- Paper 2 is a comparative literary essay based on two works you've studied.
- Candidates choose one of four essay prompts in the exam and write a comparative response using two studied texts.
- Duration: 1 hour 45 minutes (SL and HL)
- Length: ~1000 to 1300 words
- Marks: /25 (5 criteria)
- You are assessed on:
- Criterion A (5 marks): Knowledge, understanding, interpretation
- Criterion B1 (5 marks): Analysis and evaluation of textual features and/or broader authorial choices
- Criterion B2 (5 marks): Comparative analysis
- Criterion C (5 marks): Focus and organisation
- Criterion D (5 marks): Language
- You’ll be given four open-ended prompts.
- They often begin with a philosophical idea (e.g. “We are all prisoners of ourselves”) and then pose a task:
“Literature often explores the tension between personal desires and social expectations.” Compare how this tension is presented in at least two of the works you have studied.
- You do not need to respond to the philosophical statement unless it directly asks you to.
- Instead, focus on the key terms in the second half of the prompt. Those are the terms that must be addressed.
- Common terms: Discuss, Evaluate, Compare and contrast, Analyse
- All of these require comparative analysis, so the command word should not distract from the task.
- The core of the prompt is usually thematic or stylistic.
- e.g. imprisonment, identity, use of irony, impact of setting
- Rephrase the concept in simpler terms to clarify the line of argument.
- Not every text will directly reference the key concept.
- The aim is to adapt the interpretation.
- e.g. Nostalgia = emotional imprisonment.
- e.g. “Interesting characters” → define interest as “psychological complexity” or “moral ambiguity”.
- Choose points that apply to both texts.
- Look for overlapping ideas, themes, or techniques to build clear comparisons and contrasts.
Although you only write about two texts in Paper 2, you should prepare three texts in advance.
- The prompt is not known in advance.
- Each prompt favours different pairings depending on theme or literary technique.
- Having three texts allows for strategic flexibility.
- Thematic range (e.g., power, gender, memory, identity)
- Diverse genres or cultural perspectives
- Strong literary technique usage (structure, tone, irony, symbolism)
Know each text deeply, including character arcs, key scenes, authorial style, and literary features. This makes it easier to adapt them to different prompts.
- Avoid the formulaic method (low marks):
- Avoid writing two unrelated ideas for Text A and two for Text B.
- Avoid “block paragraphs” that analyse each text in isolation
- Surface-level comparisons tacked on at the end lack analytical depth
- Outcome: Limited evaluation and weak cross-textual insight
- Aim for purposeful alignment (top marks):
- Identify shared thematic threads or contrasting treatments of the same issue
- Choose points that allow for subtle comparison and focused divergence
- Consider how each author’s intent, context, and technique shapes their response to the prompt
- Select ideas that are broad enough for connection but specific enough for deep analysis
- Effective comparison means:
- Each paragraph should revolve around a single comparative insight
- Texts are examined in conversation, not in isolation
- Start by brainstorming 3–4 key issues raised by the prompt.
- Then, test which ideas logically apply to both texts and offer analytical mileage.
- Why this works (linked to IB Criteria):
- Shows a sophisticated understanding of both works (Criterion A)
- Demonstrates interpretive skill and textual evaluation (Criterion B)
- Allows for a clear, balanced, and structured argument (Criterion C)
- Use short, integrated quotes: avoid large block quotations
- Memorise key quotes that can be adapted to multiple prompts
- Write practice essays under timed conditions to develop fluency
- Plan before writing, structure is essential
- Compare and contrast throughout: avoid treating texts in isolation
- Constantly link analysis back to the guiding question