2025 Essay Competition Winners

The experimental and nonconformist ideologues of post-modernism, building upon the iconoclasts of the modernist period, viewed structure to be a needlessly restrictive and sentimental burden imposed on art throughout history and distrusted the blind faith in more ubiquitous structures such as language itself. At the same time, this view was accompanied by a parodic fascination with the stylistic and narrative impacts of those structures, which could be used to interrogate themselves reflexively. The most renowned post-modernists, from Andy Warhol and David Lynch to Vladimir Nabokov, used pastiche to reinvigorate pre-existing structures with new meanings, innovating formal qualities to reshape understandings of language and representation. This is most evidently exhibited in Nabokov's 1962 novel Pale Fire, a pastiche imitation of literary commentary, which utilises its tripartite meta-structure of Foreword, Poem, and Commentary to gradually alter the reader's understanding of the reliability of its editor, Charles Kinbote, and the nature of language itself.

Nabokov opens the novel with a foreword that simultaneously introduces the narrator, Kinbote, and hints at his pretensions and the potential illegitimacies of his claims. The foreword orients the reader into the structure of literary commentary through its first-person narrative perspective, advanced diction, and scholarly tone – but Nabokov uses these structural expectations to examine the extent to which the narrative perspective can be exaggerated before the conventional style of the book collapses. Alternating between a sober exposition of the poem the book commentates ("Pale Fire", by murdered poet John Shade), and sporadic ruptures of scholarly distance, the Foreword intends to develop nascent doubts in the reader towards the faithfulness of Nabokov's structure and instantiate the theme of unreliable narration. After describing Shade's writing process using literary jargon "He marked his cards not with the date of his final adjustments, but with that of his Corrected Draft or first Fair Copy", Kinbote abruptly interjects with the sentence "There is a very loud amusement park right in front of my present lodgings." The departure from scholarly distance created by the direct reference to Kinbote's situation introduces the employment of juxtaposition which abounds throughout the novel, and garners its effectiveness directly from the reader's preconceived ideas of the text's structure. The degree of familiarity Kinbote creates through the juxtaposition in the foreword is deemed inappropriate for scholarly discourse, and signals early on the interpretative misconduct and authorial intrusions prevalent in the Commentary. Importantly, however, Nabokov does not foreground this but chooses to subtly introduce it through hints at Kinbote's narcissism ("the competence, and perhaps honesty, of its present editor and narrator") and extensive, visibly exaggerated accounts of his friendship with Shade. Nabokov's structural choices question the notion of identity throughout the novel as Kinbote's perspective gradually becomes more claustrophobic and the reader is left uncertain of the true nature of the world beyond Kinbote's descriptions. All of this is achieved utilising a degree of juxtaposition and first-person narration, both in quantity and quality, that capitalises on the reader's notions of the structural role of a Foreword to shape the reader's understanding of the appropriate attitude of scepticism with which the rest of the book must be read.

This structural confusion is exacerbated by the Commentary segment, which expands the usage of juxtaposition to the macrostructural level, increasing the reader's understanding of the disparity between what Kinbote says about Shade, and what Shade actually writes. In the table of contents, the Commentary is placed last "in conformity with custom", but the final paragraph of the Foreword instructs the reader to consult the Commentary before the Poem, since "without [Kinbote's] notes, Shade's text has no human reality." On a purely formal level, the structural importance of Kinbote's commentary is understood through the conjunction of quotation and first person perspective, by which they are convoked to reveal Kinbote's patent disinterest with the text proper of Shade's poem, and heavy interest in narrating the story of his own life. This is seen as the quotations which Kinbote 'commentates' get progressively shorter and less related to the commentary he writes on them. He finds increasingly tenuous connections to his (likely deluded) experience as the overthrown king of a foreign nation, Zembla. At his note to Line 130 he quotes the line "I never bounced a ball or swung a bat" by misinterpreting the American poet's reference to basketball and baseball by stating "Frankly, I too never excelled in soccer and cricket," before launching into a 10-page description of this king's reign. Since he refuses to reveal this identity, referring to the king in the third person, the narrative perspective takes on a different significance than the Foreword. As Kinbote imposes his first-person perspective into the life of Shade, unwittingly displaying his fanatical obsession with the poet, he deposes it from his actual experience, which he commentates on from the third person. For example, in his note to line 433, quoting Shade's "to the sea… which we had visited in thirty-three," Kinbote immediately sidelines his role as commentator, since he "is not in the possession of the particulars", and instead states the ages of the former Zemblan King (himself) and Queen in 1933, segueing into a 9-page description of their flight after the coup. This structural reversal of narrative perspective represents the core theme of the novel, Kinbote's attempt to mythologise himself and his own story, to which he subjugates Shade's story throughout the poem. The disjunction between the quotations from the poem and the self-centred descriptions of the commentator are a representation of the poet's disdain at the complete lack of Kinbote's story in Shade's poem, contravening his belief that he had 'given [Shade] the subject for his poem,' referring to his homeland, Zembla, and the story of its king. By ultimately perverting the structure of a commentary into an autobiography (disguised as a biography), Kinbote represents to the reader his ultimate goal of fulfilling his own narcissism and delusions of grandeur, completing their understanding of the formal subversion in Nabokov's structure. By gradually destabilising certainty in the reliability of the narrator, Nabokov imparts the post-modern scepticism of language and appearance onto his own readers by forcing them to traverse the structure of a text that demands scepticism by its very themes and character(s).

The most crucial part to this understanding is the realisation that by the very nature of this structure, the Poem is essentially jettisoned from structural significance. The narcissism of the commentator foregrounds his own story by misinterpreting Shade's poem to a degree that renders it incommensurable with the rest of the novel. Kinbote's instruction in the foreword forces the reader to skip the central section of the structure precisely because it becomes irrelevant once the reader realises the purpose of the author's structural devices. Nabokov not only destabilises the notion of 'beginning' and 'ending' in the structure of a novel, but he challenges the idea that portions of that structure must be read at all, depicting the ideological nature of expression and establishing a distrust for language and structure in line with post-modern ideology. The reader's understanding is formed throughout the text precisely by navigating this structural confusion since every formal disruption and structural subversion is revelatory of the character and motivations of its editor, Kinbote, and the degree to which such meta-structures are fallible.

The romantic era was marked by a deep fascination with nature, emotion, and the critique of industrialisation. Percy B. Shelley's Ozymandias, Wiliam Blake's The Tyger, and John Keats the Human Seasons explore the power of nature and time, the duality of creation, and life's natural cycle. Influenced by romantic ideals, these poets' express ideas that remain powerful and relevant today proving why they continue to be considered literary classics.

Percy B. Shelley uses irony and symbolism to investigate no matter how great, human achievements are eventually diminished by nature and time. In this work, we are told the story of an ancient traveller who comes across the ruined, decaying statue of a once-powerful dictator, Ozymandias. Shelley highlights how the king once believed he was unbeatable, shown in the proud words carved into the pedestal "look on my work, ye mighty, and despair." However, this is ironic, because all that remains are "trunkless legs" in the "boundless and bare" desert. Shelley contrasts Ozymandias's arrogance with the forgotten legacy of his empire. Furthermore, Shelley also uses vivid imagery to describe nature and how "the lone and level sands" have taken over, reflecting the hegemony of nature, its total power outlasts all human constructions. Interestingly, while the empire has vanished, It is the sculptors art that survives through the "sneer of cold command." Art, even as an artifice, can record the downfall of tyranny, but nature will eventually engulf even that. Shelley critiques the classic idea that power and legacy can endure forever. Through the ruined statue and ironic inscription, he exposes the arrogance of rulers who believe their status is permanent. This conveys a timeless truth, no matter how influential someone seems, time will eventually erase their achievements a message that resonated in Shelley's Romantic context, where he challenged society's obsession with empire and power.

Similarly, Blake dives into the duality of creation and explores romantic concerns with morality and the duality of human potential. Written as a companion poem to his earlier poem The Lamb, which symbolises innocence and purity, The Tyger symbolises a beautiful but destructive creation. It questions not only the coexistence of beauty and terror in creation itself but also the choices of its creator. Blake underscores the perfect and "fearful symmetry" of the Tyger to question how the same creator could make both the Lamb and the Tyger. "Symmetry" suggests beauty and balance in its creation, while "fearful" adds a sense of danger and awe. Additionally, Blake asks a series of Rhetorical questions to deepen this mystery. Blake asks, "what immortal hand or eye" and "who made the Lamb make thee" to develop the contrast between the innocence of the Lamb and the terrifying power of the Tyger. This invites the reader to feel awe, wonder at creation, and question moral and spiritual beliefs. Maybe Blake combined the perfect nature of the Tyger with these deep rhetorical questions to push important romantic ideals such as the sublime or nature and limits of human understanding. What makes The Tyger such a classic romantic poem is how Blake uses the Tyger as both a literal and symbolic figure. It represents not only the natural danger found in the wild but also the deeper duality within humanity, our capacity for both creation and destruction. Blake hints at the ambiguity of divine intention, is the Tyger God's creation, or a reflection of human artifice and power? Ultimately, Blake invites the reader to reflect on the good and evil that exist within all things, including ourselves, making the poem classic in its emotional and philosophical depth. Blake's questioning of divine intention remains relevant as humanity continues to wrestle with scientific, moral, and spiritual uncertainties in today's world as they did in the romantic era.

John Keats uses an extended metaphor and sonnet structure to explore how life mirrors the seasons, and how each stage has its value. "The Human Seasons" is a poem written to express the cyclical nature of human life and encourages the reader to embrace life rather than cheat it. When Keats is describing the seasons, he personifies the soul as "four seasons," which is a simple yet profound metaphor. By comparing the human soul to "four seasons," Keats simplifies the stages of life and shows how they are a collective experience for all humankind because the human experience of birth, growth, change, and death is shared and universal to all people. Keats compressing this universal experience into just 14 lines of a Shakespearean sonnet shows his ability to capture the complexity of life in a simple yet powerful way. Each quatrain represents a season of life: spring's innocence, summer's ambition, autumn's maturity, and the final couplet ends in winter's death an acceptance. The mirroring of the seasons works because, beyond representing different life stages, the sonnet's structure mirrors the movement through life, with each season marking a distinct stage. By combing a range of techniques Keats masterfully mirrors life's cycle through a simple but structured framework, while urging the reader to value emotion over reason. Possibly Keats sought to show how people grow, change, and decline over time, and to persuade the reader to accept life's natural cycle with all its beauty and calmness. This is because only by moving through each season can we fully live as human beings as we have those experience. However, this serves as a warning because we can see people not doing this in anti-aging and hustle cultures. Individuals using technology to allow themselves to stay in their "spring" and "summer" forever, avoiding the reality of decline or rest. In Keats' romantic context, this acceptance of life's cycle reflected a resistance to industrial progress and celebrated nature and emotion. This text is so classic because it offers a relatable and lyrical reflection on life's stages that continues to resonate in a modern world.

Each one of these poems express a central romantic concern. Whether it's Ozymandias, The Tyger, or The Human Seasons they all reflect romantic values such as imagination, emotional expression, and personal freedom, while presenting their own unique appeal. What makes them classic is not just the romantic ideas themselves, but how powerfully and poetically they are expressed. These texts continue to stir the hearts and minds of readers today, which is why they remain classic works of literature.

John Steinbeck publishes "Of Mice and Men", a story about George and Lennie, and the adventures (and trouble) that they find whilst working on a ranch. This text gets its name from a Scottish poem, specifically from the line "The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry". The title alone tells us what will happen, yet we are still shocked up until the final moments. The plans of everyone usually don't go to plan. This shows Steinbeck's genius, how he weaves everything together to create an arguably perfect story, unsurprisingly one of the most well-known pieces of American literature. What makes this text even better is the messages and themes tucked subtly in the corners of pages. He raises a large number of messages and themes to encourage a range of discussions. Steinbeck talks about loneliness, hostility, and unrealised dreams, ultimately provoking important thoughts in the reader's mind about how these messages can apply to their wider world context.

John Steinbeck carefully chooses his words in the text to illustrate important themes or messages that apply to wider world context. In the quote "Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world.", George explains how lonely it is to work on a ranch. The use of a superlative – "loneliest" – is an intentional choice from Steinbeck. It transforms this quote, making it discuss extreme loneliness, and how no one else in the whole world can be lonelier. This superlative emphasises the important message of loneliness by raising it to the highest degree to ensure us, as the reader, consider it to be the main message in this quote, and are now aware of the underlying theme of loneliness throughout this entire text. This is likely done to not only highlight loneliness within the text, but also to bring attention to loneliness in 1930's America as a whole, which is where this text was set, and where it was written. The single superlative in this quote alone helps to raise awareness to the main theme of loneliness both inside and out of the text.

Another example of this is when hypothetical questions in this text are a tool used to set up the discussion of possibly inappropriate themes or messages that again apply to the wider world context. John Steinbeck writes "Maybe ever'body in the whole damn world is scared of each other.". This is where Slim voices his concerns about 1930's America, and the hostility within it. He looks for a reason to explain the hostility and hatred, and Slim stumbles upon fear. Slim wants other people to tell him if he is right or not, but directly asking would not fit his God-like personality, so he instead phrases it differently; hypothetical. The pinnacle of 'what if's – a subtle grasp at an important message within Slim's environment; Hostility; Fear. Steinbeck chooses to use a hypothetical question because it provokes thought within the reader. It encourages the thought, and maybe even the discussion, of similar important messages in real life, where considering the context of 1930's America – a time of struggle and desperation, simply doing anything to survive – these topics for discussion would not have been hard to find, yet still not talked about enough, so Steinbeck uses a hypothetical to encourage the reader to give thought.

Furthermore, Steinbeck highlights the message of unrealised dreams by using phonetic spelling in the text. From the quote "Sat'iday night. Ever'body out doin' som'pin'. Ever'body! An' what am I doin'?" a lot of information can be gathered. This quote comes from Curley's wife, a key character in the text. She explains in this quote how everyone has gone out on a Saturday night, but she is not allowed to come and has to stay at home instead. This reflects back on the overall theme of loneliness, and the tone and use of exclamation marks shows yelling, reflecting back on the message of hostility. The use of phonetic spelling in this quote is key; The misspelling of "Saturday", "Everybody", "doing", "something", and "And", shows that Curley's wife is likely uneducated. She also says in the text about how she "could have been in the pitchers", phonetic spelling for "pictures", referring to that she could have been a movie star. Instead, CRACK! Her neck snaps. As that noise explodes through the barn, in the space between a moment all of her hope of becoming something better and finally being happy are gone. An uneducated girl full of hope to be a movie star now lies lifelessly on a pile of hay, identified only as a possession. At the end of her life, everything she was had been boiled down to two words; "Curley's wife". One of Curley's possessions. Her dreams of something better, dreams of anything better, had been snapped, remaining her as a possession, only now lifeless. This challenging reality is another important message raised by Steinbeck. He implies that no matter what your reality is, do not settle for less than your dreams, for then you may never reach them. This can be applied once more to the historical and cultural context of this text: 1930's America during the Great depression. Steinbeck is teaching the reader that regardless of your struggle, do not give up on your dreams.

The first time we meet Curley's wife, she is dressed entirely in red, looking for Curley. Like a red flag. This is where George snaps at her, something we just know is weird. We are in Soledad. Soledad means lonely. In that one moment, we are shown three key messages: Everyone is lonely, there is too much hostility, and Curley's wife is looking for something (but this is paired with a red flag, almost as a warning sign). One singular interaction is filled with language features and techniques to highlight John Steinbeck's main messages and themes, encouraging thought and discussion. The entire text is made up of moments like these, all woven together and back on each other, creating a mesmerizing web of a story, spinning itself as one of the most important, and – according to popular opinion – best pieces of American literature to date.