Stasiland Questions

“STASILAND” :  Sample Essay Questions.

Introduction.
Looking at past examination questions suggests that questions will be often set around the following ideas:
-that the focus on ordinary people (both citizens and stasi) is important to the validity of the text.
-that the Wall and the GDR caused both physical and psychological impacts on individuals.
-that Funder’s first person narration and emotional responses add power to her non-fiction account of the GDR.

 I would like you to attempt either question 3 or 12 over the weekend, 800+ words.

1. “It is individual acts of resistance that make “Stasiland” so engaging.”
                                                                                       Discuss.

2. “This society, it was built on lies…”
     Why does Funder find it so difficult to uncover the truth?

3. “It’s not ever, really, over.”
      Why do the individuals in “Stasiland” find it so difficult to leave their pasts behind?

4. “Funder portrays all the individuals she interviews as victims-even those who were employed by the Stasi.”
                                                                                      Discuss.

5. Klaus: “I think the Stasi people have been punished enough.”
    In the light of Funder’s investigation, do you agree with Klaus?

6. “Funder’s ‘Stasiland” is largely a moving tribute to the women who survived”.
Do you agree?

7. “Anna Funder is far more than a detached reporter in the text, she is deeply involved in the story itself.”
    To what extent do you agree?

8. How does “Stasiland” portray that fear and paranoia consumes the lives of those she interviews?

9. “Much of the Stasi’s behaviour is simply absurd.” What drives this madness?

10. “The destruction of individuals’ basic humanity is the worse crime committed by the GDR regime and the Stasi.”
        Is this what Funder uncovers in her investigation?

11. “He was angry, telling me that history is made of personal stories.”
         The power of Funder’s account of the GDR lies in the individual experiences she recounts.
Discuss.

12. “Mauer im Kopt or the Wall in the Head.”
       Funder explores how the psychological legacy of the GDR’s totalitarian regime is often worse than the physical toll.”
Do you agree?

13.”…the Wall is the thing that defined him..”
   Funder explores how lives were fundamentally re shaped by the Wall.”
       To what extent do you agree?

14. “Stasiland” uses the stories of ordinary people to shed light on the reality of the GDR regime.”
       Discuss the interrelationship between the personal and the political in the text.

15. What is the effect of Funder’s first person narrative style in “Stasiland”?

16.
 Discuss the different kinds of courage demonstrated by the individuals in “Stasiland”.

17.  “Funder’s detachment as a non-German provides readers with a more credible and objective perspective on the GDR.”
         Do you agree?

18. “Funder makes no judgements of her subjects whether they were ordinary citizens or Stasi operatives; she simple records their stories and this is a strength of her account.”
Discuss.

19. “…this man turned inhumanity into humanity…”
       How do the Stasi justify their actions in “Stasiland”?

20. “Funder employs pathos, black humour and absurdity in her depiction of the GDR and Stasi regime and its activities. This strengthens the impact of her account.”
                                                                                                 Discuss.

Keller is an effective teacher: Year 11

Essay question: Keller was an ineffective teacher

 

* It is possible to view the character of Eduard Keller in many ways. Paul initially

sees him as condescending and dislikes him profusely. By the end of text,

however, the reader understands that Paul has developed a close and

respectful relationship with his teacher.

The two statements below describe different points of view on Keller, with

examples of evidence from the text that support and strengthen either

interpretation. Think about whether or not the following points are a fair

assessment of Keller’s teaching methods.

‘Keller is an ineffective teacher.’

Evidence from the text:

• Keller’s advice often consists of peculiar riddles, making it difficult for Paul to

understand him: ‘Only those who are dirty need to wash’ (p.41).

• He patronises Paul by making him play pieces that are not challenging

enough, such as The Children’s Bach (p.27).

• He has drinking and obvious emotional issues that make him erratic. See for

example when he calls off a lesson when he has had too much to drink

(p.73).

• He is overly critical and seldom gives positive encouragement. Paul sends

him a tape of his Honours performance only to have it sent back with a

detailed critique (p.124).

• He frequently insults Paul: ‘It is you who are ignorant’ (p.71).

• His view of the world is negative and pessimistic which is not good for a

young man such as Paul. Compare Paul’s and Keller’s attitudes to Vienna

on p.133.

• Keller rarely practises or performs himself and so is a poor model: ‘I never

hear you practise’ (p.41).

• He has been limited in what he has been able to teach Paul and fails in the

goal of making him a successful concert pianist.

• Keller sees only imperfection in everything and therefore will never be happy

with his own performances, let alone Paul’s.

 

 

 

‘Keller is an effective teacher.’

Evidence from the text:

• Keller has an impeccable pedigree of musical ancestors, with his own

teacher being Leschetizky (p.21).

• He was a renowned performer at the height of his career. Henisch calls him

the pianist and teacher he ‘prized above all others of his generation’ (p.132).

• Taking Paul back to basics is a good thing as it undoes his bad habits and

teaches him humility.

• He does give positive encouragement sometimes: ‘You should have won the

competition. You were the best’ (p.113).

• He is upfront and honest for Paul’s own good, explaining, ‘A small hurt now

to avoid a wasted life’ (p.113).

• He is kind and fatherly when he occasionally gives Paul gifts. See for

example when he gives Paul the Czerny manuscript (p.54).

• His great piano playing is something for Paul to aspire to. As Paul observes,

‘the hands played, autonomously, with an abandon and rapture beyond

anything I had ever heard’ (p.73).

• He never gives up on Paul and follows him to Adelaide to help in the

competition.

• He has taught Paul all that was possible to teach; as he notes, ‘I have taught

you everything you were able to learn’ (p.115).

 

 

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

 

How to write a text response tips

Text response

Where do you start?


1) Read the question. Pick out the key words. Formulate a multi-faceted contention/purpose that demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the text, not just a superficial one. Look at the question from all angles.

2) INTRODUCTION:

• Contextualise for your assessor (historical, social, text type, book name, author).
• Integrate your contention/purpose.
• Signpost your key ideas but don’t go into intimate specifics.
• Integrate at least 2 quotes from the text to display an immediate engagement.
• Do not start going into specific textual examples or start mentioning ‘people’. If the question is about a specific person, then you may use their name, otherwise don’t list people in the intro.
• Make sure your introduction is acutely indicative of what you will explore throughout your response. It serves as the springboard of future ideas.


THEREFORE:
An efficient introduction should:
• clarify and define key terms and phrases by discussing the main issues that will be tackled.
• articulate your main argument in a confident and assured manner - show a strong sense of authorial control.

DO NOT:
• simply repeat the topic in your opening sentence.
• simply agree or disagree.
• disregard the topic altogether and rewrite a pre-planned essay that is largely irrelevant to the topic.
• begin your introduction with: “In my opinion this statement is true…”, “I agree with the above statement”, or “In this essay I will talk about …”, and other such like expressions. Such phrasing is both unnecessary and begins the essay on an unsophisticated note.

2) Paragraph 1: Idea/argument number 1.

• This has be your strongest point.
• Topic sentence must be meaningful and leading. It must represent your discussion for the paragraph therefore it cannot be ambiguous, a general statement about the text or waffle. It has to be pointed and articulate and a platform for future discussion and exposure of ideas.
• You validate your findings with : textual evidence, explanation of characters themes, issues, construction and also quotes: fluent integration of quotes. Quotes must not stand alone without any connection to ideas and/or discussion.
* Make sure you are not just retelling the story. Think: state/validate/elaborate.
* Use your linking words to make your response fluent and analytical.
http://www.smart-words.org/linking-words/transition-words.html
http://www.somers.k12.ny.us/sis/main/writing/transitional_words.html
* Do a final sentence that adequately sums up your point for this paragraph.
* Do not do a linking sentence at the end.

Paragraph 2:

* Begin with recognition of previous argument by using a linking word or phrase ie Furthermore/ in addition / moreover Funder presents the Berlin Wall as a symbolisation of oppression that not only physically divides individuals and systems, but also... (Whatever topic sentence may be).
* continue to back up your topic sentence idea/argument with appropriate textual examples and quotes.
*continue to use linking words

Paragraph 3/4

See above.
These will be your 3 and 4th ideas/arguments.


CONCLUSION
The final paragraph should tie up your ideas and return quite clearly to the initial topic. Do not just summarise your views here. A good strategy is to provide a clear, logical and thorough response to the topic by re-expressing it to suit the way you have developed your argument. Such a strategy assumes that you have clarified, defined and substantiated the issues involved thoroughly in the main body of the essay. Never introduce new ideas that have not been developed earlier in the last paragraph. Finally, remember to finish confidently and assertively!
*integrate at least two quotes into the conclusion.
• Avoid concluding your essay with: “In conclusion…”, or “to sum up…”. This is a very clumsy formulation and ends the essay on a tepid note.


overall!!!!!

ESSAY WRITING CONVENTIONS

Be a thoroughly good writer rather than a careless or ignorant one. Practice by getting into the habit of applying the following writing conventions:

•
Underline or use italics for the title of the text (do not use quotation marks).
•
Discuss the text in the present tense (not the past tense). The text is “alive” and is being read now, in the present. The rule is simple: discuss it in the present tense.
•
Style and Tone must be formal (i.e. no colloquialisms, abbreviations, etc.).
•
Avoid contracting words (“don't”, “isn't”, “i.e.”). Write the words in full (“does not”).
•
Do not use the personal voice: “I think”, “In my opinion” — your essay is your opinion!
•
Refer to the author's concerns/intentions/view/values throughout the essay (e.g. "Funder is critical of the way…" ; "Funder is ruthless in satirising the Stasi as she … or Funder is seeking to/Funder's juxtaposition of the two system suggests" etc
•
Use the appropriate language (i.e. vocabulary and metalanguage) to write about characters, themes, etc. Ensure you have developed a vocabulary sheet throughout your study of the texts. We will add to ours on the Lusco 2014 blog.
•
Using Quotations. When you use quotations, you must quote exactly. You must, however, only use the quotation if it strengthens your argument. It is better to quote a few apt words or key lines than include large “chunks” which are irrelevant.

— Use the ellipsis (three dots) ... when you omit parts of a quotation.

— When you quote and you use a word(s) that is not in the quotation itself, put the word(s) in square brackets [ ].

— Note how quotations are used to support arguments and how they are integrated into an argument in sample essays.


DO NOT in the process of your discussion:

• bombard your reader with too many quotes. Quotes should illustrate an argument or idea rather than act as a substitute for it!
• re-narrate the story. Examiners know the plot and who the characters are! They are interested in your ideas and views.
• simply rewrite an essay that is not relevant to the topic.
• deviate from the topic!

Beware of “one-track” response. Try to recognize complexities: the better answers always do.

You may like to think of each paragraph as based on an "equation":
One paragraph = one topic sentence (main argument) + detail (supporting arguments) + relevant examples (textual evidence + quote) = well rounded paragraph that explores a key argument related directly to the topic.

Good luck and I am looking forward to reading some insightful essays.

East Germans know how to party

The Lipsi:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qbc9VUBy_8

Anna as a narrator :Year 12

Essay Question: 'Anna is not an objective observer.'  Discuss narrative point of view in Stasiland.

“Uwe, I’ve been having Adventures in Stasiland...I’ve been in a place where what was said was not real, and what was real was not allowed, where people disappeared behind doors and were never heard from again, or were smuggled into other realms (p.120)”

KEY TERMS:
Objective Observer: As a non-fiction text what are the reader’s expectations? Factual accuracy? A “balanced approach”? No bias or prejudice? Journalistic approach based on fairness? A careful handling of the interviews, perhaps even a “verbatim” report without embellishment or hyperbole? A narrator who is omniscient and does not play an active part in the narrative? Do you find this? If “Yes” then where? If “No”, then where and why does she play a part? To what extent? How reliable is she as a narrator and can this be easily verified?
Narrative View Point as a Problem: Does the reader trust the narrator to be truthful and authentic? Why? Why not? Is Funder “reliable” as a narrator? If so, why? If not, then why not? Does either view alter what you “feel” about the “truth value” of the stories she relates? If “Yes”, then what does it alter? If “No, then how does Funder’s claims to veracity appear to be credible?

Is there an ethical compromise here between Funder’s revelations about the “hidden” subject matter (Stasi control and the apparent free and complete coalescence of the total populations (with only minimal resistance)of those who served the Stasi, the need to tell a story that many would not wish or want to either remember or believe? Are the private stories an antidote to the claimed ignorance, complicity and apathy of the peoples of the GDR?

Does Funder “own” story parallel the deceit, lies and absurdist claims of the GDR?
Does her personal story allow “slight embellishment” and the addition of personal anecdote as an antidote to the universal distortion of truth practised by the Stasi, in order to reveal that “truth is often more revealing than fact” ?

Narrative Point of View in Journalism (Non-fiction).

Funder’s “Stasiland” makes claim to be “non-fiction”, which it may give the appearance of being, but to what extent is it non-fiction or are there the flourishes of an autobiographical journey in her telling of her stories and in the selection of her interviews and what she reports and how she reports it that imply partiality and bias? Are their author controlled embellishments of the truth (as in most first person narrations) that serve Funder’s opinionated interventions to present continuity, action, interest, amazement, incredulity and sympathy? Does this “subjective” point of view also involve some degree of unreliability on her part and are we not totally dependent on her credibility to authenticate the facts of her equally biasing interviews? What questions does she neatly avoid or leave open that may still leave the reader able to trust her judgment and accept her view as authentic and having truth value?

Funder’s style may be best described as “narrative journalism” a term that is currently growing as a genre. She clearly and at times somewhat candidly places herself at the centre of her investigation into a world that sees her as an outsider. Her charm affects a self-parodying characterisation, which encourages the reader to identify with her personal predicament and her desire to find an answer to a deceptively simple question. She adopts a clearly observational style in that what we are told is guided by her experience and her perspective – she is the “detective” and we, the readers follow her progress as a search for “truth”, as she has revealed to her the means, the motive and the opportunity through “eye-witness” testimony of both the victims and the perpetrators.

Check her use of literary techniques, especially Figurative Language (metaphors, similes and analepsis). These are simply the “colouring” of Funder’s psychologically journey; note her use of self-deprecating humour and tendency to personal anecdote. Her appeal to “truth” as a journalist is that her reportage often asserts (rather than individually tests) accuracy. She appears well-informed (and therefore verifiably “truthful”) by presenting eye-witness testimony, and factual historical evidence that exposes the “terror” employed by the Stasi.

Autobiographical – Point of View but this shifts – combines first and third person narrator:
• The reader is reliant of her capacity as a truth-teller
• She is a guide through history as though she is taking us with her through a time warp, conscious of where she is, where is going to and methodical in her desire to reveal a past that is denied by a generation as though it did not happen.
• Funder is both “observer” and “subjective participant” – without her there would be no story.
• She is clearly an “outsider” but this allows her to gain an intimacy with her subject matter and her subjects that is dualistic – it disarms and allows the victims to reveal their courage, it shames and reveals the perpetrators in their cowardice.
• She does choose sides

As in all first person narration the question of trust and then reliability is raised.
p. 202 “She may not be worthy of our trust, but she is all we have”
Journalistic Appeal: Inform, Educate, Expose, Account, Entertain
What to look for? Examples and evidence from Funder’s stories (characters and journeys):

• How does Funder reveal herself to the reader, by candid descriptions of her involvement in the search for “truth” and how she (as an outsider) claims a privileged position?
• How does Funder reveal her sources and often the struggle to find them? Is there a bibliography or just acknowledgement of sources? Why? When?
• How does Funder use the “omniscient narrator” from time to time to heighten tension and create immediacy in describing a past event? Search for examples.
• How does she bias her point of view with descriptions of the atmosphere and mood, with the reader having to accept what she describes as though is objective commentary? Rather than just her well informed “opinion”?
• How does she display her sympathies and antipathy for her sources and interviewees, and biases the reader against the Stasi personnel?
• Look for adjectives and adverbs that describe individual character and how she reveals the “absurdity” of the Stasi operatives as they try and justify what they did.
• Examine how she uses “The Wall” as both a literal and figurative symbol that still casts a shadow of nostalgia, and yet ironically, even to this day, projects another unworldly influence on all who had come into contact with its physical barrier and its psychological intimidation of the individual.

Year 12: Themes and Ideas we will focus on.

We have already discussed the different kinds of Walls that Funder presents:

The WALL

1) Physical
2) Psychological
3) Ideological

and also the central ideas of MEMORY and FORGETTING

" Memory like so much else, is unreliable. Not only for what it hides and what it alters, but also what it reveals." (p216)

* memory is both personal and collective

*memory is political

*memory is malleable


Furthermore

TRUST

* trust in the state

* trust in others

* trust in ones capabilities

COURAGE

* resilience

* resistance

VICTIMS and PERPETRATORS

* who were the true victims of the regime and why?
* who were the perpetrators?
* who were both?

Music in Maestro

Music

Music is not so much a ‘theme’ as an ever-present thread in the rich tapestry of the novel.

MOTIF

The whole structure of the novel is written as if it were a musical score….with passionate highs and sombre lows, even an intermezzo.

 

It is a central preoccupation in the lives of the main characters in Maestro. Paul's parents are enriched, even defined, by their interest in Friday night soirees and Gilbert and Sullivan operas. Music is ‘their true career’, Paul suggests (p. 16). The simple harmonies and tongue-in-cheek lyrics of Gilbert and Sullivan provide an important source of entertainment as well as a vehicle for social interaction in both Adelaide and Darwin.

Paul’s father John lives vicariously through Paul’s ‘achievements’ with the one wish….that Paul be a better pianist than he was. John’s approach to music shows the one time he is truly happy, when he is immersed in music. Similarly, Nancy find solace and joy in music, although she has more musicality and freedom with her musical choices, choosing to play freely and with passion. It is ironic that Paul doesn’t share her sense of freedom musically, that he chooses the more conservative and technical path of his father.

 

Music is Keller’s means of survival, both materially through his teaching and spiritually through the emotional and intellectual nourishment it provides. In exile, he dismisses the passionate excesses of Liszt, Rachmaninoff and Wagner, seeking refuge in the technical safety of Mozart, Bach and Scarletti, ‘as if seeking some kind of ultimate discipline, some perfect control to set against the treacheries of emotion.’ (p. 50). Beware of beauty, he warns Paul on several occasions; beauty is synonymous with ‘lyric flashiness’, insincerity and lies. This superficiality can be extended to Paul’s involvement with the vacuous Megan Murray. Once he has denied his roots in the impassioned music of the Romantics, however, he becomes something of a lost soul.

 

Paul's life, too, is shaped by his love of music. The novel charts a shift in his attitudes. As he matures, he adopts a more sensual response to music, responding emotionally rather than intellectually to what he hears and sees. The final, brief section of the novel shows his struggles and subsequent agonies of self-doubt as he tries to establish himself as a first rate concert pianist. Paul’s sense of self, as reinforced by his forceful parents, has always been based on the inflated view of his abilities as pianist. After that has been taken away from him, as exposed by his failures in Europe…what does he have? What is he? If he isn’t a musical genius, that who is he? Paul, like his Maestro, has to find a way to reinvent himself away from music.

 

 Even the minor characters are defined in part by their musical ability and interests. The musical talent of Bennie is one source of the friendship that initially develops between himself and Paul until Paul tires of his friend's ‘fiddle scraping’ and his victim status. Rosie and Paul are initially brought together by their obvious musical talents. Their first sexual encounter at the Botanical Gardens was surrounded by music.

Even Megan suddenly finds Paul attractive once he has become Rough Stuff's musical director. Rockin' Rick Whitely, an ageing, seedy DJ with an antipathy to country and western music, signals the changing face of popular music in the 1960s with the emergence of such icons as Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, the Doors, the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. All the characters are linked explicitly and inexplicitly by the omnipresent motif of music.