|
Dr Tim Barnard | History | NUS | Back to GEM2005/HY2243 |
GEM 2005/ HY2243
FILM AND HISTORY
Feedback on Project 2
Double Tick: (Grade 85)
You were able to see the different sides of what is being presented to you and understood the complexities of the search for ‘truth.’ You analysed and cogently argued the implications of your analysis on historical studies and the consumption of history.
Tick plus: (Grade 75)
Well-written and argued, but there was some hesitance in exploring the implications of the question of the relative nature of the truth and its relation to history.
Student also expanded and explored the phrase “ the Search for Truth” as a Process that was important. (regardless of whether the “truth” could be found or not)
Tick: (Grade 65)
In general, the papers showed understanding of the issues that are brought up by the films, and certain contingencies of the search for ‘truth’, but often had difficulties with the idea that the truth is relative.
Many of you got caught up with just arguing if there was such thing as “truth”, you failed to see this in relation to Historical studies (“the search for truth”).
Tick Minus: (Grade 55)
Many of these papers failed to make connections between the two films’ interpretation of truth. The nuances of the term ‘truth’ as implicated by the films were also not satisfactorily discussed, or not well thought-out. In addition, there was too much attention paid to details in the films, while not discussing the larger implications of the project question.
With regard to Rashomon the person knows who killed the samurai.
General Comments:
1) In quite a few papers there were questions written throughout, indicating the types of questions the authors asked themselves and sought to answer. This is great! These questions are an important step in thinking more deeply about these issues and how it relates to the understanding of ‘truth’ and history. But a project that is mostly questions and few answers is not a good project. There might be no single "right" answer but there are good and bad answers.
2) Some students expressed the view that the search for truth in Breaker Morant was more important than in Rashomon, because Breaker Morant was based on ‘real events’ and Rashomon is fictional. While one could go into more detail and argue for this case, the point of the comparison is missed, which is the treatment of the truth, and how it is presented in these two films, and the implications for such a search for truth in historical studies.
3) Some papers contended that the search for truth was not important in one or both films, and instead the films intended to show Australian nationalism, Japanese society and ‘the nature of man (and woman).’ To change the focus of the film is a legitimate approach, yet aren’t those categories themselves also subject to the same search for truth and can be equally debated? For example, what is the nature of man and woman, and how does a selfish man and weak(er) woman strike us as ‘truthful’? While the Japanese are often held up as having difficulties with coming to grips with its past (in the case of World War II), does this mean that Singaporeans' understandings of the same events are “objective”?
4) There are some of you who are beginning to use a less formal style writing in the projects. ie. First person narratives and asking questions (pt.1) DO NOT do this. The projects are not the discussion forums, this is a written assignment. Yes bring some of the issues and the enquiring nature of the forums to the projects but in a little more formal manner.
5) A question was set, the markers expect an answer(s). Tip: to save word count, there is no need to write lines such as; “in my opinion” – we can safely assume the answers are your thoughts. Also, try to paragraph your points. Far too often, we come across entire projects with just two paragraphs (One for each film! ) Do not be so rigid.