Paper 1 Question 2 AQA English Language exam

Hello everybody. It's Mrs. Ware of Stream English here. And today I'm going to help you with that last-minute revision for the AQA language GCSE paper one section A question two. Because you've been very naughty and left your revision to the last minute. So in this video I'm going to be going through the basics of what you need to know for this question, plus the more detailed things like uh how to plan, how to prepare, and we'll have a little look at a practice question as well. If you find this video helpful, don't forget to hit like and subscribe. Let's do this. So the first thing we need to have a look at is the question itself. So we've got here an example question. I can't remember what past paper this is from,

but it doesn't matter. The basic setup of the question is always the same in every paper. First of all, you are given a specific line range that you have to talk about. Now, unlike with question one and question four, you don't have to seek out that chunk of text yourself. They copy it over for you so that you know exactly what chunk of text you're dealing with. Why they don't do that with the other questions as well, I don't know. But they do for this one, so let's just appreciate that. The phrasing of the start of the question is also always the same. "How does the writer use language here to describe something?" And that something is going to vary depending on whatever the text is about. So I've seen papers

where it's something about the setting, I've seen papers where it's something about a character, um and I've seen papers where it's something about like atmosphere or tension as well. But those tend to be the kind of three main groups: setting, character, or overall feeling like tension, atmosphere, drama, excitement, whatever. They then give you this bullet point list of the things you could potentially talk about. So words and phrases, that's looking at the writer's word choice, um um language features and techniques, that's looking at things like metaphors, semantic field, sentence forms, that's looking at uh your sentence moods, like for example, imperatives, interrogatives, or also looking at

things like short sentences being used for effect, uh longer sentences to build up pace, whatever it is. The next thing you need to know is that this question is worth eight marks. So, um that's a sizable amount if we consider that for the past few years with the uh grade boundary difference has been about four marks between each grade, and but it's definitely not the most important question of this section. Question four is much higher at 20 marks, question five even higher still at 40. That being said, this is not a question you want to ignore. You want to take this just as seriously as three, four, and five. Because it's eight marks, you're going to be spending around 10, max 15 minutes on it. How long exactly you spend will

depend on the strategy you've chosen with how you're going to divide up the time in this paper. If you're looking for suggestions on those strategies, again, have a look at my other videos. The mark scheme for this question is split into four levels, and basically the level that you go into heavily hinges on the quality of your analysis. And we can see that based on the comments that AQA have put on the side here. With level one, simple, limited. Level two, some understanding. Level three, clear and relevant. Level four, detailed, perceptive. So, I'm just going to start off by explaining what AQA mean by that, so that we understand exactly how it is we're going to get marks in this question.

For the uh three bullet points that you can see in the second column here, um there are basically three main things that they're looking at in your answer. As I've already mentioned, the first is on the quality of your comment on the effect of language. [snorts] The second is about your quotes, or as they call it, textual details. And the third is about whether you've got subject terminology or not. It's really important to note that the top bullet point, the quality of your comment on the effect of language, is the decider of your level. That will basically decide what level you get put into, and then the other two are kind of there for the examiner to fine-tune and think about what exactly within that

level, what exactly what mark you should be getting. It's worth noting though that for you, bullet point two is also really important. It doesn't matter if you are the greatest analyzer of all time. If you don't choose a good quote, you're not going to be able to do good analysis, because good analysis hinges on having something to analyze. So actually that second bullet point of uh choosing relevant appropriate quotes is also going to be really important for you as well. You need to make sure that you've done that, too. And the third detail on subject terminology, I just want to stress stress here uh that you do not want to technique spot. Um basically what that means is that you identify a technique in the quote, but

you don't actually in any way talk about it or analyze it or anything like that. You just you can spot it, you say that it's there, and that's about it. AQA hate it when students do that, because this is not what this is about. This is not about identifying techniques. It doesn't matter if you can identify the fanciest techniques in the world. If you don't actually analyze that technique in that quote, you're not really going to be getting any credit for it. So that's something important to keep in mind with subject terminology. For the level one, simple limited comment, basically that suggests that you've only written one, maybe two sentences, and that's about it. Um basically you don't really have any

quotes, and you don't really have any comment on those quotes either. Um you just have a sentence answering the question and that's about it. Level two is much more of a common mark to get because four out of eight is where the pass starts to happen. So four, three and four out of eight is a very common kind of mark to get for this question. And as you can see um it's about you attempting to analyze but you're not doing it very well. There can be several reasons why you've not done it very well and I'm going to try and go through some of those now. The first one is that you've been generic. What I mean by that is that you've said something that is true of any text ever. It's not specific to the text that

you're dealing with in this exam. Some classic generic phrases are things like it makes the reader want to read on. It gives the reader more information. It builds a vivid picture in the reader's head. Ugh, I hate them. I hate them hate them hate them. Hate them. And so do AQA. Because they don't actually show that you understand anything at all. They're just kind of cliché phrases that don't really mean anything. The second way that you can go wrong is if you've misunderstood the text. Now you might have heard a teacher say before that there's no right or wrong answer in English. That doesn't mean that you can say whatever you want. It means that there isn't an objective answer. It's very subjective. Instead of

having a concept of right or wrong, we have what we call a valid or invalid interpretation. So you want to make sure that you have a valid interpretation. That means that the idea that you've got about the text can be proven by things in the text. Students can often misunderstand a text. They might say that a character is nervous when actually they're not at all. Or they might say that a setting seems to be quite ominous when it just isn't at all. And therefore they've said something that's just invalid. And therefore they're they're going to be able to show the clear understanding needed for the level three. Another way that you can go wrong with the analysis is with circular analysis. For example, you might in your point say

something like the character is presented as unfriendly. That's fine. You then provide a quotation. You then say, "This quote shows that the character is unfriendly." You've just gone round in a circle. Your comment on the quotation hasn't added anything uh new to your answer. You've just basically repeated yourself. That's circular analysis there. That's a very common thing that students do. So, if you're attempting to uh comment on the text, if you're attempting to show that you understand it, but you're perhaps not managing to um quite so successfully, then you're going to be in the level two with some understanding. To get into the level three, you have to show a clear understanding. Now, one

thing that's important to note here, um something that I learned while I was an examiner for this paper, is that you only have to demonstrate the level once in order to get into the bottom of that level. What I mean by that is you can have a student where 98% of their answer is level two. And then suddenly, they have two sentences that are level three. Because they've got two sentences at level three, they've shown a clear understanding, I have to give them five out of eight. This means that if you're given by a teacher a score at the bottom of the level, that should be an indicator to you that your answer more often was at a standard of the level below the one that you've been placed in. So, if you get a

five out of eight, it means that some of your answer was at least at a level two standard. If all of your answer was at a level three standard, they would have given you six out of eight rather than five. So, that's really important to keep in mind for when you're looking back over your work and you're reflecting on how you can improve, look at the criteria of the level below the score you got because that is a standard that would have been common in your answer as well and that's why you only got the bottom of the level. But going back to level three and they're showing a clear understanding and what that means. So basically it kind of is obvious from the phrasing you're not wrong. You have clearly

understood the text but it's not just that you've clearly understood it but also that you're able to defend it. You are able to prove that your interpretation is valid. You clearly know what it is you're supposed to be doing for this question. You have your idea to answer the question. You have your quotation. You begin to break down your quote to try and explain how it shows your idea. You might know this in your school as like a P paragraph or a peel paragraph. I've seen it as like peasel, whatever. I personally call it a T paragraph because then I can make lots of analogies with cups of tea and use pictures of cups of tea. And if you want to know more about my tea paragraph structure, then you'll

need to have a look at the other videos / my course where I go into that in a lot more detail. But the basic idea here is that you've just shown clearly in both your idea to answer the question, the quote that you've chosen to back it up and your explanation of that quote all across the board, you clearly understand the ideas of this text. This one, this level three five or six out of eight is where you start to be getting into quite a wide range of different grades actually depending on how you did in the different questions but theoretically at a six out of eight the grade nine is possible. Of course this will vary depending on year on year depending on grade boundaries but there have been previous

years where if a student got full marks in question number one and then the top of level three in question two, three, four and five, then they were able to achieve a kind of low-grade nine. So, in theory, if you got six out of eight on this question, a grade nine is in your reach, depending on how you do on the other questions as well. To make yourself a kind of more secure grade seven, eight, or nine though, you want to be aiming for that that level four, seven, or eight out of eight. To get that seven or eight out of eight, you need to have detailed perceptive analysis. So, the word detailed is pretty self-explanatory there. What they mean is um well, I'll use this analogy. Uh I come from a family where if you're

eating chicken and it's just chicken on the bone, you must eat all of the chicken on the bone. We're we're not one of those snap the bone in half and suck out the marrow families. We're we're we're not that bad, but we are uh chew the cartilage on the end kind of family. You if if you come from one of these families, you know what I'm talking about right now. But, the basic premise if you don't come from one of those families is that you need to eat all of the chicken that is on the bone. Leave no meat behind. If you're leaving meat behind, it means you're wasting chicken and that is unacceptable. It's the same with analysis. A lot of times, students will have a quote and they will perhaps talk about one word in

that quote and then they'll move on. Even though actually, there were other things they could have talked about as well that would have added to their idea and really develop their analysis. But, they didn't talk about those things, they just moved on to something else. That means they left meat on the bone. You want to make sure you don't leave any meat on the bone. You talk about absolutely everything that is relevant to your idea and to the question. If you do that, then you're dealing with detailed analysis because you're breaking down your quotes in a lot of detail. You're looking at multiple things going on. Detailed can also mean that you're looking at more than one quotation for the same idea. Okay? So, if you have an

idea of something like, you know, the the um character is presented as violent, you don't just try and prove that with one quote, you've also got a second quote to back it up as well. And again, on both of those two quotes, you've done detailed analysis, you've gotten the chicken off the bone in both of them. For the uh extra special, you would then also look at what is the link between those two different pieces of analysis that you did, between those two quotes you just analyzed. How how do they kind of connect to one another in meaning as well? For the perceptive part, being perceptive is an incredibly difficult um thing for a teacher to uh try to teach their students. It's one of the hardest

things that an English teacher has to try and teach um their their really able students because essentially what being perceptive means is that you are understanding a text on a really deep level, and you're understanding it on a level that most students just don't They just miss um and don't see. So, some students misinterpret this, and they think that this means that everything you write has to be like utter genius uh from the word go. That is not true at all. Um basically, what it means is that you have shown a clear understanding of the text, but more than that, you've shown a really insightful understanding of how that idea, how that meaning was conveyed by the writer. So, part of that will

come from you being really detailed in your analysis, like I said before, but another part of that is you being able to spot the links between things. So, if you've analyzed um a metaphor and um I don't know, assonance within one quote, you are also able to say how the two connect together. Or if you analyzed a metaphor in one quote, and then you analyzed sensory language in another quote, you can also explore how the meaning created in each one kind of combine to create an overall effect, how they build on one another, how they perhaps contrast with one another, whatever it is. So, you're really good at spotting you're You don't just look at one thing. You're really good at spotting the links between

multiple things. You can spot patterns in meaning. You can spot um patterns in like effect as well. So, you might just have a level three idea. You might have something like the storm is presented as being threatening and violent. But, what makes a level four answer different to a level three answer that has the exact same idea is how they prove that idea is valid, the detail that they go into, what it is that they're looking at, how they look at how things combine together. So, level four is not an easy thing. Obviously, that's why it's uh what you have to do to get the very highest grades. Um but, it is definitely uh possible. So, the text that we're going to be uh having a look at today is from The Great

Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. And I love this novel. Um I mean, books are always and I stress always better than the films. But, um if you have seen the film, then you probably know how great this book is, too. Um to give you a rough idea, it's basically set in the 1920s, and one of its key themes is sort of criticizing the extravagance, the wasteful spending, the over-the-topness of people in the 1920s, and how they were so focused on this kind of superficiality um and focused on that above deep, real human connection. Wonder if that sounds at all familiar in any way. Anyway, let's have a look at the text. When we're looking at this question, the first thing we need to do is uh look at the question. So, the question here is

how has the writer used language to describe the party? And if I was in an exam, the first thing I'd want to do is highlight that question key phrase of the party. There's two reasons I want to do that. Number one, because before I start reading the text, I need to make sure I know what is it I'm looking for. What is it that I need to think about? And so now that I've highlighted that, I know I need to think about the party. The second reason is that when it comes to writing my answer, I want to keep using that question keyword. I want to keep using the phrase the party, the party, the party, so that the examiner can clearly see that I am answering the question and that everything I'm saying

is relevant to the question. Once I've done that, the next thing I need to do is just read the text. Now, as I'm reading the text, I remember I want to have in the back of my mind what is my answer to the question, and I'm basically trying to come up with an adjective or a phrase that can answer the question. So, I'm going to read the text and then I'll tell you what adjectives I came up with. The lights grow brighter as the earth lurches away from the sun, and now the orchestra is playing yellow cocktail music, and the opera voices' pitches a key higher. Laughter is easier minute by minute, spilled with prodigality, tipped out at a cheerful word. The groups change more swiftly, swell with new arrivals, dissolve and form in

the same breath. Already there are wanderers, confident girls who weave here and there among the stouter and more able, become for a sharp joyous moment the center of a group, and then, excited with triumph, glide on through the sea change of faces and voices and color under the constantly changing light. Man, I love F. Scott Fitzgerald. Oh, so [gasps and laughter] what adjectives can I come up with? Well, the adjectives that I came up with, first of all, this party seems lively. Uh it seems fast-paced, and it seems convivial. If you're not sure what convivial means, it basically means that it's very like sociable and fun, and the sociableness is why it is fun. Um fun fact, I learned that word from Sims. So,

hey, go video games for teaching vocabulary. Um now that I've come up with my adjectives, I need to think about how I would prove those ideas. So, I've got my interpretations, lively, fast-paced, convivial. How can I prove that those interpretations are valid? I'm going to have to do that by picking quotations and analyzing how those quotations prove this is a lively party, this is a fast-paced party, etc. So, if I have highlighters in the exam with me, which I recommend that you have, I would go through and highlight the potential quotes that I can analyze. If you've got multiple highlighters, then you could like color code your different ideas. So, I could have a yellow for lively, a blue for fast-paced, and a red for

convivial, and then I know I've got lots of different um quotes for the different ideas, and it makes it easier for me to spot what it is that I'm going to talk about. For the moment, I'm going to imagine you've just got the one highlighter, and so you're just highlighting the same. I'm also doing that because my ideas of lively, fast-paced, convivial are going to be provable from very similar quotations. They're not completely separate from one another, and nothing ever is in a text. They in these ideas intertwine with one another, and so they intertwine in the quotes. So, um I'm just going to have quotes that have the ability to prove potentially all three, or two of the three, or whatever.

When it comes to choosing what quotes to highlight, there are some important things that you want to remember. The first thing is that we want the quote to be relevant. It needs to clearly be a quote that shows the idea that you've got. So, in my case, clearly shows that the party is lively, or fast-paced, or convivial, and is clearly about the party. It needs to be relevant to both the question and to your idea. The second thing is that you need it to be rich. What I mean by that is you need it to be lots of things you can analyze. The worst thing is to pick a quote with explicit meaning. Explicit meaning is when the writer just says exactly what they mean. So, they will say something like, "I am sad." You do not want to

choose that quotation to prove that a character feels sad. That is a terrible quote choice. Instead, you want to choose a quote where there is a lot of implicit meaning. So, instead of the writer explicitly saying, "I am sad." the writer describes tears rolling down her face, her heart snapping in two, whatever else it is that they say. The second thing is as well as it being implicit, ideally, there's multiple things you could say about it. This is like the dream quotation now. The first thing you want to be looking for is if it's metaphorical. If there's a metaphor in the extract that is relevant, talk about it. Absolutely pick the metaphors. But also, if as well as the metaphor, you're able to talk about sentence

length, repetition, semantic field, individual word choice, and the connotations of the word of the word, if there's more than one thing going on in that quote, then that is good. I do have personally my own little um hierarchy of techniques where as I've just mentioned, metaphorical language is absolutely at the top of the hierarchy along with any symbolic language as well. Um your middle would be patterns. So, if something is repeated, if you've got semantic fields, lexical fields, and then the third is like your kind of word choice. Um word choice isn't a bad thing to go for. The fact that it's in third doesn't mean that you should avoid talking about that, but often a writer will have a lot

more going on than just word choice. So, if you've been taught by your teacher to like zoom in on a particular word, that is absolutely a a good thing to do, um but just keep in mind that don't do that at the expense of a metaphor. If there's a metaphor that could be talked about, don't talk about word choice, okay? Don't be the guy that ignores three metaphors to really talk for a paragraph about the use of a noun. Don't be that guy. The third thing you're looking for is that the quote is not going to be too long or too short. So, if I'm trying to show that the party is lively, I need my quotes that do that to be the exact right length. I don't want to include anything that isn't relevant to the

party being lively. Not too long, not too short, just right, kind of like with Goldilocks. So, going back to this text then, I can see that there is a lot of potential quotations that I could go for. Uh lights grow brighter as the earth lurches away from the sun. So, that interesting kind of juxtaposition between the things getting darker, but lights growing brighter, and how that's symbolic of perhaps like the energy and excitement of the party and how lively it is. [snorts] Uh the synesthesia in the orchestra playing yellow cocktail music, the metaphor in the opera of voices, the repetition of laughter is easier minute by minute, the metaphor of laughter being spilled with prodigality, um and

tipped out at a cheerful word. Uh the groups change more swiftly. That word choice of swiftly, the metaphor swell with new arrivals, uh the metaphor dissolve and form in the same breath. Uh the metaphor of girls weaving here and there. Um the metaphor of gliding through the sea change of faces, the uh triadic structure of faces and voices and color, uh the word choice of constantly changing light, but also perhaps the symbolism within light itself. Now, I've just run through those very quickly, um but basically that's the kind of thing you want to do is you want to go on a little technique spotting hunt. Now, remember I said one of the worst things to do in your answer is technique spot, but when you're trying to find what to

talk about, that is what you want to do. Just quickly hunt for the various different techniques that show the lively, fast-paced, and convivial. Once you've got them highlighted, the next step is actually thinking about what effect they create. Um I'm not going to do that in this video because if I went through every single one of these quotes and analyzed them, we'd be here for several hours. Um but if you do feel like you need a lot of help with that, if you feel like you need a lot of practice and work and guidance on how to analyze, then just make sure you have a look at the other videos of the course cuz they will go through those things in a lot, lot more detail. But for right now, basically, you have to just think to

yourself, some students write it down as they're planning, but you don't have to write it down cuz obviously you're thinking about it. Um they think about how does uh let's say um yellow cocktail music show that things are lively. And they would think to themselves, okay, so cocktail music, that's like fairly obvious. I don't need to engage with that. The bit I need to talk about is the yellow because that's what's interesting here. So, calling it yellow cocktail music, well, it can't be yellow, so it's synesthesia, but why yellow? What's the symbolic meaning of the color yellow? So, yellow can symbolize brightness, it can symbolize happiness, it can symbolize energy. So, if the music is yellow, and the music is

what's playing at the party, then obviously he's saying the party is full of brightness, happiness, and energy. So, essentially, just think to yourself, what is the writer doing? How is the writer creating the meaning that you have come up with? Simple. She says. One thing that's important to note when you're doing this thought process is the limited amount of time you've got. In my opinion, that's the hardest thing about this paper, not the questions themselves, but the time you've got to do it in. So, it's worth keeping in mind that first of all, although I came up with three adjectives on the side here, you need a maximum of two for your answer. You could just have one, but you'd need to have a lot of different things to

prove it. So, two gives you a kind of safer space where you can then have maybe one or two quotes to prove each one. Following that formula, which again, you don't have to follow that perfectly because the bigger priority is making sure you're proving your interpretation. And I'm not saying it can be neatly done every single time in two ideas and each idea having two quotations. It's not like maths like that. But as a general rule of thumb, with that idea of two ideas and two quotes to back up each one, you're only looking for four quotations. So, when it comes to all this highlighting that you've done and thinking that you've done, you don't want to go through and think about how to analyze every single one cuz that's

going to take you too long. Instead, you have to use that criteria we talked about before about what makes a really good quotation, and you need to make those kind of fast decisions on what are going to be the two best quotations for you to be able to prove your interpretation. It's worth keeping in mind that another um criteria that makes a quote really good is also how well you understand it and how well you feel you can explain yourself. You might feel, for example, that the quote yellow cocktail music is probably a really sophisticated technique cuz it's synesthesia and you might be tempted to do that cuz you want to show off, but you also don't feel like you really understand how you could

explain how that meaning is created. You know it shows that the party is lively, but you don't know how you'd explain that. So, don't pick that quote. On the other hand, you might feel that the opera voices, you get that one. You understand how you would explain that. So, that's going to be a better choice to go for and even if you might have convinced yourself that synesthesia is a more fancy technique to go for, a more impressive one than just a good old metaphor. That's not true, by the way. They're equal. So, that's something really important to keep in mind there is that because of the time crunch, you need to act quite fast in making those decisions on which quotes to just kind of like spot, but

then ignore as being like, "Nah, that's not as strong as some others." And which ones like, "Yeah, I'm going to talk about this one, so let me think about how to analyze that." You are not going to have time to think about absolutely everything that could be in the text. The final thing we're going to do is have a look at once you've done that kind of thinking and planning, how does that then work when you write it out in practice. Now, this is going to involve me talking about how to structure your paragraph, but I'm not going to be going into that much detail. So, again, look at the other videos if you feel like you need more help there. The first thing you want to do is just go straight in with your idea.

With your answer to the question. And that is what this model answer does. So, the writer suggests that the party is very lively. Straight to the point, no nonsense. One of the worst things that students do is they start their answer off by saying a really generic sentence that adds nothing. The writer uses lots of different language and structural techniques to present the party. It's not answering the question, it's not identifying any techniques. Just don't do it. It's a waste of your time. It's a waste of the precious seconds you've got in this exam. Instead, just go straight in with what your idea is, what your answer to the question is. The writer uses sensory language to create a sense of the liveliness being

present in all aspects of the party. So, the next thing is that it identifies a technique that is being used. In this case, we've got sensory language. And it says what effect that creates, the liveliness being present in all aspects of the party. It doesn't, however, stop there. It goes into much more detail. Firstly, with providing quotes. So, this uh strategy here of saying your idea and then doing a colon, that's a really quick and easy way that you can have um build your quotations in. Um so, it says, "Firstly, with sound, the orchestra is playing yellow cocktail music and the opera voices pitches a key higher." So, it's identified the sound of the sensory language. And then it's provided the quote. It

then zooms in and looks more closely at that quote. So, we have the synesthesia of yellow cocktail music could symbolize the happiness that the music brings to the listeners and also its energy and excitement as these are often symbolized by the color yellow. So, now it's broken down in a lot more detail exactly how that synesthesia is creating uh meaning, how it's um presenting things as uh lively. Additionally, the synesthesia could suggest that the party is so lively that it is difficult to distinguish our different senses and they all mix together. So, this is something that's starting to get it into the level four in terms of being insightful and detailed because it's not just looking at one meaning behind a quotation. It is

looking at multiple possible ways of interpreting it as indicated with that adverb there, additionally. It's like another way we could interpret it. And that's kind of a sign of a good level four potential answer there, the fact that it's considering multiple ways of interpreting a quotation. The metaphor of people's voices being an opera suggests a lot of noise, too, which contrasts with the image of the cocktail music to create a sense of a very busy party with lots of different noises. So again, we've just got uh zooming in on another part of this quote we had uh before of the orchestra playing yellow cocktail music and the opera voices pictures a key higher. Um so we've looked at the yellow

cocktail music and we've looked at the opera and we're starting to look at how they contrast. Note how much different terminology we've had. We've had the sensory language, synesthesia, symbolize, contrast. There's lots of different kind of terminology being talked about and it is being talked about. That's the key thing. They're um they're not just kind of technique spotting and moving on. They're actually comment commenting on it. Furthermore, as operas have connotations of being dramatic and powerful pieces of theater, the writer could be suggesting that the noise of the people speaking is not an unpleasant clash with the cocktail music, but rather a source of enjoyment and entertainment in its own

right. So again, they're looking at more things. We've got connotations. They're using adverbs like furthermore to help create more of a flow between their different sentences. They're really constantly focusing on the writer um and what the writer is doing and how the right writer is crafting things. So this would be considered a really good response. It's not a complete response. We need more. Um but uh yeah, this would be a good response because it is definitely detailed and it's starting to become um insightful with things like um the multiple interpretations and also spotting that deep meaning of even though cocktail music and opera are very different sounds, the writer is not trying to suggest that's an unpleasant

thing. They're trying to suggest it's like an enjoyable thing. In terms of what my feedback would be for this um response, there's just a couple of things that I would talk about. First of all, the fact that they um provided a longer quote than what they have actually analyzed. Um so for example, when they are identifying sound, the orchestra is playing yellow cocktail music. They only talk about the yellow cocktail music. They didn't need the orchestra is playing. Secondarily, the Secondarily, the opera voices pitches a key higher. Now, I think there was a missed opportunity there. There was some chicken left on the bone because they didn't engage with that bit of pitches a key higher. Like,

that kind of continued metaphor, the extended metaphor into the noise getting louder and the significance of that. The fact that the voices are trying to stay above, um, the music of the orchestra and how that makes things seem even livelier and busier and whatever. So, in terms of the second bullet point in the mark scheme of them having a judicious length of quotes, I don't think they have like fully got that, but I am nitpicking here, um, because there is no denying that the analysis is detailed and perceptive. So, the last thing that you now need to do is have a practice yourself. Practicing is incredibly important for this paper. It's not enough to just listen to me telling you things about

the question. You need to actually have a go yourself. And you can have a go with this question because you've got that start a model. You've got the adjectives that, um, I've already identified. So, you can practice taking those adjectives and using them to try and write analysis yourself. Now, there's a few different levels of difficulty you can give yourself here. Level of difficulty number one is you can, uh, stop the video here. You know the adjectives that I have identified and you go in yourself, find quotes to back it up, and then analyze those quotes. If that's the level of difficulty you want, stop here and go do that. The second level of difficulty that's a bit easier is that I, in a second, will

tell you some quotes you could look at to continue, um, uh, this text, okay? So, I'm going to help you with identifying the quotes. If you do not want this level of difficulty, if this is too easy, stop here cuz I'm about to start highlighting quotes for you and telling you what techniques you could talk about. All right, I gave you a chance to stop and you didn't. So, that must mean that you want the quotations. So, this is again for the ideas of it being lively, of it being fast-paced, of it being convivial. I'm not going to hand it on a plate and say exactly which ideas these quotes match up with, but I will help you with identifying which of the really rich rich quotes that help to show a

combination of those three. So, the first one that we want is this description of the groups. The groups change more swiftly. The metaphor swell with new arrivals and then the metaphor dissolve and form in the same breath. There's a lot of different metaphors going on and that is telling us a lot about the activity at the party. Um and what that is like. So, you want to definitely have a look at those quotes. Another one would be the sea change of faces and voices and color. We've got two different techniques going on in this one. We've got the metaphor in the sea change and then we've got the tricolon on the triadic structure of faces and voices and color. So, that list of three, you might also

know it as why faces, why voices, why color, why all three. But, you've also got the syndetic list. So, the syndetic list of faces and voices and color. Why repeat that and like that in the list as well. So, this is a really rich quote here with metaphor, tricolon, and syndetic list that you're going to be able to talk about. And then finally, the fact that that is all happening under constantly changing light. So, that word choice of constant, the word choice of changing, and the kind of symbolism, the metaphorical meaning behind the constantly changing light. Because yes, the light is literally literally constantly changing, but it's also a metaphor for the party itself. So, how is it a metaphor for the party itself?

So now, take those quotes, take the ideas that I had before, have a go at writing this out in a paragraph, and analyzing how F. Scott Fitzgerald presented the party in The Great Gatsby. And I will see you later. Bye.