The History Boys: The French Scene

 How is the French scene typical to Hector and his relationship with the boys?

The subject at matter in the scene is sexual, which suggests that Hector is open with the topic with the boys. The openness of the topic with the boys shows that they comfortable and friendly relationship, as shown in the previous scenes of the play. However, at some points in the scene Hector is seen as slightly unprofessional. This is shown when Hector agrees to Dakin's proposal of setting the scene in a 'brothel'. Then, later on in the scene Hector is amused to when Posner asks Dakin to take off his trousers- which he does. Within Hectors classroom, he has no restrictions on the boys which suggest his role as the boys teachers isn't met. Whilst Dakin takes his trousers off at Posner's request, the boys mock and tease and Hector remains silent, and corrects Dakin in his French tenses 'I would like to stretch out on the bed in the conditional or the subjunctive'.  Throughout the scene Hectors behaviour with the boys seems inappropriate to the viewer and makes them feel slightly uncomfortable.

Definitions

Farce: a comic dramatic work using buffoonery and horseplay and typically including crude characterization and ludicrously improbable situations.

Fall guy: a scapegoat

• In the scene, farce could be used to describe the comedic performance the boys are acting out. Throughout out the scene many characters are seen as sexually inappropriate such as Posner and Dakin. Although some of the characters are acting in a sexually inappropriate way, it is hidden through the humorous way the boys are presenting the characters. Later on in the scene the Headmaster is labeled as the fall guy. This is shown when the Headmaster interrupts the boys performance, and is unable to fluently speak French unlike the boys and Hector. Through the Headmasters lack of understanding of the situation of the classroom, he is shown as unintelligent. The shift of attention then draws from Hector to the Headmaster, as he continues to interrupt the inappropriate lesson.

What does the play suggest about the boys and the teachers personalities?

• Headmaster; school-centric,unlikeable and unable to maintain respect, strict
• Hector; passionate, inappropriate, genuinely loving and caring of the boys
• Irwin; snide, slick, wants to prove himself 
• Posner; feelings of being an outsider, eager to impress, submissive
• Dakin; confident, intelligent, open minded, slightly cruel, humorous 

Throughout the scene there is the subtext, this is the thoughts and feelings of the character even though they may not speak these. Personally, I believe in the scene Hector is giving subtle sexual messages towards the boys. Hector may not be completely open, but he agrees to the ideas of the boys that are of a sexual nature. At no point in the scene does Hector halt the performance, he seems to enjoy it as he irregually contributes. The fact that he allows the boys to perform to him, with little guidance suggests he admires the boys. At the near end of the scene, the Headmaster catches the class performing an inappropriate scene. As Hector convinces the Headmaster that the scene they are performing is of a hospital in Belgium, the boys give assistance to the lie: making it seem more realistic. The fact that the boys give help to Hector, when he is in a problematic situation suggests the boys have an alliance with him;the boys will do anything for Hector. Even though in Hectors classroom there are no boundaries, Hector still manages to have a form of respect over them.

The History Boys: Act 1 Scene 1

In the first scene of Act 1, Irwin is in a wheelchair addressing numerous members of parliament about  passing a bill that will abolish trial by jury. If the bill does get passed, this will eradicate the presumption of innocence of the person convicted. Within the scene Irwin appears very passionate and informed about his case, however it does not appear he putting forward this bill to allow people to 'walk the streets unmolested' as he says. After Irwin states that the real liberty of the proposed bill is to allow people to 'walk the streets unmolested' he follows with 'etc..etc'. The use of the 'etc's' sound impersonal and almost robotic-protecting citizens isn't why Irwin is proposing this bill. Therefore the way he uses his words juxtapose each other, making the reason behind the proposition appear untrue and makes his character seem slimy. Irwin also appears untruthful when he uses the metaphor saying paradox works well and "mists up the windows". The use of the metaphor suggests the bill conceals the truth and therefore making the trial for the person prosecuted unfair. However, the metaphor also suggests he is aware that the bill is unethical, yet feels he should still propose it.

At the end of Irwin's monologue he finishes with the line "School. Thats all it is. In my case anyway. Back to school" as well has this line being making a good transition to the next scene, it also suggests that school is a huge aspect of his life and that is where he learnt his strong opinions and how to prepare a good speech. Irwin appears to have strong thoughts of school, because in this scene he talks very passionately about the bill and then about school-making the two thoughts comparable. On the other hand it could suggest that he feels that school structure  is mimicking the political system where people "mist up the windows".

My original perception of Irwin was that he was an intelligent young man who was enthusiastic about teaching and learning. However after reading the first scene, my opinion on Irwin has dramatically changed. I now perceive Irwin has self-centred, not very sympathetic, very cynical and comparable to a villain like character . Furthermore I believe Irwin is very manipulative, as he takes advantage of his respected position to bombard people (in this case the MP's) which his own very strong opinions which so far don't seem very immoral.

Analysing a Blog

The blog I have chosen to analyse is one by the writer Charlie Brooker.
 Charlie Brooker Blog

Whilst looking at Charlie Brookers style of writing it appears to be that he is writes with a lot of humour and wit. This is evident in the blog post titled " Goodbye,cruel 2014: we promise not to miss you once you've gone", unlike other writers, Charlie Brooker appears to be realistic of the year that has just passed and not very optimistic. This contrasts with the typical end of year  blog posts, as they are often very positive and reflective, however Charlie's is not. Within the title Brooker uses the word 'cruel' which has connotations with pain and suffering, the use of this lexis shocks the reader and makes them reconsider their thoughts on the year that has just gone.

Later on in the blogpost, Brooker deliberatly changes his grammar and uses simple sentences at the start of every new paragraph. This is shown when he writes 'But things were still grimmer internationally. '. The use of the simple sentence gets across his point sharply, which engages the reader a lot more, as we are left to read on to find out why things were 'still grimmer' elsewhere. 

In the blog post, the structure of the blog is very much the same. When Brooker goes onto another reason why 2014 was so 'cruel', he starts a new paragraph.  Then in every new paragraph he uses a simple sentence, with summarises what that paragraph is going to be about. For example when Brooker talks about the disappearance  of the Malaysian plane he writes 'Mystery of the year was the vanishing flight MH370'.

My Linguistic Fingerprint

Considering I was born and raised in Bristol, people would assume I would speak like an award winning farmer with hundreds of acres. However this is not the case, well maybe a little bit! My personal linguistic fingerprint is dependent on many factors such as family,  friends and the environment I live. With all of these factors combined this creates my unique linguistic fingerprint which is special to me. A linguistic fingerprint is the distinctive way people communicate.

My personal linguistic quirks include replacing the 'th' sound in the word Bath to the sound 'ff'. So when spoken out loud it sounds like 'Baff'. This feature of my dialect was introduced to me from my environment and my friends, so therefore this feature is giving me the stereotypical Bristolian dialect which is often associated with the area.  Having a parent that is from South Wales has also influenced my linguistic fingerprint, as my father still speaks with a typical Welsh accent. Some linguistic  traits from my father which I attained over the years include saying 'Where to?' and 'Now after'. Of course these phrases don't make grammatical sense, yet they still appear in my dialect and when I speak. This just shows that its not only the environment I'm in, that impacts my linguistic fingerprint but my family as well.

However, my personal linguistic fingerprint varies time to time dependent on I am doing or who I am  speaking to. Often I changed my dialect whilst talking on the phone, my accent is often changed to a more formal tone, where I pronounce words properly. Personally, I speak with a more formal tone on the phone because it allows the person on the other end to hear me properly but it also gives me a sense of sophistication. Despite this I am properly not fooling anyone. This is not the only time I tend to change or alter my dialect, I often speak more formal and pronounced when I meet new people or in a shop when they ask you a question. I feel it makes me look more polite. Nevertheless, there is only so long I can put on a false persona, before the 'ff' and 'likes' start to creep back in.

I guess this just shows how imprinted my linguistic fingerprint is in me, and even if I would like to alter it, it is quite impossible, ma babbeeeerrrrrr!