EN1107 Suggestions for preparing for the exam 2020
This course in particular:
You have to answer two questions in two hours.
You will also have 15 minutes reading time.
The paper is divided into two sections. Answer one question from each
section. Section A will have questions on the texts you studied in Block 3;
Section B obliges you to compare and two texts on which you have been
taught in this term. You are not expected to write about Blocks 1 and 2 in
this exam.
The questions in Section A will take the form of passages for commentary
and analysis. They will be taken from the Block 3 novels. Choose one
passage. See the advice below on commentary exercises.
You cannot take books into the exam with you.
It is useful to learn quotations. If you cannot, make sure that you at least
refer to specific incidents in the novels. Avoid waffle and unsupported
generalisations.
You are encouraged but not obliged to cite critics. If you cannot remember
exactly what they said, you can paraphrase them.
Section A: Critical Commentary.
What is it?
A commentary – sometimes called a ‘gobbet’ exercise – usually comprises a close
critical analysis of a short passage taken from a work you have already studied.
You will be asked to present a close reading of the extract and to comment on
how it relates to the rest of the work – or how it exemplifies the themes of the
course. You should pay special attention to the language of the passage. For
example, you might choose to comment on imagery, figures of speech, narrative,
irony, or the use of direct speech. You might also consider the text’s genre.
A good commentary will think about the effects of these features. It is not enough
simply to state that ‘There is imagery in this passage’. Rather, you should
identify, for example, specific images and explain how they contribute to what the
passage means. (Remember that you do not have to comment on every word or
idea in the passage, only the ones about which you have something to say.) The
best commentaries will draw their detailed observations together to make a larger
point about the passage as a whole.
Your commentary should have a proper introduction and conclusion, but these
should be appropriate to the scale of the task (you may only need two or three
sentences in each case). It is often a good idea to begin by putting the passage in
context, perhaps by identifying its genre or its place in the larger narrative, and
you might conclude by drawing out those elements of your reading that seem
most important. However, it is unlikely that you would want to begin with, say, a
survey of the author’s life and works, or an overview of the history of the novel.
It is vital to focus on the passage itself. Everything in your commentary should be
relevant to the passage. Where you introduce contextual material, you should
always explain to your reader precisely how it relates to and illuminates specific
features of the passage.
Here are a few suggestions for general questions that you might ask yourself
when writing a commentary:
What is the passage trying to convey? How is it conveying it?
Is its viewpoint consistent?
Is it a first-person account? a reported account? a dialogue?
Is it primarily descriptive or discursive?
This course in particular:
You have to answer two questions in two hours.
You will also have 15 minutes reading time.
The paper is divided into two sections. Answer one question from each
section. Section A will have questions on the texts you studied in Block 3;
Section B obliges you to compare and two texts on which you have been
taught in this term. You are not expected to write about Blocks 1 and 2 in
this exam.
The questions in Section A will take the form of passages for commentary
and analysis. They will be taken from the Block 3 novels. Choose one
passage. See the advice below on commentary exercises.
You cannot take books into the exam with you.
It is useful to learn quotations. If you cannot, make sure that you at least
refer to specific incidents in the novels. Avoid waffle and unsupported
generalisations.
You are encouraged but not obliged to cite critics. If you cannot remember
exactly what they said, you can paraphrase them.
Section A: Critical Commentary.
What is it?
A commentary – sometimes called a ‘gobbet’ exercise – usually comprises a close
critical analysis of a short passage taken from a work you have already studied.
You will be asked to present a close reading of the extract and to comment on
how it relates to the rest of the work – or how it exemplifies the themes of the
course. You should pay special attention to the language of the passage. For
example, you might choose to comment on imagery, figures of speech, narrative,
irony, or the use of direct speech. You might also consider the text’s genre.
A good commentary will think about the effects of these features. It is not enough
simply to state that ‘There is imagery in this passage’. Rather, you should
identify, for example, specific images and explain how they contribute to what the
passage means. (Remember that you do not have to comment on every word or
idea in the passage, only the ones about which you have something to say.) The
best commentaries will draw their detailed observations together to make a larger
point about the passage as a whole.
Your commentary should have a proper introduction and conclusion, but these
should be appropriate to the scale of the task (you may only need two or three
sentences in each case). It is often a good idea to begin by putting the passage in
context, perhaps by identifying its genre or its place in the larger narrative, and
you might conclude by drawing out those elements of your reading that seem
most important. However, it is unlikely that you would want to begin with, say, a
survey of the author’s life and works, or an overview of the history of the novel.
It is vital to focus on the passage itself. Everything in your commentary should be
relevant to the passage. Where you introduce contextual material, you should
always explain to your reader precisely how it relates to and illuminates specific
features of the passage.
Here are a few suggestions for general questions that you might ask yourself
when writing a commentary:
What is the passage trying to convey? How is it conveying it?
Is its viewpoint consistent?
Is it a first-person account? a reported account? a dialogue?
Is it primarily descriptive or discursive?
