Fin Brickman

Language Paper 2 Questions

2. In Source A, the driver appears makes a conscious and rational decision to overtake the bike,
‘gambling on the assumption’ that the bike would not swerve. This suggests that the driver, having
assessed the risk of a collision, has continued with the overtake, which is rational, if irresponsible,
given that he knows that he is ‘cocooned’ in his own car and very unlikely to be injured himself. In
this situation he most likely has the motivation of needing to get somewhere as quickly as possible
and has come to the reasonably logical decision to overtake the cyclist. In contrast, in Source B, the
drivers’ actions are still irresponsible, but in this case, they seem irrational, as they class ‘passing too
close’ as a ‘sport’. In this way the drivers’ actions have no clear rational motivation, but instead seem
highly immoral. In the same way as in Source A, the drivers feel safe given the size of their vehicle in
comparison to the bike, but in contrast, the drivers have little or no regard for the cyclist’s safety,
‘well-knowing’ the danger that they are posing. Since they are ‘chasing the lady’, the reason for the
drivers in Source B passing so close may show their enmity towards a female cyclist.

4. Source B is written as a very serious and clear instruction to drivers not to pass so close to cyclists,
nor to run the risk of a collision. The underlying idea throughout is that selfish drivers, wanting to
make miniscule decrements into their journey time, endanger the lives of cyclists who have done
nothing wrong. The author maintains a serious tone throughout, showing how ‘appallingly’ these
drivers act, and appealing to the reader’s empathy and reminding them how a cyclist is still ‘another
human being’ made from ‘unprotected flesh and bone’. Showing how vulnerable and fragile these
cyclists are, and especially mentioning ‘friends’ and ‘loved ones’ appeals to the reader’s emotion and
shows just how horrifying every single accident is, making the reader reconsider their actions on the
road. The direct appeal to the reader with the second person pronoun ‘you’, and imperatives such as
‘remember’ help the writer to further engage with her audience, and the commanding tone
essentially forces the reader to think more about their actions in the future. In Source B, in contrast
to this grave tone, the author takes a more light-hearted approach, often exaggerating humorously,
such as suggesting that she was ‘bordering on collapse’. This shows how she takes these incidents
much less seriously than the more cautious author in Source A, and this is particularly epitomised by
the irony in the first line. She very drily suggests that a ‘new sport’ has been devised by these
drivers, and also ironically juxtaposes her relative calm with the potential fatality of cycling, saying
that cycling would be ‘nicer, to use a mild expression, if he’d try not to kill me’. This irony helps the
reader to share the author’s more light-hearted approach, but also portrays the writer as relatively
fearless now, which is further shown later by ‘what cured my fear’. In contrast, the writer in Source
A fears these incidents much more, finding them ‘terrifying’ and ‘alarming’.