Criterion A: Knowledge and Understading (5/5) The student knowledge of both works seems impressive to me.

He/she shows a thorough understanding of both plot and character development, and shows in this essay a very deep insight of the characters minds. To add up, the student demonstrates a good level of understanding of the context of both, novel and play. The student seems to be aware of the political, historical and social factors implicit in both texts: the situation in XIX century West Indies and in Norway. This paper shows also a good level of independence and critical thinking. Criterion B Response to the question Literary works often show men and women struggling to resolve problems and not succeeding very well. To what degree do you find this to be true in at east two of the works you have studied? I agrre with some of my colleagues in that comparison is the weakests point here. However, the criterion B states that candidates are not required to compare and contrast the works. They can write about them separately before drawing a conclusion. Taking this into account I would also give the student a 4/5 in this section, due to the fact that the student answers the question in a very in depth and extensive manner. Criterion C: Understanding of the use and effects of stylistic features In this part, it is very important that, as the paper two criteria states, we all have in mind that characterization, setting, theme, narrative point of view and structure should also be understood as part of stylistic features. As mention on previous commentaries, the students mentions only some techniques and stylistic features such as stream of consciousness, but does a great job describing the characters and analyzing the theme and subthemes, supporting his/her assertions with all the necessary quotations. I think that given the time and the broadness of the question, the student does an excellent job. I would also give him/her a 4. Criterion D: Presentation The essay is well structure and coherent, where ideas are exposed in a clear way and supported always with good examples that clarify all the points intended. I completely agree with the examiner. Criterion E: Language I also agree with the examiner here. Taking into consideration that this essay was written by a non-native speaker, I think the language used is more than addecuate. How many of

you could write at that age a commentary like this in a language different than your mother tongue. Obviously, theres some sentences that sound a little weird, but the intention of the writer is always clearly understood and the student is always to the point. Excellent paper 2. I wish only a percentage of my students could write like this.