Shakespeare and the 19th-Century Novel (8702): Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, in the style and at the standard of the examination, and do not reference any specific set play or novel — apply the method below to your own studied texts. They are not reproduced past-paper questions. Examination boards hold copyright in their own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers available free from your board.

Related: Shakespeare and the 19th-Century Novel revision notes

The additional questions below (1b and 3) are not part of the fixed exam structure, but give you extra practice at applying the same extract-to-whole-text method to a different angle on your studied texts — theme, character responsibility, and relationship development are three of the most common ways AQA-style questions frame Paper 1, so practising all three builds flexibility rather than a single rehearsed essay shape.

---

Section A (practise using your own studied Shakespeare play)

1. Starting with a key extract of your choice, explore how Shakespeare presents power (or another central theme) in your studied play as a whole. [34]

1b. (Alternative Section A question) Starting with a key extract of your choice, explore how far Shakespeare presents a central character as responsible for their own downfall in your studied play as a whole. [34]

Section B (practise using your own studied 19th-century novel)

2. Starting with a key extract of your choice, explore how the writer presents a central character’s development across the novel as a whole. [30]

3. (Alternative Section B question) Starting with a key extract of your choice, explore how far your studied 19th-century novel presents a central relationship as changing over the course of the story. [30]

---

Answers (worked approach — marks depend on your studied texts)

1. A top-band answer opens with close analysis of the given extract — language, form, structure, and how the theme is dramatized in that moment [12] — then moves outward to the whole play, tracing how the theme develops across other key moments, using a well-chosen (memorised) quotation bank [14]. Throughout, the strongest responses treat the play as drama, commenting on staging or performance choice at least once, and integrate historical/social context directly into the argument rather than as a separate paragraph [8].

1b. As with Q1, a strong answer starts with close analysis of the given extract, examining what it reveals about the character’s own choices and agency at that specific moment [12], then extends this across the whole play, weighing evidence of self-inflicted downfall against evidence of external forces (fate, other characters, circumstance) [14], reaching a clear, debated judgement rather than simply asserting the character is or isn’t responsible [8].

2. A strong response begins with the extract itself — how the writer’s language and narrative choices present the character at that specific point [10] — then tracks the character’s development across the whole novel, using precise textual evidence from at least two further points in the story [14], with relevant social/historical context woven into the analysis of why the character develops as they do [6].

3. As with Q2, a strong response opens with close analysis of the extract, focusing on how the relationship is presented at that specific point [10], then traces how the relationship changes across the novel, using precise evidence from at least two further moments [14], integrating social/historical context relevant to why the relationship develops as it does — for instance, contemporary attitudes to class, marriage or gender that shape how the writer presents the relationship [6].

---

Building an extract-proof revision approach

Because you cannot predict which extract will appear in the exam, revision should focus on being able to apply your knowledge to any extract from your studied texts, not on memorising a response to one specific passage. Practise this by choosing several short, unfamiliar extracts from your own play and novel and timing yourself writing a brief plan (5 minutes) that identifies: what the extract reveals in isolation, which whole-text moments it connects to, and which pieces of context are genuinely relevant. This mirrors the actual exam skill far more closely than rehearsing a single polished essay on a pre-chosen passage, which can leave you stranded if a different extract than expected is set.

Where marks are usually lost

• Extract analysis that doesn’t connect outward to the whole text.
• Character analysis that only covers one scene, missing the “develops across the whole novel” demand.
• Context added as a disconnected final paragraph instead of integrated throughout.
• Shakespeare answers that ignore staging/performance and treat the play purely as printed text.
• Spending more time on Paper 1 revision than its 40% weighting (vs Paper 2’s 60%) justifies.
• On relationship-based questions like Q3, describing the relationship at one point without tracking how and why it changes across the whole novel.
• Treating “context” as generic historical background rather than context specifically relevant to why the character or relationship develops as it does.

Preparing for a closed-book exam

Because Paper 1 is closed book, none of these questions can be answered with the text in front of you — every quotation has to come from memory. The most efficient preparation is not attempting to memorise the whole play or novel, but building a compact, well-chosen bank: 2-3 major characters, 2-3 central themes, and a handful of pivotal moments per text, selected specifically because they support multiple possible essay questions (extract analysis, character development, thematic argument, relationship change) rather than just one. Practising retrieval of that bank under timed conditions — not just reading it over — is what makes it usable in the actual exam, where recall under pressure is a different skill from simply recognising a quotation when you see it.