Violence is a common part in the world, but you also can watch it in several films, even in children’s films you can see violence and I wonder if such films can influence our society.
To start with I want to recur and say that there’s even violence in many children’s films. Indeed there are also other non-violent films which are very successful, but there are more violent films. Many people say that these violent films may influence people, especially children and teenagers. Examples are that some pupils or students who want to copy a film get disabled or a violent movie is an impulse for gun rampages.
But in contrast most of these violent movies, like “Kill Bill”, are so unrealistic that a normal person wouldn’t try to copy it. The majority of people don’t get violent just because they had watched a movie. What I also think is that we don’t turn into a non-violent society just because people can’t watch violence in films because there is so much of real violence in the world which isn’t caused by movies.
At least I would say we shouldn’t ban these movies, but we should think about the age limit because children who watch violent films mostly don’t understand that a movie is just a fictitious story and they don’t know how to cope with. But even if we raise the age limit we wouldn’t turn the society into a non-violent society.
words: 242
Friday, 22 February 2008
Thursday, 13 December 2007
Snow Falling on Cedars
In the novel we notice similarities and differences between the love of Ishmael and Hatsue and how they change during life.
That’s why I want to discuss their relationship. Both, the Japanese Hatsue and the American Ishmael grow up on an island and are friends since a long time. Ishmael starts to love her and kisses her, but it seems as if she doesn’t feel the same. Some days later, when they are at their secret place in a cedar he wants to apologize, but she shows him that it wasn’t a mistake. They become a couple and are happy together, but both never show their love in public. They behave in a different way because Hatsue’s family wants her to be a Japanese girl. So she’s not allowed to have a white boyfriend while Ishmael’s father isn’t that strict.
However, their relationship lasts for a long time, until Hatsue’s mother realizes Hatsue’s secret when they are in a Japan camp. She doesn’t want Hatsue to see him again and tells her to marry a Japanese man.
During Hatsue has to stay in the camp, Ishmael is fighting for America in the Second World War and looses one arm. Because of that he starts to hate all the Japans. While Ishmael even hates her she isn’t allowed to love him anymore. After some time in the camp she gets to know the Japanese Kabuo. Although she doesn’t really love Kabuo she marries him because of her family. Some years later when Ishmael is a journalist, his hate is almost gone. He doesn’t think anymore about Hatsue until Kabuo is taken to court as a murderer where he notices that Kabuo isn’t guilty and wants to help him, when he meets Hatsue and recognizes that he has still feelings for her. Nevertheless he helps Kabuo who wins the trial. After this Ishmael feels good by helping Kabuo.
In contrast to the beginning of the story she doesn’t love him anymore, but he still loves here and just wants her to be happy.
That’s why I want to discuss their relationship. Both, the Japanese Hatsue and the American Ishmael grow up on an island and are friends since a long time. Ishmael starts to love her and kisses her, but it seems as if she doesn’t feel the same. Some days later, when they are at their secret place in a cedar he wants to apologize, but she shows him that it wasn’t a mistake. They become a couple and are happy together, but both never show their love in public. They behave in a different way because Hatsue’s family wants her to be a Japanese girl. So she’s not allowed to have a white boyfriend while Ishmael’s father isn’t that strict.
However, their relationship lasts for a long time, until Hatsue’s mother realizes Hatsue’s secret when they are in a Japan camp. She doesn’t want Hatsue to see him again and tells her to marry a Japanese man.
During Hatsue has to stay in the camp, Ishmael is fighting for America in the Second World War and looses one arm. Because of that he starts to hate all the Japans. While Ishmael even hates her she isn’t allowed to love him anymore. After some time in the camp she gets to know the Japanese Kabuo. Although she doesn’t really love Kabuo she marries him because of her family. Some years later when Ishmael is a journalist, his hate is almost gone. He doesn’t think anymore about Hatsue until Kabuo is taken to court as a murderer where he notices that Kabuo isn’t guilty and wants to help him, when he meets Hatsue and recognizes that he has still feelings for her. Nevertheless he helps Kabuo who wins the trial. After this Ishmael feels good by helping Kabuo.
In contrast to the beginning of the story she doesn’t love him anymore, but he still loves here and just wants her to be happy.
Sunday, 2 December 2007
Correction of the first written exam
Task 1:
Dear John,
Yesterday I was at an exhibition where I saw the painting “The problem we all live with” by Norman Rockwell and I couldn’t stop thinking about it. That’s why I write to you.
On the left and right side you can see two white men walking next to each other, wearing brown suits, black shoes, identity badges and yellow arm bands on which is written “Deputy US Marshall”. The men on the left side wear golden rings and the man in the foreground has a piece of paper in his pocket.
Between the four men there’s a black girl walking in white clothes, carrying school books. Everyone is walking on a pavement from the right to the left side. In the background there’s a beige wall.
At the top of the artwork it says “NIGGER” in capital letters and tomato spatters are on it. I can’t forget that work because I think it depicts the 1950s in America. In my opinion it depicts that the black people are innocent because of the white clothes, but the white are guilty because they feel like better people.
This painting made me think about racist people and I realized that it’s still a current topic. I think, when you see the painting yourself you’ll agree with me.
Yours, Ruth
Task 2:
When I look at the photo I would say nowadays you can call it art. It just has to be taken by a famous artist or to be exhibited at the right place and time, but in my opinion this isn’t art because everyone can take this photo. Real art has to be unique and should be expressive. I think when you look at real art you will get to know what the artist wanted to say after a few minutes, but I think when you look at this photo you won’t get to know the reason for it.
However, I don’t want to say that no photo is art because on the one hand they really can be expressive, but on the other they are often just taken baseless I would say like this photo. That’s why I don’t think it is art.
Dear John,
Yesterday I was at an exhibition where I saw the painting “The problem we all live with” by Norman Rockwell and I couldn’t stop thinking about it. That’s why I write to you.
On the left and right side you can see two white men walking next to each other, wearing brown suits, black shoes, identity badges and yellow arm bands on which is written “Deputy US Marshall”. The men on the left side wear golden rings and the man in the foreground has a piece of paper in his pocket.
Between the four men there’s a black girl walking in white clothes, carrying school books. Everyone is walking on a pavement from the right to the left side. In the background there’s a beige wall.
At the top of the artwork it says “NIGGER” in capital letters and tomato spatters are on it. I can’t forget that work because I think it depicts the 1950s in America. In my opinion it depicts that the black people are innocent because of the white clothes, but the white are guilty because they feel like better people.
This painting made me think about racist people and I realized that it’s still a current topic. I think, when you see the painting yourself you’ll agree with me.
Yours, Ruth
Task 2:
When I look at the photo I would say nowadays you can call it art. It just has to be taken by a famous artist or to be exhibited at the right place and time, but in my opinion this isn’t art because everyone can take this photo. Real art has to be unique and should be expressive. I think when you look at real art you will get to know what the artist wanted to say after a few minutes, but I think when you look at this photo you won’t get to know the reason for it.
However, I don’t want to say that no photo is art because on the one hand they really can be expressive, but on the other they are often just taken baseless I would say like this photo. That’s why I don’t think it is art.
Sunday, 18 November 2007
Life after death
Death is one part in our life, namely the last part of our earthly life. During life we often are confronted with the death of beloved people. Also I had to undergo that, but so I realized that death is inevitable for everyone. Because of these experiences I thought about death, if there is a life after death and how it looks like. I haven’t got answers for all my questions yet, but the biggest part of them will never be responded. Even if I don’t really have an imagination about the hereafter I don’t believe that there is a hell, reincarnation, rebirth... In short I don’t really agree with the Christians, Buddhists etc, but I often wonder if the descriptions of NDE* are true. In my opinion our souls go to a peaceful place after death.
I hope so, but how long will they stay there?
words: 147
*near-death-experiences
I hope so, but how long will they stay there?
words: 147
*near-death-experiences
Thursday, 27 September 2007
Letter to the editor
Dear editor,
Yesterday I read your article “Giuliani forced into climbdown” in your magazine and I was really shocked about Mayor Giuliani’s behaviour especially because of Ofili’s Virgin Mary and I’m glad that the Brooklyn museum won the battle against him.
I mean art is often controversial, but it also can have expressions even if it is “shock art”. In my opinion everyone should be able to have his own opinion about art, but I think no one should have the right to fight against an exhibition in a legal battle. Giuliani wasn’t allowed to withhold money and to go to law against art because with that action he damaged the Brooklyn museum’s reputation and especially the right of free speech. What I want to say is that your article opened my eyes and showed me that art really can split up the public opinion.
Yours,
Ruth
words:147
Yesterday I read your article “Giuliani forced into climbdown” in your magazine and I was really shocked about Mayor Giuliani’s behaviour especially because of Ofili’s Virgin Mary and I’m glad that the Brooklyn museum won the battle against him.
I mean art is often controversial, but it also can have expressions even if it is “shock art”. In my opinion everyone should be able to have his own opinion about art, but I think no one should have the right to fight against an exhibition in a legal battle. Giuliani wasn’t allowed to withhold money and to go to law against art because with that action he damaged the Brooklyn museum’s reputation and especially the right of free speech. What I want to say is that your article opened my eyes and showed me that art really can split up the public opinion.
Yours,
Ruth
words:147
Wednesday, 26 September 2007
My own summary
Giuliani forced into climbdown
A row over the art exhibition in NY because of Ofili’s painting, which showed the Virgin Mary adorned with dung, has ended after six-month legal battle with the major Giuliani who withheld money from the Brooklyn museum and damaged NY’s reputation. He has been forced to restore the withheld funding.
words:50
A row over the art exhibition in NY because of Ofili’s painting, which showed the Virgin Mary adorned with dung, has ended after six-month legal battle with the major Giuliani who withheld money from the Brooklyn museum and damaged NY’s reputation. He has been forced to restore the withheld funding.
words:50
Giuliani forced into climbdown
There has been a legal battle between Mayor Giuliani and Brooklyn museum about Ofili’s Virgin Mary in the Sensation Exhibition. He threatened to withhold funding and to evict them. The museum won because of the right to free speech after 6 months and he gave in.
words:46
words:46
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
