CGAA Yr 1 - Written Assignment Stuff - or The Voice of Experience Speaks!

As promised, I've put together a non-exhaustive list of 'hints & tips' inspired by my recent experience of reading your debut assignments. Some of what follows will repeat feedback given to specific students, but I thought I'd open things up to everyone, as it's really important that students seek to improve and polish this aspect of their degree studies. So - in no particular order:

Stop using the first person!

i.e. ‘I think that, I believe that, In my opinon, If you ask me…'

Instead of ‘My essay is looking at Vincenzo Natali's 2009 film Splice’ consider ‘This assignment examines Vincenzo Natali's 2009 film Splice…’

Instead of ‘For my research I have looked at Nightmare Movies by Kim Newman, The David Cronenberg Companion by Bodie Horrace and How To Turn A Baboon Inside Out by Seth Brundle’ consider ‘Sources for research include Nightmare Movies by Kim Newman, The David Cronenberg Companion by Bodie Horrace and How To Turn A Baboon Inside Out by Seth Brundle...'

Don’t narrate! (or write as if you're thinking outloud)

e.g. ‘My essay is on Splice. I was thinking about looking for some research in books, but I couldn’t find any good ones, so I started looking on the internet, and I found some good quotes which I’ll be using in my essay because I want to show how I’ve researched my essay using the internet….'

Yawn! Your tutor is giving up the will to live – just get on with it! Be specific always – it’s not a diary entry. WHICH 3 books are you using? Don’t tell your reader about content you’re NOT using or about information you COULDN’T find. DON’T talk about how ‘hard’ it’s been to find relevant information. Your reader doesn’t care!

When you introduce a film for the first time always give the director and the release date.

e.g. 'David Lynch’s The Elephant Man (1980) explores what it means to be human'.

Give film titles/book titles etc. capital letters –

e.g. The Elephant Man, The Company of Wolves.

The first time you introduce a director/practitioner/specific individual, give their full name; after that use surname only.

e.g. 'David Lynch’s The Elephant Man (1980) explores what it means to be human. Lynch’s use of black and white cinematography and evocative soundscape contribute to the film’s expressionistic style...'

If you use their christian name, it presumes a familiarity you do not have with the subject : 'David Lynch’s The Elephant Man (1980) explores what it means to be human. David’s use of black and white photography and evocative soundscape contribute to the film’s expressionistic style…'

(it's like, yeah, me and David go way back – we're old drinking buddies….)

Avoid vagueness!

e.g. ‘In the past’ (when exactly?), ‘In the olden days’ (when exactly?), ‘Back then’ (back when?), ‘people did this a lot’ (how much?) – ‘people did this a lot in the past, but now people don’t do it as much’ (which people did what, to what degree, and when, and now [meaning when? Right now? This century? This decade? This minute?] which people are doing what and by how much less than before?). Vagueness is a consequence of a research ‘blindspot’ or ‘lazy reporting’. If it’s getting vague, you don’t know as much as you thought and it’s time to hit the library.

Avoid generalizations!

e.g. ‘All women think this.’

Unless you have done a recent survey of ‘all women’ this statement cannot be proven; if it cannot be proven it is a generalization and has no place in an EVIDENCE based discussion.

Avoid superlatives and sycophancy!

e.g. Neil Jordan’s The Company of Wolves (1984) is a brilliant film.

In Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927), the set designs are just amazing.

(Here ‘brilliant’ and ‘amazing’ are entirely ‘content free’ – i.e. they don’t tell your reader anything. Your job is to unpack what you mean by ‘brilliant’ and unpack what you mean by ‘amazing’.

e.g. 'Neil Jordan’s The Company of Wolves (1984) impresses in its use of dream-logic by which it links its separate stories' or 'In Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927), the set designs are monumental and imposing'.

Always put your film titles/book titles etc. in italics to distinguish them from rest of text.

e.g. 'In Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927), the set designs are monumental and imposing'.

Always put your quotations between “ ” and italicise them.

e.g. "This is a quotation!"

If you don't know who said your quote, or the source from which it came, or the date of publication etc. then it is a non-reputable source and you should avoid using it.

A published source is defined as 'published' by the availability of its corresponding data - if you can't satisfy the bibliography criteria - author/publication/publisher/date - it is not a trusty-worthy or reliable source of evidence. Get rid - and find an alternative that can be trusted. This is why relying on the internet exclusively for your research is a BAD IDEA!

Unpack your quotes /demonstrate your knowledge/define your terms!

Many of you are just letting your quotes ‘hang around’ – like especially invited dinner guests who end up with nothing to contribute to the conversation. ‘As Kim Newman observes ‘Splice shares Cronenberg’s fascination with body horror’.

Okay – but Cronenberg who? Body horror what?’ And Newman’s point is? And the point of you choosing this quote and using it in this context is...?

Consider: ‘As Kim Newman observes, ‘Splice shares Cronenberg’s fascination with body horror’ (Newman 1989:76). Here, Newman refers to Canadian director, David Cronenberg, whose early films – Shivers (1975), Rabid (1977) and The Fly (1986) among others - are preoccupied with themes of bodily disintegration and infection. Of his 1979 film, The Brood (1979), David J. Schow noted ‘Cronenberg turns our private terrors of the flesh into horrid, visceral manifestations’. (Schow 1986:102) Splice’s depiction of unstable and evolving flesh exploits similar anxieties regarding the body’s capacity to shock and surprise.’

You unpack the quote into its important elements, define them where necessary and thereby demonstrate your knowledge of the concepts encompassed. Then you apply the content to your own discussion in a proactive way: i.e. you use the quote to enrich, advance and corroborate your argument. Quotes have no inherent value of their own – they only become significant when they’re used to illuminate your subject further.

Okay - as promised, Dan and Charlotte have kindly allowed me to make their unit 1 essays available via myUCA. The reason I want other students to read them is because both Dan and Charlotte demonstrate good academic technique and present very well controlled discussions. Yes, there is still room for improvement in terms of style etc. but they give a clear example of degree level 'essay-ness'.

To access their essays, go to Space/Unit Materials and you'll find a named folder.

Of course, there's loads of useful hints and tips re. essay writing available to you: please take the time to access the information and refine your approach accordingly. You'll find vital info here and here.

And finally - a very basic bit of advice from a man who knows a thing or two about the secret to creating a first class written assignment: if you're not reading interesting stuff, you're not going to write interesting stuff! You'll only get out what you're putting in - so, if you're not doing the research, if you're not reading around the subject and engaging in independent study, and if you're leaving it to the final week (worse still, the night before) your written assignments WILL be average, generic and doomed to academic mediocrity, and you WILL be capping your own final percentage... and one day soon, it will be your 8,000 word dissertation taking a big 20% shaped hole out of your final degree award... I see it happen every year to talented individuals - but it's not inevitable.

There is absolutely no reason why all CGAA students shouldn't also be confident scholars, articulate essayists and critical forces with which to be reckoned. That is the project of Ba Hons CGAA - to create extraordinary 'all rounders'... Be amazing, remember?