[0:01]Hi everyone, welcome to Miss Adams Teachers English language and literature A level. In this video, we are going to be taking a look at the Edexcel Voices in Speech and Writing anthology. We're going to look at 4.2 Past Masters Podcast: The Truth is In Here, UFOs at the National Archives. I'm going to take you through the contents, some useful contexts and obviously some points on genre, audience and purpose. Before we look at some key quotes and analyze the literary linguistic features in relation to the voices constructed. This is a great one for voices because there are two different voices to look at. So let's get started.
[0:43]So, a quick look at the content of this particular text from the anthology. Uh this is the Past Masters podcast, a podcast that is run by two people uh called Bob and Joe. And they are having a conversation about the recently released files all about UFOs that have been taken to the National Archive from the Ministry of Defense. Um and what you're going to discover is that there is a sort of sense of enthusiasm from one of the um podcasters, Joe, and a kind of sense of cynicism from Bob. And so it's a kind of exchange between the two of them about what to expect from the files themselves. So just some keywords to help you with context, obviously you need to think about the fact that the Ministry of Defense have transferred these files over to National Archives. Um and they are on UFO sightings, so unidentified flying object objects. Don't get that confused with aliens, okay? It doesn't have to be aliens. Now, the fact that this has come about is because of the Freedom of Information Act. So originally like in the past, um there is a suggestion that there were no such investigations, there were there were no um, you know, there was no one looking at these things. And then uh John Major and then Tony Blair in particular, it was Tony Tony Blair that passed the Freedom of Information Act which meant that people could actually demand access. Um and really there has the Ministry of Defense has had a UFO desk that has actually been collating all of the information about any mysterious sightings or strange objects in the sky. And these are the uh documents that have been sent over to the National Archives and so they are readily available for people. Um the other thing that you might just want to be aware of in terms of context, it's more of a cultural reference but you're going to see this cultural reference to the X-Files, which is a very, very popular show um in the sort of nineties-ish. with Gillian Anderson and David Dechovny. I only mention it because there are a couple of like I said um cultural allusions to it um through the piece. Okay, so let's think about GAP, genre, audience and purpose. So obviously it's a podcast, but this is a multimodal text, both in uh production and reception or consumption. Because obviously this is originally um a spoken piece that has been transcribed. So you've got the transcript of the actual conversation. But then you also have a little bit of written blurb, which we'll look at in a bit more detail, that introduces it. So it's been transcribed and then re-formatted and made available for digital media, social media, et cetera. So both in the construction of it and then the consumption of it, it is multi um multi-modal in nature. It is pre-planned. Yes, of course there's going to be a little bit of spontaneity in it, but generally Joe and Bob will have discussed where the uh piece is going, what they're going to talk about, what their roles are. Now, even though it's a conversation between two people, they are not the audience. Okay, so it is a public audience, quite a broad one. So the podcast itself are going to have um a group of followers.
[4:11]that are subscribed and it's of course for them, but the nature of the content of this particular podcast is also going to attract a wide range. So you're going to have people that are obviously interested in UFOs, perhaps conspiracy theorists, anything to do with the military, to do with the government, fans of sci-fi, fiction, films. Um so it's a really um uh audience here. And of course, it's a podcast, it's to inform, yes, but it's to entertain. Yeah, they want people tuning in each week, so uh they have to be engaging, they have to find ways to hook those readers in. Now, the voice is really interesting because what we need to say is voices, because you've got two people speaking and they are both very different and distinctive. So you're going to see each of my slides, not all of them, but many of them have a sort of verses. So, you know, challenging versus accommodating, to describe the differences between Joe and Bob. Other than the opening, each slide will have a sequence of their conversation, so it will always have both of them on each slide, because technically, this is like a kind of interview. Okay, starting with the first one. So I've kind of just referenced this as introductory because this is the framing of the context of this particular episode on the podcast. So this is the written part, we talked about it being multimodal. This is the written part that helps us understand what we're about to read in the transcript or it would be the written part online before you click to listen to the podcast, okay? So, from ghost rockets in Scandinavia to mysterious spheres tracked over Eritrea, the Past Masters team look at the records of Unidentified Flying Objects held at the National Archives and ask, is the truth in here? Okay, so what we have here is we've got a semantic field of the paranormal, ghost rockets, mysterious spheres, um unidentified flying objects. Um and uh we've got like I said, this first reference, this pop culture reference or allusion, no allusion with an A, not with an I, allusion to the X-Files. Um because the X-Files popular slogan was the truth is out there. And so what they've done is they've punned on the prepositional phrase and said is the truth in here, turning it into a rhetorical question. And that prepositional phrase in here draws attention to these files. So what a narrative hook, are we going to find out the truth about UFOs, aliens, etcetera in these files? So great little bit of um introduction. Then we get um the very specific context. Uh the Ministry of Defense is now transferring files on UFOs to the National Archives covering 1978 to 2002. So if anyone was thinking, oh gosh, is this going to be a sort of flimsy conspiracy, then we get the kind of the beginning of this sort of historical access, factual access coming in saying there is credibility in this. This is to do with uh the Ministry of Defense and what those files are, okay? Note as well, we have unidentified flying objects here in the introduction, so it is clear what UFOs stand for, moving forward. Okay, so the opening of the actual podcast, so this is where we're going to get this little phatic exchange, it's going to be welcoming, it's going to be friendly in voice. Uh so Bob and Joe. Bob, Hi there, you're listening to Past Masters from the National Archives in London. I'm Bob, and I'm Joe. So we've got frontal coordinate conjunctions, um here in both Joe and Bob's speech. And I'm Joe, and this month. So very much a convention of speech, but informality, so part of the kind of friendly tone is the way that they sound very chatty, um there. So frontal coordinate conjunctions, we've got a little temporal discourse marker here, where we're saying this month, which is a reminder of the genre of this piece. Of course, they clearly have a monthly podcast and it's a reminder that the episode content is going to change. So it's making it very specific to the content of this piece. We're looking at one of the strangest sets, so we've got the superlative here, again, another little narrative hook. Um so strange as sets of records we have here at the archives, the British government's very own X-Files. So we've got this little hyphen here that creates a dramatic pause, it's almost like a little drum roll, please. And then, yeah, the British government's very own X-Files. So we've got a repeated cultural allusion or pop culture reference here. Um but look at the way that it's pre-modified, very own X-Files. The X-Files is an is an American show, so it's saying, well, this is the British version, but it's factual. Okay, now let's start looking at the differences between their two voices. So I've labeled this one enthusiasm versus cynicism. So Joe starts off, Mysterious lights in the sky, unexplained radar traces. Reports from military sources and members of the public and official government policy on UFOs from the Old Air Ministry, the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign Office and the Admiralty. Everything she says there is a minor sentence. There's, you know, like every single one. Yeah, there's not a single verb in any of those utterances. Um so this is about creating a little bit of drama, a little bit of tension, whilst at the same time, using lexis that's associated with the government. Um that makes it feel quite factual because she is citing sources. Yeah, Air Ministry, Ministry of Defense, Foreign Office, Admiralty. Okay, so we've got this military lexis here, kind of grounding it in like reality. Bob, and why are we looking at this? Okay, so another frontal coordinate conjunction. Okay, but it's also just demonstrating that he is the challenger of this conversation. He is the questioner. He's almost there with that interrogative, he's almost saying, remind me what the point is? Joe responds. So this is where we've got, we've got a set sets of adjacency pairs here, so very again, typical of the convention of both podcast and interview where podcast where you've got more than one person, you've got the two and fro, and they are using turn taking and the standard question, answer, question, answer version of adjacency pairs. Now, look how positive and enthusiastic she is, through the adjective fascinating and this noun insight. That suggests that this material is credible, yeah, if it's insight, it's thoughtful knowledge. Fascinating insight into the workings of government. And it's secret files on aliens, how good is that? So that's where we see her enthusiasm. Note the juxtaposition between the tone, fascinating insight, credible, slightly more formal, and then your exclamative and your rhetorical question, is more leaning towards the sort of more sensationalist version, um the kind of exciting, ooh, could it be aliens? Now, look at Bob's response, I think they're unexplained aerial phenomena, aren't they? Where's the evidence they're aliens? So what we've got here is we've got two interrogatives uh and one of them is formed via a tag question, that's where you just have the little question, the little two words at the end of a sentence. Um he does hedge it slightly with I think, but the fact that he um sort of undermines her excitement by giving the logical view, demonstrates that he is the cynical role. Um you could argue whether this is quite a challenge to Joe, whether it is you could consider it to be a face threatening act. So if it was a face threatening act or an FTA, you might like to consider to what extent Joe attempts to save face in her response. Um she says now, skepticism is very healthy, so we've got this little discourse marker again, uh creating that conversational tone. And here, skepticism is very healthy, she concedes slightly. She offers a compliment, yet she then counter-argues her next point. So she's she's going, yes, okay, that's true, but here is something else. I think when you've heard some of these documents, you might not be so sure. But notice that it is hedged, same repeated hedging of Bob's, but double hedged, you might not be so sure. So suggesting that uncertainty, stark contrast to this very declarative, uh challenging statement, I think that's very unlikely. Um modified by this very intensifying adverb very. Now, this interrogative is pretty interesting. What have you got? Because it's direct address to Joe. He uses the second person pronoun. He doesn't say, what have we got here? What have you got? So it positions her as the person needing to kind of defend her case and defend her viewpoint. Interestingly, in contrast, she uses the first person plural pronoun when she says, well, we've got dozens of files. So you can read that two ways. You can read that as her trying to bring him into, um, the kind of role there. Or she's referring to herself and the other sort of enthusiasts that are sort of seeing the credibility of the, um, files or hoping to find something quite mysterious. Um, she also tries to add a little bit of credibility in this moment through the um, adverb of manner here, carefully kept. Alongside these numbers that we've got, dozens of files, hundreds of sightings, adding a little bit of authority. Um and as the conversation progresses, again, you'll notice that we're still using adjacency pairs, turn taking, question, answer, response. Um Joe continues to echo the kind of idea of mystery. We've got the idea of the British government watching the skies, quite dramatic, uh phrase there that also suggests intention. But that's juxtaposed and undermined, um with the kind of Bob's version, the reality, uses historical lexis here, draws upon the context of the time saying, well, no, they're looking out for German airships before First World War. Um now, before you start thinking, oh gosh, isn't Bob a horror, you know, he's slams down everything Joe says, um they are potentially playing roles here. This is pre-pre-prepared and planned, and it would make sense for them to have these two opposing roles because the subject is divisive. This is backed up even more so by the references that they're making to the X-Files, this pop culture reference, because the two main characters of the X-Files, Mulder and Scully. Scully was the cynic. She was a scientist, she was a doctor, um and she was always the one saying, no, there's a logical, reasonable rationale for this strange behavior. Mulder was the believer, the fanatic who sorry, believed in aliens. And so you could argue that by taking on these two opposing roles, they are echoing the partnership of Mulder and Scully just swapped over genders. Okay, further concessions from Joe, that's right, so again, quite accommodating here. Now, Bob goes on continuing to use historical lexis. Uh in his very much, you know, declarative form, while since then, they went on to bomb cities up and down Britain in 1915, that sounds very sensible. And then we've got another frontal coordinate conjunction. In this case, it's a negating one, so it's showing he's opposing her once more. But it's nothing to do with aliens. What else have you got? It's the same structure. It's the same direct address, second person pronoun, same interrogative, um but it's this little adverb here, what else? Come on now, there's got to be more. So it's another little challenge. Um we've got that little bit of hesitancy. You could almost say it's almost like a little false start. Oh, okay. World War two. She's coming up with more ideas. It's again, this idea of backing up her point. Uh throughout the war, British and American pilots report seeing strange patterns of light on bombing runs over Germany. Note again, another interrogative, like the lights you get on an aircraft, reasonable, logical, very scully. And here, um, this little interrogative, it doesn't show that it's an interruption, but it feels like one. But here, we've got a definite interrupting. Joe is hedging, um trying to formulate her response. Well, sort of, but not and then this hyphen demonstrates that it is another, it is an actual interruption here. That's another mystery solved then. Note the determiner another, kind of presenting him as the sort of powerful role here. He's the one that solves the mysteries. And then through these declaratives, you get this sort of self-congratulatory tone. I'm getting good at this, um positioning him again as the slightly more dominant one of the team. That's it for me. I hope that was useful. When you're writing about this, if this were to come up in your exam, make sure that you are considering the fact that there are two very different opposing voices. The whole way through this. So whatever it's compared with, just make sure that you're drawing attention to which voice you're either drawing parallels to or presenting contrasts with. Any questions, you know what to do, drop me a line in the comment. I will come back to you. Um thank you very much if you have subscribed. Click that button if you haven't already and then you'll find out when the next video is ready for you. That's it from me. Thank you so much for watching. Happy revising.
