Political and social protest writing - exemplar student response band 5

An exemplar student response to a Section B question in the specimen assessment materials, followed by an examiner commentary on the response.

Paper 2B, Section B

Sample question

'In Harvest, the world is unmade in seven days and it is those with political power who are solely to blame.'

To what extent do you agree with this view? Remember to include in your answer relevant detailed exploration of Crace's authorial methods.  

Band 5 response

The novel was written in 2013 and set in an ill-defined past and in it Crace sets up all sorts of ambiguities and tensions. It could easily be argued that although Crace sets his story in the past (seemingly the 15th or 16th centuries) he is actually commenting on the complexities of political power and its impact on ordinary people in the 21st century. He chooses as his narrator an outsider to the village, though one who has been there ten years, but it is not entirely clear who Thirsk speaks for. Are his attitudes those more associated with the sophisticated world than with the people about whom he writes? Does Thirsk somewhat idealise the world of the village before it is 'unmade'?

In this respect, the given quotation is interesting. It is built on the premise that the world in Harvest is actually unmade. Presumably here there is sense that the novel replicates the Creation story in reverse: whereas God creates man, Jordan destroys him. The novel therefore becomes more of a dystopian text than a pastoral one.  The quotation also claims that the finger of blame can be pointed solely and directly at those with political power– perhaps more specifically Master Jordan and his acolytes since he is the one who wants to forcibly enclose the land of The Village and introduce sheep farming.  Although Jordan is a cruel and tyrannical man and although he clearly wants to make money for himself, his desire to introduce 'sheep' is interesting in pastoral terms. It could be argued that he is carrying out the wishes of God and restoring order - Cain, the tiller of the land murdered the favoured gentle shepherd Abel and Jordan is simply putting sheep back firmly where they belong. In this sense, therefore, the world is not so much being unmade as being remade, taking the world back to the Golden Age and idyllic arcadian beauty.   Besides, although Jordan abuses his power, he cannot be said to be solely to blame for what happens. The novel is far too complex for that. 

If readers were to agree with the claim that the world is 'unmade', then they would have to see the world at the start of the seven day story as a perfect one. While it is true that there is a sense of beauty in the opening account of the gathering in of the harvest (there is joy in working together, in looking forward to the harvest supper, in electing the Gleaning Queen and the master who presides over them is benevolent), Thirsk reminds us that the work is hard and life is modest – much labour is spent putting a simple meal in front of them each day and after the gathering of the harvest, the next yearly round will start with the ploughing of the fields.  It is no country idyll. From Thirsk's account it is clear that any sense of country life being perfect is a myth. Sickness has robbed him of his wife and Master Kent's wife Lucy has died, along with his daughter, in childbirth. As a result both men are wracked with sadness and this overshadows the happy gathering in of the barley.

However, it would be a mistake to claim that Edmund Jordan's arrival makes the lives of the fifty eight villagers better in any way. It would also be a mistake to think that his town ways are made better by his contact with the country.  He has political power (rather dubiously gained through Crace's invention of a law which enables Jordan as Lucy Kent's nearest blood relative to inherit her property after her death) and he uses it ruthlessly. After he arrives he usurps Kent's power and when Kent's horse Willowjack is killed, although it seems likely that the villain is the female stranger, Jordan stamps his authority on the villagers and fills them with terror. Thirsk's description of him is significant: 'But what holds our attention and most persuades he is a man we should not trifle with is his high-crowned hat, his copotain, which he's adorned not only with the Jordan family badge but with both feather and gemstone clip. That hat alone says power, wealth and provenance. That hat alone could purchase each of us'. The collective fear here is made clear through Thirsk's use of the third person plural and the build up of detail of Jordan's hat steadily enforces Jordan's dominance (no wonder he became known locally as King Edmund). Jordan threatens and bullies and in order to secure his power, he shows how willing he is to find and punish scapegoats. He plays on the villagers' superstitions and claims that there must be sorcery amongst them and then terrifyingly he arrests two women and the child Lizzie Carr claiming they are witches. Like any skilful modern despot he turns the people against each other, demonstrating exactly what fear can do. What happens afterwards reminds us of what happened in Hitler's or Stalin's purges. Men and women betray each other and many run away while they can. Thus the village is depopulated; they are all harvested.

However, the blame cannot be placed entirely at the hands of Jordan. Kent also has political power but he uses it (or misuses it) in an entirely different way. Perhaps because Thirsk has a bond with Master Kent and because Kent is so benevolent, Thirsk becomes an unreliable narrator as he does not foreground Kent's ineptitude. (Thirsk is often a recorder of events rather than a critic). However, the reader can see further than Thirsk. As master, Kent allows the village to decay, his own manor house has fallen into disrepair through his negligence and when he is called upon to exact punishment he is not discerning. He wrongly places the blame for the fire in his dovecote on the strangers because it is convenient to do so. He then orders the shaving of their heads and he puts the men in the pillory, a disused form of ancient punishment erected on the site of the church which is not built. Crace makes the pillory a symbol of a curious crucifixion with the old man dying there in a horrible way: 'His wrists and throat were purple with bruising. It looked as if he'd tried to pull himself free and didn't care whether or not he left his head and hands behind'; one of his feet has been gnawed by someone's loose pig. The description is starkly matter of fact and all the more gruesome. At the end of the novel, Thirsk sees Kent riding away with Jordan and although no sense is given of what happens to him, there is a sense that 'an alliance has been forged', that they have 'joint interests' and will both look forward to profiting.

It could be argued that Kent's carelessness and lack of firm leadership also encourages similar behaviour in his people. When they could stand together and rebel against Jordan for taking their women, they do nothing. When they do choose to act it is too late and it is misdirected (they attack his groom and Mr Quill but Jordan is untouched). Crace's presentation of both Kent and the villagers suggests that they are in need of change – though not of course the change that Jordan brings.

Crace's position in this novel is interesting. By choosing a narrator who is articulate but often non judgemental ambiguities are set up and there is no final solution. At the start of the novel, when there is peace and harmony, there is also stagnation. It is not a vibrant community bustling with children. When strangers arrive who could revitalize the community, they are not welcome. It is therefore suggested that without the arrival of Jordan, the villagers could not survive anyway. As a result I do not think that the world is unmade in seven days and I do not think that those with political power are solely to blame.

Examiner commentary

This is a very confident and well-shaped response in which the candidate constructs a sophisticated argument. There is a real sense of grappling with the ideas set up in the quotation and although the ideas are a little awkwardly put together at times and although the argument is not clearly driven home, there is engagement and some interesting thinking going on.  The candidate has good knowledge of the text and uses the open book well for relevant sections to comment on. Overall, this is an assured and perceptive response.

AO1 

The essay is well structured and the argument proceeds systematically.  The task is clearly in the candidate's mind though at times ideas seem a little forced and over complicated.  Nonetheless, the candidate writes with a strong and assured personal voice using literary critical concepts and terminology in an appropriate way. The written expression is mature. Quotation is well integrated into the argument.

AO2 

There is perceptive understanding that Harvest is a novel that could be labelled in a number of ways and that Crace has deliberately constructed the novel to shape meanings. There is some insightful discussion of structure and language.

AO3 

Relevant contexts are perceptively discussed, including the historical context and the context of when the text was written. Social and moral contexts are linked well to that of the genre of political and social protest writing.

AO4 

As the candidate fully engages with the task and focuses on power and blame, there is perceptive exploration of the political and social protest writing genre thereby establishing connections with the wider genre. The focus on power is secure and ideas are thoughtfully interrogated.

AO5 

There is perceptive and confident engagement with the debate set up in the question.   The candidate is clearly thinking and takes an unusual angle.  There is some complexity in the answer.

This response seems consistent with the Band 5 descriptors.

This resource is part of the Elements of political and social protest writing resource package.