they had come to a time where no one dared speak his mind, when fierce, growling dogs roamed everywhere" - pg 87

The animals have come to realise that they are being manipulated and treated nearly as cruelly as when they were under the rule of Mr Jones. This can be seen from Clover's remark upon how "they had come to a time where no one dared speak his mind, when fierce, growling dogs roamed everywhere" etc. She also says that "still, it was not for this that she and all the other animals had hoped and toiled. It was not for this that they had built the windmill and faced the bullets of Jones's hun." This short passage taking the third person perspective of Clover, gives us an insight into the terrible effects of terror in a totalitarian regime. It is as if the other animals were oblivious once more, because they cannot, and will not do anything to go against Napoleon's rulings, and shall be stuck in this endless cycle of exploitation, fear and utter subservience.

# data[].attributes.body
Squealer's speech: "You have heard then, comrades," he said, "that we pigs now sleep in the beds of the farmhouse? And why not? You did not suppose, surely, that there was ever a ruling against beds? A bed merely means a place to sleep in. A pile of straw in a stall is a bed, properly regarded. The rule was against sheets, which are a human invention. We have removed the sheets from the farmhouse beds, and sleep between blankets. And very comfortable beds they are too! But not more comfortable than we need, I can tell you, comrades, with all the brainwork we have to do nowadays. You would not rob us of our repose, would you, comrades? You would not have us too tired to carry out our duties? Surely none of you wishes to see Jones back?"

In his speech, Squealer employs a plethora of rhetorical devices to convince the other animals that pigs sleeping in beds are necessary for the farm, and to quell any doubts about the pigs' 'leadership'. The first instance of rhetorical language are the three rhetorical questions at the start of the speech, where Squealer introduces his argument. This is not only a means of getting the other animals to question their initial thoughts on the matter, already inciting doubt into his listeners, but it is also an example of less obvious pathos, whereby Squealer is making his audience feel shameful for not having faith in the pigs. "You did not suppose, surely..." How could the other animals possibly think that the pigs were doing this for their own benefit? Furthemore, the way that Squealer has structured his argument is very effective. First, he states the issue as just aforementioned in the form of a question. He then proceeds to explain the what a bed actually is, using the example of the "A pile of straw is a bed..." which all the farm animals can relate to. Subsequently, he stated that "sheets are a human invention" and that is what the rule was against. The pigs had certainly stripped the bed from sheets, and therefore the rule was not undermined. This could be thought as an example of logical syllogism, where Squealer is stating that, in summary, the ruling was against sheets and not beds (premise 1), they have removed the sheets from beds (premise 2) and therefore they are not undermining the ruling (conclusion). Throughout his speech, Squealer is also relying upon the other animals' ignorance and obliviousness to their manipulation, using his literacy (that was available to none of the other animals) as a way to persuade the audience of his argument. He finishes off his speech with another three rhetorical questions, two of which use the rhetorical device of anaphora, "You would not rob us..... You would not have us..." The use of anaphora enables specific words to cement themselves in his listeners' minds by their repetition, which is particularly effective in this scenario as the other farm animals are portrayed as less intelligent, and have the tendency to forget some information. Because this anaphora is also a negative referring to pigs and their 'health', which further provokes guilt in the farm animals, who do not want to be the reason that the farm is not up and running. Finally, the fear element of propaganda is used in this speech, when Squealer says, "Surely none of you wishes to see Jones back?". As Mr Jones was a terrible and tyrannical figure in the minds of all animals, the horror at the possibility of him returning to the farm is enough in itself to pacify the other animals thoughts.

Napoleon's speech: "Comrades," he said quietly, "do you know who is responsible for this? Do you know the enemy who has come in the night and overthrown our windmill? SNOWBALL!" he suddenly roared in a voice of thunder. "Snowball has done this thing! In sheer malignity, thinking to set back our plans and avenge himself for his ignominious expulsion, this traitor has crept here under cover of night and destroyed our work of nearly a year. Comrades, here and now I pronounce the death sentence upon Snowball. 'Animal Hero, Second Class,' and half a bushel of apples to any animal who brings him to justice. A full bushel to anyone who captures him alive!"

In Napoleon's speech in chapter VI of Animal Farm, rhetoric is used to further convince the animals that Snowball is the enemy. Primarily, and similarly to Squealer, he starts off with two rhetorical questions, the latter being a hypophora, where Napoleon "roared in a voice of thunder" the name of "SNOWBALL" as an answer. This is an effective device as it allows for audience interaction and involvement, providing clarity and emphasis to his point. Moreover, by framing Snowball as the perpetrator behind the ruin of their hard efforts, Napoleon appeals to the heartbroken emotions of the other animals, (the rhetorical device of pathos) who have spent months working tirelessly towards this feat, only to have it destroyed so heartlessly. He not only incites animosity towards his rival but also fosters a sense of unity among the animals against a common enemy. He also employed language to deepen this solidarity by stating, "overthrown our windmill,". When Napoleon offers the reward of "Animal Hero, Second Class, and half a bushel of apples" acts as a carrot and stick: he encourages obedience meanwhile reinforcing his control over the other animals. Likewise to Squealer, Napoleon uses emotive language and imagery to incite terror in the farm animals, for instance: "crept here under cover of night,". This not only gives the animals a sense of trepidation - that Snowball could sneak past them amongst the shadows and strike (and could do it again) - but also it portrays Snowball as a coward, that he chooses to take advantage of the dark and not confront his enemy directly. Through the strategic use of rhetoric, Napoleon establishes himself as the leader, exploiting the animals' fears to secure his own position of power against his former political enemy.

# data[].attributes.body
Summary:

To have a successful campaign, there must be a story. There is no ideology to it, it's simply that "great storytelling is great storytelling". Voters soak up information, billions of it at every election, but what they truly need is simplicity: a compelling and organised argument that hooks the listener. However, there has to be something that connects it all. This is usually done through a metaphorical filter, where one pinpoints on either threat, opportunity, fear or hope - and manipulates it. The simplifying of the election 'story' comes down to 4 main aspects: the victim of the threat or denied opportunity, a villain, a resolution and a hero. For instance, in George W. Bush's campaign in 2004, these categories are clear: the victims are 9/11 against the threat of International Terrorism, the villain is Al Qaeda, the resolution is quite an aggressive principle of action against thess International threats, and the hero is George w. Bush. This 'story' with all its characters also utilises fear, which people respond to in a strong manner. Fear prays on the emotions of the population, and gives them a desperate need to escape the problem as soon as possible. The exit for this would be the hero. That is why campaigns are chiefly about two things: hope and fear, because both are powerful driving emotions that generally incite action in the affected population.

# data[].attributes.body
Believe me by Tahereh Mafi

# data[].attributes.body
Summary paragraphs:

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a theorist and historian, as well as being a harsh critic of the Capitalist system of governance. He perceived its history as a constant struggle between the two distinct social classes, the oppressors and the oppressed. In total, he identified around 5 main issues with Capitalism. Number one was that the modern work under its system is alienated. He believed that work was something to be enjoyed, but the modernising of our world made it seldom possible for the worker to get a sense of contribution to society. This leads to something Marx dubbed Entfremdung, which is the feeling of disconnection between the work all day, and who you feel you truly are, and what you think you could ideally provide to existence.

Second there is the insecurity of modern work. The human becomes completely dispensable, a thing that can be let go of as soon as the costs rise or savings can be made through technology. It is with this that Marx enforces his idea that Communism is not just an economic theory, but something that, understood emotionally, expresses the human desire not to be left behind, to have a place in this world.

Then comes the blaring factor of workers being paid little, whilst the Capitalists, or bourgeoisie, get rich. The Capitalists shrink the wages of the proletariat, the labourers. This is called primitive accumulation, or ursprüngliche Akkumulation. Marx believed that the profit that the Capitalists see as reward from this labour is theft, of the talent and hard work of the workers. “Capitalism, at its crudest, means paying a worker one price for doing something that can be sold for another, much higher one.” The fancy word for exploitation is profit.

Next is the instability of Capitalism. Marx believed that Capitalism was simply a series of crises one after the other. It was the issue of producing too much, far more than one could consume. This crisis of abundance was characterised by the efficiency of the factories mean that few of us actually need to work. However, those who do, usually at the top, complain. This enraged Marx, who thought that the wealth of the massive corporations should be redistributed to everyone.

Finally, Marx proposed the idea of Capitalism being bad for Capitalists. He didn't think the bourgeoisie were evil. Quite the opposite, he was acutely aware of the sorrows that came from their marriages, and argued this unity of two people was, in these cases, business, and not love. He reasoned that Capitalism forced everyone to put economic interest at the centre of their lives, which meant for no honest or truly deep relationships. This is what Marx labelled as commodity fetishism, or Warenfetischismus: makes us value things that have no objective value. He wanted people to free themselves of their financial and economic prison, and that both men and women should have the permanent option to enjoy leisure.

In total, Marxism was a utopia imagined by Marx, a world with no private property or inherited wealth, steeply graduated income tax, centralised control of the banking, communication and transport industries, with free education. He thought it would allow people to adopt different behaviours. His belief would become the cornerstones of some of the most significant ideological movements of the 20th century. However, from studying ideology, this Marxist, or true communist society has not yet existed:

A political system must have the underclasses (the proletariat and working/middle classes) own the means of production, not the government or police force, in order to be communist. Aside from certain first-century Christian communities and other temporary communes (The Soviet Union was actually state-run capitalism), a Communist system of governance is yet to be established.

To link back to the renowned fable, and satirical work of Animal Farm, by George Orwell, Old Major in the start of the book was employing rhetoric to convince the farm animals of rebellion against their Capitalist, or more dictatorial, ruling system, and that an equal society was the greater option. In some sense, Old Major represents Karl Marx, as both talked about the labourers producing all the product, but the people at the top taking everything for themselves. Both had conceived this perfect world were everyone was equal, yet the consequences were harsh, and cruel autocracies disguising themselves as communist.

# data[].attributes.body
Notes: (these are not the main homework. Some of this is directly from the video or website from the firefly page. The summary is below.)

Capitalist critic: Karl Marx, as well as being a theorist and historian

Born in 1818 in Trier, Germany and died in 1883

Soon became involved with communist party

Worked as a journalists, writing books and articles: writing about Capitalism

Perceived human history to have consisted of a series of struggles between the oppressed and the oppressing (social classes)

Problems he identified:

Modern work is alienated

Work can be one of the sources of our greatest joys. But to enjoy it, they need to see themselves in the objects they created. The issue in modern society is specialised jobs. Although they are highly efficient, it is also seldom possible for any one worker to derive a sense of the genuine contribution they might be making to the real needs of humanity.

It leads to Entfremdung: feeling of disconnection between what you do all day, and who you feel you really are, and what you think you’d ideally be able to contribute to existence

Modern work is insecure

Capitalism makes the human utterly inexpensible: can let go the minute costs rise of saving can be made through technology.

Communism isn’t just an economic theory. Understood emotionally, it expresses a deep-seated longing that we always have a place in the world’s heart

Workers get paid little while Capitalists get rich

Obvious qualm: shrink the wages of the labours - primitive accumulation, or ursprüngliche Akkumulation

Capitalists see profit as a reward for ingenuity and technological talent. Marx believes profit is theft of the talent and hard work of the workers, who are relied upon by the bourgeoisie.

Capitalism, at its crudest, means paying a worker one price for doing something that can be sold for another, much higher one. Profit is the fancy term for exploitation

Capitalism is very unstable

Marx proposed that capitalist systems are characterised by series of crises. Crisis is dressed up by Capitalists - caused by producing too much, far more than needed

Crisis of abundance - our factories so efficient: enraged Marx - few of us need to work because of the productivity of the modern economy - but we complain. We should call it freedom

We should distribute the wealth of the massive corporations - give it to everyone

Capitalism is bad for Capitalists

Marx didn’t think of Capitalists as evil, in fact being quite aware of the sorrows caused by bourgeoise marriages - argued the marriage was business - not love

Thought that Capitalism forced everyone to put the economic interest at the heart of their lives - no more deep or honest relationships → commodity fetishism = Warenfetischismus: makes us value things that have no objective value.

He wanted people to be free from financial constraint - men and women should have the permanent option to enjoy leisure

Marx proposed that there is an insidious subtle way that the economic system colours the sort of ideas that we end up having

The economy generates what Marx termed an “ideology” - a capitalists society is were all believe all sorts of things that are basically just value judgements that relate back to the economic system: that a person who doesn’t work is worthless

In short, big evil of capitalism is not the corrupt nature of its people at the top, this is true anywhere, but it teaches us to be anxious, competitive, conformist, and politically complacent.

Marx utopia: a world without private property or inherited wealth, steeply graduated income tax, centralised control of the banking, communication and transport industries and free public education. He also expected that a communist society would allow people to develop different sides of behaviours.

After moved to london, supported by Friedrich.

His writings became the keystone for one of the most important ideological movements of the 20th century

Philosophers until now have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point however, is to change it.

A political system must have the underclasses (the proletariat and working/middle classes) own the means of production, not the government or police force, in order to be communist. With this in mind, communism has not really existed yet, aside from certain first-century Christian communities and other temporary communes (The Soviet Union was actually state-run capitalism.)

"Religion is the opiate of the people,”

Literature, according to Marxists, reflects class struggle and materialism, as well as social institutions that it emerges from. Marxists generally view literature:

"not as works created in accordance with timeless artistic criteria, but as 'products' of the economic and ideological determinants specific to that era" (Abrams 149).

Literature reflects an author's own class or analysis of class relations, however piercing or shallow that analysis may be.

# data[].attributes.body
India

Main holocaust literary work

Night Pgs. 108-109

Extract 2

Night pgs. 6 to 7

FEEDBACK

Criterion A

Perceptive 7

Clear conceptual understanding (a problem shared is a problem halved - main importance of sharing one’s story).

Extract 1

Effectively contextualised - loss of faith in survival

Humanity’s capacity for cruelty and indifference

Excellent zoom-ins on the use of fire imagery

Extract 2

Systematic dehumanisation

Universal truth

Sharing of the stories - helps to divide the weight of traumatic event

Personal cost of survival

Unable to to accept harsh realities recounted, until it becomes a personal reality.

Brighter/less cruel future

Criterion D

Competent and Sufficient 6

FEEDBACK

Communication - effective use of slides at the beginning - however, as the presentation develops, they are very ‘wordy’ consider how to reduce the content to enhance communication.

Consider how to speak at a slightly slower pace to ensure your reader can follow all points.

The bullet point plan holds you back, consider how to refine your notes further so that you can fully engage with the presentation style.

Next steps:

You need to develop the ability to effectively organise and present information orally without relying on a script, instead utilizing a structured outline or bullet point plan as a guide

# data[].attributes.body
Craft a paragraph demonstrating the systems between these systems of governance, and societal structures. Publish onto your padlet.

The four different political systems of government to be discussed are theocracy, autocracy, democracy and a republic. A theocracy is a system of governance that centres around a specific religious ideology. An autocracy is when a state is ruled by an individual who holds absolute power. A democracy gives power to the people, deriving from the greek words, demos and kratos: people and power. Democracy and a republic are frequently interchanged, as a republic shares the same values about giving the people a free and democratically election as to whom should be in power. However, according to Diffen: "In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority." (Diffen, 2010). For hundreds of years, humans have been trying to find a governmental system that avoids any poverty, corruption or political issues that seem to arise with many means of leadership. Through this exploration, democracy has risen as a popular means of governing a country/ state, as the people value their voice being heard and acknowledged to possibly make a difference. On the other side, there is autocracy, which tends to bring out the negative side in rulers. Having absolute power generally leans towards brutal regimes and dictatorships in societies.

# data[].attributes.body
Task 1: Starting with this source, conduct research into at least three sources examining the form of a FABLE:

What is a fable:

To google, a fable is, "a short story, typically with animals as characters, conveying a moral."

According to Cambridge dictionary, it is, "a short, traditional story, usually involving animals , which is intended to show people how to behave."

Both definitions highlight how these stories feature animals as key characters, with a lesson that is hidden within it.

This technique is called Anthropomorphisation, which means that non-human things, are given human traits and characteristics. This is used to enlighten stories, as well as making it more fictional.

Who are fables usually written by:

The name synonymous with the beginning of fables is Aesop, as he, according to western tradition, was the one who began this type of storytelling.

The earliest known fable collections that have been linked back to Aesop dates back to the 4th century BC.

There are also some other figures who are associated with the beginnings of fables, for example: the Greek biographer Plutarch, the Greek satirist Lucian, and the Roman poet Horace.

However, during the 19th century, fables turned their audience towards the its use in children's literature. Rudyard Kipling, Hilaire Belloc, Beatrix Potter and Lewis Carroll were amongst the few famous authors that employed this form.

Some other authors also adopted this style of storytelling, but not particularly for children. George Orwell's Animal Farm, is a prime example of this, a short book that uses farm animals to portray Stalinist Russia

When were Fables typically written?

As aforementioned, the start of fables can be linked back to the 4th century BCE; however, with the 19th century bringing a new twist to these tales.

In other cultures, like the Indian oral tradition of fables, these stories could be dated back to the 5th century BCE

In Japan, this would start at around the 8th century, reaching its peak during the Kamakura period (1192 to 1333). In the 16th century, Aesop's fabulistic style was introduced in Japan.

Why were they written? / What is the purpose/intent:

These fables, intertwined with children's literature, was, and still is, a means of teaching children a life lesson with the more entertaining tool of storytelling. Many of the animal characters had child-like characters, which helped this specific audience empathise with them more.

Furthermore, back in the times of the ancient greeks, fables were an opportunity to self-reflect, as many were of the opinion that society wasn't living up to its prestigious expectations.

Fables were also a way of criticising the government with the fear of being punished.

Bibliography for Task 1:

Cambridge Dictionary (2024). Fable. [online] @CambridgeWords. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/learner-english/fable [Accessed 1 Feb. 2024].

Horgan, J. (2014). Aesop’s Fables. [online] World History Encyclopedia. Available at: https://www.worldhistory.org/article/664/aesops-fables/ [Accessed 1 Feb. 2024].

The Editors of Encyclopaedia (2023). Fable. In: Encyclopædia Britannica. [online] Available at: https://www.britannica.com/art/fable [Accessed 1 Feb. 2024].

Twinkl (2023). What Is a Fable? [online] Twinkl.co.za. Available at: https://www.twinkl.co.za/teaching-wiki/fable [Accessed 1 Feb. 2024].

Task 2: Source one fable that you think will interest the class, and be ready to RETELL it to a partner (explain who is involved and what happens). It could be connected to your home country, to Singapore, to your childhood.

- Pinocchio:

This fable starts with poor man called Geppetto, who wants to make a living a carpenter. He goes to carve a piece of enchanted wood, that becomes a wooden boy. When the feet are finished, this wooden boy, called Pinocchio, abuses Geppetto, who wants a boy, and runs away. Unfortunately, Geppetto gets arrested whilst trying to get Pinocchio back. When the wooden boy returns to his home alone, the Talking Cricket tries to warn him in a kind a gentle tone, reminding him of his obligations. But Pinocchio would have none of it, and killed the cricket. Going his own way, Pinocchio encounters the Fox and the Cat, two characters disguised as Assassins, who hang Pinocchio in order to claim the 5 gold pieces that Geppetto gave him. However, he is freed by the Fairy with the Azure Hair, by lying to her about the gold pieces. Because he lied, his nose grew characteristically long. He again falls in with the Fox and the Cat, who yet again try to trick him out of his gold pieces. Pinocchio goes back to the Fairy to be her son, and starts school twice. But two times he falls in with bad company, the latter time resulting in him becoming a donkey. After further adventures, where Pinocchio is constantly led astray, he gets swallowed by the Terrible Shark, where he finds Geppetto in the stomach as well. Pinocchio finds it within himself to save Geppetto, and take care of him. Because of this display of responsibility, kindness and selflessness, Pinocchio is found by the Fairy, who turns him into a real boy.

The moral of this story centres around how detrimental lying is, and we see this every time Pinocchio lies, because his nose grows consequently longer. Moreover, this teaches children that disobedience and disrespect, especially towards those who only mean the best for you, only brings negative consequences, and if one is compassionate and loving towards their parent, they will be rewarded.

- Bibliography for Task 2:

Lowne, C. and Bauer, P. (2023). The Adventures of Pinocchio | Summary, Characters, & Facts. In: Encyclopædia Britannica. [online] Available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Adventures-of-Pinocchio [Accessed 4 Feb. 2024].

# data[].attributes.body
Considering the summative assessment question (below), review the annotations you have made of Anne Frank's 'Diary of a Young Girl' in your booklet and decide upon two extracts you think would be interesting to conduct a close reading of:

Question: What does the extract tell us about the importance of sharing your story with the world?

What extract have I selected? Input page numbers

Why did I select this extract?

How does it explore the question?

At the very top are the two extracts I have chosen...

→ First extract: Saturday, 20 June 1942

- Pages 6-7 (10 lines)

- Since this extract is at the start of the book, we also get a window into the completely different life that Anne had, before Hitler and his loyal Nazis tore everything apart. It portrays the simple life that Anne had, filled with all the everyday problems or musings that a thirteen-year-old girl should have. Yet beneath this shallow yet safe world, there arises a perceptive and thoughtful girl, that has her mind far beyond where one her age would be.

- The question asks us what the extract tells us about the importance of sharing your story with the world. And, at the beginning, from a perspective a girl no longer a child, who is coming of age, I would say that this extract tells us we are not alone. For all those give-or-take 13 year old girls out there, not having a proper friend, yet being surrounded by so many loving people, is not something only you experience.
However, linking this more back to her experience with the Holocaust, the importance of sharing your story with the world is demonstrated through this background information, this life before the horror. It is crucial that we get to see this part of Anne, the part where she still can be a normal-ish teenager (considering the Nazis were already causing much havoc amongst the Jews in 1942).

→ Second extract: Friday, 26 May 1944

- Page 305 (10 lines)

- I selected this extract because it really highlighted Anne's mental degradation. We also get mentions of key events that could be discussed as context for the extract. For example, Anne raises the event of the 'break-in', which is an essential part in displaying the fear that has been engraved in them with the shadow of their discovery looming everyday. Furthermore, there is mentions of an arrest of a Mr van Hoeven, who was hiding two Jews in his house. This upset and unsettled everyone living in the Annexe; what if they were to be found too.

- This extract explores the question of What does the extract tell us about the importance of sharing your story with the world?" This is because, it is necessary for readers to catch a glimpse into the terror that the Nazis caused to Jews wherever, and the toll that took on them. The effects of their systematic genocide led Anne and whoever was living in the Annex to be reduced to a state of constant distress, particularly as the years went on. Anne story of the misery and continual degradation experienced in the attic is an important one to share with the world, highlighting just some of the cruelty that was inflicted on the Jew race. This extract mentions just a few of the many things that have been a result of their oppression as a race. In this way, we, as readers, can empathise with Anne, and ensure that no other person can end up "more miserable", or "utterly broken", with "the awful food, the tension, the miserable atmosphere, my disappointment..."

# data[].attributes.headline
Elie Wiesel 'Night' - Reading, listening and responding to chapter 3

# data[].attributes.subject
Elie Wiesel 'Night' - Reading, listening and responding to chapter 3

# data[].attributes.body
Response:

Wiesel, having spent time at both Birkenau and Auschwitz concentration camps, speaks of the difference of both in chapter 3. In Birkenau, we see Wiesel lose his faith in his religion, as he experiences the horrifying actions of children, babies and anyone else chosen being thrown into a fire ditch, into the crematorium. When he arrived in Birkenau, the first thing he smelled was the "wretched stench" of "burning flesh". The trauma that Wiesel underwent in that camp was unparalleled. "What was there to thank Him for?" Wiesel questions his God, the one who is supposed to protect him, at his absence in the face of this cruelty, in their terrible treatment. "For us it meant true equality: nakedness. We trembled in the cold". They were stripped of their identity, their clothes, left shaking in the cold of the Night, vulnerable and reduced to a base, animalistic state. It is here, in Birkenau, that Wiesel first confronts true inhumanity, and it is here that the imprint of death with last forever in his mind. In Auschwitz, we see a drastic change to the conditions and treatment at Birkenau, although still savage and brutal. "Around midnight, we were told to run. "Faster!" yelled our guards." Made to run, in the cold, with no clothes. The heartlessness of the Nazis was never-ending. However, Wiesel mentions the man in charge of their new block in the camp, "a young pole." He spoke with kindness and compassion towards the Jews, telling them not to lose their faith in life, and to rest. "Those were the first human words" says Wiesel. Moreover, we receive information such as "evening meal" and "we slept a lot. In the afternoon and at night". Those infinitesimal luxuries in the camp; a small respite from the terrors of the crematorium. Even with that little salvation in the midst of emotional and physical agony, the horror was still there, ever present. "At the start of the third week, our Blockälteste was removed; he was judged too humane. The new one was ferocious... The good days were over." That small relief was no more. The comparison between Birkenau and Auschwitz greatly differs in the effect it had on Wiesel. Birkenau was the first camp he was sent to, where he met barbarity for the first time, where he witnessed fellow Jews tossed into flames, their bodies transforming into smoke. Auschwitz, however, was perceived as a break in that trauma, although still inhumane in itself. But in the end, even the smallest of kindnesses was stripped away by the Nazi's, plunging them into night once more.

# data[].attributes.headline
Elie Wiesel 'Night' - Reading, listening and responding to chapter 2 | Part 2

# data[].attributes.subject
Elie Wiesel 'Night' - Reading, listening and responding to chapter 2 | Part 2

# data[].attributes.body
Quote 4: "We stared at the flames in the darkness. A wretched stench floated in the air."

Word choice:

- 'darkness' - connotations of, again, hopelessness, but also evil and gloom. To link to a denotation of this word, it can also mean spiritual ignorance, having ideas relating towards the lack of anything divine present. In context, this could symbolise the lack of holy/ heavenly presence, so that villainous times start to leak back.

- 'wretched' - an extreme way of saying something is "of poor quality; very bad" or "used to express anger or annoyance." The smell of the air is beyond durable, not only because of its horrible stink, but also because of the reason behind it. The Jews are enraged by this, at this smell and its cause.

- 'floated' –> contrasts with the ideas of 'darkness' and 'wretched', as it is usually a verb with connotations of something light and more cheerful than the situation the Jews are facing from Wiesel's perspective at the moment.

Sentence forms:

- Two simple sentences to make two separate quotes that, with less words, creates more tension as an effect on the reader, who would understand that this matter is, by now, more serious and urgent.

Language techniques:

- A slight oxymoron between 'wretched' and 'floated' because of their quite contrasting connotations and related ideas. Usually a 'stench' would waft, not really float. The lightness of it is too stark against the horrific stench.

Quote 5: "In front of us, those flames. In the air, the smell of burning flesh."

Word choice:

- 'front' –> the only way forward is through the flames that devour the Jews. The 'front', represents the future, the way forward. Instead of it being bright and hopeful, it is full of rage and destruction, and that is the only direction the Jews can move towards.

- 'flesh' –> although the idea of burning flesh is quite gruesome, it can also portray the layers of the Jews that are being burnt off, one by one, until what is reached is a red, aching sore. A denotation of this word is also, "the flesh of an animal, regarded as food." Again relating to the ideas around Jews being treated as animals, as prey for the hungry Germans, starving for more Jew blood, their flesh.

Sentence forms:

- Two, truncated compound sentences, with very similar prepositional clauses at the start of the sentence. This 'preposition', creates the effect of a placement, as well as building up the reader's illustration of the Jews' situation in this moment, through visual imagery. Almost makes the reader feel like the Jews are surrounded by evil, either that being "those flames" or "burning flesh".

Language techniques:

- Symbolism of the 'flames' as the Holocaust. Derived from "holokauston, meaning "a completely (holos) burnt (kaustos)"" Whole burnt. Their doomed fate awaits them in the future.

Message and link to INDIFFERENCE:

Wiesel's message is to an effect about the burning of hope. In the first and second quote, this is portrayed when Mrs Schächter is brushed off as crazy or hallucinating in her desperate cries of understanding. No one believes her. Her hope of saving the Jews, at least warning them, is lost. In quote 3, 4 and 5, there is the development of the cruel realisation that they are burning Jews as their would of rubbish. That is what lays in front of them, that dreaded future where there seems no escape from the ruby flames against black night.

Indifference also plays a huge part in this. Indifference at Mrs Schächter pleas. Indifference from the outside world, to the Jews. Indifference from the divine beings that Jews so need to aid them. Indifference is a dangerous cycle, and in this case, not only when something so stark and distinctive as fire, ignoring it, on any side, could be considered crime.

# data[].attributes.headline
Elie Wiesel 'Night' - Reading, listening and responding to chapter 2

# data[].attributes.subject
Elie Wiesel 'Night' - Reading, listening and responding to chapter 2

# data[].attributes.body
Considering the symbolism of FIRE. Judiciously select 5 quotes that relate to symbolism of fire. For each quotation - ZOOM IN on:

word-choice

sentence forms

language techniques

consider Wiesel’s message and how this might also link to INDIFFERENCE.

Quote 1: "Look! Look at this fire! This terrible fire! Have mercy on me."

Word choice:

- 'fire' - relating to the 'Holocaust' which is derived from "holokauston, meaning "a completely (holos) burnt (kaustos)"" Whole burnt. She is predicting the flames that will burn the Jews.

- 'terrible' - to further emphasise the feelings of distress and horror that the fire evokes. Definition: "causing or likely to cause terror; sinister." Foreshadowing the doomed future that the Jews are fated to.

- 'mercy' - "compassion or forgiveness shown towards someone whom it is within one's power to punish or harm." Wiesel is highlighting how these Germans have it within their power to harm another person, even 'punish' them because of their religion.

Sentence forms:

- Short sentences in the form of an imperative verb. Making the sentence more impactful, demanding attention from the reader to that specific point. "Look!" And although it seems as if nothing is there, the reader almost feels obliged to believe she who is speaking. The short sentences also give more exclamation for the reader to make after each of them, as it is clear that an emphasis is being made on this certain part of the paragraph and even chapter.

Language techniques:

- Repetition of the word 'look' and 'fire'. Ensures that the reader pays attention to these specific words. 'Look', compels the reader to see beyond the pages, at this foreboding 'fire'.

Quote 2: "She is hallucinating because she is thirsty, poor woman. That's why she speaks of flames devouring her."

Word choice:

- 'Hallucinating' - "experience an apparent sensory perception of something that is not actually present." The woman's senses are picking up on the fire that will destroy the Jews. She feels it in her bones, as well as seeing it with her own eyes.

- 'Devouring' - "eating food or prey hungrily or quickly." The prey are the Jews, which are being feasted upon by the flames of the Holocaust. Genocide at a rapid pace, the fire not stopping because it is hungry for more, hungry for the extinction of a religion.

Sentence forms:

- A compound sentence that explains how everyone is finding reason for the suddenness and almost madness of this woman. The sentence seems to contain in it a bit of persuasiveness, but not necessarily for the reader, but for the reassurance of everyone around her.

Language techniques:

- A bit of exaggeration in the part where Wiesel writes about the women feeling "flames devouring her". It magnifies the situation, illustrating its importance in the chapter.

- Metaphor/ allusion –> 'flames devouring' to the Holocaust, making the reader think about the fire of the Holocaust burning the Jews.

Quote 3: "This time we saw flames rising from a tall chimney into a black sky."

Word choice:

- 'chimney' –> "a vertical channel or pipe which conducts smoke and combustion gases up from a fire or furnace and typically through the roof of a building." Although the denotation describes a technical object, it could be perceived as a certain channel, or passage. In this passage, does the smokey remains of the dying Jews linger upwards, burnt like logs in a furnace, treated equally or worse than one.

- 'black' –> the sky is usually something people look up to for hope. Instead, it is portrayed as 'black' and dark, with all the hope for a way out sucked out of it. Symbolic of the title of the book, "Night", and the metaphorical darkness of the Holocaust.

Sentence forms:

- Descriptive sentence –> 3 points of description: 'flames', 'chimney' and 'sky'. Evokes visual imagery in the reader, making them illustrate the image of a foreboding night.

Language techniques:

- Metaphor/ allusion –> 'flames devouring' to the Holocaust, making the reader think about the fire of the Holocaust burning the Jews.

# data[].attributes.body
The ideas in the wider reading on Elie Wiesel's remarks at the Dedication of Yad Vashem Holocaust History Museum connects to Anne Frank's diary because of the ideas discussed about trying to record such a time. Wiesel, in his speech, stated, "My good friends, all of us know more or less that there was a tragedy; and we also know we must be honest about it: There are no words". Being someone who has personally experienced being the target of unparalleled rage and genocide, describing trauma on such a scale would most definitely prove impossible. One who was not there could only hope to scratch the surface of the extent of the victim's hurt. Instead, we are left with fragile memories and minds that can try to piece together that period of time, so that those who choose to listen to the harrowing story can attempt to understand more. "If we decided to tell the tale, it is because we wanted the world to be a better world — just a better world, and learn, and remember." Passing the story to others is giving them a gift, and that gift extends to the entire world. A gift that can change it for the better. Anne Frank's diary, simply be being a diary, similarly had some ideas around sharing a story of trauma, although a different kind. Anne was forced into hiding along with her family, because Jews were being hunted. For the most part of the war, her and those finding shelter in the Annexe were not caught and sent to die in those god-forbidden camps; however, the shadow of constant discovery had its own effect. Trauma in the eyes of Anne was more mental than physical, and expressing that in her diary became something of a salvation to Anne. Anne shared her story with the world to try and change it for the better, to remind people the constant horror it was to live in a time like this, no matter where you were. Both Anne and Wiesel might not have had the same experience in the war, but they chose to share it, chose to surface memories that were troubling and probably not pleasant to relive. But as Wiesel said, "we are duty-bound to try and not to bury our memories into silence", "You must face them. Even if you cannot articulate them, we must face them.".

# data[].attributes.body
The ideas in the wider reading on Elie Wiesel's speech called "The Perils of Indifference" connects to Anne Frank's diary because of the effects that INDIFFERENCE has on both, although in seemingly contrasting situations. Elie Wiesel speaks on how this indifference in those privileged against blatant human suffering, is an evil in itself, is a form of punishment so high, because that feeling of abandonment intensifies the pain already being felt; that feeling that people know you are enduring something by the hand of sadists, yet only to stand by and ignore it. Elie Wiesel describes it as, "indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor — never his victim, whose pain is magnified when he or she feels forgotten. Not to respond to their plight, not to relieve their solitude by offering them a spark of hope is to exile them from human memory. And in denying their humanity, we betray our own." Anne, on the other hand, voices her opinions on indifference more close to home. It is mentioned throughout her diary of Anne's discord between her and her mother, expressing her feelings of anger and sadness at her mother's more distant and reserved nature, which sometimes even leads her to being insensitive towards Anne and what she might be going through. Because of this, Anne calls her mum, "mumsie", as to create a distinction between a mother who would be more emotionally attached to the child, and Edith (her mother), who had a lack of sweetness for Anne. As a result of her mother's carelessness to Anne's emotions, and incomprehension of how her youngest daughter truly feels, Anne isolates herself from her family more and more, and starts understanding what true loneliness is - the same kind that Elie Wiesel mentioned briefly in his speech. That feeling of rejection, especially of motherly love that Anne so craves, highlights the legitimacy of the cruelty of indifference. In both these literary texts, it is emboldened how detrimental indifference and disregard for distress is, in both the indifferent and the victims. It allows this sort of barbaric activities to continue, as it is the equivalent of looking torture in the eye, and turning away to ignore it. One cannot do that, and retain a steady conscious. For those suffering, as Wiesel said "whose pain is magnified when he or she feels forgotten." There is no winning side in indifference. "Indifference, after all, is more dangerous than anger and hatred."

# data[].attributes.body
Create a post on your Padlet explaining how the ideas in the wider reading CONNECT to Anne Frank's diary. This should be approximately one paragraph in length - using the WHAT HOW WHY format.

The ideas in the wider reading, where Martin Niemöller quoted on his experience of not speaking out against prejudice during WW2, connect to Anne Frank's diary because of the ways that Anne Frank used her diary to make her thoughts heard, and how who were helping her family spoke out - in their own way - against the Nazi oppression. Firstly, Niemöller did not openly oppose the cruel Nazi Regime, ignoring the brutal discrimination against groups of people as he was not one of them. However, when his time came to be discriminated against, and taken away by Nazis, no one was left to speak out for him. Guilt, as a result, ensued, to the point that after the war, to preach "collective guilt for Nazi persecution and crimes against humanity" - Holocaust Encyclopedia. On the other hand, Miep Gies, Johannes Kleiman, Bep Voskuijl and Victor Kugler were the prominent figures who helped hide the Franks and their Jewish friends, as well as bringing with them comfort and support. In their own way, they were speaking out against the Nazi persecution, risking death to aid those who were being oppressed. It didn't matter the fear, or the different religion, but only that they were in need, and therefore they stepped in to help. Anne Frank's diary was her way of opening up to the world, but especially to her Kitty, and making sure that this type and scale of discrimination would never really ever reach that level again, detailing the life, or more like the stolen life, in the Annex. Both have elements of how important it is to speak out against prejudice, no matter who you are, or where you are, because, as we see from Niemöller, the remorse is bitter. His quote highlights that, with the use of repetition, how important it is to voice one's opinions, particularly when it comes to doing so against a draconian reign, despite the fear because one voice can change everything.

# data[].attributes.body
The ideas in the wider reading connect to Anne Frank's diary because it is mentioned throughout it how quite the number of people were helping Anne and her family stay hidden from the Nazi oppressors, and in the wider reading text, there are many mentions of people and even nations who tried to resist the German rule by smuggling many fleeing to safety. Firstly, in Anne Frank's diary, Miep Gies was one of the people who significantly aided the Frank family and their friends hide from the public. In the text about the courage of Denmark (and those others who risked their lives to help others), it states, "The Danes responded quickly, organizing a nationwide effort to smuggle the Jews by sea to neutral Sweden." There was further information on individuals taking in families to conceal them: "About 20,000 Polish Jews were able to survive in hiding outside the ghetto in Warsaw because people provided shelter for them in their homes." These countless highlights to do with people and organisations aiding others to survive, when those helping might not, sheds light on how people like Miep, or countries like Denmark are not always successful, but their effort will forever be memorable and extremely commendable; it is even written in history.

# data[].attributes.headline
Anne Frank's Biographical context | 30/ 10/ '23

# data[].attributes.subject
Anne Frank's Biographical context | 30/ 10/ '23

# data[].attributes.body
Article 1: Who was Anne Frank?

Anne Frank was one of the one million Jewish kids to have died as a result of the Holocaust, under the authority of Adolf Hitler and his loyal Nazi's. Because of Hitler's brutal discrimination against the rules, Anne, alongside her family, had to abandon her life and hope of a future to go into hiding, spending two years in what she called the "Secret Annex". Four people who refused to abide by Hitler's rule, risked their life everyday to help the family of Anne, and the friends that were hiding with them. It goes to show that not every German had the same brutal prejudice against a religion, enough to go to the effort of trying to save someone's life at the possible extent of your own. However, in the end, some unknown Dutch had tipped the Gestapo officials about the location of Anne and the rest, which lead to their arrest. The events that followed after demonstrates in all ways the cruelty of the Holocaust. Anne and her sister were labelled with tattoo ID numbers, stripped of their identity and treated like animals, forced into labor because of their youth, and eventually died of typhus. The only one who survived out those in the "Secret Annex", was Anne's father.

Throughout Anne's time in the "Secret Annex", though, she kept a diary of what happened, and what she was feeling. Published posthumously, her diary became a true inspiration for those world-wide. She was a symbol, a symbol for peace and the lost hope of those children who died in the Holocaust, a symbol of the lost promise.

Article 2: It Is Raining on the House of Anne Frank

This poem by Linda Pastan really emphasises overall, how both Anne Frank and Vincent Van Gogh had to undergo struggles of being unable to express themselves. Nevertheless, they both remained people who "could find the pure/ center of light/ within the dark circle/ of his demons." Both people who remained a symbol of light in the darkness of their times. Anne, who lived in a "skeleton" of a house, an attic, scared almost always of the shadow of impending death, but always trying to be strong, trying to be that "pure/ center of light." In this poem, there is also is a comparison between Anne, and the tourists visiting the "Secret Annex" where she stayed. Pastan describes the tourists as "herded together under the shadow/ of their umbrella's", people who "would rather be/ somewhere else", and people who "so steep must rise/ to some occasion." There are direct links to Anne's life in the Annex in these phrases representing the tourists, as how Anne never wanted to be where she was, stuck in an attic with many other people, always having to submerge her feelings of tiredness, sadness, anger. She had to rise to the occasion of being strong in the face of inhumanity and mental loneliness, even if it constantly put her down. Even the title of the poem suggests misery and despondency, raining an example of pathetic fallacy with negative connotations. But is what strength is, learning to stand in the rain, and to find the silver line in the dark, demonic clouds.

# data[].attributes.headline
Key Context: Modern Conflict - By Carol Ann Duffy | 09/ 10/ '23

# data[].attributes.subject
Key Context: Modern Conflict - By Carol Ann Duffy | 09/ 10/ '23

# data[].attributes.body
Task Description

Read the article written by Carol Ann Duffy a prominent British poet who held the title of the first female poet laureate. In her article (on page 33), she explores the purpose of war poetry today.

Read it carefully, considering how British poets of the 21st century present war and their experiences, then reflect on how this compares to the war poets we have studied so far.

Write a brief reflection on your Padlet:

Carol Ann Duffy describes the early 21st century poets as those who "do not go to war". Their experience of it is mainly through online platforms. At least what one can call 'experience'. War is the maker of poets from soldiers, a concept that molds those who have witnessed firsthand the terrors/ elation of warfare into beings in need of expression. Poetry is what is resorted to. But is there now the soldier, or more the civilian who recounts the tales of war? There is after all increased interconnection that links the world in ways unimaginable to the past, meaning that nearly everyone can observe conflict, from a much further view. Duffy quotes Plato in saying that "it is the poet's obligation to bear witness." It is an "obligation", not a voluntary action. But can one truly bear witness to warfare when seeing it through a screen or a recorded voice, or is it equally as important to do so? Some of the most famous poets like Wilfred Owen, Siegfried Sassoon and Julian Grenfell, their poetry was impactful because of the raw experience, because of its emotional intensity, because of the intense sensual register. All that was shared from directly in the front-lines, or amidst the raging war. From reflection, I believe that war poetry is constantly changing, therefore making it hard to compare against with different time-periods of that same genre.

# data[].attributes.headline
Creative Writing Diary | 25th September 2023

# data[].attributes.subject
Creative Writing Diary | 25th September 2023

# data[].attributes.body
Diary Entry:

My dearest diary,

How can I explain life on the battlefield with only meer words to reflect it? It is horrendous, as a start. Simply horrendous. I have always known that war was not something that could end in triumph, or victory, only that powerful, aching feeling one gets in their chest, which I believe would be the equivalent of prevailing remorse. For me, at least. I keep seeing the faces of those who were killed, meeting their eyes the second before they fell, knowing that Death was now not a constant shadow, but a brutal and final reality. Waves of people kept coming with unrelenting force, falling all the same. Some screamed, others just fell silently, but somehow, that seemed all the more worse.

The apprehension was a nightmare from another world. Cramped up in a tube of land, thinking what could be your final thoughts. It drove some to hysteria. One boy, a fellow comrade, began muttering incoherently through the night, until came the sharp crack of a gunshot, and the same eerie hush again swallowed us whole.

The anxiety was a weight, that bore down with resolve unmatchable, such that would leave a deep and unforgettable scar. A horde of shivering men would be called to run, never to return. Whispering voices pervaded, assuring me the of the end of agitation, because the terror would terminate with a sudden blanket of darkness. I was never called. I feared for the friends I had made, mourned their loss as no others would, as my health and sanity gradually deteriorated.

"My sprites, my heart, my wit and force, in deep distress are drown’d;" - ('Loss of Good Name' by Edward de Vere)

My will to live also dramatically decreased, as did our sources of food and water. Death again made His appearance, gliding through the night, snatching our men from their slumber, the groans of the remaining living echoing in the bleak plains sounding like agonised cries of ghosts long-forgotten.

Life is comprised of two different types of people, those who do, and those who watch those who do. But if feels as if in the case of war, there is a third, those who both watch and do. Harrowing is the only word close enough that I can conjure up to describe warfare, where one has to murder, and then look them in the eye, or gaze at them whilst the life is sucked from their body, and the soul snatched away. How one departs from such atrocities with a clear conscience escapes me.

We are fed lies like our meals, made to believe we are glorious, honourable, even heroic for becoming a soldier and fighting in the war. Yet right now, I have never felt more like a villain.

Yours faithfully,

Edwood Henry Fairchild

# data[].attributes.headline
Introduction paragraph | 25th September 2023

# data[].attributes.subject
Introduction paragraph | 25th September 2023

# data[].attributes.body
Julian Grenfell and Siegfried Sassoon were both war poets at the brutal time of WW1, their poetry displaying the stark contrast between two very different attitudes of that period. Although both of them had experience in trench warfare and the horrors that are an inevitable consequence, their perspectives remain distinctly separate, with one echoing the triumphing patriotism of the time, and the other opposing and resenting it. "Into Battle" by Grenfell is a representation of war and idealisation, how it is innately part of the natural order, whereas "Glory of Women" by Sassoon is used portray the encouraging attitudes of women towards war as damaging, depicting them as fools in the process. Grenfell and Sassoon both use powerful and allegorical imagery in their war poetry to present their different attitudes towards war, and overall highlighting the effect of the prevailing sentiment of patriotism of the time, revealing how idealisation and disillusionment are contrasting results of such.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.headline
Creative Writing 'Interruption' | 11th September 2023

# data[].attributes.subject
Creative Writing 'Interruption' | 11th September 2023

# data[].attributes.body
Paul Nash's depiction of the front line:

THINK:
- I think that this painting is illustrating the image of the front line in a marsh
- I think that the tree has been destroyed by something viscous, as it appears torn apart and sagging
- I think that this is a specific portrayal of trench warfare, as it is barren and desolate, as no man's land would be.
- I think that there has been some sort of explosion, as there a huge smoke plumes, and the area shows significant signs of destruction

THINK 2nd PAINTING:

- I think that this painting is depicting men trudging along the trenches to go to fight, as there are carrying heavy warfare equipment
- Due to the peaceful look of the painting, I think that no war has occured in that place yet, and it is a pathway to the front lines

Diary entry from the perspective of a soldier:
- trauma
- heading off to the front-lines
- how the apprehension causes madness in the mind of a soldier

Dearest Diary,

# data[].attributes.body
Round 1: 100%
Round 2: 100%
Round 3: 100%
Round 4: 100%

# data[].attributes.body
Source 1: The British Library

War Poetry is an independent genre, and an extraordinary literary phenomenon at that. It can be distinguished by the amount of poetry produced, and their self-consciousness as war poets. During war time, there was more than 2000 war poets from just England and Ireland. War poetry, controversial to what some may think, is not only poetry of the trenches, but can expand to combatants and non-combatants, men and women, georgians and modernists. Additionally to being expansive in terms of its poets, it is expansive geographically - it can be found all over the world: Turkey, India, Eastern Europe etc. War poetry is also unique because of its necessity to move beyond cultural history or literary memory, beyond structure of feeling: primal moments when poetic form is asked to bear witness to historical trauma.

The first World War brought with it a limit (and still brings it today) to language. Wilfred Owen, Isaac Rosenberg, both poets who bring us directly into the perilous zone of war. This is where language gropes, tries to understand and seize the rawness of such a horrific experience. It is capturing reality that is otherwise be uncapturable. In the process, it is almost like language is actually being contorted or beaten to reveal this raw reality. It is alleged by historians that poetry from WWI hijacked the whole history of WWI, that it has distorted our understanding of world wars, because of this.

Why do we read Wilfred Owen more than other military accounts? It is true that Dulce et Decorum est is not the only truth, not the only account of extreme violence and pain, but one of many: those of civilians, women, non-combatants. We can't narrow down WWI experience to trench warfare, and that to Dulce et Decorum est.

We don't read these poems to satisfy some political need/ agenda , or to make peace in the world, but because they make us realise how complicated we are, how human we are because of it. All the things we are: idealist, mortal, and guilty. To reflect on the spell that is cast upon us because of the sensuous likes of language.

Source 2: Wilfred Owen, 'Dulce et Decorum Est' (British Library)
- Key Takeaways:

• 'Dulce et Decorum Est, Pro Patria Mori' means in latin that it is sweet and fitting to die for one's country - the zeitgeist of the time
• Almost a genre circulating around Dulce et Decorum Est
• Both terror and a sense of exhilaration are fused and confused in the word ecstasy
• Dulce et Decorum Est is drafted and re-drafted - almost like a poet's workshop - though that we see Owen's sonic understanding and memory of poetic form
• His corrections give us an insight into how he would feel the words on the page
• Dulce et Decorum Est is a polysyllabic sound
• Owen is sometimes nicknames the Patron Saint of pity.
• The difference between the works of an aging civilian painter and a young combatant in the war are very distinct - one majestic, and the other displaying the horror flat out on the page - plunging into sensory moment from the start
• There is language to show all the movement from visual, to tactile, auditory etc, which engages the senses in single, but powerful phrases
•It evokes a tactile thickness on the reader

# data[].attributes.body
A book I have pretended to have read:

Even though I find myself reading basically any book I can lay my hands on, I have once, pretended to read the classic 'Little Women' for the purpose of making the person who gifted it to me happy. However, I was quite young when I received this book, and consequently had little understanding of the complex language used, so now that I am older and have experience with reading books like this, I have full intention of reading it at a (near) future date.

The book I hate the most

The book I hate the most is called 'Emma', written by Jane Austen (although I think 'hate' would be too strong a verb to describe my particular feeling towards this book). This is because, partly, it was the first classic I had ever read, resulting in a large confusion for the language used. Because of this, I had troubling understanding quite a lot of the book, or finding parts that seemed to me relatively droning. At a future date, I may find myself reading this book again to possibly re establish my current dislike of it. Although, this being said, I can't deny that Jane Austen has a beautiful way of writing, with what I can now look back on to be a great characterisation of all characters. Overall, I can say that my dislike of this book is based largely on the time in which I read it.

The kinds of things I look for in a book – what kinds of ‘hooks’ am I typically engaged by?

In a book, I love there to be an adventure that the character/s embark on. This is mostly based on my wish to go on an adventure myself, so when that desire is somewhat replicated in novel, I tend to be more hooked to it. Furthermore, plot twists, or cliffhangers between chapters are what make a book more of a page-turner for me, as it makes me want to find out what happens next. A book series that I have read (and re-read because it was so good) called 'The Mortal Instruments - ShadowHunter novels' included lots of these plot twists and cliff hangers, which made me very eager to finish each book.

Books or texts I want to read in the future

Books that I would like to read in the future are more of those on war, as I find the topic, however gruesome and saddening, quite entertaining when written about, as well as interesting in itself. So far, from reading 'The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas', 'Salt to Sea', 'The Secret Act', 'The Diary of Anne Frank' plus a few more, I have found I deeply enjoyed this topic, not only because of the exciting tales of the characters, but also because they are (from my experience) deeply moving, especially those about the lives of the war survivors. Specifically, I would like to read a book called 'All the Light We Cannot See' which I have been told it was very beautiful and moving.

Film adaptations of books I particularly liked

To this day, I have still found the film adaptations of the Harry Potter books to be excellent, due to the great casting, acting, and the similarity between the books and the movies, which, however saddening, is something one cannot find often. As well as this, after reading 'The Hunger Games' this summer, I watched the movies, and found them to be fantastic! It really set the scene for the books, and although some of the movie sections have not been done completely as same the book (although managing to achieve that to a high standard everywhere else) they still were really entertaining and enjoyable to watch.