It is important that candidates recognise that in all papers, three questions should be answered in order to get the best possible mark (ensuring that the rubric for the paper has been followed accordingly).
Examiners follow a simple mathematical formula when awarding a final overall mark: they give each answer a mark out of 100 (up to three answers only, as required by the exam paper); they then total all available marks; and finally they divide the total by three, thus giving an average overall mark.
So, if your first answer is given 57%, your second answer is given 56%, and your third answer 50%, then the calculation will look like this:
57 + 56 + 50 = 163
163 ÷ 3 = 54.3
Overall mark: 54%
Two good essays and no third essay will always bring the mark down. So, if in the example above a third answer was not given, the calculation would look like this:
57 + 56 = 113
113 ÷ 3 = 37.6
Overall mark: 38%
In this case, even if the candidate had written a ‘poor’ third answer getting a mark of 40% their overall mark would be higher than not attempting an answer at all:
57 + 56 + 40 = 153
153 ÷ 3 = 51
Overall mark: 51%
Note in the example above how the 40% mark, while low, still enables the candidate to achieve an overall mark in the Lower Second category, which is in keeping with their first two marks of 57% and 56%. Not answering a third question would see the candidate lose considerable marks and drop two whole classes. It could also mean the difference between a pass and a fail.
Candidates are thus strongly advised to give equal attention across the paper, plan their time accordingly, and attempt to provide three answers of roughly the same length and as full as possible. Candidates are also reminded that it is totally unnecessary to copy out the question again into the answer book; a question number in the margin is sufficient enough, and this will also save valuable minutes.
The Examiners were generally pleased with the standard of answers to this paper. Candidates showed that they had studied their chosen texts carefully and were well prepared for the examination. A good range of questions were answered by the candidates, with a particular enthusiasm for the question examining the use of narrative style in two texts. There was also a pleasing combination of unusual novels this year, showing good analytical thought processes and a pleasing ability to link novels of different historical periods.
Section A asks candidates to focus on only one author and as such they are expected to show a detailed understanding of their texts. Section B requires answers to refer to at least two different authors and as such there should be an equal balance between the discussions of the novels. Candidates will not achieve more marks if they write at length about one novel and do not leave themselves enough time to give equal weight to the second text. A brief mention of the title of the second novel does not constitute a discussion of the text.
Candidates taking this paper need to be able to demonstrate a clear understanding of their chosen novels, as well as showing knowledge of the development of the novel as a genre and an understanding of debates in literary criticism about the novel as a form.
This year, once again, candidates showed a high level of awareness of the critical debates about feminism, racism, gender, structuralism and political tyranny. The Examiners were heartened to see that good candidates consistently showed how their novel was placed historically, politically and culturally alongside their understanding of the form and content of the texts.
Answers that were awarded highest marks were those that specifically tackled the question set and were supported with examples from the novel and literary criticism, where appropriate, throughout the response. Good answers consistently kept in mind the history of the novel as a literary form and critical theories concerning the novel. They were also characterised by an ability to discuss form as well as content in the novel, showing how the structure and narrative of the novel were usually central to its thematic concerns.
Candidates who began by answering the question but soon diverted into a repetition of a previously prepared answer were not highly rewarded by the Examiners. It is wise to revise for the exam by writing practice essays. However, candidates need to adapt the material they have prepared to respond to the terms of the new question. This will mean leaving out some perfectly good ideas that fitted with a previous question but do not fit with the one on the examination paper. Do not include material simply because you know it to be good or carefully thought-out work. Always consider how your ideas are answering the question set, or how you could angle your ideas and examples to fit the terms of the exam question.
Plot summary is not a substitute for analysis and the Examiners did not reward extensive re-telling of the narrative. Similarly, answers which seemed unaware of the historical or cultural context of the novel or did not demonstrate any awareness of critical approaches to the novel were not highly valued by the Examiners.
Candidates should always be aware of the need to express their ideas in clear written English. When the style of expression interferes with the candidate’s ability to convey their ideas and arguments, then it is impossible for the Examiners to award good marks.
Finally, candidates are encouraged to show a range of authors in their answer. It is not possible to write about the same author twice in the examination paper, even if you have chosen a different novel by them. Answers which repeat the use of an author will fail. Please note that a clarification of the examination rubric was added to the examination paper in 2008.
Good answers analysed the function and significance of point of view and discussed the impact of the narrative style upon the reader’s response and interpretation of the text. Some good candidates also discussed point of view from a modernist perspective, explaining how the narrative focus works to create stylistic effects in novels, such as the ‘stream of consciousness’ in Virginia Woolf’s Mrs Dalloway or To the Lighthouse, for example. Some good candidates discussed point of view as an aspect of the authorial intention debate, while other good candidates showed how point of view was often dependent on literary tropes of irony, allusion and figurative language. Good candidates always concentrated the impact of the use of point of view, rather than listing notable incidences of point of view in each novel. Some good candidates looked at the use of point of view to create humour and insight in novels and discussed Jane Austen’s work, such as Emma and Northanger Abbey. This meant that good candidates were always discussing what the effect of point of view had upon the reader and what the reader could learn from being alert to changes and developments in point of view in novels. It would have been pleasing to see more answers analysing point of view in art for this question.
Good candidates examined how the endings of novels reflected many of the themes of their beginning and pointed out that the style and development of each offered a sense of closure to topics raised at the beginning of the novel. Some good candidates noted that the links between themes at the beginning and end of the novel were often a feature of the realist novel, such as work by George Eliot or Charles Dickens, and that a sense of unity and development in the text as a whole was considered valuable and meaningful in earlier novels. A lack of structural symmetry between the beginning and the end of the post-modern novel was often interpreted as a pertinent critique of the conventions of the novel by some good candidates. Other good candidates examined how characters changed and developed between the beginning and the end of the novel, particularly in a bildungsroman, while others noted a change of tone or narrative focus between the beginning and the end and analysed what such changes might mean for the themes, characters and approach of the novels to their subject.
Good answers showed how a literary technique could be used in texts to change and develop a reader’s understanding of, and response to, the narrative. There were no extra marks for references to more than one literary technique and candidates are reminded that a deep focus upon one technique, showing thorough understanding of the approach and its impact on the reader will be looked upon more favourably by the Examiners than a more superficial consideration of two or three techniques. Some good candidates chose to focus on narrative style and good answers on the use of the ‘stream of consciousness’ technique in Virginia Woolf’s novels featured strongly here. Other good candidates looked at the use of analepsis and prolepsis in the texts and demonstrated the creation of suspense, anticipation and often surprise conveyed by the narrative in this way.
Many good candidates discussed the possible meanings of the prompt quote from Emily Dickinson and used their interpretation of what she meant as a structure for their answer. This is often a successful technique as there is always a relationship between the quotation and what the question is asking the candidate to consider in their chosen texts. Some good candidates suggested that the quote implied that all literary truths should be implicit in the text and that literary techniques are an attempt to disguise the truth rather than reveal it clearly to the reader. Some good candidates looked at the ways that truth was obscured and distorted in novels such as George Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm and considered the use of irony, parody and satire as tropes to disguise truth in such novels.
It was pleasing to see that some answers to this question considered nineteenth-century novels as well as later texts. The question requires a consideration of the treatment and significance of material gain – this is interpreted widely, not only as monetary gain but also as an improvement of lifestyle and status, often corresponding to a change in class position. Some good candidates focused on the significance of material gain in the novels of, for example, Balzac, such as Eugénie Grandnet or Old Goriot, or Charles Dickens, such as Great Expectations and David Copperfield. Good candidates considered the significance of material gain upon the transformations of the characters themselves as a result of material gain. Other good candidates also looked at the relationship between the individual and society, considering the changing reactions to them as a response to their wealth and poverty. Good candidates explored both how the subject of material gain was treated in the narrative and what the significance of this treatment suggested about social attitudes to money.
Good candidates concentrated on providing an outline of the main advantages and disadvantages of the omniscient narrator in contemporary novels. The ability to create a sense of intimacy and a close relationship with the reader and the value of the all-knowing figure in the text were discussed as both advantages and disadvantages to the omniscient narrator. Good candidates debated whether these advantages and disadvantages were any longer useful or desirable to a contemporary reader of contemporary novels. Some good candidates were able to relate this to theoretical discussions of post-modernism and post-structuralism. Other good candidates pointed out that some consideration of authorial intention was also relevant to the consideration of the role of the omniscient narrator – does the narrative style reveal anything of a moral position being taken by the author? Is the voice of the omniscient narrator the same as that of the author? What was the status of moral judgements made in texts where the author used omniscient narration?
The question invited a consideration of the representation and significance of any one of the three themes listed in the question. Candidates are reminded that the Examiners do not award extra marks for answers that discuss all three themes – the question is designed specifically to invite detailed study of one theme and not the superficial consideration of all three. For example, good candidates discussed how oppression was represented in texts , gave examples of instances of the theme, explained why its use was significant and concluded with what it added to their understanding of the novel to have identified and analysed that theme. In what ways does an understanding of oppression help us to understand Charles Dickens’s Hard Times or Oliver Twist, for example? Why is it that such novels show oppression? What does it tell the reader about the society represented and the specific historical, political and social conditions of the period? Some good candidates discussed the representation of oppression in George Orwell’s Animal Farm and 1984 and showed the significance of this representation to our understanding of political oppression as a destructive social force.
This question invited a consideration of the representation of gender and anxiety in novels. Some good candidates discussed how this anxiety was linked to questions about gender and showed that often this anxiety was seen as part of female experience in texts. Other good candidates showed that many literary representations of men also explored the complexities of gender anxieties and exploration of what constituted masculinity and femininity in texts was often a part of this discussion. A good answer would discuss feminist criticism, pointing out that female anxiety about gender roles and the place of the female in society had long been the subject of literary exploration. Others examined gender anxieties in, for example, Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre, Olive Schreiner’s The Story of an African Farm or Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart. The complexities of male anxiety in, for example, Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment and the analysis of whether the representation of gender and anxiety created an endless power struggle between men and women in texts could also be explored. Some good candidates also looked at the representation of gender and anxiety through other theoretical approaches to text, such as queer theory.
Good candidates discussed the pleasure and frustration of encountering the use of allusion in texts, for example the novels of Toni Morrison. The question invites candidates to consider whether the device enhances the readers’ experience of reading a novel or whether it only serves to alienate the reader by making them feel inadequate or ill-informed. The best answers showed how the use of allusion added a further layer of meaning to the critical interpretation of the work, rather than simply offering a list of instances where its use was evident. Some good candidates considered the subject of allusion from a theoretical point of view, mentioning the work of Roland Barthes and considering the allusive nature of all art and literature, which draws from previous traditions and other texts to make new work.
This question invited the discussion of narrative style in two novels and a consideration of how this style had influenced the development of the novel. There were some very good answers to this question where candidates compared authors from different historical periods and showed how both texts had changed or developed the style, structure or focus of the novel as a form on each occasion. Novels by Daniel Defoe, such as Moll Flanders or Robinson Crusoe, for example, were seen to have used the narrative style of a personal memoir to redefine authenticity in the novel. Other good candidates discussed how the narrative address to the reader in the post-modern novels of Italio Calvino, for example, redefined the relationship between the novelist and the reader. Some good candidates examined whether the voice of the narrator could be taken as the voice of truth and authority in literary texts and what implications this had for the novel as a form of influence upon the reader. Other good candidates considered how the narrator can be used to mislead the reader or to manipulate them and how this led to the post-modern distrust of the ‘truth’ of the text, to the deconstruction of the narrative and to questions about the nature of textual authority. Good candidates considered the distinctions between third person or first person narration in texts and others considered the function of multiple points of view from many different narrators in texts, showing how each contributed to the development of the novel in their own way.
The question asks the candidate to consider whether the post-modern novel offers the reader an exciting and vibrant literary experience or whether it signals the collapse of the novel as a literary form. Does the post-modern novel suggest that the whole genre of the novel is dated and no longer of interest or relevance to the modern reader? Good answers considered how the novel as a genre, and even the post-modern novel in particular, could still challenge the reader’s expectations and showed how the genre remains relevant to the contemporary reader. Some good candidates considered the novel’s importance as a historical literary construct and others explained that the themes and narratives remained relevant to contemporary readers, regardless of the style, structure and narrative point of view of the novel. Some good answers considered the innovations in literary form in the post-modern novel to be a cause of constant enjoyment and delight for the reader. Other good answers suggested that the self-conscious engagement between the reader and the writer about the making of meaning and the creation of literary form itself are topics which would remain constantly relevant to the reader. Some good answers also considered the relationship between literature and criticism and suggested that the growth of structuralist and post-structuralist analysis of texts allowed the interpretation of all novels to remain fresh and dynamic.
The question offers the opportunity to consider the significance of one theme in two novels and to examine the similarities and differences between their representation and impact in each. Again, candidates are reminded that more marks are not awarded for referring to more than one of these themes, since the question requires a close focus on one theme, rather than a rudimentary reflection on all three. A good answer would discuss the way the theme is represented and then analyse the significance of that representation; it would not simply list incidences of betrayal, for example, in the chosen text. Good candidates discussed why that betrayal was important, how it was revealed to us in the text, what were the narrative means of revelation and what was the impact of that revelation upon the development of the remainder of the novel?
There were no answers to this question but candidates could have discussed the use of irony in the modern novel and considered whether it is now an outdated form, or whether readers continue to respond to it as a means of narrative revelation.
Good candidates examined how the atmosphere of suspense is created and maintained through a consideration of narrative technique to show how the level of suspense could be built up in a novel. Less successful answers simply pointed out that a novel was good at creating suspense, but gave little attention to how this tension was achieved in formal narrative or thematic terms. It is not enough to point out that there is an atmosphere of suspense created in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, for example. Good answers went on to explain how this suspense was achieved, either through the use of the narrator or the narrative style as well as the use of metaphors, similes and the literary techniques used to build up the atmosphere. Gothic novels and novels of mystery and detection were discussed regularly in response to this question, since the success of these genres often depends upon suspense and the ability to build up a pressing desire to resolve the plot. Good answers analysed the formal means by which the author/narrator controls the narrative and allows the reader to be continually intrigued by the novel and its revelations. Some good candidates focused on the style of narration as the authors’ means of revealing and withholding information from the reader. Other good answers explored the formal structure of the novel. This was particularly evident in post-modern works where the chronological progression of the narrative may well be interrupted in order to create an atmosphere of suspense which encourages the reader to continue and resolve the mysteries of the novel’s plot and structure to enjoy the process of the narrative’s revelation of its own mystery.
Appendix 2: Examiners’ report 2010