This guide will take only about 10-15 minutes to read through thoroughly. We will look at the assignment task for module DT1200 and consider different ways to approach it, explore how to develop a clear thread of discussion, and look at how to write impactful introductions and conclusions. Extracts from first class student work will be used to shed light on good practice.
The assignment task
Let's remind ourselves of the task. You will need to write a 1500-2000 word essay that requires you to critically analyse a production while discussing the views of a theatre critic. Here is the wording from the 2021 assignment:
Analyse the ‘live’ broadcast of the 2016 RSC Tempest directed by Gregory Doran indicating to what extent you agree with ONE of the following reviews
- Henry Hitchings, Evening Standard 18 November 2016
- Michael Billington, The Guardian 18 November 2016
- Peter Kirwan, The Bardathon 11 January 2017
- Alice Saville, Time Out 7 July 2017
- Peter Ormerod, Warwickshire World 18 November 2016
You may refer to other reviews if this will help your argument.
And what are markers are looking for in a good piece of work? They will be assessing your ability to:
- Offer a thoughtful response to the theatre production and the review you have selected (relevance; argument; knowledge).
- Develop a clear and coherent structure for your ideas (relevance; argument);
- Develop, defend and sustain an argument or critical position that is responsive to the performance (relevance);
- Ensure rigorous citation, proofreading and referencing wherever appropriate (presentation; referencing).
OK, let's explore ways of tackling this assignment.
Approaching the assignment
As a starting point, here are some things to think about.
Your first step
Should you watch the production, and then read the reviews – or the other way around? If you watch the production first then it's more likely you will come to it with an open mind, unencumbered by preconceptions. However, by reading the reviews first, your viewing will be more directed - do you agree with what the reviewers are saying on particular points?
Critically assessing the production
What is your considered response to the production and what evidence supports your view? It's useful to focus on just a few selected elements of the production (and its context) that strike you as important.
Critically assessing the reviews
Here are some questions to consider.
- What are the opinions/arguments put forward by each reviewer?
- What evidence is given to support the reviewer’s opinion?
- Consider how the reviewer expresses opinion – are there any emotional appeals, nods to shared assumptions with the target readership or, generally, any language choices that reflect bias?
- You have to choose one review only - which one offers you the most room for critical discussion?
Putting it together
How can you structure your essay so that you are able to discuss your response to the production as well as the opinions of the reviewer? Let's look at two possible approaches employed by previous student writers.
Do please note that there is no 'correct' way to structure this essay. Find a structure that suits you and what you want to say.
Introductions
It is worth spending time on your introduction. It sets the scene for the reader, clarifies your position or argument concisely and provides a brief idea of how you are going to approach your discussion. Think of your introduction as a funnel shape, moving from a broad view of play/production/the review to a tight focus on argument and essay plan.
Check how these example introductions invite the reader in and map out the essay discussion.
Analysis and discussion
In this section, we will look at how previous student writers have formed a 'thoughtful' response to a particular production by critically discussing both the production and its reception by one reviewer.
Building argument
In the extract below, see how the writer sets out their position at the start of paragraph with the help of a source and through analysis of a character's use of language. The writer then proceeds to develop their point by challenging the reviewer's position, making use of evidence from Emilia's rousing speeches.
Using quotation purposefully
In this extract, note how the writer uses a quote from the review to then launch a more detailed exploration of the point.
In this extract, quotation is used as a springboard to provide a counter-argument.
Focus on production elements to say something
Here we can see how the writer grounds argument in analysis of the production while, incidentally, taking a pop at the reviewer.
TIP
In all the examples above, the writing is driven by argument. If you want to do well in this assignment, avoid a blow-by-blow account of the production. Some description may be necessary but it should be in service of the argument you are making.
Conclusions
An effective conclusion needs to bring together and amplify your argument (or position). What is your response to the production, what evidence have you provided to support it and to what extent does your response match the opinions of your chosen reviewer?
In this conclusion, the writer puts forward their own response to the production while indicating how far that they agree with the reviewer.
This conclusion broadens out at the end to look at the wider implications of the production.
Further resources
Read this - all the essentials on academic writing for drama in one online resource:
Don't forget that CeDAS offers 1:1 Writing Tutorials and Drop-Ins to help you develop your drafts before submission. Don't believe me? Find out what these students say.
For a pick of the best online self-study activities about academic writing, check these resources curated by CeDAS:
The Library offers tailored guidance for drama and dance students on searching for, evaluating and referencing academic sources.