Peer Review #7 (Aylin Julie Analin)

Link to comment: 

http://www.aylinjulieanalin.wordpress.com/2017/10/03/blog-7/

Hey Julie,

Your piece on the significance of the last line of  John Shaw Neilson’s “The Orange Tree” was very engaging and interesting as it addressed very relevant and thought-provoking points. I think another reason why I found your piece engaging was that I chose the same topic and I was definitely curious as to how you and many others approached the topic. I think your thoughts and ideas are very well developed, especially the connection you drew from the line “Is it east or west”  to the human brain and how it influences human behaviour was incredibly brilliant. I think your analysis would have benefitted from utilising more textual evidence. I also think there were points that you could have elaborated more on. Also, I think you should have tried to link your ideas back to the question at the end of your analysis to consolidate your piece. Apart from that, I think you did a great job with this topic!

Peer Review #6 (Ferdinand Esguerra)

Link to comment: 

http://www.ferdinandesguerra.wordpress.com/2017/09/20/blog-6-australian-literature/comment-page-1/#comment-23

Hey Ferdinand,

I enjoyed reading your piece on the significance of the last line of John Shaw Nelson’s “The Orange Tree” as I thought it was engaging and insightful. Since I chose the same topic, I found it really interesting to see how differently you approached the topic. Your points as to why the last line of Nelson’s “The Orange Tree” holds such significance was also fascinating to read. Your chosen examples to represent your points were also done well and this is especially true with your explanations as it captures the ideas you are attempting to convey. Nonetheless, I think your piece answered the question and it was well written. To improve on your analysis, I think you could have elaborated on more of your points and provided more quotes and explanations. Otherwise, I thought you did a great job!

Peer Review #5 (Rachel May)

Link to comment: 

http://www.rachelmay755.wordpress.com/2016/04/22/blog-5/comment-page-1/#comment-45

Hey Rachel!

Your piece on Mary Gilmore’s “Eve-Song” was an enjoyable read. I personally like your analysis of the poem as it was utterly insightful and contextually relevant to the experiences of the woman in the early 19th Century. I appreciate your incorporation of textual analysis as I think that enhanced the consolidated and meaningful aspect of your analysis. The fluency of your piece was also wonderful because your writing was grammatically correct and free from spelling mistakes. Overall, your precision in selecting quotes and ability to explain them thoroughly have shone through your analysis. Great work on your analysis, I look forward to seeing more posts from you!

 

Peer Review #4 (Katie DeCarlo)

Link to comment: 

http://www.katiedecarlo2.wordpress.com/2017/09/07/lousia-anne-meredith/comment-page-1/#comment-11

Hi Katie,

I really enjoyed reading your piece on Lousia Anne Meridith. You gave an insightful and skilful analysis on her style of writing and how it is used to portray the Australian landscape. I think your piece would have benefited if you did a summary towards the end as to how she spoke to you as a woman. Overall, it was a lovely piece of writing to read and I hope to see more from you!

 

Peer Review #3 (Natalie Azzopardi)

Link to comment: 

http://www.natalie4820.wordpress.com/2017/09/06/fruit-bats/comment-page-1/#comment-13

Hey Natalie,

I really enjoyed reading your piece on Lin Onus’s artwork titled “Fruit Bats”. It’s definitely a marvellous piece of art and I think you’ve made the art piece shine through with your in depth contextual analysis. Needless to say, your analysis of the sculpture was done well. Some constructive criticism would be to be careful of your possessive apostrophe (I noticed you wrote Lin Onus’ instead of Lin Onus’s). Otherwise, your piece was engaging and informative. I look forward to seeing more posts from you!

Peer Review #2 (Rosita Coledan)

Link to comment: 

http://www.rositacoledan.wordpress.com/2017/08/24/blog-post-2-critical/#comments

Hey Rosita,

Since I did the same question, I was really curious as to how other students responded. Reading this engaging and thought-provoking piece of writing, I think you answered the critical piece extremely well. You made really good points such as the events and holidays (ANZAC Day and Australia Day) honouring the achievements of early European settlers and the false admiration that Cook received for “discovering the land”. I definitely agree with you in regards to Grant’s opinion of the Captain James Cook statue “speaking to emptiness and the invisibility of indigenous Australian”. I think another aspect that made this piece engaging was the fact that there were no spelling and grammatical errors. You definitely nailed this week’s critical piece and I hope to see more from you!

Peer Review #1 (Lily Chester)

Link to comment: 

http://www.lilychesterblog.wordpress.com/2017/08/23/critical-a-response-to-stan-grant/comment-page-1/#comment-5

Hi Lily!

Since I chose the same question, I wanted to see how other people responded to the critical writing task. To my amazement, you’ve blown it out of the park quite literally. I think you made a really good point where you said: “we shouldn’t simply disregard that indigenous Australians were the original inhabitants of the land”. I think a lot of things were taken from indigenous Australians and to have a “proud” monument of Captain James Cook who supposedly “discovered this territory (in) 1770” is absolutely shameful. In relation to the quote: “America cannot avoid the legacy of racism. We find it all too easy to avoid”. I think, just because Australia “can” avoid the legacy of racism, it doesn’t mean we should. Hopefully, in the near future, we can all concentrate our efforts to reconcile with Indigenous Australians. Overall, your piece was very enjoyable to read and it was well structured. I most definitely wish to see more of your work!