How do I answer an ELAT question?

Although this may seem daunting, all it takes is preparation and careful planning. Remember to ground your answer in close reading, and do not make assumptions. Choose 2 of the extracts to compare, the qyestion says 2-3, but 3 may be too difficult given the time constriction. It may be useful to bring in other critics, but this is not essential. In the essay include analysis ofL imagery, syntax, phonology, sentence types and context. When it comes to context, usually the date is given below the extract, so a basic knowledge of what was happening in each century can never be a bad thing! Try and learn key terms which will impress the examiner, and remember to have your own, original argument. Below is a part of my ELAT examination, which got me an interview at Oxford. As you can see, my answer comapres two texts and has an argument.

Mr Verloc's controlling nature is introduced to the reader in the first paragraph of the extract. The syntax of his initial declaration places the imperative: 'come' at the start, displaying his commanding persona. This is followed by the image of an 'unbroken contract', which implies Mrs. Verloc's loyalty. However, the use of the noun induces the idea of conformity and an inability to escape from an order. Interestingly, the sentence prior to the imagery follows a trochaic cadence, with the rhythm alternating from stressed to unstressed. The changing rhythm sounds almost like the march of soldiers, appearing indicative of her compliance to Mr. Verloc. Shortly after, the rhythm is paused by a caesura. This break in the regular recurrence foreshadows Mrs. Verloc's endeavour to bring Mr. Verloc's control to an end. In the ballad, Edward uses the declarative sentence: 'Oh I have killed my father dear, alas and woe is me. Oh!.' The interjections used at the outset and the end successfully highlight Edward's displeasure at what he has done, conveying that he is shocked at his actions. The syntax of the phrase places the personal pronoun 'me' toward the end; the positioning could be implicit of Edward's life reaching an end as he cannot live with the guilt. In his utterance, 'father' is modified by 'dear', implying that Edward loved his father and that the murder was not premeditated. This contrasts to Mrs. Verloc who causes the 'carving knife' to 'vanish' without the 'slightest sound'. The sibilance used reinforces the idea of a soft, gentle movement, showing the tact she took to perform her action. The passive verb 'vanished' invokes the perturbing image of sorcery, denoting to black magic. The allusion appears ungodly, suggesting that what Mrs. Verloc is preparing herself for will displease a deity.

Furthermore, no remorse is demonstrated by Mrs. Verloc even when the knife is, 'planted in his breast'. The phrase conjures the image of a seed being planted in soil, alluding to the idea of death being part of the natural cycle, making Mrs. Verloc's actions seem less abhorrent. Perhaps too, her guilt will grow each day like a plant, until she is unable to function. However, her guilt is not conveyed in the final paragraph, rather she is described as, 'a woman enjoying her complete irresponsibility'. The pronoun used at the start of this phrase implies that she has become dehumanised due to the murder. This idea is echoed through likening her to a 'corpse', which alludes to Ecclesiastes where it is said that the dead are not conscious of anything. The fact that she has been compared to a dead being removes all of her sentience, alluding to Mary Anne Warren's criteria for being considered a person. Warren contended that without the ability to feel pleasure or pain, a human cannot be considered a person, meaning that Mrs. Verloc's person-hood has been extracted. In contrast to Mrs. Verloc, Edward repeats the phrase, 'I'll let them stand until they fall', in reference to the 'towers' and 'halls'. The repetition crafts the impression that Edward is firm in his admonition to give up his wealth, feeling that he does not deserve it. The rhyme of 'hall' and 'fall' enforces the idea of declining wealth. In this stanza, Edward measures the possibility of turning away from his crime, saying,'here never more must I be. Oh.' The first line of the ballad has a masculine ending, and the last line has a feminine ending, the metrical foot proves indicative of his diminishing bravery. Edward’s desire to flee contrasts quite clearly to Mrs. Verloc who remains rooted next to the, 'mortal envelope of […] Mr Verloc'. The fact that Edward wants to run away from what he has done implies that he cannot hold the immense guilt. Yet, Mrs Verloc sits in the same room as the corpse that she has created, suggesting that she does not fear the consequence of her actions. Her inability to think or feel guilt could be demonstrative of her being unable to comprehend what she has done. The image of the envelope hints at the idea of journeying, perhaps in Mr Verloc's case to the afterlife. Irony is created by this as Mr Verloc is more free than Mrs Verloc. Unlike Mrs Verloc, he is free from the burdens of everyday life, yet she has to cope with her actions and remain 'corpse-like' in the world.

Conclusively, the guilt Edward experiences after killing his father is not reciprocated by Mrs Verloc. Her inability to speak and move contrasts to Edward announcing his abdication. I have argued that the differing responses was likely due Mrs Verloc premeditating the murder, whilst Edward’s actions were spontaneous and filled with regret.