The Joy of Christmas Model Essay – ‘ACC’ Grade 9

How does Dickens present the importance/joy of Christmas?

Within Dickens’ festive, allegorical novella, Christmas is presented as the
driving force behind an altruistic and benevolent society. Dickens may be doing
this to draw his audience back to the moral foundations of religion and
festivity, in order to facilitate a sense of collectivism.

Firstly, Christmas is presented as being tainted by Malthusian views. This is
evident when Scrooge questions “what reason do you have to be merry?
You’re poor enough”. The business-centric capitalist ideas of Industrial Britain
have polluted the virtues associated with Christmas. Scrooge sees it as a
distraction from his profit making. Dickens is emphasising that the focus of
Christmas has strayed too far away from the core foundations it was built on:
empathy, joy and community. Scrooge, as a caricature of greed, serves to
represent the prevalent view of Christmas as a profit-making opportunity. The
fact that Scrooge believes money correlated to happiness is ironic as despite
being fortunate, “the cold within him froze his old features”. Scrooge is
portrayed as the complete antithesis to the happiness imbued in Christmas.
Dickens is attempting to educate his audience in the futility of the pursuit of
greed. At a time where poverty is most visible, the Cratchits are significantly
more joyful than the miserly Scrooge.

However, Christmas is also portrayed as being a universal source of joy which
when embraces brings fulfilment and a warming sense of community. This is
evident when “such a bustle ensued” in the Cratchits home for the “feathered
phenomenon”. The use of the noun “bustle” connotes atmosphere and
community. Dickens is highlighting that Christmas has the power to unite and
is reinforcing the ubiquitous joy that the Cratchits hold for it. However, theirs is
a subtle juxtaposition between nods to their joy and nods to their ever-present
poverty. The fact that it is a “phenomenon” emphasises rarity and significance.
Although this could be portrayed as emphasising their overwhelming gratitude,
it could also be see as a clear show of their lack. However, no matter how little
they have, they have the capability to embrace Christmas and its happiness.
Dickens is emphasising that the dual power of Christmas and family is
indomitable. This is further reinforced, when despite their possessions being
“threadbare” they are still “as good as gold”. They place value on family and
love, not material gain. They see Christmas as a time for festivity, not as a show
of material wealth. Dickens may be doing this to reinforce the value of
Christmas as religious. “A Christmas Carol” is a Christian morality tale. The

Cratchits embrace the true value and disregard anything that could dampen
their spirit. Furthermore, Christmas is presented as catalysing the transformation of a
seemingly intransigent Scrooge. By the close of the novella, Scrooge has gone
to “church” and is “happy as an angel”. The use of the positive simile here is in
direct antithesis to the “sharp as flint” simile utilised in Stave 1. Dickens may
be doing this to parallel the misanthropic Scrooge with the moral and
reformed Scrooge. This emphasises how Christmas and therefore Christianity
has the power to provide salvation for anyone who embraces its values.
Furthermore, the repeated use of the religious noun “angel” suggests a sense
of purity, as if Scrooge has been reborn. The Christmas Spirit has been
revitalised within Scrooge and his childish innocence has been restored where
he can enjoy Christmas untainted, Dickens may be doing this to highlight to his
audience that wider change starts with simple foundations such as embracing
the Christmas spirit. Christmas acts as an outlet for Scrooge to express the
repressed emotion from his childhood. This is further reinforced when Scrooge
was “as merry as a schoolboy”. Again, the reference to this innocence
reinforces the power of Christmas as a relief from the horror of the world.
However, subtly, Christmas is used to expose the depth of change that is
required. Scrooge is an archetypal miser of Industrial Britain and although
thinks “I’ll send it to Bob Cratchits” this does not remedy the resounding
remained of suffering still rife throughout Britain, just because Scrooge has
made an outstanding transformation, this does not account for the rest of
society. Christmas allows Scrooge to try and remedy his behaviour, but does
not guarantee universal change.

In conclusion, the Christmas spirit epitomises what it means to be both
altruistic and moral in a world of overwhelming ignorance and provides a
ubiquitous joy which all can embrace.

With many thanks to CRC year 11 2023-2024

The role of femininity and masculinity in ‘An Inspector Calls’

A wonderful guest post from VC: year 10 2022

In ‘An Inspector Calls’, Priestley depicts society in 1912 as misogynistic, capitalism-ruled and segregated. The role of femininity and masculinity play a huge role in this depiction and is illuminated especially in Gerald’s characterisation. When recalling his meeting with Daisy Renton he remembers how he ‘told the girl … she’d better let me take her out of there.’ In act 2, Gerald constantly makes remarks about how empowered he felt in his rescue of Daisy ( ‘I went across’). This is a direct contrast of Sheila’s repetition of the personal pronoun ‘I’. Instead, she uses it in a way of expressing remorse, guilt and acceptance of her mistakes. Further on page 35, Birling seems shocked at the idea that Sheila had at some point slipped through his protective grasp outside of the domestic sphere and has been exposed to the stories of ‘Alderman Meggarty‘. She remarks that her friend ‘only escaped with a torn blouse’ which blatantly suggests that Meggarty is known for being a womanizer (he is afterall, an embodiment of the very worst of The Establishment’s hypocrisy).

Gerald, in my opinion. also represents the worst that Edwardian society had to offer and purposefully stays silent for a large amount of the interrogations, perhaps because he knows what is to come and how he’ll have to be in the spotlight, and admit to his affair with Daisy Renton. He may well have been fabricating a story that makes it appear more like he ‘rescues’ Daisy and not offers her a glimpse of a lifestyle she may have enjoyed permanently had she had been the lucky one. This of course relates back to Sheila being the ‘luckier of two Eva Smiths’. Gerald embodies the ills of the patriarchy and could be viewed as a traitor to the higher classes when he villainises Alderman Meggarty for being a sexual predator. The ironic fact is that Gerald is guilty of the same crime only he had been more subtle and sly about how he went about it.

The Birlings’ are of course shocked at this revelation and rare criminalisation of the higher classes which inevitably completely botches their sense of morality at Alderman Meggarty’s mercenary, exploitative act. Finally, Gerald embodies a younger generation’s version of Alderman Meggarty when he makes the statement,‘young and fresh’, when recalling his first impressions of Daisy. These dismissive, derogatory adjectives are a pure microcosm of his desire for his women to be ‘untainted’ and virginal. There’s a huge possibly that the only reason Daisy Renton held any value for him is because she is ‘unspoiled’ by other men and her virginity was intact.

Why you shouldn’t ignore Alderman Meggarty in ‘An Inspector Calls’

I recently dared to tell my class that I thought Alderman Meggarty might very well be the most important character in the play. Of course, the statement is subjective and depends upon the context of our reading. If we are exploring the text through a feminist lens, then for me he is essential to our understanding of how rife misogyny was amongst the middle and upper classes, but also as a reminder of the hyper-masculine abuse of privilege and power that was rampant too.

He is NOT a physical presence on stage, just as Eva isn’t. But, his presence should haunt audiences when we hear of his ‘obscene fat-carcass’ and his malevolent, predatory behaviour towards Eva Smith/ Daisy Renton at The Palace Bar.

We hear of Alderman M at the half way point of the play, right at the heart of the action. This is structurally significant as it seems to suggest that this predatory, abusive behaviour was a malign and corrosive one that stretched across Edwardian society and was not just confined to this singular bar – a microcosm then for sexist and exploitative behaviour.

Remember the Establishment? The exclusive group of those with power in society was exactly where Meggarty sat. He is known to the The Birlings also (a way of connecting them with the exploitation of the working classes and of women too). Corruption runs deep in Edwardian society, Priestley makes this very clear. Meggarty is are man outside of the household, he shows us that the family are not the only perpetrators.

Not only this, but Mr Birling is connected to Meggarty through their sheer physical size. Priestley wastes no time in making it known they they are overweight: ‘heavy-looking’ and ‘portly’. Each has an inflated ego and sense of self importance. Both use their power to DISEMPOWER Eva (or attempt to). In a way, both are the embodiment of conservative fat cats with too much money and no sense of community or collectivism.

Meggarty is involved in local government, the very people entrusted to guide society. He and Birling are self-serving, in that they seek to secure their own position in the social hierarchy over considering the very real needs of the working classes.

Not only this, but Meggarty is connected to Eric too, in his ready consumption of alcohol. As a motif in the play, alcohol represents greed, material wealth and corruption. All of the men drink apart from The Inspector who refuses for he is far too invested in his ‘duty’. Meggarty is ‘half drunk’ and a renowned ‘sot’. These men use alcohol to escape their social responsibility, something the Inspector teaches and is the embodiment of.

Have I convinced you yet? You tell me…are there any other reasons why Meggarty is so vital to our understanding of this flawed world?

-Miss Huttlestone

The theme of kingship in ‘Macbeth’

Firstly visit the following helpful link to refresh your memory of key contextual factors around kingship in Shakespeare’s time:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/english/macbeth/background/revision/1/

Kingship may well rear its head in the Macbeth question on Tuesday. If this occurs don’t panic, simply read over these helpful notes before your exam:

It could be good to start your essay with  an introduction including some context as a basis for your essay (and the basis of the whole play) based on the political climate of the time.

This is just a guide as to what you COULD say in your essay – please use these ideas to further your own.
Point One: the ideal king:
•Act One
‘valiant cousin’ =  premodifying adjective used by Duncan in act 1 scene two to elevate his soldiers, he treats both Macbeth ans Banquo as equals, he does not discriminate between those deserving of his praise.  ‘worthy’ = praises his men/ gratitude – rewards Macbeth’s bravery; he is a benevolent and fair king, the epitome of key virtues associated with a well liked monarch.
Duncan also admits his own misplaced judgement in the Thane of Cawdor – he is human.
Macbeth is emotionally conflicted in a long soliloquy in act 1 scene 7 as he deliberates whether to complete the act of regicide: ‘We will proceed no further in this business./He hath honored me of late’…’Duncan Hath borne his faculties so meek, hath been So clear in his great office, that his virtues Will plead like angels, trumpet-tongued’. Here he believes his death is against god’s will, against the divide right of kings and the chain of being. If ‘angels’ will ‘plead’ (a verb of desperation for someone deeply invested in that which they seek to save) then Duncan must be highly valuable as a monarch.

In act 1 scene 6 Duncan is a greatful guest and compliments Lady Macbeth’s abilities to host:’our honored hostess!’ And later ‘Give me your hand. Conduct me to mine host. We love him highly’. His language is highly emotive and complimentary. He treats all of his subjects irrespective of gender with care and tenderness.
Act Five – another form of favourable kingship at the close of the play as order is restored:
Malcom portrays many similar qualities to his father – rewarding and praising friends for loyalty and bravery – he unites the country (see final speech) could also refer to Malcom’s testing of Macduff’s loyalty – interesting for discussion of what being a good king is.

Shakespeare’s intentions in displaying correct kingship?
To create a contrast that accentuates the wickedness of The Macbeth’s acts, as well as the horror of a tyrannical king.
Praise to King James – draws attention to the more flattering qualities of kingship, while behaviour of Macbeth and subsequent consequences are a warning…

When Macbeth is crowned in act 2 a change in his language reflects his new position as a king- hints of what kind of king he will be:
• Use of the royal “we” – superiority.
• Strong verse rhythm – confidence and power.
• Banquo’s change in language – “your highness”, “my good lord.”
• Imperatives and interrogation.
• Dramatic irony and deceitful nature – ‘our bloody cousins’ (purposefully lays blame on Duncan’s innocent sons for his own self preservation)
• Macbeth’s public confidence is immediately contrasted with his self-doubt and insecurity left alone on stage as he knows the fullness of the crime he has committed.
Macbeth’s transformation in to a tyrant and subsequent demise demonstrates the repercussions of a corrupt ruler/ a usurper.

Hiring murders to kill his friend – transformed from great warrior to weak.

Corruption of his mind – “full of scorpions”/haunted by guilt and fear.
Scotland is suffering under his rule, “a country afraid to know itself”- loss of identity violent sorrow is common place. A corrupt king makes a country ill.
His soldiers have no love for him, “those he commands, move only in revolt.’ Act 5, scene 2. Many desert him near the end of the battle – direct contrast to the battle at the beginning of the play.

In summary:

Macbeth unlawfully seizes the throne by murdering Duncan. He demonstrates the traits that go against the divine right and God, as he takes counsel from the three witches. In this way, kingship in “Macbeth” is shown as something that is divinely appointed by contrasting the way Macbeth takes over the throne and the other kingly figures in the play such as Duncan and Macduff.

 

 

 

How does Priestley present the differences between Mr Birling and Inspector Goole in ‘An Inspector Calls’?

The following are some wonderful example paragraphs for this potential essay question for the play. This question concerns not one but TWO protagonists and involves the skill of comparison. A tricky but fruitful essay title.

Two Line Introduction (state your ‘big” idea, your concept first):

Clearly, Priestley deliberately crafted the characters of Mr Birling and Inspector Goole to juxtapose one another, to create a dichotomy of viewpoints on society and encourage the audience to divert their preferences to the Inspector’s socialist ideals. Birling, a “hard-headed man of business” represents the ills of capitalism and its devastating effects. The Inspector however, functions as his spokesperson, advocating the socialist ideal of a world in which “we are members of one body”.

Main Body of the essay (4-5 developed paragraphs all sharply referring back to the above concept):

Initially, Mr Birling is portrayed as a “heavy looking, rather portentous man,” instantly creating a sense of his self- importance and his insatiable need to command the attention of those around him. The adjective “heavy” has connotations of stability and seriousness, ironic connotations considering the ease at which the Inspector disturbs the supposedly solid foundations of the Birling household. Priestley goes on to deliberately undermine his authority through the use of dramatic irony in Birling’s speech, in which he dismisses suggestions of war as “fiddlesticks”. The comical exclamative is obviously intended to portray him as naive and opinionated, making the audience dislike his pomposity and ridiculous ignorance. A 1946 audience may well sense the deep distaste of his ignorance, having lived through two world wars and having seen the nation tested by ‘fire and blood and anguish’. 

Not just this, but his bombastic declaration that the Titanic is “absolutely unsinkable” literally means that he is unable to comprehend the possibility of disasters happening. Metaphorically, his use of the adverb “absolutely” depicts him as a fool whose self-aggrandising declarations are laughable in the eyes of the contemporary and modern audience. Symbolically, he represents the archetypal capitalist businessman of the time whose insular perspective blinkers him to the realities of the world.

However the Inspector is the iceberg which the Birling family ship collides with and ultimately causes their downfall. His significance in the play is immediately apparent when the stage directions characterise him as having a sense of “massiveness” and “solidity”, mirroring the description of Birling but creating all together different effects. However, whereas Birling is merely “heavy-looking,” indicating only a superficial sense of importance, it is the Inspector whose “purposefulness” gives him true gravitas. He powerfully holds the floor in interactions with the other characters, skillfully ‘cutting in’ and undermining their illusions of confidence, stability and security. A 1946 audience may well have much admired his dedication to unearthing the truth behind Eva’s suicide as he seems to place morality above self interest. 

As the play progresses, Priestley repeatedly employs emotive language when the Inspector relentlessly reminds the Birling family how Eva Smith died: “Burnt her inside out, of course.” The dyphemism and violent verb “burnt” juxtaposes the calm, almost casual “of course”, indicating possible sarcasm. Literally, this means she suffered a painful death. Metaphorically, it depicts the emotional suffering of a young woman falling prey to the ruthless behaviour of the arrogant Birlings. Symbolically, it represents the suffering of “millions and millions” of working class people who could not survive within a harsh Capitalist society. Priestley sought to expose, through the Inspector’s characterisation the great plight of the working class in a society riddled with class divide. He sought to inspire a sense of collective responsibility and community spirit, reminding audience members that ultimately, we are ‘all members of one body’. Here the noun ‘body’ suggests that class division should not exist as everyone in the world are essentially one society. It also has connotations of a human body, because if one part of the body, such as the heart, was to stop working the whole of the body would shut down. 

Priestley’s intention to expose the insensitivity and callous nature of many of the upper class is further reinforced by the Inspector’s final speech, in which he authoritatively declares that “We are all responsible for each other.” By this point (In Act 3) the Inspector has successfully attacked the foundations of the Birling family and completely destroyed their façade of respectability, thus gaining the audience’s admiration. Therefore it is this point at which Priestley uses Inspector Goole as the embodiment of Socialist values and moral authority in the play. Ultimately, he reminds the audience that their decisions and behaviour have consequences which need to be carefully considered.

Swiftly conclude but summing up the key strength of your argument:

The fact that Mr Birling is only concerned for his reputations and “knighthood” at this point further makes a mockery of him, and therefore Capitalism itself. But by presenting the Socialist ideal of a world in which “we are not alone”, Priestley, through his indomitable mouthpiece, is able to present us with an alternative vision of the future that is inspirational and ethical.

So how do those pesky poems link together?

 

Hi all,

A lot of you have asked me which poems I would put together (and why) so here are my suggested combinations along their respective themes:

SMART pairing by THEME:

Power of Nature: 

• ‘The Prelude’: Humans lured by nature’s “peak[s]” into “trouble[d minds and] darkness”. Nature challenging humanity – it’s omnipotent and awe-inspiring.
• ‘Ozymandias’: as the “Mighty…King of Kings” is transformed into a “colossal wreck” after nature causing him to “decay”. Again nature is in conflict with humanity – it’s omnipotent and awe-inspiring compared to the futility of human folly.
• ‘Exposure’: Nature is the greatest enemy to soldiers as the “ice-east winds […] knive” them. Nature is omnipotent and malevolent. 
• ‘Bayonet Charge’: Unlike the other poems, nature is made powerless by human conflict as the “hare” becomes fearful.
• ‘Storm on the Island’: Man is portrayed as being at the mercy of the storm that ‘strafes invisibly’ and brings chaos to a man-made community. Nature is an unknown force that cannot be contained. 
• ‘Kamikaze’: Here nature is so powerful it encourages the pilot to abandon his duty and subvert all cultural expectations – no easy feat! Visions of the beauty of nature create a conflict within the pilot: honour + duty VS the value of love and beauty. 

 

Effects/realities of conflict: 

• ‘Remains’: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder as the soldier remains scarred by horrific “bloody” memories in conflict irrespective of returning to a domestic sphere – the aftershock of conflict is significant and detrimental.
• ‘Bayonet Charge’: The soldiers are dehumanised into weapons of conflict as leaders pursue violence in “cold clockwork” without consideration of the soldiers’ identity and individuality.
• ‘Exposure’: The reality of conflict is Futility (pointlessness) as war leads to “nothing” – no true, pure victory. 
• ‘Charge of Light Brigade’: The reality of conflict is pure death as the soldiers enter the “valley of Death. The poet attempts to create respect as the soldiers become “hero[es]”, deserving of “honour”. However many readers now sense the false perception that conflict leads to “honour”, as the poem can be read satirically as a criticism of their blind bravery.
• ‘Poppies’: The reality of conflict is parental remorse as the mother regrets “brave[ly]… releas[ing]” her son to conflict as she knew this would inevitably lead to his death with her holding a “popp[y]” in his remembrance. The mother is left futilely “hoping” to hear her dead son’s voice at his memorial after she “released” him to conflict.
• ‘War Photographer’: The reality of conflict is social insensitivity/devaluation as society is left “not car[ing]” for war victims in broadcast. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder as the war photographer “tremble[s]” even in safety.

 

Loss of identity: 

• ‘Charge of the Light Brigade’: during conflict the individual soldiers are generically referred to as the “6 hundred”, as mere numbers of conflict.
• ‘Remains’: The soldiers vaguely refer to each other as “somebody else”, as bodies without an individual personality.
• ‘London’: The “chartered streets” lead society into having “mind-forged manacles”, who devalue lower class women and prostitutes as nameless “Harlots”.
• ‘My Last Duchess’: The man’s domineeringly devalues/steals women’s power by referring to them as “object[s]” without a name.
• ‘Bayonet Charge’: The war soldiers are dehumanised into weapons of war, who “plunge” into danger for “honour”.

Explorations of Power:

• ‘Ozymandias’: Displays a fixation on pride,glory and personal power. It also shows through the deterioration of the statue, the price of vanity and corruption. Human power is made submissive to time and nature.
• ‘My Last Duchess’: Also portrays the Duke’s damaging and violent fixations on power, pride and superiority. Ironically, his fixations leave him single-minded and serve as a illustration of his weaknesses.
• ‘London’: The poem explores a centre of power and corruption and how such oppressive institutions exert too much power of creativity and individuality. 
• ‘Checking out my history’: The power of individual voice and cultural identity. History has a strong power to define who we are in the present. 

 

*I will update with which poems go well with ‘Tissue’ and ‘The Emigree’ once we have finished our studies of them!