Watch the exam extract HERE
Extract: Hustle, Series 1 Episode 4, written by Tony Jordan, dir. Minkie Spiro
Extract length: 5 minutes max. Timing of extract: First 5 minutes of Episode 1.
Answer the question below, with detailed reference to specific examples from the extract
only.
1 Discuss the ways in which the extract constructs representations of gender using the following:
• Camera shots, angles, movement and composition
• Editing
• Sound
Mise-en-scene (50)
Examiners’ Reports - January 2011
Comments on candidate responses to Question 1 – Television drama
The extract provided candidates with the opportunity to negotiate their own reading, which they could justify through analysis of the four technical codes. There were a number of different interpretations provided by candidates; most of these were entirely valid. There was a good range of technical examples for candidates to analyse.
As noted in previous series, it is important that candidates move from description of key technical areas to analysis of how representations are constructed. This enables candidates to achieve higher marks for their responses. Candidate responses which did not link the technical analysis to representation often lacked focus with a common misconception being to discuss class, rather than gender.
Candidates tend to structure their responses in one of two ways for question one. Some began by addressing the concept of representation in the extract and a discussion of the representational differences between the male sales assistant/manager and the poorer, older female character and then introduce the affluent, younger and elegant female character, comparing this further with the representation of gender in the gentlemen’s club. Candidates would then analyse these examples in a chronological approach to the extract, whilst integrating different technical aspects, for example, combining the analysis of camera composition with sound.
On the other hand, and a slightly more popular approach, would see the candidates address the technical areas one by one. Stronger candidates could provide an integrated analysis of the extract through analysis of key examples identified. These candidates explored how the technical features could be applied using a combination of the technical features. Weaker candidates could list many technical aspects, with varying degrees of accuracy, but struggle to say anything meaningful about the representation of gender.
Candidates should be advised to keep introductions brief and to avoid theoretical introductions and/ or historical contexts to television drama; analysis of the extract itself should begin straight away. On occasion in this series, candidates offered quite general textual analysis and these responses often lacked a focused discussion of gender and thus penalised themselves from gaining a level three or four mark for EAA.
The mark scheme
enables credit to be awarded to candidates in three different categories:
Explanation, Analysis and Argument (20 Marks); Use of Examples (20 Marks); and Use of Terminology (10 Marks).
Under use of examples, candidates cannot reach level 4 (16-20) when only three technical areas are discussed. This mark scheme is able to credit answers which have different strengths, and in this series, the marking of candidate papers revealed this flexibility in its application.
Representation
Most candidates were able to discuss differences in the status of gender within the sequence, though only a very small number of candidates were able to develop their answer further by showing how the audience were positioned in relation to these representations.
More confident candidates were able to analyse the ways in which the extract attempted to position the audience in relation to the sales manager and the female clientele, the second male in the shop and the cross cutting to the gentlemen’s club and as a result were able to explore the nuances of gender representation. These stronger responses showed a good grasp of the changing ambivalent nature of the representation of women and men, for example, either commenting on how the female protagonist played up to gender stereotypes or the centrality of this performance to the ongoing hustle. In relation to masculinity, candidates identified the stereotypical inability of men to multitask. Most candidates made reference to the sales manager’s character (David Walliams) as being feminised and confident candidates asserted that the second male character in the shop was able to dominate Walliams’ character as he was constructed as more stereotypically masculine – chewing gum, open shirt without tie, use of male colloquialisms – for example reference to ‘bird’ as stereotyped slang. However, many candidates formulated a much simpler version of gender representation with arguments such as ‘women like shopping’, the men in the club represent gender because ‘men like drinking whiskey and smoking’. Weaker candidates often relied on the use of binary oppositions in discussion of gender representation, rather than take this opportunity to explore a range of representations offered by the extract.
The majority of candidates attempted to formulate an argument about the representation of gender in the extract with the vast majority moving beyond the minimal descriptor for EAA. Candidates that scored less well tended to make points about the representation of gender in an isolated fashion rather than linking their points as part of a coherent analysis or argument.
Camera Shot, Angle and Composition
Overall, this technical feature was well addressed by the candidates. Most candidates used appropriate media vocabulary, commenting on shot composition, analysing the high and low angled shots in the extract and commenting on the ‘hand held’ camera techniques during the search for the ring. The tilt up of the camera on the woman’s dress was commonly misidentified as a pan but generally a wide range of terminology was accurately used. More able candidates were able to link the composition and the framing to the representation of gender by discussing the apparent significance of the hustler in the background of the frame, when the sales manager was speaking to the less affluent female character introduced at the beginning of the extract. Many candidates were able to comment on the direct mode of address by both male and female characters, commenting upon its unconventionality and function in linking the male and female hustlers. Candidates also commented on how the shots of the direct address to the audience conveyed control of the situation and therefore represented a form of dominance in character relations.
Weaker candidates were able to describe key shots used in exemplification, but would often lack explicit links to how these shots assisted in the construction of the representation of gender. These candidates would also tend to focus on just identifying the narrative flow of the extract through the naming of the shots.
Mise en scène
The majority of candidates discussed this area with confidence. The extract itself was rich in mise en scène that contributed to representation. The contrast of the affluent clothing boutique, with the gentlemen’s club was the setting most compared, at times in a sophisticated way. Candidates made most use of the accent, performance of characters and it was pleasing to see many candidates making reference to lighting with more able candidates confident in using terms such as high key, artificial and low key. Most candidates were able to discuss how the characters’ appearances linked to gender characteristics.
More able candidates could contrast the gender representation of different characters through the mise en scène and how power and status is represented. Candidates are also advised to look for the range of representations within the extract with more able candidates commenting on each character’s apparent gender and how that held some status within the scene, for example of the way in which the female hustler held equal if not more power than males in the scam. The representation of the cockney male was contrasted to the more proper sales manager, who candidates often pointed out, was well spoken, tailored and legitimate.
Weaker candidates are still wedded to simplistic colour analysis and ignore all contradictory evidence to claim that characters dressed in white must be 'pure and innocent' while characters dressed in red are either 'passionate' or 'in danger', for example. This often appeared in discussion of the representation of the female hustler. This ‘binary’ approach needs refining by centres in relation to debating how meaning is constructed in an extract and it is suggested that comparing and contrasting different elements of representation deserves more attention in the classroom.
Sound
The analysis of sound was better than in previous series; for example, candidates attempted to link music with the representation of the characters, looking at how it was used to underscore characters’ actions. The use of terminology was generally better than previously in this area.; centres seem to be heeding the advice that an analysis of the dialogue is not sufficient.
Most students were able to differentiate between diegetic and non-diegetic sound and to demonstrate that the soundtrack was closely linked to our understanding of the protagonist, though few went further by discussing how the sound mix and sound effects were used. Most candidates were also able to use terminology confidently and could describe the tempo and use of music, for example, the manic use of jazz music with the female shopper. Often weaker candidates showed confusion with technical terminology, referring to ambient sound which was not heard in the part of the sequence they referred to, or simply getting diegetic and non-diegetic sound the wrong way round.
Editing
As previous series, this technical area proved to be the most problematic for candidates and the one technical area of analysis that was often omitted in responses. Those that did cover it were able to make meaningful links to representations by showing how the editing created particular viewpoints with which we are encouraged to identify or how screen time indicated the shifting relationship between characters in the sequence, for example through the discussion of rule of thirds. Most candidates made reference to the pace of editing to reflect the frantic situation and actions of the characters in the extract, for example in describing the affluent female shopper and the confidence she exudes in the hustle. Many candidates could identify the use of transitions; shot reverse shot and cuts to aid continuity and the use of cross cutting between the two situations to enhance tension. Many candidates identified the editing transitions, though the use of the term ‘jump cut’ was not accurately applied and candidates often misidentified the wipe transition as a ‘swipe’. Only a minority of candidates interpreted the function of the wipe as highlighting the juxtaposition between a female and male environment. The most able of candidates even interpreted the editing through the comedic style imbued within the extract, highlighting that candidates can be articulate and imaginative with the analysis of editing.
More able candidates demonstrated the ability to link the use of editing to the representation of characters, such as the use of long and short takes to represent power and the use of eye line matches to reinforce a sense of dominance.
However, many candidate responses seemed to be very limited in address of the issues of editing and all too frequently editing was absent from candidate responses – which again, does not enable candidates to reach a level four on the marking criteria for the use of examples. Weaker candidates often omitted any discussion of editing or offered quite simplistic accounts of how editing was used, for example in the use of the shot reverse shot sequence between characters. Many candidates identified the types of transition without discussing how these were connected with representations, in particular the use of wipe transitions or freeze frames. There was little sense of the way in which the editing created a perspective from which the sequence made sense and most candidates confined themselves to discussing the pace of cutting.
This series has shown that with the right preparation, candidates can engage with the nuances of editing under exam conditions, with evidence that candidates are able to discuss crosscutting, eye line match and ellipsis in an extract. As in the previous report, the advice offered to centres is to encourage as much practice on the concept of editing as possible and how this assists in the construction of representation. Centres should begin by identifying editing techniques and encourage candidates to apply these to a range of examples in class and importantly, test them on this.
