Well I've finished my first exam, I think it went reasonably well, although I'm not certain of that. Some of the questions were hilariously pretentious but I managed to find and answer the neccessary two - ones that I rejected included these Gems:
"Instead of 'Imagism', would it make sense to speak of 'imagisms'?"
and the marvelous
"How Can the notions of 'difference' and 'deferral' bound up in the derridean Differance help us to grasp modernist modes of textuality?"
Which is a good example of why I don't want to carry on with my studies beyond BA level - I don't have a fucking clue what that means, not the foggiest notion, and I'm not an underachiever or a slacker, despite whatever impression I give on here.
I managed to write more than I usually write in exams, still less than most, but more than my normal; the downside of this being that, having just written about 10 pages of closely spaced handwritten text in three hours, my right hand is really hurting. I have a pulled muscle in my thumb (I didn't even know you could injure that muscle), a bruised thumbnail and a blister on my index finger. ouch, I think I'm probably going to be playing with a pick for a few days.
Unsurprisingly, the exam paper was just as badly put together as the rest of the course and about 90% of the people I spoke to afterwards replied that they had done the exact same pair of questions as me, as they were the only two that corresponded to the stated aims and objectives of the course as taught be the seminar leaders, rather than the chapters of the pretentious wazzock of a module convenor's book.