Contemporary Fiction

Final Exam Study Guide

Ms Gareis

2014-2015

What should I expect?

It will include a matching portion, short answer portion, reading comprehension portion, MLA formatting portion and essay portion.

Honors students will have two extra questions in each section as well as be required to write an extra paragraph on the essay.

The total possible score for all versions will be 100 pts. There will be one extra credit question (valued at a possible 5 pts).

The exam will be CLOSED book, any reading material needed to complete the exam will be provided for you during the exam period.

It will cover the following material.

Vocabulary

 

Satiracal Terms, Logical Fallacies and Graphic Novel Vocabulary will be covered. You will be given a word banks.

The vocab portion may require you to match, create sentences, write definitions or any combination of these three tasks.

Grammar

Review the handouts we’ve completed in class.

The grammar potion will be comprised of tasks taken directly from these sheets.

MLA Formatting

 

Be familiar with the basics of MLA formatting and style.

The MLA formatting portion may require you to match, correct, or create a first page, in text citation, or works cited page or citation for a single author book, webpage, image, or periodical.

 

Reading Comprehension

 

You will be provided with a short reading passage and several questions that you will respond to directly and in complete sentences. Grammar, spelling and content will be all be factored into the grading of this portion. The passage will be related to either Never Let Me Go, V for Vendetta, The Institute, Satire or Logical Fallacies.

Be prepared to

  1. Read the passage
  2. Answer questions regarding the passage
  3. Formulate a strong and arguable thesis

The Novels, Satire, Dystopia, Logical Fallacies, and Debate

You should be prepared to accurately identify and discuss protagonist, antagonist, foil, round character, flat character, dynamic character, static character, plot; including conflict, inciting incident, rising action, falling action and resolution, theme, motif, symbol, tone, mood, setting, diction, irony, epiphany, metaphor in both V for Vendetta and Never Let Me Go:

You should understand and be able to identify elements of satire and the difference between satire and gallows humor.

You should understand and be able to identify various types of logical fallacies.

You should be able to use graphic novel vocabulary to analysis one or more panels from a text.

You may be required to match, write definitions, directly respond to short answer questions, complete diagrams or any combination of these tasks.

Essay Question

You will be asked to write a three (four for honors) paragraph essay concerning V for Vendetta, Never Let Me Go or The Institute.

Advertisements

6 responses »

  1. Pasha says:

     Satire is a literary genre that uses irony, wit, and sometimes sarcasm to expose humanity’s vices and foibles, giving impetus, or momentum, to change or reform through ridicule.
     It is a manner of writing that mixes a critical attitude with wit and humor in an effort to improve mankind and human institutions.
     Some writers specifically use humor to covey serious messages
    Example 1: INDIRECT
    ARLINGTON, TX—Calling the transformation both delightful and stunning, friends and family members confirmed Tuesday that 17-year-old Ashley Parker was blossoming into an absolutely gorgeous object.
    According to Parker’s relatives, in the span of 14 months, the high school junior underwent a staggering metamorphosis from a young girl with thoughts, feelings, and aspirations into a truly stunning commodity.
    “Ashley has really developed into quite a striking assemblage of physical attributes that are found to be sexually attractive in our culture,” said Parker’s uncle Keith Hayes, expressing astonishment at how his niece had steadily matured from a precocious youth into a shapely, ravishing thing devoid of intellect and personality. “It’s hard to believe that she used to be that little girl [capable of subjective experiences] that I remember. Now look at her—she’s such a lovely vessel for displaced sexual frustration and voyeuristic lust, just like her mother.”
    “Seems like just yesterday she was this creative 7-year-old kid, pretending her Barbie was the first woman president,” Hayes added. “My, they grow into little more than consumer goods so quickly.”
    Marveling at the rite of passage that all females make from girlhood into entirely disempowered objecthood, Hayes expressed confidence that the 17-year-old would one day become a highly prized physical possession for “one lucky guy.”
    Parker’s classmates at Wakefield High School were also reportedly captivated by the adolescent’s transition from a young woman into an eye-catching repository for male gratification. High school senior Kevin Turner said that Parker had become a particularly alluring instrument of purely physical pleasure in the months since she was a young, conscious, independent preteen girl.
    “I grew up with Ashley and never thought much of her before, but over the last year or so, I really started to see her for the beautiful little piece of equipment she is,” said Turner, expressing enthusiasm for how the teen had evolved into a dazzling sexual apparatus. “I’m thinking of asking that mere receptacle to prom.”
    “Take a look at it,” added Turner of the former human being. “I can think of a lot of things I’d like to do with that.”
    Edmund Powell, Parker’s history teacher, echoed the sentiment of many pupils, claiming that he was impressed by the junior’s transformation from an honor roll student and sentient human being into a lovely piece of meat.
    “Ashley used to be one of the brightest and best students in my class,” said Powell, recalling the former girl who once consisted of more than a single, surface-deep dimension. “But, wow, now you’d have to say that she’s something very special. Something very special indeed.”
    While Parker’s mother Stacey was reportedly certain that her daughter would make a beautiful and unthinkingly gracious trophy someday, the 38-year-old cautioned Ashley not to get her hopes up about finding the perfect money bags right away.

    Like

  2. Pasha says:

    Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments

     Hasty Generalization
    o Making assumptions about a whole group or range of cases based on a sample that is inadequate (usually because it is atypical or just too small).
     “My roommate said her philosophy class was hard, and the one I’m in is hard, too. All philosophy classes must be hard!”
     Missing the Point
    o The premises of an argument do support a particular conclusion–but not the conclusion that the arguer actually draws.
     “The seriousness of a punishment should match the seriousness of the crime. Right now, the punishment for drunk driving may simply be a fine. But drunk driving is a very serious crime that can kill innocent people. So the death penalty should be the punishment for drunk driving.”
     Post Hoc
    o Assuming that because B comes after A, A caused B.
     “President Jones raised taxes, and then the rate of violent crime went up. Jones is responsible for the rise in crime.“
     Slippery Slope
    o The arguer claims that a sort of chain reaction, usually ending in some dire consequence, will take place, but there’s really not enough evidence for that assumption.
     : “Animal experimentation reduces our respect for life. If we don’t respect life, we are likely to be more and more tolerant of violent acts like war and murder. Soon our society will become a battlefield in which everyone constantly fears for their lives. It will be the end of civilization. To prevent this terrible consequence, we should make animal experimentation illegal right now.”

     Weak Analogy
    o Many arguments rely on an analogy between two or more objects, ideas, or situations. If the two things that are being compared aren’t really alike in the relevant respects, the analogy is a weak one, and the argument that relies on it commits the fallacy of weak analogy.
     : “Guns are like hammers–they’re both tools with metal parts that could be used to kill someone. And yet it would be ridiculous to restrict the purchase of hammers–so restrictions on purchasing guns are equally ridiculous.”
     Appeal to Authority
    o Often we add strength to our arguments by referring to respected sources or authorities and explaining their positions on the issues we’re discussing.
     “We should abolish the death penalty. Many respected people, such as actor Guy Handsome, have publicly stated their opposition to it.”
     Appeal to Pity
    o The appeal to pity takes place when an arguer tries to get people to accept a conclusion by making them feel sorry for someone.]
     “It’s wrong to tax corporations–think of all the money they give to charity, and of the costs they already pay to run their businesses!”
     Appeal to Innocence
    o In the appeal to ignorance, the arguer basically says, “Look, there’s no conclusive evidence on the issue at hand. Therefore, you should accept my conclusion on this issue.”
     “People have been trying for centuries to prove that God exists. But no one has yet been able to prove it. Therefore, God does not exist.”
     Straw Man
    o One way of making our own arguments stronger is to anticipate and respond in advance to the arguments that an opponent might make. The arguer sets up a wimpy version of the opponent’s position and tries to score point by knocking it down.
     “Feminists want to ban all pornography and punish everyone who reads it! But such harsh measures are surely inappropriate, so the feminists are wrong: porn and its readers should be left in peace.”
     Red Herring
    o Partway through an argument, the arguer goes off on a tangent, raising a side issue that distracts the audience from what’s really at stake. Often, the arguer never returns to the original issue.
     “Grading this exam on a curve would be the most fair thing to do. After all, classes go more smoothly when the students and the professor are getting along well.”
     False Dichotomy
    o In false dichotomy, the arguer sets up the situation so it looks like there are only two choices. The arguer then eliminates one of the choices, so it seems that we are left with only one option: the one the arguer wanted us to pick in the first place.
     “Caldwell Hall is in bad shape. Either we tear it down and put up a new building, or we continue to risk students’ safety. Obviously we shouldn’t risk anyone’s safety, so we must tear the building down.”
     Begging the Question
    o A complicated fallacy, an argument that begs the question asks the reader to simply accept the conclusion without providing real evidence. the argument either relies on a premise that says the same thing as the conclusion (which you might hear referred to as “being circular” or “circular reasoning”), or simply ignores an important (but questionable) assumption that the argument rests on. Sometimes people use the phrase “beg the question” as a sort of general criticism of arguments, to mean that an arguer hasn’t given very good reasons for a conclusion, but that’s not the meaning we’re going to discuss here.
     “Active euthanasia is morally acceptable. It is a decent, ethical thing to help another human being escape suffering through death.”
     Equivocation
    o Equivocation is sliding between two or more different meanings of a single word or phrase that is important to the argument.
     “Giving money to charity is the right thing to do. So charities have a right to our money.”

    Like

  3. Kierstyn Kirk says:

    • Satire is a literary genre that uses irony, wit, and sometimes sarcasm to expose humanity’s vices and foibles, giving impetus, or momentum, to change or reform through ridicule. A serious tone to persuade their audiences to accept their perspective on various issues, some writers specifically use humor to convey a serious message.
    • Satire can be divided into two basic types: informal and indirect, as in stories, poems, plays, or novels; and direct or formal, in which the satirist speaks directly to readers or listeners.
    • Horatian satire is a type of direct satire, which pokes fun at human foibles with a witty even indulgent tone.
    • Juvenalian satire is a type of direct satire, which denounces, sometimes with invective, human vice and error in dignified and solemn tones.
    • If the creators of satire don’t have a reform or a solution in mind but are simply holding up an aspect of the world as ridiculous, then they are creating irony or gallows humor rather than satire.
    • A technique often used in satirical novels is the contrast between utopian and dystopian societies. The author usually introduces what at first appears to be a utopian society, but which the reader soon realizes is actually grotesque or dystopian.
    • Various characteristics that often appear in satiric writing:
     Irony- Irony is a mode of expression, through words (verbal irony) or events (irony of situation), conveying a reality different from and usually opposite to appearance or expectation.
    • Dramatic irony occurs when there is miscommunication in a book, play or film and the audience is smarter than the characters: In Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare Romeo finds Juliet in a drugged state and he thinks she is dead. He kills himself. When Juliet wakes up she finds Romeo dead and kills herself.
    • Situational irony may occur when the outcome of a certain situation is completely different than what was initially expected: When a fire station burns down.

     Hyperbole- is deliberate exaggeration to achieve an effect; overstatement: I am so hungry I could eat a horse.

     Litotes- are a form of understatement that involves making an affirmative point by denying its opposite: You are not as young as you used to be.

     Caricature- an exaggeration or other distortion of an individual’s prominent features or characteristics to the point of making that individual appear ridiculous.

     Wit- is most commonly understood as clever expression, whether aggressive or harmless; that is, with or without derogatory intent toward someone or something in particular: Education, the next best thing to a record deal.

     Sarcasm- intentional derision generally directed at another person and intended to hurt: At a party a lady tells Winston Churchhill he is drunk to which Churchhill said “My dear, you are ugly…but tomorrow I shall be sober.”

     Ridicule- the use of words intended to belittle a person or idea and arouse contemptuous laughter.

     Parody- an imitation of an author or his/her work with the idea of ridiculing the author, his/her ideas, or the work itself: like SNL videos

     Invective- is speech or writing that abuses, denounces, or attacks. It can be directed against a person, cause, idea, or system: “I cannot but conclude the bulk of your natives to be the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth.” (Swift, Gulliver’s Travels)

    Like

  4. • Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments
    o Hasty Generalization: making assumptions about a whole group or range of cases based on a sample that is inadequate: “My roommate said her philosophy class was hard, and the one I’m in is hard, too. All philosophy classes must be hard!”
    o Missing the Point: the premises of an argument do support a particular conclusion–but not the conclusion that the arguer actually draws: “The seriousness of a punishment should match the seriousness of the crime. Right now, the punishment for drunk driving may simply be a fine. But drunk driving is a very serious crime that can kill innocent people. So the death penalty should be the punishment for drunk driving.”
    o Post hoc (false cause): Assuming that because B comes after A, A caused B: “President Jones raised taxes, and then the rate of violent crime went up. Jones is responsible for the rise in crime.“
    o Slippery Slope: The arguer claims that a sort of chain reaction, usually ending in some dire consequence, will take place, but there’s really not enough evidence for that assumption: “Animal experimentation reduces our respect for life. If we don’t respect life, we are likely to be more and more tolerant of violent acts like war and murder. Soon our society will become a battlefield in which everyone constantly fears for their lives. It will be the end of civilization. To prevent this terrible consequence, we should make animal experimentation illegal right now.”
    o Weak Analogy: Many arguments rely on an analogy between two or more objects, ideas, or situations. If the two things that are being compared aren’t really alike in the relevant respects, the analogy is a weak one, and the argument that relies on it commits the fallacy of weak analogy: “Guns are like hammers–they’re both tools with metal parts that could be used to kill someone. And yet it would be ridiculous to restrict the purchase of hammers–so restrictions on purchasing guns are equally ridiculous.”
    o Appeal to Authority: Often we add strength to our arguments by referring to respected sources or authorities and explaining their positions on the issues we’re discussing: “We should abolish the death penalty. Many respected people, such as actor Guy Handsome, have publicly stated their opposition to it.”
    o Appeal to Pity: The appeal to pity takes place when an arguer tries to get people to accept a conclusion by making them feel sorry for someone: “It’s wrong to tax corporations–think of all the money they give to charity, and of the costs they already pay to run their businesses!”
    o Appeal to Ignorance: In the appeal to ignorance, the arguer basically says, “Look, there’s no conclusive evidence on the issue at hand. Therefore, you should accept my conclusion on this issue”: “People have been trying for centuries to prove that God exists. But no one has yet been able to prove it. Therefore, God does not exist.”
    o Straw Man: One way of making our own arguments stronger is to anticipate and respond in advance to the arguments that an opponent might make. The arguer sets up a wimpy version of the opponent’s position and tries to score point by knocking it down: “Feminists want to ban all pornography and punish everyone who reads it! But such harsh measures are surely inappropriate, so the feminists are wrong: porn and its readers should be left in peace.”
    o Red Herring: Partway through an argument, the arguer goes off on a tangent, raising a side issue that distracts the audience from what’s really at stake. Often, the arguer never returns to the original issue: “Grading this exam on a curve would be the most fair thing to do. After all, classes go more smoothly when the students and the professor are getting along well.”
    o False Dichotomy: the arguer sets up the situation so it looks like there are only two choices. The arguer then eliminates one of the choices, so it seems that we are left with only one option: the one the arguer wanted us to pick in the first place: “Caldwell Hall is in bad shape. Either we tear it down and put up a new building, or we continue to risk students’ safety. Obviously we shouldn’t risk anyone’s safety, so we must tear the building down.”
    o Begging the Question: A complicated fallacy, an argument that begs the question asks the reader to simply accept the conclusion without providing real evidence: “Active euthanasia is morally acceptable. It is a decent, ethical thing to help another human being escape suffering through death.”
    o Equivocation: sliding between two or more different meanings of a single word or phrase that is important to the argument: “Giving money to charity is the right thing to do. So charities have a right to our money.”

    Like

  5. Max Murdoch says:

    Max, Shweta, John

    V for Vendetta

    Protagonist: V
    Antagonist: The Government
    Foil: the leader
    Round character: Evey
    Flat character: Helen Hayer
    Dynamic character: Mr. Finch
    Static character: Peter Creedy
    Including conflict: V trying to get his revenge and take down the government/dictator
    Inciting conflict: the war that leads to the experiments that happened in the resettlement camps.
    Rising aciton: saving Evey, blowing up government buildings, killing resettlement employees
    Falling action: after V’s death
    Resolution: Evey becomes the new V to help lead the people to a better future
    Theme: Everyone living with the idea of anarchy
    Motif: Trying to take down the government
    Symbol: Guy Fawkes mask
    Tone: author is supporting the idea of everyone living with anarchy
    Mood: Fear, mystery
    Setting: London
    Diction: Language is easily accessible
    Irony: Starting the idea of anarchy and dying at the end
    Epiphany: When Finch takes LSD to try and comprehend V
    Metaphor: the door of the cage is open, Evey

    Like

  6. Virginia Martinez says:

    Never Let me Go

    Protagonist: Kathy.
    Antagonist: The Humans
    Foil: Ruth
    Round Character: Kathy
    Flat character: Miss Emily
    Dynamic Character: Madame
    Static Character: Ruth
    Plot including conflicts: Kathy is friends/fake friends (?) with Tommy and Ruth. (they are both dating). Chrissie and Rodney (cool older couple at the Cottages). Madame is the principal seem like a enemy to the clones but actually fights for their rights. Miss Emily: Hailsham guardian. Miss Geraldine: Guardian at Hailsham, nice one. Miss Lucy was the most rebellious of the guardians. She gives them clues.
    Inciting incident: They are clones and are being used for organs. They don’t know what is going on. They are used and kept somewhere without knowing anything about the world outside that school.
    Rising Action: They start to discover about humans. About the fact they are clones. They want to find their similar. Miss Lucy starts to give them information that actives their curiosity. Seeing Madame come back once in a while in a car. Not knowing what the gallery was for. Living in oblivion.
    Falling Action: Learning about their clone situation and how they won’t ever be considered as humans and won’t ever have the same opportunities. Learning how they will all donate organs and finally die. Just going to be used.
    Resolution: They all die, won’t change their future because they finally agree its their destiny.
    Theme: Freedom. Friendship. Human cloning and bad and selfish utility of science and technology. Hope, dreams and plans.
    Motif: Sex. Secrets. Drawings.
    Symbol: Drawing, hope. Norfolk. And the casset. The boat symbols how lost they are and how they don’t know anything.
    Tone: Angry. Authors is mad, wants people to stand up for themselves. To be unique, not follow what society does. He is angry about how people don’t question anything and just blindly follow what they are told to do. They are walked into their death.
    Mood: Distressing, depressing, dark. There’s no hope, no light.
    Setting: England, late 1990’s. Imaginary world though.
    Diction: Easy language, known for everyone to understand. Narrated by Kathy.
    Irony: “The humans look at the clones like trash, but they actually rely on them to live longer” – John.
    Epiphany: They are clones (for the reader and for the characters is the same Epiphany.)
    Metaphor: We are all clones if we follow society. If you allow outside things to tell you what you are and what to do you might as well be a clone.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s