Written Text Exemplars
Achieved with Excellence 8
“It is often the most frustrating characters who are the most compelling and believable” To what extent
do you agree with this view. Respond to the question with close reference to one or more novels.
A simple yet
effective
introduction that
outlines the topic
and the direction
the essay will
take.
The Handmaid’s Tale – Margaret Atwood
Good links to the
topic. The writer
uses quotes from
the novel and
integrates them eg
“walking uterus”
and “live, in any
form”.
Judgements made
about Offred to
emphasise how
she ‘frustrates’ the
reader – she
‘kowtows’ to
Gilead’s values.
Reiteration of key
argument –
Offred is a human
being and acts
how human
beings would act
in similar
circumstances.
Offred, the protagonist of the novel, invokes sympathy at times but mainly inspires frustration
in the reader due to her crippling complacency. As the protagonist of the novel we would
expect Offred to embody the role of the hero. In reality she is the antithesis. Offred is a
‘handmaid’ in the totalitarian patriarchy that is the dystopian world of Gilead. In her role
Offred is treated merely as a ‘walking uterus’. She is put under the control of her so-called
commander, inheriting the possessive version of his name – ‘of Fred’. While the regime that
Gilean implements on women physically entraps her, what truly restricts her is her
complacency and passivity. Resigned to the duty that she has been assigned to, Offred is not
willing to jeopardise her immediate safety and comfort. Offred’s main priority is, after all, to
‘live, in any form’. Lacking the strength to follow her moral compass and the independence to
trust her judgements and decisions, Offred merely kowtows to the patriarchal values of Gilead;
she is obedient, passive and malleable. This apathetic complacency instils a great deal of
frustration in its readers. Offred’s inherent weaknesses lead her to being a pitiable character,
though not entirely sympathetic – her inaction actively confines her. Indeed she believes her
life has ‘no exit’ so ‘why fight?’ However it is, in fact, these weaknesses that make her so
entirely human, and believable. Offred is, in reality, the everywoman. We may like to believe
that, put in similar circumstances, we would sacrifice our safety for our freedom and that of
others, but this is delusional. In this way, through Offred, Atwood reveals all that is weak in
human nature. We might not like her, purely because Offred confronts us with all that is
wrong with ourselves.
Good descriptions of
how the Commander
is also human,
despite the fact that
he commits
‘inhuman’ acts.
More examples are
needed in the second
part of this
paragraph though –
does he really long
for human
interaction?
It is said that art imitates life. With close examination to such texts as Margaret Atwood’s
iconic dystopian novel, The Handmaid’s Tale, this idea is best exemplified. Atwood’s literary
prowess has enabled successful characterisation to occur through such characters as Offred,
the Commander and Moira. These characters go to prove the idea that it is often the most
frustrating characters who are the most compelling and believable.
The Commander is another character in The Handmaid’s Tale who, though less pitiable that
Offred, is entirely human in characterisation. In the novel the Commander is revealed to be one
of the seminal architects in the establishment of Gilead. On his orders Gilead’s rigid laws,
social structure and punishments were founded, however, subverting expectations, the
Commander fails to obey the rules that he created. The Commander begins secretly seeing
Offred whose ‘presence here is illegal’, because he believes that he is ‘above reproach’. He even
frequents Jezebel’s, the Gileadean equivalent of a brothel, because he gives biological
justification for it, that ‘nature demands variety’. More than willingly enforcing the laws of
Gilead upon the women, the Commander continues to flagrantly violate them, without
punishment. Although he seeks satisfaction elsewhere, due to the failed logic in Gilead’s law
structure, he still refuses to admit to defeat. Rather he defends his actions vehemently. This,
naturally, results in the readers viewing the Commander with frustration and disgust.
However while embodying man’s inhumanity to man, the Commander is not pure evil. While
undoubtedly possessing some entirely unfavourable characteristics, and not only being to
blame for his own misery and the suffering of others, in reality the Commander is merely a
weak man. What drives the Commander to violate his own statutes is pure loneliness. Just
like everyone else the Commander longs for human interaction. He craves love, longing,
affection and connection – things he is deprived of in Gilead. In fact even his refusal to own up
to the flaws in legislature is a frailty many of possess – stubbornness. While he may not earn
our admiration, or even our pity, the Commander proves himself to be one of the novel’s most
believable and compelling characters, flaws and all.
An interesting
argument is
presented about
Moira – namely
that it is only
when we see her
later in the novel
that we truly
begin to believe
in her. This
reiterates the
writers’ point
that the most
‘human’ of
characters are
often the most
frustrating. It is
because we want
to believe that we
will react
differently if we
were in their
shoes. Great use
of quotes here
and a powerful
concluding
sentence.
Offred’s best friend Moira immediately appears heroic and worthy of our admiration, though it
is not until later on in the novel that we truly find her to be believable. In stark contrast to
Offred’s role as the pitiable anti-hero, Moira is introduced to us as the human manifestation of
non-conformity – the fiery tempered, feminist lesbian who rejected the patriarchy that would go
on to dictate her life in Gilead. While we, at once, find Moira instantly more affable than Offred,
she appears almost one-dimensional, devoid of any true depth of emotion, or any inherent
weaknesses. Offred admits that ‘Moira made us dizzy. She was like an elevator with open sides.’
While Offred remains obedient to her role, Moira breaks free from the Red Centre, terrifying her
handmaid counterparts now that ‘she’d been set loose, she’d set herself loose. She was now a
loose woman.’ Accordingly, Moira seems invincible and somewhat unrealistic. However it is
when we meet her again at the end of the novel that we really understand just how human she
is. No longer the sassy woman, calling commanders ‘pigs’ and demanding attention, Moira is a
defeated woman. Working as a prostitute in Jezebel’s it appears that Moira has buckled under
pressure and was now letting herself be exploited by the men she tried so hard to revolt against.
She admits ‘I’m not a martyr’ and the reader responds in frustration. It is always disheartening to
see those that we so admire having lost their passion and their fire. While she does disappoint
us, we respond in sympathy, rather than fury. At last Moira has revealed her weakness, her
Achilles heel. Offred had wanted ‘swashbuckling heroism…something that befits her...something
I lack’ for Moira, but instead she was conquered. Now Moira was more compelling, more
human, more real. Atwood’s message, via Moira is bleak. She proves that no one is invincible
and even our heroes can be defeated. Moira was just like us.
The Handmaid’s Tale is successful on account of the fact that it presents characters who, due to
their flaws, are wholly convincing and believable. While no doubt Offred, the Commander and
Moira incite frustration at times, they confront us with what it truly means to be human.
Through such characters Atwood offers her most poignant messages, even if they do seem bleak.
Excellence
This is an excellent essay with some very perceptive comments made about what it means to be human
and why we relate to these characters – even though we do not want to be like them. More quotations
from the novel would, however, support these ideas even further.
Achieved with Excellence 7
Shakespeare’s tragedies generally conclude with the downfall and death of the noble protagonist. Discuss
with detailed supporting evidence, whether or not Othello can be considered a ‘noble protagonist’,
given his murderous actions at the end of the play.
Othello – William Shakespeare
William Shakespeare’s Othello will forever be a character surrounded by controversy. There
will always be critics and not a few readers who cannot forgive Othello for his violence and
misplaced anger toward his wife Desdemona. However, others argue he remains, despite this
lapse a character of great dignity and one worthy of respect. Indeed, though certainly the
unhappy victim of manipulation, Othello is I believe arguably one of the most noble and
romantic of Shakespeare’s protagonists.
Othello is a man shrouded in mystery. Though lacking in the airs and etiquette of fine
Venetian society, he is widely respected and awed by all those who know him for his military
prowess and temperate nature. He appears, as A C Bradley writes “almost from wonderland”,
from a far off place, bearing stories of mythical creatures and magic handerchieves. It is this
mysterious dignity that attracts Desdemona to him, as well as his controlled and noble
manner. He exhibits this several times early on in the play, refusing to become angry or act
rashly: “keep up your bright swords or the dew will rust them”. He is also perhaps the most
poetic of Shakespeare’s heroes, a characteristic evident in many of his speeches, “these nine
moons wasted”. He has an eloquence beyond the airs and graces of Venetian court, as well as
a thoughtful and mild disposition. Certainly, then, at the outset of the play Othello is every
inch the “noble protagonist” necessary in a Shakespearian tragedy.
It would be foolish to say, however, that later events leave Othello’s character untarnished. It
is undeniable that eventually Othello is consumed with jealously and acts in a way far
removed from his calm and reasoned normal self. However I would argue that this is not so
much indicative of a flaw in Othello’s character as representative of the weakness of all men,
the susceptability of everyone to suspicion and jealously and the influence of unfortunate
circumstance. Othello is, in fact, the victim in the play, the unlucky plaything of a villain who
admits “I hate the Moor”, a calculating and conniving man who will do anything to bring
about Othello’s demise. The blame lies not with Othello, but with Iago.
As J I M Stewart writes, “Othello is everything that the human soul strives to be, Iago is that
which corrupts and perverts it from within. Othello is guilty of nothing except perhaps being
too passionate, too emotional. After all, Othello is a man who “loved not wisely but too well”.
He is a man, according to Bradley, of “one nature” when he trusts he trusts fully. When he
fights, he fights with all the strength he can muster, when he loves he loves wholeheartedly.
And when Iago plants the “seeds of distrust” in his mind, suspicion consumes him.” This is
not a criticism, merely perhaps an explanation. It is Othello’s emotional nature that
eventually clouds his normally flawless judgement. However, despite this, it is impossible to
say that Othello was any more jealous or more suspicious than any other man would have
been under the same circumstances. Despite Iago’s constant insinuation, Othello does not
immediately nor unquestioningly take Iago’s word for Desdemona’s infidelity. He demands
proof when a less level-minded man would have blindly assumed the worst. Indeed, that
Othello does even this much is a tribute to his noble and controlled nature, for what man
would not believe the word of another whom he considered an honest and trustworthy
friend?
Also, it cannot be forgotten that Iago had not chosen as his victim a long-married man who as
Bradley put it “knew his wife like his sister”. Othello and Desdemona were newlyweds and
there was much Othello would not have known about his bride. Perhaps it is understandable
then, that as a foreigner and an older man without as firmer grasp of Venetian customs as the
company his wife usually kept, that Othello might be particularly receptive to Iago’s cunning
and lies. It is natural, under the circumstances, that Othello may have been lacking some of
Introduction
gives
clear
indication of
writer’s
viewpoint
but also
acknowledges
differing
views.
Opens
discussion
with early
impressions of
Othello.
Shifts to
discussing
later
impressions of
Othello.
Mature thought
apparent in
range of
perceptive
comments.
Writer has
engaged with
text and with
other critics’
ideas.
Fluent writing
which
engages
reader.
Sophisticated
language and
varied syntax.
Uses a range of
quotations
[from text and
critics] and
evidence
the confidence he would otherwise possess. If Othello and Desdemona had been longmarried, it is very unlikely that Iago’s conniving could have had such great and dire effect.
Bradley writes “the Othello of Act Four is not Othello” and it is easy to see what he means.
This is Othello in his fall (a fall which is never quite completed) and it is here that his noble
nature is most in question. It is here we see a strong, proud man reduced to a quivering,
confused shadow of his former self. He is violent and angry, but then this is no more than
could be seen in any other man and reveals only Othello’s humanity. He loses his eloquence
and his calm nature, but the loss is temporary. When he kills Desdemona, it is not so much a
murder as a sacrifice, and the remorse he feels is painfully genuine.
In the final act of the play, we see Othello return to the man we met at the production’s
outset. He is a man of dignity, a man fond of beauty and poetry, a man quiet and controlled.
Here, again, is Othello the hero. In his death is the same pride with which he lived his life.
Despite the fateful turn of events and Othello’s unsavoury actions, he is not a bad person. He
suffered the inherent weaknesses that all humanity suffers, and was tricked into becoming
something he was not, because of it. But he is not to blame for Iago’s dangerous
understanding of human nature, Iago who played our hero cruelly, deceiving him at every
turn. Iago who said “though I hate him as a do hell’s pains yet for necessity of present life I
must show out a flag and sign of love which is indeed but sign.” Ironically it is because of his
human imperfection that Othello died much as he began, the perfect tragic hero, the perfect
“noble protagonist.”
Sustained
insight evident in
ability to look
at Othello
through
different lenses
and make
mature
comments
closely linked to
question.
The conclusion
rounds off a
well –
structured,
balanced,
lucid
argument.
Achieved with Excellence 7
“Characters and how they interrelate is the main focus of a novel.” To what extent do you agree with this view?
Respond to this question with close reference to one or more novels you have studied.
The Handmaid’s Tale - Margaret Atwood
In the novel The Handmaid’s Tale written by Margaret Atwood, the relation of
characters is in high focus, especially the relations between the narrator Offred and
minor characters such as Offred, her mother and Nick. This is because the relations
of characters is essential in heightening the knowledge that we hold of our narrator.
Firstly great importance and time is spent throughout The Handmaid’s Tale
developing the relations between Moira and Offred. As her best friend in the time
before the regime and companion and source of hope during the regime, Moira is
instrumental in displaying characteristics of Offred which would otherwise go
unnoticed. Our first impressions of Moira are given as bright, confident and
vivacious through a variety of quotes. Statements such as ‘wearing purple overalls,
with spiky hair and the gold fingernail she wore to be eccentric’ and ‘as usual she
defied fashion’ give the impression of a strong and defiant woman and already we
make contrasts with the more reserved Offred who lacks all of this natural strength
and confidence. As their relations are brought into dominance this contrast is only
further highlighted. We see Moira display strength and courage in attempts to
escape from the red centre and determination when she threatens the aunt, ‘I’ll stick
it all the way in,’ and escapes. This heroic act is of course what we expect from our
narrator, but however Offred expresses her lack of interest in trying to escape by
saying ‘Moira made us dizzy. She was like an elevator with no sides.’ Like so many
others Offred is already becoming resigned. Their differences are only further
highlighted when Offred acknowledges them, and her passivity. She says ‘I don’t
want her to give in, go along, save her skin. I want swashbuckling heroism, single
handed combat, something that befits her. Something I lack.’ Their relationship,
ultimately, is developed to display this major character flaw of passivity, which is
essential for our understanding.
Another relationship that is focussed on is that of Offred and her mother. Once again
told in flashbacks, we draw many parallels with Moira and Offred’s mother. Once
again she is a woman of great strength and confidence and Offred strives to highlight
their differences. An ardent feminist, Offred’s mother refused to become a handmaid
and a tool for procreation upon the instillation of the new regime. Instead she
insisted on becoming an ‘unwoman’ and work in the colonies. This display of
strength and determination s lacking in Offred as she says things like ‘I just want to
live, in whatever form.’ The relations that we are shown between the two are once
again prominent. We cannot help but focus on Offred’s many weaknesses as her
mother’s strength grows. We are shown a feminist who actively fought for her cause.
She burnt pornography and participated in marches and even attempted to include
Offred, ‘want to throw one on, honey… the magazine had a naked pretty girl on the
front.’ However, Offred shied away from her mother. The resentment in their
relationship is evident and Offred lacks many admirable qualities her mother has.
She says that ‘she wanted too much from me…I didn’t want to live life by her terms’
indicating frustration and a want for a more complacent upbringing. The relations
between Offred and her mother also show that Offred blames the feminist movement
and by default, her mother for the regime by saying ‘you wanted a feminist culture…
well you have one. It isn’t what you meant but it exists.’ Lastly, their relations show
Offred’s need to draw strength from those around her as we see her defeated when
these sources are gone. These vital character traits need to be exposed, hence the
predomination of character relations as focus for a novel.
Lastly the relations of characters can also be shown through the relationship
between Offred and Nick. This relationship is a major focus in the novel, and plays
great importance as it reveals weaknesses, strengths and actions of Offred’s character
in present time. Firstly this relationship allows us to see one great strength in Offred,
through her meetings with the commander. As Nick acts as a signal he is
Succinct introduction offers
a clear thesis statement
Main body paragraphs are well
structured with:
 clear topic sentences
 detailed and convincing
supporting evidence
 perceptive comments - the
purpose of the relationship
being to highlight Offred’s
flaws
Writing is controlled
and fluent;
Comparisons are made
between relationships;
Clear links made to the
thesis statement.
Detailed evaluation of
relationships between
characters; this paragraph
could go further to comment
on what is revealed about
human nature through these
relationships.
instrumental in ensuring these happen. These meetings show us a great thirst for
knowledge in Offred and a dissatisfaction with the regime. ‘What do you want to
know, he says… I want to know whatever there is to know…what’s going on.’ This
strength shows Offred in a positive light and displays a sense of heroism which we
lack through other interactions. However, Nick also shows her one great weakness.
When Serena Joy arranges the meetings to ensure childbirth, Nick and Offred begin
an affair. He exists as a symbol of love and hope in her otherwise barren land. He,
and his offering of love, is her greatest weakness. As their relationship develops we
see Offred lose interest in gaining knowledge and resisting the regime. ‘The truth is
I no longer want to escape. I want to remain here with Nick, where I can get at him.’
She refuses to spy on the Commander and grows complacent, having been given
something that makes her feel loved. ‘I expected him to be gone… the fact that he
wasn’t seemed incredible benevolence to me.’ Nick shows us how important love is
to Offred, how she will sacrifice anything, including freedom for it. ‘I became
reckless, took stupid chances.’ This strength of Offred’s desire for love would
otherwise go unnoticed without the development of their relations and its
dominance in the plot.
The Handmaid’s Tale is a novel which is focussed around the interrelations of
characters, as without it, insight and development of character would be impossible.
Its main purpose is to develop the relations of various characters with the narrator
so a reader can gain a more developed understanding of character. Without these
relations such aspects as weakness of character would go unnoticed which would
result in little understanding or appreciation. It is for this reason that The
Handmaid’s Tale among other novels focuses around the interrelation and
development of relationships amongst various characters.
Achieved with Excellence 7
“Writers consistently use novels as a lens through which they scrutinise society”
To what extent do you agree with this view?
Respond to this question with close reference to one or more novels.
The Handmaid’s Tale – Margaret Atwood
Clear
introduction:
title, author,
key words,
summary of
main ideas
Sophisticated
integration of
evidence
Analysis of
how the novel
is a lens
through which
society is
scrutinised,
and thus
analysis of
beyond the
text ideas.
Clear
introduction
of next main
idea
Continued
integration of
evidence.
It is often the case that authors use novels as a lens through which they scrutinise society.
Margaret Atwood cleverly does so by creating a dystopian setting for her novel The Handmaid’s
Tale. The extreme gender roles, theoratic society and forms of control lead us as readers to
question our own society and draw parallels between Atwood’s dystopian society and elements
of our own.
The Handmaid’s Tale is set in the near future in a society named Gilead. Low fertility rates led
to the creation of such a place and it is fertility that determines much of the ways of Gilead. In
Gilead the only people with any real power are the men. Women are forced to comply with the
strict rules and regulations of Gilead or face the horrific consequences. It is the men who make
the decisions, who are able to both make and break the rules. Women are forbidden from
reading or writing and must stay at home and take care of the house. The protagonist of the
novel, Offred, is a handmaid. Forced to have sex with commanders (to whom they are issued),
their sole purpose is to reproduce. When referring to her body, Offred comments “I refuse to
look at something that determines me so completely” indicating how meaningless her life has
become. Even the wives of the commanders do not receive many more privileges. Serena Joy,
the wife of Offred’s commander, was once the lead spokesperson for promoting more traditional
gender roles. Offred’s comment “She doesn’t make speeches anymore. She’s speechless” is full of
poignancy as that is exactly what has happened to the women of Gilead. They have no voice.
Any qualms they might raise are squashed by male authority. In a flashback to her early days as
a handmaid, Offred recalls being told “There are two types of freedom. Freedom to and freedom
from. You are being given freedom from. Don’t underrate it”. This statement is incredibly
thought provoking as it causes us to contrast the lives of females in Gilead with the lives of
females today. It is possible to argue that many women take advantage of their freedom to. The
majority of women today are able to receive and education, make their own decisions and have a
career, yet how often do they remember they fought for these rights? By presenting us with such
extreme gender roles, Atwood causes us to imagine how difficult we would find such a society.
Not only do we contrast the society of Gilead with our own, but we also draw parallels where
possible. In Gilead abortion is considered a sin deemed punishable by death. Although it is not
common practise to kill those who perform abortions, in some areas of the world, it is certainly
frowned upon, for both religious and moral reasons.
Another aspect of society that attention is drawn to is in Atwood’s novel The Handmaid’s Tale
is biblical relevance in society. Gilead is most definitely a theocratic regime. Many of the
laws/ways of Gilead are based on a very literal understanding of the bible. Much of life in Gilead
revolves around biblical messages and various aspects of life enforce these messages. Each week,
the commander reads passages from the bible to the household, focusing on those which justify
the actions and beliefs of Gilead. For example, the passage “…and Adam was not deceived, but
the woman who was being deceived was in transgression, notwithstanding she shall be saved
through childbearing”. This clearly illustrates Gilead’s belief that women are inferior to men and
can only be saved through reproduction. Ideas like this are drilled into the minds of the
handmaids as they are taught to chant “Give me children or else I die”. Unfortunately for them,
Gilead takes this saying seriously – if a handmaid is unable to conceive after three postings, she
is sent to the colonies to work until she dies. The prevalence of biblical messages is also clear in
other ways. The names of the guards – ‘Angels’ as well as the grocery stores – “Fish and loaves,
“All scrolls”. Once again, the use of the extreme causes the reader to contrast Gilead with their
Clear and
critical
comments
linking to the
question
Clear
introduction
of final idea
Thoughtful
beyond the
text comment
Clear, concise
and effective
conclusion
own society and examine any similarities and differences. Although all countries identify with
various faiths, very few of them use such liberal interpretations of the Bible (or equivalent
thereof) to govern their country by. In Gilead biblical interpretations are used to justify extreme
acts. One cannot help but question whether such a situation could occur in their own society.
Atwood’s aim to challenge the view ‘that could never happen here’ is made clear by her choice of
setting – Cambridge in North America, traditionally a strict Puritan community.
A final area of society that is examined in The Handmaid’s Tale is the various ways of enforcing
control. To readers of Atwood’s novel, it initially seems impossible that such a regime could ever
exist without real threat from opposition. However on closer examination, it is possible to
identify key ways in which the society of Gilead was able to maintain control and power.
Perhaps the most effective form of maintaining control is by creating a strict hierarchy amongst
those being oppressed. Women in Gilead are split into five categories – wives, daughters,
handmaids, marthas, econowives. The way the hierarchy is set up means that each woman
envies another woman. Offred is perceptive enough to notice this when she comments “we all
envy each other something”. The jealousy that occurs as a result of this acts as a barrier between
the women. They are unable to unite and rise up against the regime as they resent each other
and cannot work together co-operatively. This segregation is further reinforced by the uniforms
each group must wear. The handmaids are most noticeable in red – the colour of blood, fertility,
passion and the red ‘A’ worn by Esther in ‘The Scarlet Letter’. Not only are women segregated
by a hierarchy, but they are also forced to turn against each other. At the red centre, handmaids
in training are forced to chant “Her fault! Her fault! Her fault!” at a girl who was raped. This,
along with the particexutions – where handmaids are forced to collaboratively execute those
who have ‘sinned’ make it impossible for the women of Gilead to unite against the regime.
Atwood succeeds in her aim of demonstrating how hard it is to overthrow a regime unless we
are all united and that the enforcers of regimes are aware of this and actively work to prevent the
unification of the opposition.
Through the use of a dystopian setting, Atwood challenges the reader to compare and contrast
the society of Gilead with their own. By doing so, we are forced to examine various aspects of
our society such as gender roles, systems of government and ways of maintaining control. We
learn to appreciate the society we live in and are reminded of the efforts of those who have
fought for it.
Achieved with Merit 6
To what extent do you agree that novels use a clash of opposites to present ideas?
Discuss your views with reference to a novel (or novels) you have studied.
The Great Gatsby – F. Scott Fitzgerald
In The Great Gatsby, by F Scott Fitzgerald, the author uses a clash of opposites to present his
ideas and major themes. One of the contrasts presented is that of the setting of the Novel.
Prosperous East and West Egg in New York are juxtaposed with the desolate wasteland of the
Valley of Ashes. The characters too are contrasted. The wealthy with the poor, and the good next
to the bad. Lastly differing events, both positive and negative are used to show a clash of
opposites. These clashes in turn help to demonstrate Fitzgerald’s main ideas, the superficiality of
the “Roaring twenties” and the failure of the American Dream.
Firstly, the numerous settings of the Great Gatsby provide obvious contrasts. The wealthy,
extravagant and prosperous setting of East and West Egg in New York is followed directly in the
book with a description of the Valley of Ashes, where Wilson and Myrtle live. New York is
described as beautiful, “The fashionable palaces of East Egg glittered across the water “while the
valley is seen as an arid wasteland, A fantastic farm where ashes grow in grotesque mounds.” This
dramatic contrast helps present to us the importance placed on materialism and superficial
aesthetics, as well as the importance placed on achieving the American Dream and living well.
The character of Wilson symbolises one who has not achieved The Dream, which leads to his
eventual suicide. The very fact that the established aristocracy of East Egg and the self made rich
of the West Egg are also contrasted reinforces the importance of class and hierarchy to 1920’s
society.
The clash of characters, be it rich or poor, kind of heart or cruel, also shows Fitzgerald’s ideas on
the kind of people a society focused on superficiality can create. The wealthy socialites of New
York are often compared with poor people like Wilson. The wealthy come across as vain and
vacuous and are only interested in the pursuit of money and possessions. Daisy and Jordan are
often described having conversations “as cool as their white dresses and their empty eyes in the
absence of all desire” where as Wilson is portrayed as “pitiful small figure struggling to make
something of his life.” When Nick sees him for the first time he describes his grey face as blending
into his surroundings, certainly not glamorous like the wealthy in New York. This clearly helps to
show us the failure of the American Dream as those who have supposedly “achieved” it are still just
as unhappy as those struggling to. Within the wealthy there are also contrasts of character. Gatsby
is essentially a figure good and pure of heart, and possesses “a certain romantic readiness and
undying gift for hope” whereas Tom is arrogant, cruel and selfish. He even describes Wilson as
“being so dumb he doesn’t know he’s alive”. This particular clash of opposites shows us the effect
that the pursuit of wealth and power can have on people.
Lastly events in the story unfold as being either positive or negative, such as the decadent
extravagent parties thrown by Gatsby next to the tragedy of Gatsby’s murder and Wilson’s
suicide. This clash of opposites helps us to understand that the carefree life that the wealthy lead
and society’s lack of morality eventually has a negative impact on themselves and others. Daisy and
Tom are described as people who “smashed up things and creatures and then retreated into their
vast carelessness”. Myrtle’s murder is a result of Daisy’s carelessness and lack of morals while
Gatsby’s murder is a result of one man having been utterly driven to maddness because he could
not achieve the dream and also by Tom’s immorality in his affair with Myrtle Wilson’s wife.
Identifies a number
of opposites and
two key ideas.
Structured answer
Paragraphs have:
• topic sentences
• description of
opposites
• direct references
to text
• clear links to
ideas
Fluent writing.
Sophisticated
language.
Varied sentence
structures.
Integrates
supporting
evidence.
Evidence
selected
provides
convincing
support for the
ideas.
Perception evident
at times [‘This
clash of opposites
...”] but not
sufficiently
sustained for
Excellence.
Fitzgerald presents many examples of clashes of opposites clearly which greatly contributes to the
audiences’ understanding of the novels main themes, superficiality, immorality, decadence and
therefore the failure of “achieving” the American Dream. Juxtaposition of different setting is
probably the best example of the importance of materialism and “success” while character
comparison show the affect the “Dream” has on people. Lastly, including exciting, decadent and
happy events such as Gatsby’s parties, alongside tragedies help explain the failure of the Dream as
people interpret it the wrong way and as a result become careless and selfish.
Next Steps - The student could


Elaborate in the body of the answer on some of the evaluative comments in the conclusion. E.g. “Juxtaposition of different setting is
probably the best example of...”
Consider whether there are other features linked with the use of opposites that the author uses to present his ideas
Achieved with Merit 5
Shakespeare’s tragedies generally conclude with the downfall and death of the noble protagonist. Discuss
with detailed supporting evidence, whether or not Othello can be considered a ‘noble protagonist’,
given his murderous actions at the end of the play.
Othello – William Shakespeare
Shakespeare’s tragedies generally conclude with the downfall and death of the “Noble Protagonist”,
I believe Othello was no different and he was indeed a noble protagonist victimised by the
“motiveless malignancy” of the plays prime antagonist Iago. We can consider the Moor Noble,
despite his actions at the end of the play.
In the beginning of the play we are introduced to Othello as the noble and respected leader of the
Venitian army, we clearly identify him as the protagonist of the play and can tell he is noble and
respected. This is reenforced in Act 1 scene iii when he addresses the senate “Most potent, grave,
and reverend signiors, my very noble and approv’d good masters;” from his respectful way of
speaking and his status as a General it is clear we can at this stage consider him as a noble
protagonist. Although Othello’s character is dynamic, I believe his noble and good nature is
something that remains static throughout the play.
There is without doubt a shift in the moors character however, I feel this is due to one sole factor;
Iago. Academic writer F R Levis argues that “Othello is blind” and “is responsible for his own
downfall and demise” while A C Bradley supports the antithesis of this arguing “Othello is noble
and heroic” and “character change is forced as a result of the “Evil Iago”. In this debate I am in full
support of the writtings of A C Bradley, as I believe it is Iago’s persistance in antagonism which
drives Othello to act in ways he knows are not right; i.e. killing Desdemona. Had it not been for
Iago’s evil ways, the play would have ended with the same Othello it began with.
In the final scenes of the play we see Othello murder his wife and then finally comit suicide once
he realises, that Iago’s trickery were what lead him to believe Desdemona was unfaithful. It is in
the last scenes that I feel we are given the strongest yet example of Othello’s nobility. When he
realises what he has done by “put out the light, then put out the light” in killing Desdemona he
decides to take his own life why?? because he wants to regain his respect and nobility being
remembered for the man he was and his duties to the state, not the broken man he had become at
the hands of Iago. “Remember me for what I hav’d done” Othello states before taking his life. I
believe when acting as himself not as Iagos puppet, he is the stereotypical noble protagonist as
shown by his actions in taking his own life.
In conclusion, I am in full support of the academic writtings of A C Bradley and believe Othello
to be considered a noble protagonist, tricked and victimised by the persistant antagonism of
Iago’s “motiveless malignancy”. Othello is a tragedy and ends with the downfall and death of its
noble protagonist.
Introduction
establishes clear
focus for
discussion
Structured answer
follows key stages
in Othello’s
development.
Clear, convincing
argument:
 keeps to focus
of question
 supporting
evidence
linked to
judgments
about
Othello’s
character
 integrates
evidence from
critics
 sense of
personal
engagement
with text and
argument.
Reasoned
conclusion.
Next Steps: The student could

expand on ideas e.g how Othello’s nobility is established at the start of the play.
Achieved 4
To what extent do you agree that novels use a clash of opposites to present ideas? Discuss your views with
reference to a novel (or novels) you have studied.
The Great Gatsby – F. Scott Fitzgerald
In the novel ‘The Great Gatsby’ written by F.Scott Fitzgerald the clash of opposites are used a lot to present
ideas. Nick compares the Mid West to the East, East Egg to West Egg, Gatsby to the Buchanans. Even
Myrtle and Wilson clash to present ideas, about 1920’s life in America.
Nick the narrator in the novel, like most of the other characters comes from the Mid West of America. Nick
views the Mid West at the beginning of the novel as ‘boring’ and the ‘moral centre of America.’ After fighting
in WW1 he decides to move out East to New York where he sees things as ‘fast paced’ and much more
exciting. All the main characters in the novel have moved out East to better their lives and leave behind their
pasts in the Mid West. Daisy Buchanan misses her family back in the Mid West and asks after them when
Nick first arrives ‘do they miss me?’ Gatsby has moved East to make a success of himself and win Daisy back.
Nick moved to learn about the ‘bond business.’ All of these characters show us that if it is the material things
you are seeking then the East is the place to be but the Mid West provides the much needed stability
(meaningful relationships). Contrasting the East to the Mid West and helps the reader to understand the
corruption and the loneliness of the East.
With in this corrupt East it is divided smaller to present opposites, East Egg is where all the ‘old money’
stylish, elegant people live. Across the bay on West Egg all the ‘self made’, ‘new money’, corrupt people that
have money and want to fit in the with the wealthy live. If it seen that on East Egg all the houses are
‘mansions’ and have ‘manicured lawns and gardens’ where as on West Egg the houses are just as large but
lack the originality of those on East Egg. The water between East and West Egg represents the distance and
the unreachable goal for those on West Egg to make it with the East Eggers, It is very clearly portrayed in
the novel that the contrast is intentional and used to present the idea of different classes within society.
To further add to the contrast between East and West Egg the characters if Tom and Daisy Buchanan and
Jay Gatsby are used. The Buchanan’s live on East Egg, they are very wealthy and seen by Nick our nariatior as
‘careless people who go around smashing things up and retreating back to their money.’ Tom and Daisy have
everything they could possibly want except for a meaningful relationship, Tom had an affair with ‘chamber
maid’ on their honeymoon and has a ‘women in New York.’ This is not a secret and Jordan, the Buchanan’s
house guest is surprised when Nick does not know ‘I thought everyone knew.’ Gatsby on the other side of
the water on West Egg is striving for the American dream. He worked hard to try and earn his money but
when it didn’t pay off he resorted to corrupt means. His longing for wealth comes as he desires to win the
girl of his dreams, Daisy. Gatsby is described as having ‘hope’ and being ‘romantic.’ The contrast between the
Buchanan’s and Gatsby is presenting the ideas of the differences of behaviour with in different classes in
society. Fitzgerald has used this contrast very effectively to show clear differences.
Myrtle is married to George Wilson, they live about their garage in the Valley of Ashes, George is seen to be
the only character that in uncorrupt throughout the novel, this does change at the end. George is desperately
trying to make a better life for him and his wife Myrtle through hard work. He can be viewed as ‘pathetic’
Tom describes him as ‘so dumb he doesn’t know hes alive.’ George believed that Tom will sell him his car to
he can fix it up and resell it to make some money but in reality Tom visits the garage as he’s having an affair
with Myrtle. Mytrle also strives for a better life for herself but does not do it through hard work, she does it
through her affair with Tom. We hear that she spotted him on the train and was impressed by his shoes’ and
‘suit’, she is social climbing and trying to up her status by associating with people of a higher class. These
two characters are so closely linked to show the difference in how people strive to make a better life for
themselves. They clearly see how people from a lower class can compare and contrast not only to the upper
class but the difference within the lower class.
Through the eyes of Nick, F. Scott Fitzgerald has presented many different opposing ideas to create a novel
full of ideas and critisems of the values of society in America in the 1920’s. The novel has very successfully
shown these ideas and the clash of opposites was a very effective and understandable way of doing so.
Next Steps - The student could



Proof read the answer, as technical errors interfere with the clarity of the ideas at times.
Provide more specific details to support points made.
Link the part played by the ‘clash of opposites’ to the reader’s understanding of the ideas
Differences between
two characters
discussed and
supported with
details. Some
evaluative
comments.
Paragraph
concludes by
refocusing on ideas.
Structured answer:
• introduction
identifies ideas
and opposites
• body focuses on
three examples of
opposites
• conclusion sums
up points made
Response makes a
number of
assertions
throughout but
these are not
convincingly
analysed and
linked to evidence.
Achieved 4
“Central to451
the purpose of a novel is the presentation of a major theme.” To what extent do you agree with this view?
Fahrenheit
Respond
to this question with close reference to one or more novels you have studied.
Ray
Bradbury
Fahrenheit 451 – Ray Bradbury
In the novel Fahrenheit 451 written by Ray Bradbury, the purpose of the novel is to
teach the reader what can happen to society if everyone conforms. A major
theme is the dangers of conformity and points that help to show this are that
conformity can be judged by a person’s appearance, conformity restricts
individuality, people who break conformity have to face consequences and that
people conform out of fear.
Straightforward
introduction that outlines
the key points that will be
raised.
Conformity can be judged by a person’s appearance and the reader is able to see
that Montag is conforming to society: “he shined his black-beetle coloured
helmet and hung up his fireproof jacket neatly”. This quote helps to show that
Montag (the protagonist) puts effort into his appearance and the reader can see
that he is happy to conform to the rules and regulations. The quote “the strong
smile never left his face, even after he had finished work” helps to show how
Montag enjoys his job as a fireman and we can see that he is happy with his job
because he is smiling. “The smell of kerosene was never washed off completely” –
this quote helps to show that it is hard to break the conformity as there is always
a little bit that is still conforming. “He pointed to the 451 numerals stitched into
his jacket’s arm. ‘Don’t these mean anything to you?’” This quote helps to show
that Montag respects his job and expects others to respect it too. It shows that
he is proud of what he does and puts effort into it. This helps to show that he is
happy to conform because he enjoys what he is doing. “It was a pleasure to burn”.
This quote helps to show how passionate Montag is about his job and how he
believes that he is doing the right thing. We can see by Montag’s attitude to his
job and the effort he puts into his uniform that he is happy to conform to society.
Humans often conform to society because they do not want to appear different to
others and want to fit in and be accepted even sometimes if they do not agree
with what they are conforming to. Humans are social beings and do not want to
be the odd one out and come across as different from the rest. Many people often
conform to following fashion trends and such just so society will accept them as
normal and they can fit in.
Good topic sentence with
supporting quote. It
would be far more
effective if the quote was
woven into the statement.
Conformity restricts individuality. It stops people having their own freedom and
individual thoughts: “Did you know there is dew on the grass in the mornings?
But he didn’t know this and it made him quite irritable.” This quote helps to
show that Montag had never noticed the dew on the grass because he is
conforming to society and is unable to have his own individual thoughts, and
only when somebody else points it out he realises he never actually knew. “You
never once listen to what I’ve said. You laugh when I haven’t been funny and you
answer straight off.” This quote helps to show that in society there are expected
answers and people are expected to think in certain ways. The government has
brainwashed everyone into thinking the same things: “But what do you talk
about?” Montag is bewildered at the thought of talking because society does not
see this as acceptable and because he is conforming he is unable to understand
the idea of what people would talk about. “School shortened, discipline relaxed.
Spelling and grammar gradually, gradually neglected.” This quote helps to show
that conformity restricted so much individuality that everything was getting
made easier, life was made much easier. “But wasn’t it the bright boy you selected
for beatings after hours?” This quote helps to show how being smart was not
acceptable anymore because everyone was expected to be the same as everybody
else. “Intellectual became the swear word it was meant to be.” This quote helps
Good evaluation of the
idea of conformity
Repetitive statements
which detract from the
reader’s enjoyment: “This
quote helps to show…”
Good evaluations about
Montag and how he
conforms to society and
why this is significant.
Good links to beyond the
text
Good range of quotes and
evaluation of what they
reveal about conformity
to show how the government had made society the same as everyone else so that
there would be no individuality and everyone would have known the same things.
This made it much easier for the government to control society. In today’s modern
society political correctness is starting to become an issue with more people taking
offence to different matters. This could be the start of restricted individuality like
in Fahrenheit 451. Humans need knowledge to be free. They need their own
individual thoughts to be happy and many people break conformity so that they
are able to be happy or even just because of good will.
People who break conformity have to face consequences. Montag has to face
consequences for breaking conformity and so does an old lady who has books in
her possession – “Come on lady, you know it’s illegal to have books.” This quote
helps to show how Beatty is reminding the lady that she and everyone else knows
the laws and she has broken them so has to suffer the consequences of getting her
house burned down. “You will never take my books” – this quote helps to show
how the lady is happy to burn with her books, she is breaking away from
conformity and is prepared to die for it. “Why…we’re outside my house” – this
quote shows Montag coming to the realisation that he was going to have to burn
his own house down as a punishment for breaking conformity. “Your mess, you
clean it up and after your finish, you’re under arrest.” This quote shows Montag
having to burn his own house for having books which is against the law and after
that he has to face the consequences of going to jail. “You can’t tell me you weren’t
going to get caught; I mean it’s pretty silly going around quoting poetry like that.”
This quote helps to show how Montag got caught and how he made it quite
obvious that he was breaking conformity and now he has to pay the price for it.
People who break conformity normally do it because they believe in the cause
enough and the consequences either seem worth it or do not even bother them.
Humans want to be happy and sometimes do whatever it takes to be happy.
Because they do not want to live an unhappy life and sometimes the easiest way is
to put the blame on others to get themselves out of the limelight.
People conform out of fear. Many people are afraid of the government, of society or
generally whoever sets the rules and regulations. “But why should I read? What
for?” This quote shows Mildred asking Montag why she should read. She doesn’t
want to break conformity because she is happy conforming and living her life the
way she is. “Mildred thrust herself against the wall and gasped.” This quote helps
to show how scared Mildred is about the thought of someone catching them with
books in her house. She does not want to break conformity and have to suffer the
consequences. “They might come and burn the house! What about the family?”
This quote helps to show how she only cares about the family and that she doesn’t
want to risk her house for reading books which to her are nothing important. “We
burned them after we read them just in case someone found them after.” This quote
helps to show that they are breaking conformity by reading the books but are
conforming by burning them because they do not want to be caught with them and
have to face the consequences. They are conforming out of fear. Humans don’t
want to have to face consequences and often find it easier to conform and be
scared. The government can set harsh punishments for people who are found
breaking conformity and humans just want to be happy so often conform to these
rules even though they are scared.
In conclusion Fahrenheit 451 written by Ray Bradbury serves to teach the reader
about what can happen to a society if everyone conforms. A major theme was the
dangers of conformity and the main points that helped to show this were that
conformity can be judged by a person’s appearance, conformity restricts
individuality, people who break conformity have to face consequences and people
conform out of fear. Overall people are looking for happiness whether this be by
breaking conformity or conforming to rules and regulations. We can tell whether
someone is conforming by their appearance and how much effort they put in.
Good understanding
of conformity
however this could be
more detailed.
Student provides a
good range of ideas
however the essay
does read like a list of
more examples of how
conformity is shown.
More sophisticated
integration of quotes
and a more detailed
evaluation of why this
novel has been written
would enhance this
essay.
Good understanding
of the idea of
conformity.
Sensible, detailed
conclusion.