Hello, and welcome to today's lesson.

My name is Miss Watson, and I'm really looking forward to teaching you today.

We're going to be looking at travelling with animal companions and how two different writers feel about their travelling companions, so let's go.

So the outcome of today's lesson is that you will be able to understand and explain two writers' different attitudes to their animal travelling companions.

We will start with the keywords, which are intuitively, and if you respond to something intuitively, it means it's based on your feelings, not facts.

To be perceptive is to be good at noticing and understanding things that other people may miss.

If you are compassionate, it means you feel or show sympathy for the suffering or bad luck of others.

A very good quality to have.

To use a euphemism is when you choose a word or a phrase to avoid saying something unpleasant or offensive.

And something that is daunting.

Well, it makes you feel nervous about your ability to achieve something.

Now, all these words you're going to find as we are discussing the writers' attitudes.

If you would like to take a little bit of time to familiarise yourself with them, you can do that now.

Pause the video, join us when you're ready.

So let's look at the outline of today's lessons.

We're going to start by looking at how we make inferences from descriptions, and then we're gonna move on and compare attitudes to those travel companions.

Now, having the right travelling companion is really important.

So I'd just like you to have a little discussion about which of these animals do you think would make the best travelling companion.

Do you think it's the donkey or the poodle? Have a think.

Explain your reasons.

You can pause the video while you do that.

Well, this is what the Oak pupils said.

Jun thought the donkey would be more useful and he could carry his things.

And he said that they're easy to look after because they can find grass to eat.

But Izzy was on the side of taking the dog because she says, "Dogs are known to be man's best friend and they are cuddly so you would feel less lonely as you're travelling.

And a dog might protect you from danger." How did your answers compare with theirs? Now, before we start reading, I'm going to just tell you a little bit about Robert Louis Stevenson.

Now, he was born in Edinburgh in 1850 and he died in 1894.

He wrote "Treasure Island," and that's a seafaring adventure about pirates.

And his novel, "The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde," is about a respected scientist with an evil alter ego, and it's widely regarded as a Gothic masterpiece.

You may have already studied "The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." Great novel.

He was a very keen traveller.

And in 1879, he published "Travels with a Donkey in the Cevennes." And the Cevennes is in the south of France.

And he named the donkey Modestine.

Now I would like you to use this contextual information, and to think about what your impression is of Stevenson, and what your expectation is of his travel book.

You can pause the video while you do that.

So welcome back.

This is what the Oak pupils said.

Jun said that the plot of "Treasure Island" suggests that Stevenson liked adventure.

So he thinks that the travel book will contain exciting events.

And Izzy made this point that the plot of "Jekyll and Hyde" made her think that Stevenson was interested in personalities because even the donkey has a character.

How did your answers compare with theirs? Let's have a check for understanding.

Which of the following is not true of Stevenson? a, he liked to travel, b, he was involved in animal charities, and c, his novels were patched with excitement, and d, he lived in the Victorian era.

Which is not true? Have a think.

That's right, b.

He was fond of the donkey, Modestine, that he went travelling with, but we don't have any evidence that he was actually involved in animal charities.

Let's move on.

Now, whenever a writer describes something or someone, he or she is also revealing something about themselves.

So I'm gonna give you some examples.

You can tell a lot about someone from the following: what they like, what they dislike, what they find funny, what alarms them, and how they relate to people, and how they relate to their environment.

So we are going to read a passage from Stevenson's book.

I'd like you to follow along as I read, and I want you to think about this question.

What do we learn about Stevenson from the way he describes animals? "It remained to choose a beast of burden.

Now, a horse is a fine lady among animals, flighty, timid, delicate in eating, of tender health; he is too valuable and too restive to be left alone, so that you are chained to your brute as to a fellow galley-slave; a dangerous road puts him out of his wits; in short, he's an uncertain and exacting ally, and adds 30-fold to the troubles of the voyager.

What I required was something cheap and small and hardy, and of a stolid and peaceful temper; and all these requisites pointed to a donkey." Now, you might say that he thinks horses are "ladylike" and "fussy," and this might imply that he thinks he is the opposite, that he thinks he's masculine and resilient.

And he doesn't think that horses are reliable.

He says, "uncertain" and "exacting." So that might suggest that it's important to him that he feels secure on his travels.

And he is a practical man.

He wants something cheap and cheerful.

He doesn't want to overspend, and he wants his animal travelling companion to be easygoing.

So now I want us to read about Stevenson's first interactions with Modestine.

Once again, follow along as I read.

"Father Adam had a cart, and to draw the cart a diminutive she-ass, not much bigger than a dog, the colour of a mouse, with a kindly eye and a determined under-jaw.

There was something neat and high-bred, a quakerish elegance about the rogue that hit my fancy on the spot.

Our first interview was in Monastier market-place.

To prove her good temper, one child after another was set upon her back to ride, and one after another went head over heels into the air; until a want of confidence began to reign in youthful bosoms, and the experiment was discontinued from a dearth of subjects." Now, I have put some words up there in purple, and I would like you to have a discussion about what you can infer about the narrator from the words in purple.

Pause the video while you do that.

Off you go.

Hello, and welcome back.

I'd like to share some ideas, and I'd like you to look at them and think about whether they match your ideas.

So about "a kindly eye and a determined under-jaw," you might have said that the narrator is perceptive and he sees the donkey as having a personality.

Possibly he is projecting aspects of his own character onto the donkey, and we might ask ourselves if he is also kind and stubborn.

And that possibly he is projecting aspects of his own character is an example of inference.

"Hit my fancy on the spot." Now, this might suggest that he responds quickly and intuitively to people.

He responds on feelings.

That he's quick to make up his mind about people and animals.

And this quote, "To prove her good temper, one child after another was set upon her back to ride, and one after another went head over heels into the air." So the donkey obviously bucks the children off.

And this might suggest that he has a sense of the ridiculous, and he doesn't seem to mind bad behaviour 'cause adults these days would be a lot more worried about the danger that is done to children and would probably stop putting them on the animals back much quicker or much earlier.

Let's have a check for understanding.

Which of the following can we not infer from the interactions between Stevenson and the donkey.

Would you say it's a, he is easily amused, or b, he likes the donkey's appearance, or c, he has plenty of money, donkeys are expensive, or d, he has a feeling that the donkey will be trouble? Which can we not infer? Have a think.

That's right.

It's c.

We haven't really even talked about money yet.

Okay, so now it's over to you.

There are three parts to this practise task.

One, we're gonna read together the description of how the speaker bought Modestine.

I'd like you to highlight words and phrases that reveal the speaker's personality.

And then the third is I'd like you to explain what you learn about the speaker, and when you are doing that, to use some of the keywords.

So let's start with one, and we're gonna read the description.

"I had a last interview with Father Adam in a billiard-room at the witching hour of dawn.

He professed himself greatly touched by the separation, and declared he had often bought white bread for the donkey when he had been content with black bread for himself;" white bread would've been seen in the Victorian era as more luxurious, "but this, according to the best authorities must have been a flight of fancy.

He had a name in the village for brutally misusing the ass; yet it is certain that he shed a tear, and the tear made a clear mark down one cheek." So now it's over to you to highlight words and phrases that reveal the speaker's personality and then to explain what you learn about the speaker using some of the keywords.

Pause the video while you do that.

Off you go.

So welcome back.

Great focus there, well done.

I'd like to share with you what Jun highlighted.

He highlighted these phrases: "in a billiard-room at the witching hour of dawn," and "a flight of fancy," and "yet it is certain that he shed a tear." I'm interested to know if you had similar words.

I'm not saying these are the best.

I'm not saying that there aren't others.

I'm just saying that these are interesting words that I think you could make inferences from.

And these are the inferences that Jun made from the words and phrases.

For the first one, "in a billiard-room at the witching hour of dawn," he wrote this, that "This is a strange time of day to be conducting a transaction, so we get the impression that Stevenson is versatile and can adapt even to quite eccentric circumstances." And about "a flight of fancy," he wrote that, "This is a euphemistic way of saying that Father Adam is telling lies.

So here Steven comes over as cynical, but also quite non judgmental." And then, "yet it is certain that he shed a tear." "This shows that Stevenson can be compassionate and understanding as well as cynical." I just want to ask now, did you use keywords when explaining your inferences? If not, this would be the time to put them in.

Have a go at making sure you've used keywords and then we'll move on.

So we're returning to the lesson outline.

We've looked at making inferences from descriptions, and now we're going to compare attitudes to animal companions.

So we are going to be comparing Steven's attitude to his animal travelling companion to Steinbeck's attitude.

And I'm gonna give you a little bit of information about Steinbeck.

Now, he's an American writer born in 1902, and he died in 1968.

He's a Nobel Prize-winning author of "Of Mice and Men," East of Eden," and "Grapes of Wrath." You may have heard of some of those titles.

He's known for his perceptive and compassionate portrayals of the hard lives lived by Americans during the Great Depression.

And his book "Travels with Charley: in search of America," was published in 1962.

And Charley is a poodle.

And the pair travelled across America, and Steinbeck wrote up his insights into American society.

Now, for this part of the lesson, you're going to be reading independently.

You will need to read from John Steinbeck's "Travels with Charley." It's part two, and start from the paragraph that begins "For weeks," it's when Steinbeck is writing about maps, and to the end of the next paragraph where he considers how he and Charley have different horizons.

Pause the video while you do that.

Off you go.

Welcome back.

I hope you enjoyed reading that.

Before we look in more detail about what Steinbeck says, we are going to have a check for understanding.

So Steinbeck is clearly very attached to his dog, Charley.

Is that true or false? Have a think.

That's right.

It's true, but I need you to justify your answer.

Is it true because a, Steinbeck feels that Charley can communicate with him and he compares his intelligence with the dog's, or b, Steinbeck describes the dog carefully, saying that he is tall and has a crooked front tooth? Have a think.

Make your choice.

That's right.

It's a.

He feels that he has a deep, deep bond with the dog, and actually is similar to him.

Similar enough to be able to compare intelligence.

Well done.

Let's move on.

So what I'm asking you to do now is to compare Steinbeck's attitude to travel and his travelling companion with Steven's attitude.

And we're going to use a Venn diagram.

And in the middle of the Venn diagram, you're gonna write down similarities between ideas, feelings, and perspectives, what do the two writers have in common? And then on the left hand side you're going to write down ideas, feelings, and perspectives that are specific to Stevenson.

And on the right hand side, you're gonna write down ideas, feelings, and perspectives that are specific to Steinbeck.

You are going to need to pause the video while you do that.

So when you're ready, pause the video and off you go.

Welcome back.

What fantastic focus.

I'm really, really proud of you.

I'm going to put up some ideas, and I'd like you just to look at them, read them, think about them, and compare them with yours.

I'm not saying that these are the right answers.

I'm just saying they are credible answers.

Some will be similar to yours, some may be quite different, but I think you'll find them interesting.

So you might have said that they both travel with an animal.

That's a very obvious similarity between what happens in the two texts.

And they both see their animal travelling companions as having distinct personalities.

And Stevenson likes the look of Modestine, but he doesn't know her, she's new to him.

And ultimately he sees her as a useful purchase.

And that is really quite different to Steinbeck because he sees Charley as a friend, and he credits him with intelligence.

He knows his pet very, very well, and he admires as well as loves his dog.

Now, if there are any ideas there that you would like to take away and add to your notes, feel free to do that now.

You can pause the video while you do that and then rejoin for the end of the lesson.

Now, before we say goodbye, I'd like to summarise what you have been learning today.

Here we go.

Robert Louis Stevenson was a Victorian writer of novels and travel books.

John Steinbeck was a 20th century American writer of novels and travel books.

Both Stevenson and Steinbeck wrote books about travelling with animal companions.

When writers describe someone or something, they are also conveying information about themselves, and we use inference to understand that more hidden information that they are telling us.

I would just like to say well done for coming to today's lesson.

Thank you for your time, your efforts, your focus, and your thinking.

I wish you a brilliant rest of the day, and I look forward to seeing you again soon in another lesson about explorers.

Bye for now.