Romanticism Essay - How are you structuring it? (Thematic or Text by Text) (1 Viewer)

[Clifford]

Question above:

My teacher seems to despise thematic, although she concedes that at an extension level we're expected to have an integrated response. Looking at the Romanticism questions so far however, it doesn't seem like thematic would make sense/be easier or more logical.

For example, the questions are often 'The ASPECT OF ROMANTICISM is essential to the Romantic way of thinking. How is this true of your texts?' or whatever. Pretty much, it's asking you to show where the aspect is in your texts, if it's the most important, to what extent, etc. So would it be better to go through each and be like 'here, here, manifested differently to text one, but still important etc'? Or 'The aspect - text 1/2'... I'm not really sure where I'm going with this...

Pretty much:
Option 1:

intro
TEXT 1
TEXT 2 with links to text 1/thesis
TEXT 3 links to 1/2/thesis
TEXT 4 links to 1/2/3 thesis
conclusion

OR

Idea 1:
relvant texts all together
Idea 2
relevant texts al together
etc

I just worry that juggling 5 texts (super lame having to do two Coleridges) for thematic would get confusing. But do they expect integration or is strong linking enough?

Sorry about the rambling! Thanks!

 

[jellybelly59]

option 1... because that way i can relatively maintain the focus of each text without waffling and losing track of what i'm saying. Strong linking to the notion of romanticism, answering the question, clear examples + a strong thesis will get you the top band. There is no correct way to do an essay and if you link well enough for option 1 it can be considered as 'integration'. + option 2 if they ask you to focus on ONE aspect of romanticism... you're screwed LOL.

 

[MzBiiBii]

My practice essay is based on option 1.

But mines only revolving around 2-3 aspects of Romanticism ,
And my texts all sort of follow either aspect 1, 2, 3

which is a problem I think..

I don't have one topic that ALL my texts go under =/

 

[Clifford]

Good, that's reassuring. I just wondered really whether strong links qualified as integration, which it seems they do. Phew.

 

[jessicalysenko]

no, NO!
THEMATIC!!!!!

Must be IDEAS BASED. NOT TEXT BASE

(I'm doing Romanticism too)
In my speech (40%) I got full marks - it was a wide topic, so basically an essay which you stand up and say

This is the structure you MUST use. We are doing extension one, not standard. You can get away with it text by text in Paper1, but that's it!

-Thesis
-Introduce texts (optional)
(now this is all made up/example)
-Imagination (permenance/transience)
-Imagination linked to God and Nature
-Nature - the power of and importance of
(somewhere the individual should be mentioned as well)
-Idealistic beliefs
-Idealism in relation to changing ways of thinking i.e. they hate the Revolution and everyone should be happy and not want money
-conclusion

Remember, each point you make MUST be connected to thesis. Beginning AND end of each paragraph reference your thesis (if possible...)

If it's too late for you to integrate, don't worry. if your essay is really strong you can pull through but extension English is about the ideas and issues - not the texts. You are studying ROMANTICISM and your texts are the evidence for what you conclude about Romanticism!!


Good luck. So stressed right now trying to do my Romanticism essay (cutting down.. ugh)

 

[jessicalysenko]

Question above:


(super lame having to do two Coleridges)

Sorry about the rambling! Thanks!

:O Coleridge is the best!! And the easiest

 

[Clifford]

I private messaged you, so have a glance there if you can...

Haw, I love Coleridge too (I feel like I'm violating Kubla Khan when I write about it), it's just annoying have to do two poems and only one novel with the same amount of emphasis...

 

[diametric]

I've heard from some markers and teachers that Kubla Khan isn't the best text to use due to it's abstract nature, and unconventional Romanticism.

 

[jellybelly59]

i'm still thinking text based.... despite what jessicalysenko said... what happens if they ask you to focus on just 1 theme of romanticism - then you're screwed.

 

[ixswans]

Thematically.

Its easier to achieve sophistication that way and since I was taught to do everything thematically from Year 7, I'd bomb out doing it text by text.

I hate Kubla Khan. Only using it briefly since Coleridge is one text in himself.

 

[diametric]

oh and yes,

I do it thematically.
This is extension; chance of being asked to focus on ONE theme? Very little.
And, if say, they ask about ONLY the imagination,

The imagination is used in Romanticism to attain the ideal, and usually, is also linked to the 'individual.'

You shouldn't be doing extension if you can't link A and B. The rubric encompasses all of Romanticism's major qualities. Your essay should as well, regardless of what the question is. The question is asking you to bring it, with everything Romanticism has to offer. You need to recognise that.

 

[Clifford]

I've been writing a practise thematic today, and it's going swel, but I'm almost finished when I realised that the question was 'evaluate this statement in relation to your texts'.

In questions such as this, and other including "Romanticism is typified by the search for meaning through representations of the individuals relationship with the natural world, and wider social and political contexts"
analyse the extent to which this occurs in TWO prescribed texts you have studies and at least TWO others of your chosing.

How would it make sense to go thematic for that? A lot of the questions from the other thread (Romanticism questions - trials) have a quote followed with 'how is this true of your texts' NOT Romanticism as a whole... Would you go text by text and illustrate how true it is in each, with some linkage?

I can definitely see the value and sophistication of thematic in a question discussing 'Concern/s of Romanticism', but when it's 'how is this true of your texts', how would it work thematically?

Thanks!

 

[FrauDarcy]

I've been writing a practise thematic today, and it's going swel, but I'm almost finished when I realised that the question was 'evaluate this statement in relation to your texts'.

In questions such as this, and other including "Romanticism is typified by the search for meaning through representations of the individuals relationship with the natural world, and wider social and political contexts"
analyse the extent to which this occurs in TWO prescribed texts you have studies and at least TWO others of your chosing.

How would it make sense to go thematic for that? A lot of the questions from the other thread (Romanticism questions - trials) have a quote followed with 'how is this true of your texts' NOT Romanticism as a whole... Would you go text by text and illustrate how true it is in each, with some linkage?

I can definitely see the value and sophistication of thematic in a question discussing 'Concern/s of Romanticism', but when it's 'how is this true of your texts', how would it work thematically?

Thanks!

I completely understand your point of view - sometimes a question simply does not lend itself at all to a thematicvally structured response - I kind of write about two texts at once so it's half-integrated, half text-by-text. I think it completely depends on the question - integration does show a higher level of sophistication, but if one can't answer the question eloquently and integrate it then definietly text by text - I consider eloquence, clarity and sophistication of messages and language above sophistication of form. If you can effectively and clearly convey your ideas, and they're good ideas, and you've placed them in a logical order, you should get away with a text-by-text response. But really when it comes to writing about Romanticism I knew the topic back-to-front before we started it anyway, so I don't think much about planning a response - I just go. I certainly don't write an essay to memorise beforehand, just collect ideas and have a thorough knowledge of the texts and the concepts, then am prepared to chuck it all together when necessary. It's worked so far - I'm 7th in my year in ext 1 out of 63 or so.

By the way Clifford, I love your quote! From "Eric", wasn't it?

 

[FrauDarcy]

I've heard from some markers and teachers that Kubla Khan isn't the best text to use due to it's abstract nature, and unconventional Romanticism.

But surely the abstract nature makes it a wonderful medium through which to explore the imagination, the artist/writer as genius, the nature of creativity, and all that sublime and transcendental stuff.

 

[diametric]

I do not agree.

Kubla Khan is the product of the imagination; it says little of its power. Coleridge thought of it whilst unconscious and smashed off his face, so to label him a genius (with respects to this poem) and to dwell on the nature of creativity is a bit of a farce.

Moreover, it does not reflect on society, and does not epitomise the paradigms of Romanticism. Romanticism, whilst imaginative, idealistic, subjective and emotional, is only so because it responds to the very real concerns of the 18th and 19th century. To isolate socioeconomic, scientific, and religious paradigms within Kubla Khan is not the simplest of tasks.

It would be a lot easier, and perhaps more rewarding, imo, to stick with the Ancient Mariner and the Lime-Tree Bower. However, I am not the biggest fan of Coleridge. I find his writing pales in comparison to Keats', especially the very forced, long, could-do-with-a-heck-of-a-lotta-editing Ancient Mariner. Unfortunately, the syllabus demands society society society, and that's a lot more distinct in Coleridge's down-your-throat poetry.

 

[Clifford]

By the way guy up top, yes to what you said about the essay, yes to what you said about Kubla (that's exactly what I use it for), and yes to Terry Pratchett quoting!

I agree with what you said about knowing the module. That's what I've got going in, but I want to play with my structure a bit, so if the question says something that's completely tailored to thematic, I'll know how to do it well.

 

[Lloyd The Lion]

I think text by text with intergration is the way to go. What you have to remember is that the module is TEXTS and ways of thinking. The ideas we have formulated should be coming from our texts and the influences on their composition not simply aspects of romanticism, be flouncy about that and then jam in some textual referencing.