Julia

Julia – Acti IV, scene iv. • Julia did effectively address the context of the passage in that she addressed its importance to the plot in the play and how it contributes to the overarching themes of the play. • I feel that Julia could have better organized her commentary. At the beginning I understood the general theme which she aimed to prove, yet there seemed to be no clear organizational structure by which she intended to do this. It seemed as though she was going through the passage and evaluating the literary features in order of their appearance. I do feel though that Julia effectively connected each of her points to the larger argument which she was trying to prove: the contrast between Hamlet’s impulses and his very thoughtful, philosophical nature. • If I were the assessor, I would ask Julia why she felt that this was a key passage. Why was it chosen as an important passage out of all of the scenes of the play and what does it contribute to the play? • I feel that Julia addressed the various literary features well. She included umbrella terms such as diction and imagery and identified specific elements such as alliteration or polysyndeton. Julia then successfully connected each of these literary features to the larger theme which she was trying to convey. • I feel that Julia could have had a better organizational structure to her commentary instead of just analyzing each point that came up as she moved through the passage. I also feel that towards the end she focused too much on the contrast between Hamlet and Fortinbras and his army and ended up straying from her main argument which was that Hamlet was an indecisive, over-thinking character. Julia also did not address much the idea of authorial intent or Shakespeare’s purpose in including this passage. • I gave Julia a score of 17 out of 20. I feel that she had an excellent understanding of the extract, especially its context within the play. Julia had a good interpretation of the extract in that her interpretation of the extract could have been more detailed, yet she did show much awareness of literary features. I feel that Julia had a focused and well-developed response, it just could have been more structured. I felt that Julia’s language was clear, varied, and precise and that she demonstrated her knowledge of literary features by stating a wide variety of them.

media type="file" key="Julia-july's People.m4a"

Julia does well to investigate the purpose of Gordimer in her dicussion of Maureen’s relationship with the villagers. However, no real evidence of context is used. Julia draws from the passage in order of its events. This provided an adequate “process” through which Julia explain Maureen’s views on sex and creed. However, perhaps more linking during the commentary would help to explain Maureen’s full essense. - Why did you choose to elaborate on July when this investigation focused on Maureen and her sexual nature with Bam. - Why did you choose to elaborate on the last line when the majority of your focus is on creed and sex? You say that it “shifts the mood.” Julia appeared very calm during the course of her presentation, and did well to elaborate on the how’s of Gordimer and the effect that these had on the investigation of Maureen and her struggles with sex and creed in July’s village. A small improvement that Julia could make would be to provide a stronger between her two topics, for the shift that she makes halfway during the commentary is a bit confusing. When the listener is focusing on creed, the change to sex and its references kind of halts that. A better idea would be to elaborate on them at the same time, if possible, or provide a more fluid transition. In stead of simply referencing the passage when you analyze it, be sure to directly use the quotations that your are addressing. Also, be a little more elaborate on the “why’s” of your literary features.
 * 1. Does the speaker address context? Purpose?**
 * 2. Was there an organizational principles utilized for their commentary?**
 * 3. What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR?**
 * 4. What did the speaker do well?**
 * 5. What would you suggest for improvement?**
 * 6. What did they forget to address (lit terms, themes, etc.)**

What would you score them based on the rubric? //Knowledge and Understanding//: 4 //Interpretation and Personal Response//: 6 //Presentation//: 7 //Use of Language//: 3

- Ryan Touhill

//Peer Review by: Jess Metlay// Julia did not provide any context for events either pre- or proceeding this passage. She did however do a nice job of addressing the purpose of passage earlier on: "reveal Maureen's view on human nature and intimate relationships of human beings and Maureen's views on sex". Julia went in a chronological order. While this was not an ineffective method, her commentary could have been enhanced by utilizing a structure that allowed her to better incorporate her comments on both Maureen's views on human nature and relationships (specifically sex) together. Since because of how Gordimer choose to address each issue in the passage the two ideas seemed isolated till the end. -Why does Gordimer allude to both the sexual behaviors of July in addition Bam and Maureen? -How does Maureen's stagnant views on human nature and the role of sex illustrate her isolation for the black community? -How does Maureen's view that sex is related to the economy fit into her beliefs of human nature? Julia did a nice job of accessing the purpose of her quotations (ie her hows where usually very explicit). Also Julia wisely directed the listener to the two quotations that she felt were the most important in understanding the passage. This allowed the listener to pinpoint the most important facts of the passage. Finally, Julia's second point about Maureen's views on the economic nature of sex was very well developed. While overall, Julia did a very nice job she needs to improve a bit on her continuity. The jump from the discussion on how Maureen's set opinions limit her understanding of culture to Maureen's views on the physical relations between her and Bam felt abrupt. Also it is important for Julia to address how Maureen's perception of sex as an economic duty ties into her lack of understanding of the people around her; whether because it shows that Maureen is very set in her opinions or because the two ideas cause her to become isolated. I think that this lack of connection is what made the conclusion feel rushed. While Julia did a great job addressing "how" and pointing out key words she needs to be more explicit in naming and then describing the purpose of literary features. For example instead of saying "words like validity" say "the use of the noun 'validity' in the quote meaning sound is used by Gordimer to portray how sound Maureen is in her own beliefs" or something to that effect. Also make sure to not just 'decorate' with literary features, explain how each feature ties back into the thesis. Knowledge and Understanding: 4 Interpretation and Personal Response: 7 Presentation: 6 Use of Language: 3
 * 1. Does the speaker address context? Purpose?**
 * 2. Was there an organizational principles utilized for their commentary?**
 * 3. What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR?**
 * 4. What did the speaker do well?**
 * 5. What would you suggest for improvement?**
 * 6. What did they forget to address (lit terms, themes, etc.)**
 * What would you score them based on the rubric?**