Faking critic quotes (1 Viewer)

[Aerath]

ahh matey, i believe you do need critics. My trial mark was lower because i did not include or rather mention critics. My teacher clearly stated this to me, after marking it.

Ah, mate, if you had actually bothered to do your own research, you find that quoting critics are no longer necessary in the 2009-2014 syllabus.

[I acknowledge that D94 is correct in using others' knowledge to form your own response to texts in today's society. But there's no need to quote critics as was in the past].

 

[Nick_K]

I was under the impression that quoting critics was a convenient way to "Demonstrate an informed understanding..."

 

[Official]

Critics just help support your argument that is all, not needed though

 

[Aerath]

I was under the impression that quoting critics was a convenient way to "Demonstrate an informed understanding..."

It is, but there are other ways. It's one of those 'show', not 'tell' things. Quoting a critic is 'telling'.

 

[Nick_K]

It is, but there are other ways. It's one of those 'show', not 'tell' things. Quoting a critic is 'telling'.

Fair enough, that makes sense. I went into my trials without critics thinking this, but was marked down. Could you expand on how to more effectively "show"?

Also, it seems that there are a substantial number of markers that seem to think that critics is the way to go. I could be wrong, (perhaps my teachers + many of those in this thread are just dodgy). But wouldn't it be safer to hedge yourself with some reference to critics in the off change that the teacher marking your paper prefers the inclusion of critics?

 

[Aerath]

Also, it seems that there are a substantial number of markers that seem to think that critics is the way to go. I could be wrong, (perhaps my teachers + many of those in this thread are just dodgy). But wouldn't it be safer to hedge yourself with some reference to critics in the off change that the teacher marking your paper prefers the inclusion of critics?

Yeah, absolutely, I'm not disputing this. But I'm saying they're not -necessary-, it's not going to make or break your essay - they can be very helpful if you know what you're doing with them.

 

[Nick_K]

Ah ok that clarifies thinks, thanks

 

[aphorae]

Yes, and what I said is from the Syllabus. Now, the BOS can only test you on what is in the Syllabus.

Again, you've contradicted yourself. You've said it has "relative success". That is a critical response based on a personal critical criteria. What criteria is there to determine its success? Mr Smith down the street has said it has a lot of success; that's his critical response. A critic is anyone who conveys a differing perspective.

Wtf? I'm not talking about a film or a critic's success, I'm talking about the success of Shakespeare's play Hamlet. How is that evaluating a critic?! When I talk about perpetuating appeal I'm talking about the perpetuating appeal of the play by the audience or by people who want to analyse it or whatever over time -______- I am neither disagreeing nor agreeing with a different interpretation, and I am not evaluating a critical response or whatever.... ???? idek, stop trying to twist my words lmfao

 

[Absolutezero]

External critics are not required since the syllabus change. You can however, use their ideas to reinforce your arguments.

Do not fake quotes for these people. I can assure you, the marker is far too familiar with them.

 

[Jacko32]