Essay planning

Questions for answering

Account for the differences in the way two texts use generic conventions by considering their contexts.

Generic conventions

Witness for the prosecution

• Mayherne interviews Vole about the events before the death of the victim
• Murderer is introduced near the beginning of the text (Vole)
• Red herrings
  • Shade of hesitation in his words page 9
  • Romaine’s evidence that Vole came back at 20 past 9 page 11
• Follows an unassuming piece of evidence (the notes and the letter)
• Setting established early in the story
• False lead
  • People who can testify for Vole/others leaving/entering buildings
  • The letter for Shaws rents
• Denouement
• Clear motive
• “Perfect crime”
• Crime can be solved at the same time as detective (including plot twist, due to the pondering of habits)
• Note
  • Follows unconventional style of trying to save someone from the crime rather than solving it

Knives out

• Interviewing all subjects
• Red herrings
  • Walt, and being fired from the publishing company
  • Ransom, who had an argument with Harlan
  • Joni, and the payment mess up
• Explaining all the facts of the story while Blanc asks Marta things for the first time
• Evidence that doesn’t make sense
  • Blanc who got hired by a stack of cash and an anonymous letter
• Going back over info events at the time of Harlan’s death
• Falsified evidence
  • Everyone lying about possible murder motives
  • Marta lying about Harlan’s demeanor
• Blanc follows a set method to solve the crime
  • “Gravity’s rainbow”
• Unusual evidence followed
  • Footprints in the garden
  • Tear up the trellis wall
• Influence
  • “Meg. You think I can pay for your school?” pg 81
  • Using manipulation to get Meg on their side, even though Meg believes that Harlan wrote the will that way for a reason
• Car chase - modern detective fiction
• Unexpected denouement
• Sudden arrest - of ransom

Ungeneric conventions

Knives out

• Ransom is a red herring - killing out of hatred

Other Notes

Knives out

• “Protected. Playing life like a game without consequence, till you can’t tell the difference between a stage prop and a real knife. He stabs it into the desk, sharp and real. Leaves it there.”

Contexts

Knives out

• The last jedi being Johnson’s last film before its release
• “Brick” 2005 idea conceived after
• Whodunit mystery
  • Influenced by Agatha Christie film adaptation
• Alfred hitchcock plot development tips
• Title came from a radiohead song
• Youtube came out
• Kyoto protocol
• 4 coordinated suicide bombings in london
• Suddam Hussein trials beginning
• Political undertones - 2016 election
  • Trump first got elected
  • Very severe left v right ideology
  • Stereotyping
• Rise of social media
  • Instagram = 2010
  • Snap = 2011
  • Facebook - 2004
  • Reddit = 2005
  • Jacob, the troll
  • Joni, an influencer
• High number of immigrants 2000s
  • Marta being an immigrant
  • High amount of hostility against
  • Marta’s family being illegally immigrated - many people were illegal immigrants then - tripling in size

Agathe Christie

• 1923 Housing act
  • More affordable to buy houses
  • Less people living in slums
• Post world war 1 unemployment
  • Many more people become unemployed
• Women started fighting for freedom in society
  • Marie stopes, birth control
  • Gained a little bit of rights
• People starting turning to cinema and theatre for entertainment
  • Romaine’s significance, and how she could act well where Mayherne didn’t notice until the end
    • Lack of generic convention
    • Falsified evidence
  • “The roaring 20s”
  • Rise of Jazz

Writing titles

Write “Witness for the Prosection (WFP)” then after write “WFP”

Knives out is underlined

Analysis Paragraph 1

Red herrings

Knives out

• Will reading scene
  • Possible motives for murder throughout red herrings
    • Eliminates Ransom as one because he is at the will reading, albeit knowing he is not getting any share
    • Joni wants money
    • Linda wants the house
    • Walt wants Blood Like Wine
    • And they all had major arguments with Harlan before his death
      • Possibly “killing him before he can change the will”
  • Family positioning during the reading to show not only political divisions, but also to juxtapose what they want out of the will.

Witness for the Prosecution

• Romaine telling Mayherne “what if she told him he came back at quarter past 10”
  • She’s an actress and cinema and theatre were very popular for post war Britain
  • “I hate him. I hate him. I hate him!”
    • Using her acting skills to draw herself as a red herring instead of Leonard
    • Also draws the audience, as Leonard and Mayherne have set Leonard up as innocent, to believe that Romaine wanted to frame Leonard - makes him look even more innocent

Analysis p2

Interrogating suspects

Witness for the Prosecution

• Romaine was interviewed in her home - which is not a very nice home
  • Housing improvements in 1920’s.
    • Many people have “been there before” before the improvements in housing
    • Relatability for audiences to understand why Leonard killed Ms French
  • People understood Leonard and Romaine’s struggles in why Leonard might have killed for the money
    • “Low water financially”

Knives out

• Donut hole in the wall of knives
  • Donut hole is seen through all of interrogation
  • Marta’s head supposedly “fills” the hole during her interrogation
  • Hole can also be seen when first questioning about Blanc - he uses the donut hole analogy
  • Family members comment on how Marta, and immigrant, is a good girl
    • Split views around immigrants at the time
    • Filling of the donut hole represents other people’s perspective on what immigrants are like.
    • Leaves audiences to make their own decision