Theo

= __Task 1__ =

__1__
//__Homer puts three choices to the group: try to rescue their friends (even though it is very dangerous and unlikely to succeed), inflict damage on the ‘enemy’ or sit tight and stay alive, in your opinion what should the group have done?__// My view on this question is mixed, because parts of all three answers demonstrate pros and cons. In conclusion to my argument, if I was placed in Homers shoes, my course of action would be to: firstly damage the supply line (this is what they end up doing by destroying the bridge) then sit tight and protect themselves, only picking another person into the group if is results in no harm to anyone.
 * Trying to rescue fellow towns people would be “(taking) a risk to try to build up (their) numbers” but this risk would eventually have to be taken because together they could fight off the soldiers, but this would have serious risks including many loss of lives, and this would also present more mouths to feed;
 * Inflicting damage to the enemy’s supply line would cut them off from the outside world with limited food and men, leaving that force without many supplies could eventually kill off many soldiers, but that would leave captured civilians to die too;
 * Sitting tight would also present risks and benefits, for example if the enemy knew that the group existed it would only be a matter of time before the enemy found them. Sitting tight would result in fewer lives lost. Camouflaging and hiding the base is essential for the groups survival and also setting up a food supply.

__2__
//__Ellie is relived that she ‘probably’ has not killed anyone in the bridge explosion. However, she understands that her intention was ‘to do whatever was necessary’ and therefore it was only luck that resulted in no lives being lost. Is murder wrong in war?__// In any given situation war and murder are bad solutions, but sometimes they are inevitable when your livelihood is on the line. Both War and murder are terrible crimes, they destroy precious human life and can scar. Most sane murderers and soldiers, like Ellie, are scared for life after killing someone. Murdering in war is not always in your control though, for example: when you are on the receiving end of a gun barrel the only thing you can do is shoot first. An excuse, that Ellie’s and other real world soldiers make to themselves, is that it was only a military/strategic procedure that just happened to take people’s lives, but this sort of thinking is not alright, firstly that’s no reason to kill anyone. Secondly a procedure like this would only provoke the fighting and because you’re taking the offensive then no side is exempt from blame. In conclusion murder is wrong in most situations, certain situations though are exempt from this rule, but determining if it’s ok or not is a very tough decision.

__3__
//__Ellie Killed people when she caused the first explosion when she saved Lee. Would the enemy be justified if they if they refuse to treat Corrie because of it?__// After Ellie killed some people when she caused the first explosion and when Corrie had been shot, I feel that Ellie of blames herself for the hospital not accepting to treat her, but really it’s th t e invader that committed a crime. I think armies should not be able to take hospitals, doctor’s surgeries or first aid, in fact all medical areas should remain neutral, and any side being the invader or the defender should have serious repercussions in the war tribunal and in the U.N. if they try to take one of these establishments. A problem that occurs when this happens though is that one side could say, well what if they get back on the battle field? So my answer to this is that when they have come back to full health they go to a prison and become prisoners of war. My point here is that its war, you fight, but at the end of the day, when your injured you should be able to get a full treatment no matter the side, so the enemy wasn’t justified by taking the hospital therefore anything to do with the hospital is un-justified.

__4__
//__Robyn ‘could understand’ why the ‘enemy’ had invaded. They claimed they were “addressing imbalances in the region” they had very little Australia had a great deal they were going to divide up the farms for the people and give Australians the menial jobs. This would have resulted in a role reversal. Is this role reversal any less fair than the original situation where Australia was rich and wouldn’t share their wealth?__// There are two sides to this question, is it better to have more people on the top? And is it fair that we should all our work towards our country’s future only to let other groups come and reap the benefits of our labour? I think an equal society in which everyone is welcome is the only way to go. War was not the right track for this to happen but our “democratic and equal” government has made it really hard for others to enter our country: in the case of the real world immigrants and especially asylum seekers has lots of trouble getting in to our country. In response to the second question, instead of thinking of it as reaping the benefits of our work, but as working as one in order to benefit more people. Australia is a fair country that’s not fair to other un-powerful countries, but if we worked together as one community we could benefit not only ourselves and our communities but also others in need. = __Task 2__ =

__1__
//__Who is the leader in the group?__// The group has a number of different leaders in the duration of the book. Each character have their own benefits, their own skill, and they surface and demonstrate great leadership in times of need. For example in the scene where they are about to blow up the bridge Homer displays “his inner genius” and great leadership skills. Ellie, being the narrator and possibly the “main character”, portrays a major role in the group decisions. Various characters also have low points, for example Ellie is not portrayed as much of a leader when she is really questioning her morals and motives.as a conclusion, everyone in puts into the group at different times

__2__
//__Who, in the group, displays remarkable courage? You can talk about more than one person here__// Even fighting in a war displays remarkable courage but the fact that they all are teenagers fighting with no experience or training to try to save their possibly dead family and friends shows that the all have a unrealistic amount of courage, even Fi is amazingly courageous compared to any of our generations today. If I had to choose someone in the book it would probably be Homer, Kevin or Ellie because under such circumstances the manage to hold the group together and lead it to do great things.

__3__
//__Ellie is concerned by Lee’s morality; she’s concerned that if the romantic relationship breaks up there will be tension in the group. What tests of their friendship did you observe in this novel?__// In this novel Lee builds a strong hate for the invading force and takes lives of the oppressing solders, this troubles Ellie who is still trying to work what her morals are and to what length she would go to, to regain her normal life. I Think Lee is the hardest hit by the whole invasion, he turns out to be angry and hateful towards the enemy, and Ellie can’t figure out what to do, having a romantic relationship with a sometimes angry, scary person or release tension and unrest between the group. Ellie decides that she should stay with Lee and she realises that she changes him, even though their friendship was tested many times. I feel like there is a lot of tension between the two a times but Ellie sort of changes Lee.

= __Task 3__ =

__1__
//__How reliable do you think Ellie is as a narrator? Why do you think Marsden chose her as the narrator?__// No matter who tells it, every story is bent and twisted to correspond to the narrators beliefs, I think Ellie’s diary is a perfect example of this. Although Ellie portrays her emotions and her actions really well, but the beliefs and actions of the enemy are not always clearly portrayed. Every story is manipulated and changed depending on the narrator’s beliefs. This whole book doesn’t display emotions or actions from the enemy therefore cutting off our empathy. It’s not about Ellie’s skill as a narrator it’s just that the enemy is cut-off from us and the troubles warped a little.

//__2__//
//__Find out what the term **foreshadowing** means in relation to novels. Write down an explanation of what you understand it to me. Then list as many examples of foreshadowing as you can.__// Foreshadowing is a term that means: the act of providing a vague indication of what’s going to happen next. Many novelists use this technique so as not to surprise the reader to much when going on completely different events and to leave a bit of suspense in the meantime. Marsden uses this Technique many times including when the group is camping in hell for the first time and the planes fly overhead during the night then the next morning while the group were discussing it Kevin jokes “maybe we’ve been invaded”, this is a classic example of Marsden foreshadowing. More examples are when Robyn is talking to Ellie and exclaiming, “oh Ellie I hope there are no disasters” and “one year away from the show can’t hurt, well, that’s what we thought”.

= __Task 4__ =

__1__
//__Which character do you think undergoes the most change? Explain the journey that your character underwent during the novel?__// Each and every character undergoes massive change during this novel, Homer, Fi and Ellie probably the most but this paragraph is dedicated to Ellie. In the beginning of the novel Ellie is a normal rural girl but as the invasion unfolds she becomes scared and anxious for all of their safety. When she has the first argument with Chris and when she rescues Lee se becomes ‘logical, cold-blooded and merciless’ as well as savvy and adequately tenacious. As she sees Homer becoming the ‘military genius’, she extracts ideas and plans to learn more on being a leader in war. Also as she helps Lee she acquires a new found love for their old life and a hate of the enemy. I believe that, although she changes and influences, she is moulded by the people and the environment around her.

__2__
//__Ellie at one stage outlines what she sees as “Homer’s genius” – was Homer a ‘genius’ for coming up with the plans to ‘rescue’ Lee and to destroy the bridge?__// I think the improvements that Homer has made during this book are admirable, the reason for this is thanks to changes in the environment around him. Before the invasion Homer is classified as reckless and a little bit dumb, but as the book goes on he changes into a smarter more responsible person. He morphs into this better person when he finds a purpose in his life, to fight. When everyone else is tired and down homer is not only the person that lightens the atmosphere and reconnects the drive in all of them, he guides the rest of the group to focus their power on a specific area that the enemy can’t live without, the bridge.

__3__
//__Ellie worries that she might become ‘like a war criminal’ because of the acts she’s committing. She says she uses “a sense within [her]” to determine what was “good or bad”. Is Ellie a ‘good’ person?__// Yes, Ellie is a good person she’s a teenager in a dangerous position trying to preserve her family, her friends, her country and way of life. She displays empathy and relief that the bridge explosion didn’t cause loss of life. Unlike the invader who is fighting for power and greed the group is fighting for freedom and their old life while making a sacrifice of personal morals. This is a major point defining good and evil. She is not necessarily doing anything worse than would normally happen in wartime. Ellie and the rest of the group are doing what they critically need to do. And if doing what you need to preserve your own life isn’t ok then I don’t know what is.

__4__
//__When Ellie finds Chris asleep on sentry duty she loses her temper with him. She understands why sleeping sentries should be ‘shot’. She becomes ‘logical, cold-blooded and merciless’. Later she says that “I **guess** he atoned.” Did Chris belong in the group?__// I think the more people on the cause the better. Even though Chris is not a big part of the group he is still one of them and should be treated as one of them. Punishment should come to anyone that breaks simple rules because it puts the rest in massive danger. The fact that Chris came later in the book makes no difference to how much of a part of the group he is, he is fighting for his old life back, he hates the enemy, he becomes more responsible, and he contributes into group discussions, this is exactly what the rest of the group are and what they need in a person. Chris, like Homer, becomes transformed by the conditions around them, and even though it’s a terrible thing, the war changes him from a druggy to a smart, responsible person, so this is why I believe he belongs in the group. I see Chris as no less a member of the group and I believe that he also belongs there.

= __Task 5__ =

__1__
__What role does “Hell” play in the novel?__ Hell is the starting point in the novel, it is a home, a shield and a secret hideout. Without Hell there would be no place to run. Hell is always perceived as a baron, desolate place but in fact it is the life blood of the group. With running water and a landscape that nearly completely protects them from the outside world, Hell is a perfect hideout for the group. Everything about it seems made to be “dark and cool and secret”.

__2__
__Does the novel suggest that people can ‘belong’ to the land?__ Although Marsden never suggests it, the book displays a reigniting of the bond between people and the land. As the group heads into, and hides in the bush, it becomes their hideaway, camp, food and water source and their fate begins to depend on the land, much like the aboriginals before them. Even through the sort of ‘extremist’ point of view, the aboriginals had a very good balance of give and take with the land, something that our society today really lacks and something the teenagers in this book rediscover. I don’t think that this novel suggests that people can belong with the land but I do think that it shows they can have a balanced relationship with it.

= __Task 6 (Chapter 7)__ =

__1__
//__What inspires Ellie with the idea to use the ride on mower as a bomb?__// When Ellie, Kevin and Corrie are running from the initial gun shots Ellie realises that they, along with the rest of the group, are her family. When Ellie realises that they are running down Mrs Alexander’s driveway she leads them to a dead end and there she realises that she has probably killed them. This inspires Ellie to do something courageous, exploring her ‘new self’ but still saving the other two. The fact that Corrie stumbled into the lawn mower just helped her were as her true inspiration came from the love of her friends and the fact that she might have killed them.

__2__
//__What techniques does Marsden use to create tension in this scene?__// Marsden skilfully manipulates the text into a thrilling and action packed scene that wakes up the characters to the realisation that this is a war, the enemy will kill and they have to do whatever it takes to damage the enemy. Marsden uses the time of night and charge in the air that already puts heaps of tension in. To add extra affect, the storyline has Ellie, Kevin and Corrie sneaking up on the show-ground without making a sound, then, as any good scene with tension would, the observers are spotted by the enemy and they run, get cornered and in all of the mayhem the three blow up a lawn mower, kill the people that were following them and run back to their base. The only difference here is that moment when Ellie realises that she has murdered multiple people, when her little battle between good and evil ignites, that sets this scene from the rest it apart from the rest. Marsden creates the perfect amount of tension in this scene for the reader to be sucked in but also for the morals and conflictions to sink in.

__3__
//__Marsden is careful not to let the reader strongly identify with the people who die. How does he achieve this and why does he do this?__// Marsden wants us to empathise only with Ellie, he does not identify the dead because that is the best way to keep the focus on Ellie. If the focus of our empathy is drawn from the group to the enemy soldiers because we are drawn to them by what the group does to them, the whole point and morals Marsden wants to portray would be avoided. Another aspect, referring to the Australians being held captive at the showground, is that Marsden doesn’t want to refer to the people of Wirrawee because the uncertainty of the fate regarding the group’s families and friends fuels them in some way. Marsden achieves by killing people in times of high action so as not to have an obliged go into further details of the victim and the killing.

__4__
//__Why do we not condemn Ellie for the murders?__// Many different points explain why we don’t condemn Ellie for the murders she has committed. Firstly, she doesn’t show the invaders as human they are only portrayed as immoral killing machines doing whatever it takes to occupy the country. Even though we have not been in the groups situation we feel a shared anger towards the invader, therefore we overlook the murders she’s committed. My second point is that whenever she starts talking about it she speaks with resentment and fear, I think, that makes you feel sorry for her and coupled with anger makes us hate the enemy even more. Thirdly she’s writing in the future and there is an element of doubt towards weather what she writes is truthful or if she is only trying to camouflage her guilt. Another point to think about but is not always the case is that she does this for self-defence. If she’s in a life threatening situation we don’t care what she’s done as long as she stays alive. Another problem, this time has got nothing to do with the book, is that our society is dulled by the amount of murders and violence on TV, in the movies and in books, that a few murders in a book is not going to disturb or even scare them. Lastly human kindness goes to the ones described in more detail, we empathise and even prefer the ones that are the main characters and we know more about, the human mind does not favour the unknown. So in the end empathy is what makes us unharmed by what Ellie has done.

= __Task 7__ = //__Heart of Darkness__// John Marsden might have referred to this book because the main character, Charles Marlow and Ellie are quite alike. Both main characters are on a journey that is mirrored by another, a metaphoric one challenging the ideas and morals of society, amongst other things. Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness is a novel set in Africa during European colonisation. After trading magnate Kurtz goes missing in the area around the Congo River, Charles Marlow, a sailor, is commanded to find Kurtz. As Charles journeys further into the river Marlow discovers shades of his own heart that he had never seen before. Almost senile and barbaric, Marlow finds Kurtz, a demon like figure, destroyed by the corrosion of his own heart and mind. Kurtz is living in a native tribe and is treated as a god, and when asked to return, Kurtz refuses. When Klutz is forced on the ship, Marlow sees his deteriorating health and finally his death. In the end of the novel, Marlow travels back to Europe a changed man. The journey that mirrors the physical one that Both Marlow and Kurtz take, Challenges many modern day ideas. Marlow and supposedly Ellie, embark on a “radical questioning of not only (their) own nature and values but the nature and values of (their individual) societies”. Although Tomorrow When the War Began questions war, murder and various other things that the group use to survive and Heart of Darkness explores the “working of consciousness as well as the harsh realities of imperialism”, the two books are very much the same in the sense that individuals are questioning what they once knew as a fact. Tomorrow When the War Began and Heart of darkness link strongly in many different ways. =__Task 8__=

//__Berthram Christy__// The sound of birds and animals was cloaked by gunfire and the smell of gunpowder hung in the air. That was our squadron’s first confrontation and the worrying made us sick. When we moved from camp and into the green eerie jungle the gunfire stoped and was replaced by the far-away sounds of nature. As we started to see the other squadrons in line the gunfire starts again, that time sweeping into friendly lines, that was followed by grunts and cries of pain. As we slowly move into the line we met up with an American group who bid us good luck. Their commander, Richard, was a good man, for he gave us some food, knowing we were feeling sick. A Vietnamese line emerges of nowhere and strike our lines followed by a return of bullets and shells. Out of sheer confusion the American squadron charged at the enemy lines, backed by none and were shot down nearly as soon as they had got up. Or Australian squadron had stayed in their position while this had happened and as the Vietnamese moved forward, Jonny, our leader, ordered us to retreat. Cries and moans came from the shot down American soldiers and I couldn’t take it. I had to do something, in a bizarre and incomprehensible action I ran to Richard, the only one I knew, and went over his wounds, after taking a bullet to the shoulder and two to the leg the man was unconscious and laden with cuts and bruises. I turn him over onto his back, his face was disgustingly scabbed. A red burning anger brewed in inside as I pick up a gun and shower the enemy line with bullets watching a clump of unexpected soldiers go down, and drag the American back to our group. The rocking of the waves felt different somehow, everything seemed different. The smells of the calm sea, the cool breeze. The soldiers are laughing playing cards drinking beer. We’re going home they sang. The others interacted with me a lot more than before, some adored me while others envied my new-found fame and glory, but the general emotion was joy. How can they be so happy, around five hundred thousand allied forces dead and around one million North Vietnamese scattered across the battle field. This hurt to see how much these soldiers **didn’t** care, and they all knew what the loss of a life that they knew. Also, we’ve heard of the protests and riots against this war, but is society really moral, really sane, do they even recognise the hardship of others, the pain, the suffering. And not just society and other people that I am radically questioning. Suffering. Greed. Death. Me. //How many lives can a person take to save their own? Is murder ok in war? What is sanity?// These are questions that vary from person to person yet haunt generations and generations alike. I thought I’d come back a proud hero from this war, in fact I only came back a haunted one. = __Task 10__ = //__Answer the following essay question. “Loyalty, courage, goodness I wonder if they are human inventions too, or if they just are.” What does Tomorrow When the War Began suggest that loyalty, courage and goodness are?__// intro: Tomorrow When the War Began is a book by Australian novelist John Marsden and deals with the struggle of a band of teenagers fighting a merciless army in a hopeless attempt to regain their old lives. These key concepts each have different benefits: courage, the will to fight; loyalty, the force that’s keeping them alive; and goodness, the aspect that’s keeping them sane and well, all of these keep the group alive fighting and well. Then, their life was lovely and normal, after the invasion it becomes violent, merciless and messed up. Loyalty goodness and courage are key concepts that keep the group sane and fighting, but before the invasion they probably wouldn’t even think that they would depend on these attributes like life itself Goodness: Ellie and the whole group have been thrown into a guerrilla war situation with no physical or mental training and this hits their physiological state hard. Goodness, the concept that this paragraph is talking about, is the only thing the group can cling to. To know that they have a cause, something to fight for keeps them sane. By the end of the book nearly all of the key characters have killed a soldier and this scars them. The only thing that lets them know that they are doing good is to know that they are fighting for the sake of what is right, just and what they must do to help their families. Goodness is an attribute that can be learnt but pure goodness comes from the heart. I think goodness is the only thing that keeps them sane and together, fighting together for one cause. The group has to do terrible things that they would not even have contemplated before, goodness is the only thing that lets them know it’s right. Loyalty: Loyalty is not only the glue that holds the group together but it binds the couples that have formed during the book. Loyalty becomes the life blood of the group, without loyalty each character would never survive in these conditions but more than that loyalty binds the couples that are created during the book together, further tightening the group together. In the bridge explosion scene Corrie gets shot and Kevin volunteers to drive the car and get captured by the enemy, because “she’s (his) mate and (he wouldn’t) dump her and run”, this presents great loyalty that most of the characters would do’ for each other. They don’t “give a bc stuff about what’s rational and what’s logical” and that’s what bonds the groups together and keeps every one alive. Courage: Courage is the most important attribute in war as without it you can’t fight for your life and survive. The goal for all the characters is to survive and to reclaim their country and their families. In order to this, they need to fight hard to hit the enemy, but this takes enormous courage. (Just fighting in this war would take masses of amounts of courage)Courage keeps the group fighting despite the odds. Courage is one of the only concept that can fully be learnt. Without courage the group would not have done anything to deal a blow towards the enemy, to prove themselves. Most of all if the group sat tight it would only be a matter of time before the enemy discovered them in their little hide away, Hell. Conclusion: This essay outlines the importance of courage, goodness and loyalty in the book Tomorrow When the War Began. My first argument presents that goodness is key in order to keep the group fighting and happy. Loyalty is the most important to keep the group alive and together and my last paragraph states that courage is an essential attribute in war because without war demands great challenges to be accomplished and without courage you’d never be able to complete them. Marsden created a masterpiece that is tomorrow when the war began, but above that Marsden wrote this book for us teenagers to send the messages within the text. One of these messages, don’t take things and your life for granted, is a thing that our age group does a lot and that we need to fix. Other messages include the three concepts that this essay talks about, living life to the full and never giving up.

= __SHORT STORIES__ =

__2. Simile, Metaphor story the eagle__
As I run towards the cliff at full speed, with the glider in my hands, I become frightened and have to fight away the freezing up of my body due to shock. The last few metres I lose my battle and freeze up like an ice cube but the momentum of the glider and my body throws me over the edge like a slingshot. In only a few seconds, I find myself many hundred metres off the ground doing a frightening dive towards the foot of the cliff, like a falcon diving for its target, until I begin to get the hang of the exhilarating steering. Once the excitement has calmed to a still sea I can see the pure blue sky that looks like an unblemished piece of art resting upon the shoulders of the faraway mountains on the clear horizon. As I look down upon the rocky, worn down skin of the earth, a town comes into view. It has a little bell tower and a bridge and a port. When I focus on the bell tower to try to see the time I realise I must be hurtling like a rocket now. The closer I look at the bell tower the more I see the busy people rushing like ants to their little destinations, chained up by the law of their minuscule timetables. Only then I realise that I’m truly free up here, not a commandeered little person doing as I’m told. As I bring my gaze up from a tiny man making a racket in the market place, also bound by the struggle for money, I see an eagle. The eagle, only a couple meters away from me, has his sight locked somewhere in the distance like a silent sniper homing in on a rabbit and his body is as stiff as old wood. His plumage is brilliant but grey spots mark his face and neck making him flawed, yet perfect. He glances vaguely my way, and then keeps searching ahead. I feel the glider slowing down and losing altitude, that’s how I realise that the Eagle, lone and distant, is truly the king of freedom, not even bound by the shackles of gravity or money or other silly human inventions that seem utterly pointless to him. When I reach a field like a like a sea of grass blowing in the wind I see the same eagle swooping down on an innocent yet vulnerable rabbit I realise that even he, the king of freedom is dethroned by the need to feed and live. = = = = = = = = = = = = =__Task 8__=

//__Berthram Christy__// The sound of birds and animals was cloaked by gunfire and the smell of gunpowder hung in the air. That was our squadron’s first confrontation and the worrying made us sick. When we moved from camp and into the green eerie jungle the gunfire stoped and was replaced by the far-away sounds of nature. As we started to see the other squadrons in line the gunfire starts again, that time sweeping into friendly lines, that was followed by grunts and cries of pain. As we slowly move into the line we met up with an American group who bid us good luck. Their commander, Richard, was a good man, for he gave us some food, knowing we were feeling sick. A Vietnamese line emerges of nowhere and strike our lines followed by a return of bullets and shells. Out of sheer confusion the American squadron charged at the enemy lines, backed by none and were shot down nearly as soon as they had got up. Or Australian squadron had stayed in their position while this had happened and as the Vietnamese moved forward, Jonny, our leader, ordered us to retreat. Cries and moans came from the shot down American soldiers and I couldn’t take it. I had to do something, in a bizarre and incomprehensible action I ran to Richard, the only one I knew, and went over his wounds, after taking a bullet to the shoulder and two to the leg the man was unconscious and laden with cuts and bruises. I turn him over onto his back, his face was disgustingly scabbed. A red burning anger brewed in inside as I pick up a gun and shower the enemy line with bullets watching a clump of unexpected soldiers go down, and drag the American back to our group. The rocking of the waves felt different somehow, everything seemed different. The smells of the calm sea, the cool breeze. The soldiers are laughing playing cards drinking beer. We’re going home they sang. The others interacted with me a lot more than before, some adored me while others envied my new-found fame and glory, but the general emotion was joy. How can they be so happy, around five hundred thousand allied forces dead and around one million North Vietnamese scattered across the battle field. This hurt to see how much these soldiers **didn’t** care, and they all knew what the loss of a life that they knew. Also, we’ve heard of the protests and riots against this war, but is society really moral, really sane, do they even recognise the hardship of others, the pain, the suffering. And not just society and other people that I am radically questioning. Suffering. Greed. Death. Me. //How many lives can a person take to save their own? Is murder ok in war? What is sanity?// These are questions that vary from person to person yet haunt generations and generations alike. I thought I’d come back a proud hero from this war, in fact I only came back a haunted one.

intro: Tomorrow When the War Began is a book by Australian novelist John Marsden and deals with the struggle of a band of teenagers fighting a merciless army in a hopeless attempt to regain their old lives. These key concepts each have different benefits: courage, the will to fight; loyalty, the force that’s keeping them alive; and goodness, the aspect that’s keeping them sane and well, all of these keep the group alive fighting and well. Then, their life was lovely and normal, after the invasion it becomes violent, merciless and messed up. Loyalty goodness and courage are key concepts that keep the group sane and fighting, but before the invasion they probably wouldn’t even think that they would depend on these attributes like life itself Goodness: Ellie and the whole group have been thrown into a guerrilla war situation with no physical or mental training and this hits their physiological state hard. Goodness, the concept that this paragraph is talking about, is the only thing the group can cling to. To know that they have a cause, something to fight for keeps them sane. By the end of the book nearly all of the key characters have killed a soldier and this scars them. The only thing that lets them know that they are doing good is to know that they are fighting for the sake of what is right, just and what they must do to help their families. Goodness is an attribute that can be learnt but pure goodness comes from the heart. I think goodness is the only thing that keeps them sane and together, fighting together for one cause. The group has to do terrible things that they would not even have contemplated before, goodness is the only thing that lets them know it’s right. Loyalty: Loyalty is not only the glue that holds the group together but it binds the couples that have formed during the book. Loyalty becomes the life blood of the group, without loyalty each character would never survive in these conditions but more than that loyalty binds the couples that are created during the book together, further tightening the group together. In the bridge explosion scene Corrie gets shot and Kevin volunteers to drive the car and get captured by the enemy, because “she’s (his) mate and (he wouldn’t) dump her and run”, this presents great loyalty that most of the characters would do’ for each other. They don’t “give a stuff about what’s rational and what’s logical” and that’s what bonds the groups together and keeps every one alive. Courage: Courage is the most important attribute in war as without it you can’t fight for your life and survive. The goal for all the characters is to survive and to reclaim their country and their families. In order to this, they need to fight hard to hit the enemy, but this takes enormous courage. (Just fighting in this war would take masses of amounts of courage)Courage keeps the group fighting despite the odds. Courage is one of the only concept that can fully be learnt. Without courage the group would not have done anything to deal a blow towards the enemy, to prove themselves. Most of all if the group sat tight it would only be a matter of time before the enemy discovered them in their little hide away, Hell. Conclusion: This essay outlines the importance of courage, goodness and loyalty in the book Tomorrow When the War Began. My first argument presents that goodness is key in order to keep the group fighting and happy. Loyalty is the most important to keep the group alive and together and my last paragraph states that courage is an essential attribute in war because without war demands great challenges to be accomplished and without courage you’d never be able to complete them. Marsden created a masterpiece that is tomorrow when the war began, but above that Marsden wrote this book for us teenagers to send the messages within the text. One of these messages, don’t take things and your life for granted, is a thing that our age group does a lot and that we need to fix. Other messages include the three concepts that this essay talks about, living life to the full and never giving up.