Lesson video

Hello, everyone.

It's lovely to see you here today.

My name's Dr.

Clayton, and I'm going to guide you through your learning journey today.

Today's lesson is called Writing a Nuanced Response on the Manipulation of Language in "Animal Farm".

So we're going to first think about how we can respond to the question.

How does Orwell present the relationship between the manipulation of language and control in "Animal Farm"? By gathering some ideas, and think how we might start to interpret those ideas to create a nuanced argument.

Then we're going to think about how we can construct effective elements of a nuanced response before we end the lesson with you writing your response.

So if you're ready, grab your pen, laptop, whatever's with this lesson and let's get started.

So by the end of the lesson you'll be able to write a nuanced response on the manipulation of language and control in Orwell's, "Animal Farm".

So we have four words today we're going to be using as our keywords.

They'll be identified in bold throughout the learning material, and I'll try to point them out to you as well so you can see them being used in context.

So our first keyword is nuanced, which means, has subtle details that make it complex and interesting.

We're going to be thinking today about how you can develop a nuanced argument in response to a question.

So how you can develop a complex and interesting response.

Our second keyword's manipulate, which means, to control something or someone to your advantage, often unfairly or dishonestly.

We're going to be thinking about how the pigs and the narrator control language in order to influence the other animals and us as the reader.

Our third keyword is complex, which means, involving a lot of different but related parts.

So, when we talk about a complex argument, we mean an argument that involves a lot of different points that all work together to create a cohesive argument.

Our final keyword is complicit, which means, the fact or condition of being involved with others in an activity that's unlawful or morally wrong.

So, we're going to be thinking about how the animals themselves might be since involved in their own oppression, but also, how the narrator's involved in the pigs' oppression of the other animals.

So, I'll just give you a moment to write down those keywords and the definitions.

So, pause the video, write them down now.

Fantastic.

Let's get started with the lesson.

So, we have three learning cycles in our lesson today.

For our first learning cycle, we're going to think about the question itself and how we can develop a complex response to it by asking ourselves further questions.

Then we're gonna think about, we can use those ideas to develop a nuanced response to the question.

For our second learning cycle, we're going to talk through how we might plan our response to the question by using a multi-paragraph outline.

So, we're gonna talk through each of the elements of the plan and what an effective element looks like.

Then, for our final learning cycle, you are going to write your response to the question, how does Orwell present the relationship between the manipulation of language and control in "Animal Farm"? So, let's think about our initial ideas to the question, then we'll think about we can develop those ideas.

So, our question is, how does Orwell present the relationship between the manipulation of language and control in "Animal Farm"? So, what I'd like you to do is think about what initial ideas you can think of in response to the question.

Pause the video, take a few moments to think about it.

Welcome back, everyone.

Some great ideas there.

Let's talk through some of the things you might have said.

So, you might have thought about the pigs' physical alteration of the commandments, the way they changed them while simultaneously denying changing them, therefore leading the animals to doubt their own recollections and their memories.

You also might have thought about the pigs' persuasive language, how they manipulate the animals into believing what they say.

You might have thought about the pigs' suppression of the animal's language, how they almost force the animals to use simple language and therefore create a ceiling of how the animals can use language.

You also might have thought how the pigs' use of language creates social distinctions between the animals and pits them against each other.

You also might have thought about how the pigs change their language to suit their ideology.

The way they begin using language that seems to fit their ideas of equality that's central to the principles of animalism, but then moves divisive, alienated language that represents moving away from animalism.

Now, given those initial ideas, a statement about the manipulation of language and control might be in Orwell's "Animal Farm", we see the pigs using manipulative language in order to control and oppress the other animals.

We are going to think about how we might interrogate that statement in order to develop a nuanced response.

So we're going to think about how we can make a more complex argument in relation to the question.

Now, a nuanced response is one which goes beyond a surface level understanding, takes multiple layers of meaning into account, acknowledges the complexity of the text and the question, so acknowledges there are lots of different aspects to the text and the question and brings them together in one cohesive argument.

So to develop a nuanced response, we want to think about the following things.

So can we look beyond the actual language used by the pigs to think about how they're manipulating the nature of language? So you might think about their use of paradoxes and how they challenge the nature of absolutes in language.

Is "Animal Farm" only a tale about the pigs' corruption, or can it also be read as a tale of the animal's complicity? So is Orwell just criticising the pigs for their desire for power and control, or is he suggesting the animals are partly to blame since they allow the pigs to take control? Are the pigs the only ones who manipulate language in "Animal Farm"? How might we also see the narrators manipulating language in order to influence the reader? So now for a quick check for understanding.

So which of the following would we expect from a nuanced response? So A, a surface level understanding, B, acknowledgement of complexities, or C, consideration of multiple meanings? Pause the video, take a few moments to think about it.

Welcome back, everyone.

The correct answer, we would expect acknowledgement of the complexities and a consideration of multiple meanings.

So very well done if you got this right.

Amazing work, everyone.

Now, the first task of the lesson.

So what I'd like you to do is take our ideas from this learning cycle and answer the following questions to begin to develop a nuanced response.

So question one, how do the pigs use language to manipulate the perception of reality? Question two, how does their manipulation of reality enable them to control the other animals? Question three, to what extent do the animals allow themselves to be manipulated? And question four, to what extent is the narrative voice objective or manipulative? Pause video, answer the questions now.

Welcome back, everyone.

Some great work there.

What I'd like us to do now is think about how our Oak people, Sofia, responded to the questions, whether you agree or disagree.

So question one, how do the pigs use language to manipulate the perception of reality? And Sofia said, "The pigs alter the animal's perception "of reality through their manipulation of language "because they force the animals to accept challenges "to the nature of absolute truth and accept paradoxes "through their alterations to the commandments." So pause the video, think about whether or not you agree with Sofia.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now, I think we see this challenge, the nature of absolute truth most clearly, through the changes in the commandment, all animals are equal, to all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This challenges the nature of absolute truth and force the animals to accept a paradox, 'cause you're either equal or you're not.

You can have different degrees of equality.

So question two, how does their manipulation of reality enable them to control the other animals? And Sofia said, "This manipulation "of language alters the animal's perception of reality "and therefore invites them to question "their understanding of the world.

"This enables the pigs to control the animals "because they're no longer sure of what is true "or that what is happening to them is wrong." So pause the video, think about whether or not you agree with Sofia.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now, I think this is such a crucial point for thinking about the animals and how they respond to the pigs.

We might say it's obvious to us as a reader that pigs' behaviour is morally wrong, but if you are put in a position where you're unsure of your own reality, what is the truth? It's unlikely you'll call out such behaviour.

Question three, to what extent do the animals allow themselves to be manipulated? And Sofia said, "I think "we might see the animals allow themselves to be manipulated "because Orwell tells they're uneasy "at some of the decisions made.

"This implies they're aware "that what's happening is wrong, "but they don't challenge the pigs' actions or behaviour." So pause the video, think about whether or not you agree with Sofia.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now, I think this is such an important aspect of the text is always suggesting that people are naturally complicit and not willing to fight back against those in power.

That's something we might like to take away and think about.

So question four, to what extent is the narrative voice objective or manipulative? And Sofia said, "Arguably, the narrative voice withholds "the truth of the pigs' actions and presents them favourably.

"Therefore, we can see it as manipulative.

"Perhaps Orwell is suggesting that news reports "and records of events are inherently biassed, designed "to manipulate the perception of the reader." So pause the video, think about whether or not you agree with Sofia.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now, I think we see this withholding of information throughout the text.

The narrator implies the pigs have changed the commandments physically, for example.

It tells us Squealer was found with a ladder and a pot of paint.

It doesn't actually tell us that Squealer is changing the commandments.

We are left to fill in the blanks.

Therefore, we might say narrator tries to manipulate our perception of the pigs and their actions.

Amazing work, everyone.

Now we're going to plan our response to the question, how does Orwell present the relationship between the manipulation of language and control in "Animal Farm"? Now, one way you might create a plan for your response is use a multi-paragraph outline.

This consists of making a plan where overall thesis state will be, the topic sentence, supporting detail and concluding sentence, each paragraph will contain, and notes on your overall conclusion.

This will allow you to see how your argument fits together and you can ensure it's cohesive.

So we're gonna talk through each of those elements in this learning cycle and then end the learning cycle with you creating a plan.

So let's begin by thinking about your thesis statement, which should be in the initial introduction to your essay.

So thesis statements are the overarching argument of the entire essay and they're supported by the entire text.

So an example might be, Orwell depicts the pigs' manipulation of language as altering the animal's perception of reality and thus allowing oppression to take root throughout "Animal Farm".

So here, we see the overall argument of the essay.

We know it's going to focus on manipulation of language and that alters the animal's perception of reality and therefore allows oppression to take place.

We also know it's going to be supported by evidence from the entire text because it tells, we can see the argument throughout "Animal Farm".

So, now let's think about topic sentences.

So topic sentences should be the opening sentence of each individual paragraph.

So explain the purpose of that paragraph, and they're supported by moments in the text.

So an example might be, arguably, Orwell depicts the animal's complicity in their oppression through the response to Boxer's death.

So here, we can see, explain the purpose of the paragraph.

We know it's going to focus on how the animals are arguably complicit in their own oppression.

We can also see it supported by specific moment because it tells it's going to affect the animals' response to Boxer's death.

So now for a quick check for understanding, what I'd like you to do is tell me which of the following is a topic sentence? Is A, throughout "Animal Farm", Orwell depicts a manipulation of language, or B, arguably, Orwell depicts a narrative voice as withholding the truth of the pigs' actions? So pause the video, take a few moments to think about it.

Now, the correct answer is B.

Now, I'd like you to tell me why it's B.

So pause the video, take a few moments to think about it.

Welcome back, everyone.

You might have said, sentence A makes an observation about the whole text.

It tells that Orwell explores a manipulation of language, where sentence B conveys an argument the paragraph will focus on.

It focuses on the narrative voice and how that narrative voice withholds the truth of the pigs' actions.

So very well done if you've got those right.

So now let's think about the supporting details.

So supporting details are analysis of the methods.

This might be analysis of language, form or structure.

They support the topic sentence.

So evidence connects to the argument of the paragraph.

They come from across the text.

So to make it a convincing argument, you want to make sure you have a wide array of evidence to support your argument, and includes relevant context, that this can be really effective, but it must be focused and linked to the argument.

So an example might be where the topic sentences arguably Orwell depicts the narrative voice as withholding the truth of the pigs' actions.

And we have the supporting details.

The milk had disappeared.

So the implication the pigs have drunk the milk but not explicitly stated it.

There were so many pigs.

Here, the narrative voice is justifying the pigs' exploitation.

Omniscient narrator.

So narrator's all knowing, but withholding information.

Being kept out of the British press.

Now, that's a quotation for the original preface to "Animal Farm".

It links to Orwell's statements, the British press withheld information about the Soviet Union.

So here, we can see analysis of methods that showing the effect of the language on the reader.

We can see other the supporting detail, links to the topic sentence because it's demonstrating how it's the narrator who's not telling us the truth of the pigs' actions is withholding information.

We see the supporting detail coming from across the text, since we have quotations chapter two and chapter 10.

We also have an effective use of relevant context.

It specifically thinks by the context of the narrative voice being an omniscient narrator and how that's relevant, but also how Orwell felt as if the British press withholding the truth about the Soviet Union from the general public.

So now for a quick check for understanding.

So what should you ensure when selecting supporting details for an essay? Is A, your supporting details link to the topic sentence, B, your supporting details come from across the text, or C, your supporting details are one-word quotations? So pause the video, take a few moments to think about it.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now, supporting details can be one-word, quotations, but they don't have to be.

So the correct answers are supporting details should link to the topic sentence and they should come from across the text.

So very well done if you got those right.

So now let's think about concluding sentences.

So concluding sentences should make it clear through discourse markers, the paragraph has reached its conclusion.

They should focus on the writer's intentions and they should summarise the paragraph without repeating the topic sentence.

So an example might be, ultimately Orwell reveals how the narrative voice is arguably complicit in the pigs' oppression of the animals by withholding information about and justifying their actions.

So here, we can see the concluding sentence beginning with the discourse marker, ultimately, that makes it clear the paragraph's reached the conclusion.

The phrase, Orwell reveals, demonstrates this is focusing on the writer's intentions.

Then we can see how it summarises the paragraph by saying that Orwell reveals how the narrative voice is complicit, so involved in the pigs' oppression of the animals by withholding information about it and justifying their actions.

So now for quick check for understanding.

So which of the following would serve as the strongest concluding sentence for a paragraph on the manipulation of language in "Animal Farm"? Is it A, as I said in my topic sentence, Orwell explores the manipulation of language in "Animal Farm"? B, thus through the depiction of the manipulation of language, Orwell is perhaps examining the relationship between language and our perception of reality? Or C, this brings me onto my next point about how the pigs suppress the language available to the animals? So pause the video, take a few moments to think about it.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now, sentence A just repeats the topic sentence, and sentence C doesn't clearly show the paragraph has reached a conclusion, because it says it's going to be another point.

So the correct answer is B.

It says, "Summarise the paragraph "and focus on the writer's intentions "and use the discourse marker, thus, "to make it clear the paragraph has reached its conclusion." So very well done if you got that right.

Now, an effective inclusion might be structured like this.

It might start with a specific response to your thesis, then focus on the writer's overall intentions and then ends by thinking about the impact of the text today.

So an example might be, throughout "Animal Farm" Orwell arguably presents the pigs as manipulating language in order to strengthen their control over the animals.

Specifically, Orwell's presentation of the pigs' manipulation of the concept of absolute truth and paradoxes show the effect that language can have on our perception of reality.

Through this, we're invited to consider our own perception of reality is our own or is it being influenced by the rhetoric of those in power? So here, the example begins with a focus on the thesis, by suggesting that Orwell presents the pigs manipulating language order to strengthen their control over the animals.

It focuses on the writer's intentions by suggesting that Orwell's presentation is linked to the concept of absolute truth and paradoxes and how that shows the effect that language can have on our perception of reality.

And then it ends by suggesting the impact of the text today might be that it invites to consider our own perception of reality and whether it's being influenced by the rhetoric of those in power.

So now have a quick check for understanding.

So which section of the conclusion is missing? Pause the video, take a few moments to think about it.

Welcome back, everyone.

The correct answer is impact of the text today.

So very well done if you got that right.

Amazing work, everyone.

Now, the second task of the lesson.

So what I'd like you to do is create a multi-paragraph outline to answer the question, how does Orwell present the relationship between the manipulation of language and control in "Animal Farm"? So remember to create a thesis statement that explains your overall argument that's supported by the whole text.

Create topic sentences for each paragraph that explain the focus of the paragraph with specific references to moments in the text.

Use supporting detail of each paragraph that shows analysis of methods that link to the topic sentence and includes relevant context.

Create a concluding sentence for each paragraph that summarises the paragraph and considers the writer's intentions, and create an overall conclusion that shows specific response to the thesis statement, a focus on the writer's overall intentions and a consideration of what the impact of the text might be today.

So pause the video, create your multi-paragraph outline now.

Welcome back, everyone.

It's fantastic work there.

What I'd like you to do is read back through your plan and self-assess it.

So did you include the following? A thesis that presents the overarching argument, topic sentences that explain the individual focus of your paragraphs, a range of supporting detail from a variety of moments in the text, context as part of your supporting detail, concluding sentences that summarise the paragraph and link back to Orwell's intentions, a conclusion that focuses on Orwell's overall intentions and what the impact of the text might be today? So pause the video, read back through your plan now.

Welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people making alterations and edits where they needed to.

Now we're going to move on to the third learning cycle where you are going to use your plan to write a response to the question, how does Orwell present the relationship between the manipulation of language and control in "Animal Farm"? Amazing work, everyone.

We're now in the third learning cycle.

We're going to think about what a deeper analysis looks like.

Before you write your response to the question, how does Orwell present the relationship between the manipulation of language and control in "Animal Farm"? So as I said, let's just take a moment to think about how you can take a surface level understanding and turn it into deeper analysis.

So surface level understanding.

So we have a point of view about the text.

To turn that to deeper analysis, you want to show a nuanced understanding with a critical response.

So your complex and interesting response.

Surface level understanding has a clear argument you stick to.

To turn that to deeper analysis, you want to use evaluative or critical response to hang your argument on.

So you want to show judgement about the text, what it's saying about society.

In a surface level understanding, your argument shows you understand the plot, characters and the writer's purpose.

To turn that to deeper analysis, you want a razor sharp focus on the writer's central message.

Now, the plot on characters support this.

So constantly bring your argument back to the writer's message what they want the reader to understand through the text.

Now, in a surface level understanding, your ideas show an understanding for the conventional interpretations of the text.

To turn that to deeper analysis, you want to show your interpretation of the text, rather than make a case for someone else's interpretation.

Now, a surface level understanding shows you can identify the writer's language choices using accurate terminology.

To turn that to deeper analysis, you want to select terminology that enhances your argument.

So every piece of evidence you use supports and enhances your argument.

A surface level understanding shows you can comment on form and structure as well as the language.

For a deeper analysis, you want to show an interwoven analysis of the language form and structure.

So thread it into your argument rather than dealing with it separately.

A surface level understanding shows your comments focus on the effective language, form or structure.

For a deeper analysis, all the comments should link tightly to the overarching argument.

So show how the effect of those methods builds up your argument.

In a surface level understanding, your use of context is appropriate.

You avoid general comments.

Context used to support analysis, it's not bolted on.

For a deeper analysis, you want a highly selective use of context, used to evaluate different interpretations and supports the overarching argument.

So think about what the writer is saying about society through your use of context, how it relates to your argument.

So, now for a quick check for understanding.

So which two of the following would you expect to see in a response containing deeper analysis? Is A, interwoven analysis of language, form and structure? B, use of contextual information is appropriate? Or C, use of contextual information is highly selective and linked tightly to the argument? So pause the video, take a few moments to think about it.

Welcome back, everyone.

The correct answers are interwoven analysis of language, form and structure, and use of contextual information is highly selective and linked tightly to the argument.

So very well done if you got those right.

Fantastic work, everyone.

We're now on the final task of the lesson.

So what I'd like you to do is write your response to the question, how does Orwell present the relationship between the manipulation of language and control in "Animal Farm"? Now, remember to include an introduction with a thesis that explains your overarching argument, at least two analytical paragraphs which are clear topic sentences.

Judicious use of embedded quotations, analysis of methods that's tightly focused on your argument, context is interwoven throughout with the sharp focus on Orwell's purpose, the conclusion that considers Orwell's overall intentions and what the impact of the text might be today.

So pause the video, write your response now.

Welcome back, everyone.

It's fantastic work there.

Now, what I'd like you to do is assess your work by identifying the following.

So where have you included a clear thesis statement, used clear topic sentences, offered inferences showing a nuanced understanding of the text, used embedded quotations judiciously, included analysis of methods that's tightly focused on your argument, used subject terminology to enhance your argument, interwoven analysis of methods, interwoven context, with a sharp focus on Orwell's purpose, included a inclusion that summarises your thesis with a sharp focus on all Orwell's message? So pause the video, read back through your work now.

Welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people making alterations and edits where needed.

Now, this lesson has been focused on writing a response to Orwell and "Animal Farm", but you can take these ideas about developing, planning and writing a nuanced response and use them in any extended response going forward.

You all did amazingly well today, everyone.

Here's a summary of what we covered.

An essay should have a strong central argument.

Use an evaluative or critical thesis to hang your essay on, support with clear topic sentences.

Analysis of writer's methods should be interwoven and used to support each other.

Essays should focus on the writer's intentions.

The conclusion is an opportunities to summarise this.

I really hope you enjoyed the lesson, everyone.

I hope to see you for another lesson soon.

Goodbye.