Writing a script for my presentation.

1. Year ten English Writing a script for my presentation.

2. The introduction An engaging start! Brutalising, horrifying, destructive of life and humanity; war has been a perennial means for people to solve their disputes despite its awful effects. I have chosen the song ‘War’ by Edwin Starr to transform into a visual text, to illustrate how people have protested against war. Today I will give some context to the song and explain the subject matter of the poem, its themes and language features, and finally, show you my visual text and explain how it links to the song. . The text is identified, and your PURPOSE explained. You explain how you will achieve your purpose.

3. Paragraph one- context The song ‘War’ was first recorded by the motown artist Edwin Starr in 1970. It was a direct response to America’s involvement in the Vietnam War but has gone on to be covered by a number of artists such as Bruce Springsteen and Bob Marley. It has become an anthem of the anti-war movement. Includes background on: Who, Why, How

4. Paragraph two- subject matter and themes The topic sentence tells you what the paragraph is about It is clear from the opening line of ‘war. What is it good for? ‘, that the song takes a strong stand against war as a means of resolving disputes. As the song progresses it elaborates on the ways in which war has led to the deaths of innocents, the emotional trauma of mother s who have lost their sons and the destruction of the lives and dreams of young men who have been made to go and fight. Finally, it suggests that there must be peaceful means of resolving disputes. This is a significant element of the song, since it gives the listener hope that there is an alternative, and that things can improve. The rest backs up the argument

5. Paragraph three- language features This strong anti-war message is conveyed powerfully through the use of numerous language features that enhance the impact of the song. The song starts with the rhetorical question ‘war; what is it good for?’ telling the listener straight away that Starr believes it is good for nothing. The whole first and subsequent alternating verses are almost like a call and response, with the singer asking the question and the listener answering in their heads. This is also use of repetition to reinforce the idea that war is good for nothing, leaving it echoing in the listener’s mind. 1. Identify

6. The song also makes use of metonymy in such lines as ‘war means tears to thousands of mothers’ eyes. This equating of war with one of its results reminds listeners of the negative effects that it has. Cumulationis another technique which the song employs, for example in the line ‘made him disabled, bitter and mean’. Here starr is building an image of the effect that war has on soldiers. The same technique is also used in the last verse to suggest the positive alternative to war ‘peace, love and understanding’. 2. Provide examples

7. The song also personifies war, suggesting its only friend would be the undertaker, because it gives him so much work. Finally, the song makes use of strong verbs such as ‘shattered’to strengthen the impact of lines such as ‘oh war has shattered many young men’s lives’ . This word suggests the irreparable damage done, something that a word like broken wouldn’t convey, since it is possible to fix something that is broken, but not something that has shattered. 3. Provide an explanation

8. Paragraph four- explaining your visual text My visual text has focused on the main language features of the song and turned these into images which emphasise the themes of the song. By looking at my text, viewers will be able to understand the main ideas of the song. Firstly I have... Explain how the visual text links to the song/porm

9. conclusion In conclusion, it is clear that War by Edwin Starr is an ideal song to transform into a visual text, due to its clear anti-war message, which is conveyed through the use of many language features that can be transformed into visual images. Sums up and reinforces your argument