- Paper 2 is a comparative literary essay based on two works you've studied. You choose one of four essay prompts in the exam and write a comparative response using two of your 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, this is what you must address.
- Common terms: Discuss, Evaluate, Compare and contrast, Analyse
- These all require you to write a comparative analysis, don’t overthink the command word.
- The core of the prompt is usually thematic or stylistic.
- e.g. imprisonment, identity, use of irony, impact of setting
- Rephrase it in your own words to clarify your focus.
- Not every text will directly reference the key concept.
- Your job is to adapt your 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.
- You won’t know the prompt beforehand.
- 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, character arcs, key scenes, authorial style, literary features, so you can flexibly apply them to any prompt.
- Avoid the formulaic method (low marks):
- Don’t just write 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