Grazia

Speaker: Grazia
 * Will Carabasi

1. Did the speaker address context? Purpose? - I believe that Grazia did a very nice job with sharing the context and setting the tone for the rest of her commentary. She shares nicely how the argument and fueds of emotion influence the feelings felt by Maureen right now, as she has just been yelled at by July that she is not allowed to work in the field. The purpose of the author, Gordimer, was not addressed extremely efficiently. The arguments that support Gordimer’s commentary, however, are evaluated in great depth. Maureen is characterized along with her “master-servant” relationship. 2. Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary? - Yes there was an organization principle. The organization principle, however, was quite linear as she went line by line. At first, however, Gratzia seems to be shifting around with the “his little dancer” line and connected to her past life. It is then obvious that she is going line by line, which is completely acceptable. - The organization of keying in on Maureen’s relationships was a very effective strategy. 3. What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR? - How does this scene foreshadow the complete switchover of Maureen’s identity in her own mind? Is she beginning to come to the realization that she will never fit in? - How can we see Maureen’s actions (drowning of the kittens, work in the fields, and anger) juxtaposed with those of Bam? 4. What did the speaker do well? - Grazia picked out many important lines and dissected them very well. She illustrated Maureen in a very effective was while comparing her to a parasite which I thought was rather interesting. - I like how Grazia pointed out how Maureen calls July “him” and the ambiguity in why July has two names. 5. What would you suggest for improvement? - I would recommend speaking a bit faster and more poised. - I would also recommend using Gordimer as the key person in the commentary rather than summarizing. - I thought the literary features could have been used more effectively in relating authorial purpose. - I liked the poetic topography piece. 6. What did they forget to address (lit terms, themes, etc.) - Grazia missed some opportunities to address the themes and relate Gordimer’s commentary on apartheid. 7. What would you score them based on the rubric? Knowledge/Understanding: 4 Interpretation/Personal Response: 7 Presentation: 8 Use of Language: 4

Grazia by Elliot Weiser** Grazia effectively set the scene with an appropriate amount of context. Unfortunately, the first few minutes of the commentary was dominated by context and not so much the analysis of literary features. She addressed authorial purpose toward the conclusion, which is fine, but it deprived her audience of a focus or motivation during the rest of the commentary. Grazia went through the passage line by line during her commentary. Using this structure was probably not as effective as some other ways in order to comment upon the theme of appearance vs. reality in her particular passage. - How can we see the theme of appearance vs. reality in other parts of the text? - Could Hamlet’s dark, “mournful,” appearance indicate something else about Hamlet that Claudius does not explicitly mention? Grazia illustrated the presence of appearance vs. reality very well and what that went toward in terms of Shakespeare’s purpose. She also effectively described the emotions of each of the character’s present. I would recommend spending less time discussing character emotions, which she did really well. It took away from the time she could have spent in analyzing other literary features and how they lent themselves to character emotions or Shakespeare’s goal. Grazia’s commentary could have improved greatly had she included an analysis of the didactic tone present in the beginnings of Claudius’s father-like speech. Knowledge/Understanding: 5 Interpretation/Personal Response: 8 Presentation: 8 Use of Language: 4 media type="file" key="Grazia July's People Commentary.m4a"
 * Did the speaker address context? Purpose?**
 * Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary?**
 * What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR?**
 * What did the speaker do well?**
 * What would you suggest for improvement?**
 * What did they forget to address (lit terms, themes, etc.)**
 * What would you score them based on the rubric?**

Steph's Peer Review: -Did the speaker address context? Purpose? Yes she does identify the context of the passage. She skims on the idea of the purpose when she references the master-servant relationship, and how the roles are different. She also mentions the idea that there are different kinds of work for black and white women. -Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary? Yes, the commentary was organized well. She read and identified areas of the passage that were important in a chronological order. -What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR? How does love affect the relationship of Maureen and Bam? How has Bam and Maureen’s relationship changed in the new environment? How does July and Maureen’s relationship change how Maureen discovers her identity? -What did the speaker do well? Grazia mentioned flashback, which is important to the story. She also mentioned the bakkie as a symbol of power and how important it is in reference to the Smales and how it gives Bam purpose. It was important to mention love and the relationship of Bam and Maureen, which she did well. Maureen’s recognition that she never really loved Bam was a great realization in her goal of finding her identity. She mentions a lot of themes like love, Maureen’s awareness of her body, and Maureen’s shift in her relationship with July seen through the diction. She also mentioned poetic topography, which is vital. - What would you suggest for improvement? She sounded really nervous which was at times distracting. -What did they forget to address (lit terms, themes, etc.) Grazia could improve her commentary a lot by adding the purpose of the novel, and how Maureen is the protagonist and this is her journey in finding her identity and discovering herself.

Knowledge and Understanding: 5/5 Interpretation and Personal Response: 8/10 Presentation: 8/10 Use of Language: 4/5

Peer Review by Rebekah Te Hau: Did the speaker address context? Purpose? Grazia does go into the context of the passage, however she doesn’t set up where in the text it occurs, or what led up to it. However, she does not go into the purpose of this passage as much as she could.

Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary? Grazia’s commentary was organized. She did pull out the literary features and techniques, which she found in each line.

What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR? Some questions I would ask if I was the accessor: -The theme’s which she mentions in this passage, can they be seen anywhere else in throughout the text, and whether or not they help to develop the text.

What did the speaker do well? Grazia was able to analyze and pull out the literary features the author used throughout this passage, and went into the purpose of these for some of them. Grazia was also able to show how parts of this passage relate to other parts of the text.

What would you suggest for improvement? Some suggestions I have for Grazia, which would help to improve her commentary is for her to first of all set up where the reader is in the book at the time this passage occurs in the book, and also to tell the accessor what had happened leading up to this point in the text. Another thing that would help Grazia to improve is her confidence, as at times she sounded nervous and studdered or used um, which took away from what she was saying.

What did they forget to address (lit terms, themes, etc.) Grazia didn’t miss a lot in this passage. The only major thing, which she missed was the purpose of this passage, and of the literary features used within this passage.

What would you score them based on the rubric? Knowledge/Understanding: 5/5 Interpretation/Personal Response: 7/10 Presentation: 7/10 Use of Language: 4.5/5