English Mock Response to Feedback

1)Be careful with meandering sentences!

Fix: These roles seem to have a common thread in that they are, in some way, associated with being “small”. This can be seen not just in the sense that they are “small parts” but also in that they rely on her being physically small as a “little slip of a thing”. Furthermore, she is also presented as “small” in a more metaphorical way as a victim when she plays a character “wrongfully accused of stealing drugs”

Fix 2: The writer’s use of detail contributes to a contrasting characterisation of Annabel. She is presented as seemingly small and timid in the first half of the passage and later on characterised as arrogant. This creates a narrative structure where the focus shifts from one distinct characterisation of Annabel to another

2)Convincing – I find it difficult to see how she can be described as ‘arrogant’

Fix: [Maybe focus on showing how Annabel is defined first by her roles as an actor then as a wife then?]

3) Consider plausibility! This is a reach

Fix 1: [cut everything following ‘could suggest battle’ in order to avoid overanalysing?]

Fix 2:[cut section about Ibsen]

4)Be precise about the technique used

Fix: The imagery created by the simile of boiled food

Paper 1 CAT Reflection


  1. Identify “WOW” words related to question: Intertextuality, Allusion, Poetic Devices, Time and Space, narrative perspective/ structure/ point of view, context, Communication, Voice etc.
  2. Acknowledge the form in the introduction. Link thesis to formal feature you’ve been asked about
  3. Use words specific to the text type. Poetry: Rhyme, persona, lineation, rhythm (ish), figurative language, imagery etc etc. Prose: Narrative voice, narrative perspective, atmosphere, structure.Drama: Stage directions, motifs, symbols, dramatic irony
  4. Body paragraphs should contain references to technique/form

Rowand Barthes: Death of the Author (5 quotations)

“It will always be impossible to know, for the good reason that all writing is itself this special voice, consisting of several indiscernible voices, and that literature is precisely the invention of this voice, to which we cannot assign a specific origin: literature is that neuter, that composite, that oblique into which every subject escapes, the trap where all identity is
lost, beginning with the very identity of the body that writes.”

“Probably this has always been the case: once an action is recounted, for intransitive ends, and no longer in order to act directly upon reality — that is, finally external to any function but the very exercise of the symbol — this disjunction occurs, the voice loses its origin, the author enters his own death, writing begins.”

“The absence of the Author (with Brecht, we might speak here of a real “alienation:’ the Author diminishing like a tiny figure at the far end of the literary stage) is not only a historical fact or an act of writing: it utterly transforms the modern text (or — whatis the same thing — the text is henceforth written and read so that in it, on every le-vel, the Author absents himself).”

“child. Quite the contrary, the modern writer (scriptor) is born simultaneously with his text; he is in no way supplied with a being which precedes or transcends his writing, he is in no way the subject of which his book is the predicate; there is no other time than that of the utterance, and every text is eternally written here and now.”

“the writer can only imitate a gesture forever anterior, never original; his only power is to combine the different kinds of writing, to oppose some by others, so as never to sustain himself by just one of them; if he wants to express himself, at least he should know that the internal “thing” he claims to “translate” is itself only a readymade dictionary whose words can be explained (defined) only by other words, and so on ad infinitum:”

HL Essay Preferences

Text Preferences:

  1. 소년이 온다
  2. If this is a Man
  3. Atonement

Lines of Inquiry:

  1. From the perspective of Korean culture/traditional beliefs? Korean History? A Confucian analysis? Translation
  2. From the perspective of the history of the Nazis. As a memoir. Author’s message.
  3. Crime novel. Death of the author. Historical reading

The reading from the perspective of Korean culture or traditional beliefs is certainly a possible one. There are several references within the text such as the use of the term 혼 (魂 though the text notably avoids any use of Chinese characters) which is one of several terms for a soul that the author could chosen from. That may or may not have been a conscious choice of course though it is certainly interesting.

HL Practice Essay Feedback

General Feedback:

1) Write the question and focus on it. Link to Readers, Writers and Texts as well as Time and Space.

2) Introduce your text and ensure there is a common thread throughout the essay. Also, be selective, focus on the writer and don’t retell the story.

3) Be concise. Quote properly and effectively.

4) Ensure to have both literary and topic based sources. Let the experts speak for you


Specific Feedback:

  1. Be a critical reader of your secondary sources- don’t just take them as fat. Challenge/support them.
  2. Ensure you format quotations consistently and accurately

Also note: Just page number and year for actual text being written about (in text citations). When selecting secondary reading, go literary, not just historical.

Goal: Challenge and support secondary sources and ensure the sources are more literary and less historical.


Skip to toolbar