mercredi 28 février 2007
Do you have an artistic hobby? Write about it.
Parce que l’on ne songe pas forcément à l’écrire de nous-mêmes… Bac blanc d’anglais, sujet d’expression écrite concernant notre hobby… Admirable comme sujet. Je sais bien que ce n’est pas bien long mais j’ai pris un immense plaisir à le rédiger. L’appréciation du correcteur m’a presque fait monter les larmes aux yeux. Merci.
Do you have an artistic hobby? Write about it.
All over the world, everybody ha passions or hobbies, sometimes, they use it to make
money, sometimes, just to be happy. There are people who have artistic hobby like painting, playing music or writing… I have my artistic hobby.
I think that the most important thing in life is to be happy. And the easiest way for it is to practice your passion. I’ve found my passion with a pen. To write… Yes, it is an ‘art’, and a great art. Contrary to painting, this art does not rest in the hands of an artist. Vermeer, for example, is a famous artist thanks to his painting, the colors we can always watch of them, thanks to his brushes and his few movements. To paint is a corporal art. But to write… It is more psychological. The activity of taking a pen and make few movements is not difficult in itself. The most important thing is the intention, the communication with the reader, with the world, the harmony, and that, it is all an art.
I discovered the activity of writing when I was seven: I learnt to read and I loved it. Lots of extraordinary stories, lots of poems… Brilliant men who wrote these ‘masterpieces’ for a young girl. I wanted to imitated them, I wanted to be them! With my pencil, with my little sentences, I decided to change the world, my world. When we are young, nothing is enough beautiful, pink rabbits do not exist and it is so sad… ‘So, we’ll create them.’ It is not difficult: ‘If I want it, I take a pen and I write a P-I-N-K R-A-B-B-I-T’ and a pink rabbit is born! It was wonderful, imagination became reality, and children became happy…
And I kept this hobby, this artistic hobby. I write, I write, I write everyday. Right, I’ve forgotten my ‘pink rabbits’, I’ve left my little sentences for a best vocabulary but I write. To me, writing is a pretty life because with words, all can be described. You can’t paint something you hear or you smell, but you can write it. If you see a very good film or read a very good book, you can express it, just with a pen, just with words. In my opinion, words are the soul of the writer.
In conclusion, thanks to school, I discovered my artistic hobby. And everyday when I read Molière or Alfred de Musset, I think that words are the most beautiful thing: words are ‘as you like’, one word in one mouth will be different in another mouth, and it is so exciting. One week ago, my little brother approached me and asked ‘Please, write me a story’. Isn’t it the prettiest request?
‘Good luck for your writer’s career…’
samedi 17 février 2007
Heat Wave, Penelope Lively
So I will speak about a book, Heat Wave. It was published in 1996. Everybody knows in this class this book, because we studied it. Remind you, when he came back at his house Harry found Pauline burning his book.
I will start with a short presentation of the author, Penelope Lively.
After that, I will present the book in its integrality.
Finally, I will try to explain you, why Pauline burnt Harry’s book, thanks to some quotations.
I. Presentation
1. The author: Penelope Lively
Penelope Lively was born in cairo, egypt, on March 17, 1933. She began writing prolifically in 1970. Her work is generally concerned with the flow of time, the continuity of past and present, and the relation between history and personal memory. More, she wrote for children too.
2. The characters
So, I will present you the most important characters, the characters with ‘Heat Wave’ begins. Voluntarily I will omit certain details not to reveal the suspense of the history immediately.
♣ The story begins with a woman, Pauline Carter, who is looking out of her study at World’s End. She is the most important character because she is the woman who sees and understands everything. She always knows the truth before her own daughter, Teresa. At the beginning of the text, she is fifty-five years old. More, we learn she is a publisher, and that she will spend her summer editing a novel about romantic love. Pauline is a woman alone.
♣ Pauline has got a daughter, Teresa. Teresa is a ‘kind girl’ who is in love with Maurice since three years. A sentence describes very well her love: ‘Her eyes on Maurice far gone in love snared, committed, lost.’ With the wire of the pages, we understand that Teresa is incandescent with happiness, and, like she says ‘You can’t think when you’re in love.’ She looks so vulnerable. She has a baby with Maurice, Luke.
♣ Maurice is her husband. He is forty-four. He is an ambitious writer and works on a history of tourism, about the myth of the British countryside. At the difference of Teresa, he never uses endearments like ’Darling’, or ‘Sweetie’. He looks egotist and he is terrified of age. He loves being pleasant.
3. The story
If you want to read this book, do not listen, because it will have scoops.
Proofreader in the edition, Pauline spends her summers in a row of cottage lost to the north of england, baptized World’s End. A curious name. This summer, the adjoining cottage is occupied by Teresa, Maurice and Luke. When Pauline is copyediting an allegory of romantic love, she tries not to observe that the seemingly idyllic marriage of her daughter, Teresa, to ambitious writer Maurice, is treading rough water. But it looks like an evidence. From the thirty-fifth page, Maurice goes out during the night, and at the thirty-ninth, he lays his hand for an instant on a girl’s knee... Pauline is not long understanding, she soon realizes that he is involved in an affair with his editor's girlfriend, Carol, conducted when the couple visits World's End on weekends and during Maurice's sudden. Trips of Maurice in london are increasingly frequent…
It could be the simple history of an outgoing husband, but, it is a more subtle version. To Pauline, it is her own story which reproduces, the situation carries the echoes of her own betrayal by Teresa's father, Harry, also in his time an unscrupulous writer, like Maurice. And to her, it is so difficult, she doesn’t know what she must do. Remembering the wasted years of her life before she had the courage to divorce Harry, Pauline is terrified that Teresa is doomed to repeat her history.
II. Why Pauline burnt Harry’s book?
So as you could notice it, this book is not very happy. When Harry left Pauline, she had a discussion with her own mother. And she said: ‘If he were dead, I would be unhappy. Pure and simple _ just unhappy. That would be straightforward, compared with this.’ And in the extract we studied in class, we saw that the act of burning a book was like to kill someone. To writers, their books are like their souls. They can’t live deprived of that. We can imagine Pauline wanted to soften her suffering and by burning this book she killed him, she tried to forget him.
Which is so strange is the Maurice’s death at the end of the book. Maurice was unfaithful to Teresa and he died, just after a discussion with Pauline. We can’t say that justice is done, but when Teresa’s father, Harry, called her, he says that she seems ‘well, fairly calm, considering’. Like Teresa’s mother said, the sort oh her husband seems less painful compared to infidelity.
III. My point of view
In conclusion I found this book not easy. In fact, everything is implicit, no words, lots of silences, long on looks… The ambiance becomes quickly a startling climax with heat and tension. More, there are lots of flash-back. Pauline sees her own stepson and she thinks about Teresa’s father, she is always thinking ‘infidelities’ and ‘sadness’, and it is distressing to the reader who shares the faintness.
I want to add that this novel is not a good thing for people who are happy in couple because the conclusion of this book is the impossibility of compatibility and it is so sad. In my opinion, in the world there is more happiness than deception. But let us not reproach anything to Penelope Lively, there is always more to say on misfortune.
lundi 8 janvier 2007
Heat Wave, by Penelope Lively (1996), Written assignment
Written assignment
Heat Wave, by Penelope Lively (1996)
Instant où Harry rentre chez lui et trouve sa femme Pauline, en train de brûler son livre. Attention, ce qui suit n’est qu’un simple sujet d’invention, il n’est en aucun cas ce qui se passe en réalité dans le livre. J’en parlerai par la suite, je pense étudier ce livre dans son intégralité dans le cadre d’un exposé oral.
Topic: What happens next in the story?
‘He looks at her now, instead of at the typescript.
‘Why? Why – for Christ’s sake.’
She looks back at him. ‘You know’, she says.’
Just then, the baby starts crying, at the beginning some tears and then true cries.
The young woman looks at Harry who does not move, he looks confused. She turns on her heels to join her baby. Harry who remains alone approaches with slow steps, like a ghost gliding on a waxed parquet floor, of the tiny Victorian fireplace. He kneels down and looks at the burning wrecks of his life, the heat of the fire accentuating the coldness of a body, from now on, deprived of a soul. Harry is curiously calm, he is unable to think, he does not understand. He can feel a presence behind him, also slowly, he turns around. Pauline is there, with her baby in her arms, their baby. Both have tears with their eyes, one of hunger and the other of sadness. Harry remains very calm and he does not seem to understand, not to know what drive her to commit the crime of burning a book.
‘Look’, Pauline says, ‘Audrey, our baby. She will be three months tomorrow and I have never seen you tightening her in your arms. A father should have taken his baby in his arms!’
With effort, he manages to pronounce a weak ‘I do not have the time.’
He is so white, Pauline is aware that she has been killing her husband. Today all has changed. From now on, she cannot move back any more. She opens her mouth to speak but her husband, in a tired tone, precedes her:
‘I had said it to you, I had warned you, writing first, you afterwards.’
A sob shakes Pauline, it is right, he had said it to her, she remembered his look, when they had met in the street. Pauline had hoped to change him, and she thought that the birth of Audrey would enable him to realize that a family was more important than everything else. But it was worse. Before, they went out, sometimes the evening, he took her to the theatre… But when Audrey was born he went away only at greater length.
‘I wish you had spent more time with us… Look, you do not even know your own daughter; you are a stranger for her.’
Without a glance he rises and looks at the typescript. Tears bead on Pauline’s cheeks. Slowly, she approaches him and murmurs:
‘When you come you are indifferent, we do not exist for you… Look, you are late again… I feel lonely.’
‘I feel lonely too, you do not understand anything.’ he answers while turning around to look at her.
He shakes his head. Pauline carries of speaking:
‘But I tried hard to understand your passion, to understand your priorities. I swear it is true!’
Harry does not answer. He looks at Pauline and Audrey. None makes the least gesture. Without transport, with calm, he pronounces these last sentences:
‘Listen Pauline, I am going away. My book, my writing, it is all my life. And I have seen today that you cannot understand. Then it is preferable that I should leave. I cannot stay here with what occurred today. Sorry but I can’t. If Audrey reads my book one day, perhaps she will understand.’
And he takes his hat, as in front of two foreignes, inclines himself in front of his wife and his daughter. Pauline had never thought that he would leave them. Audrey looks lovingly her father but he does not take care. Powerless, she starts to cry but her father is not there any more. Between passion and family, he chooses his passion. As certain men have the passion of women, he has the passion of writing, stronger than all, a small family is only one spark of short length compared with the unchanging fire of passion.
BILAN: 15,5 / 20 . Les fautes sont ici, pour la plupart je l’’espère, corrigées.
lundi 13 novembre 2006
The color of water, James McBride
Le lundi 13 novembre 2006
Writing activity
The color of water, James McBride
Topic: Imagine the conversation Richie had with his mother after the incident with Rev. Owens.
Richie came home, hangdog sheepish. His mother, who was sitting with nine of his siblings in the kitchen, looked at her son.
- You look under the weather…
- Yes, answered Richie, sullen.
- Didn't your Sunday School course occur well? his mother asked.
- Oh Mommy… I hate Rev. Owens! I hate this life of lies! … Oh, if only…
- Explain to me.
- The Bible… began Richie.
- Do not criticize a holy book! his mother stopped him immediately.
- No, of course. But I don’t understand. I feel that everybody is lying to me, that one doesn’t tell me the truth. It isn’t normal! Religion should be something of confidence, something sure, and finally, I’m only more disturbed by that. Please understand me.
- Who is lying to you?
- Everybody, Rev. Owens, God…
- God?!? his mother repeated without understanding.
- Yes, continued Richie. Where is the justice in our world? “Love you to them ones the others”, “God loves everybody, for him, there is no difference of color of skin”… Blablabla… Nonsense! Oh, why do we have a so incoherent religion?
- Richie…
- Please mommy, listen. Christianity is a strange religion. It is the only one in which men seek to represent Christ. You follow me?
- Yes, but…
- “Iconography only for Christians”… What an honor! Right? And what color is Christ?
- Please, we have already spoken about that.
- We spoke about the color of God’s spirit… But Jesus… Look…
He took in his bag the picture of Jesus and carried on with his preoccupation:
- Jesus is, or was, I don’t know, white… Like you… Jesus was white! White! Where is equality? Why was he not black? Are black inferior? They don’t deserve God with their image?
- I forbid to you to say that! she irritated.
- Do not irritate you. What do you think of what I said to you?
- Jesus is all colors.
- Rev Owens has already told me that! But, if it was right, why white? He ain’t white, He ain’t black, they should make Him grey!
- Don’t say silly things…
- I was thinking you know… Mommy…
- Yes?
- Is your religion so incoherent?
- Let us not speak about that want you, she answered with tears with her eyes.
- Moslems refuse to paint God.
- …And they are quite right… And you are not wrong. I find unjust that everybody seeks to impose an image of Christ, each one should be free of mind. It is encouraging segregation; people who have Christ with him image will seem hero.
- I believe in God, but I don’t want to impose a vision, I don’t want painters to decide for me if Jesus must be white or black. I will not go to the Sunday School any more.
BILAN: 15,5...
lundi 9 octobre 2006
A little story about New York, by Dana T.Payne => Travail de réécriture
Writing activity
Topic : A little story about New York
Réécrire ce récit du point de vue du méchant.
- 2 prétérits en Be Ving
- 2 past perfect
- 3 would
In the 1970’s, I would walk alone between Columbus and the Central Park West. One day of summer of the year 1979, I was sitting on a bench in edge of road, wondering how I will be able to pay the rent for the poor wretch studio that I occupied with my six brothers and sisters. I wasn’t a bad guy, I would work to making odd jobs, but it never was sufficient. I was crossing the chic neighborhood, when a malicious idea was offered to me. They had lots of things, and my young family and me, nothing. That seemed to me a cruel injustice, all at once I hated these rich people! I decided that it would change. Without to speak with anybody, I put to watch films where money of people was stolen, where a robber introduced into houses. I discovered, with great distress, that only the threat was necessary and that the gallantry of Arsene Lupin would not be enough for me. Before marking the “great project”, I have thought that it was preferable to test on a less rich area. The chance was offered to me: During my usual walks, I had noticed a woman who lived alone. I thought that it wouldn’t be difficult to take her money. I was disgusted by myself, of having to steal an innocent woman but I did not have any more choice. One day, the opportunity involved: I heard her ask to her neighbors if they needed something because she went to the store. After his departure I hooked the lock and waited her, holding a long knife… I was about giving up when I heard it return, I was scared. She was loaded. I asked: “Give me your money”. But, she answered “Are you crazy? I just went to the store. I don’t have any money!”. “Give me all your money – or I’ll cut you!” I heard my own voice saying. How could I talk like that, I don’t know. “No!” she said. “Go away!”. I was so astonished, she was only a helpless female, and me, I was a big tough-looking guy with a knife… I repeated for the last time “Give me all your money.” She retorted “Get out of this building!” “Get out of here. Get out of here now!”. I could not do anything, I told her “okay” and I ran away in the staircases… No, definitely, I was not a mugger. My only regret would be that after that, I would not be able to roam in these streets which I liked so much…
NB: La prof n'a toujours pas regardé mon travail, alors je ne sais pas encore combien il vaut. Les fautes ne sont pas corrigées (out simplement car si je savais où elles étaient, j'éviterais de les faire...)
lundi 2 octobre 2006
Expression écrite en anglais: pour ou contre le port des armes?
27/09/2006
Terminale S
Pro gun and anti gun
Topic : Present a two sided arguments.
Today, an increasing number of people in the world own a gun. Opinions are mitigated. Our society is divided into two sides: pro gun and anti gun. The question of bearing an arm is a subject of preoccupation for many. Medias show us lots of worrying tragedies which took place because people used arms to cause damages, to hurt others… And nowadays, we may wonder whether bearing an arm is a good thing, or not. Let’s weigh the pros and cons of this controversial subject.
To begin with, let’s study the opinion of pro gun people, or people who think that to bear an arm is justified in our society.
At first sight, one might think that it is quite normal. In a sense, they are not wrong. When you look in a dictionary what is an arm, the word “defence” is written. So, bearing an arm to assure your security, to reassure yourself, is a good argument. We can quote the example of old people. Do you really think that prohibition of bearing weapons prevents people from attacking little old women without defence? The question was to be asked.
In addition to that, liberalists think that the question of owning arms concerns personal freedom, the natural right to safe defence, and we cannot reproach them for the logic of their opinions. Besides, they often add that it is inconceivable that official governments like the police, soldiers have the right to bear arms to defend citizens if this right does not belong to the citizens, who can choose freely to delegate it or to use it themselves.
Secondly, for the great majority of people, the question is to know if the law must authorize the bearing of weapons or not, but they make a mistake. In fact, the criminals will be always armed and no law will disarm them. The law can force them to hide their weapons, but when they want to cause damage, they always will be more armed than their victims. Laws prohibiting bearing arms are not other thing only laws which disarm potential victims. And it is absurd to claim that the free bearing of weapon would confer an advantage to the criminals.
Thirdly, in the south of america (mexico), in the united states too, for instance, arms, guns are part of the culture. A myth had been created with Westerns. John Wayne, Clint Eastwood became heroes, and most citizens think they have the inalienable right to bear arms like them. Why in movies and not in reality?
We will finish this part by stressing the fact that the bearing of weapons has always been the distinctive mark of the free man, in opposition to the member of a dominated nation, the slave.
However, when you look at it closely, it is obvious that owning an arm does not present only advantages... Let’s study the arguments of the anti gun sides.
To start with, it is necessary to introduce this notion by quoting Charlton Heston, the NRA President: “There's no such thing as a good gun. There's no such thing as a bad gun. A gun in the hands of a bad man is a very dangerous thing. A gun in the hands of a good person is no danger to anyone except the bad guys...”. Why not? But how can you tell who is a bad man and who is a good person? In doubt, should we give weapons to everyone? It is so inconsistent and stupid!
For instance, we just need to follow the news to hear about “school shooting”. It shows not only that children can be killed by weapons, but also that they can have very easy access to it! That could happen in canada one week ago, at columbien high school in 2000, in licoln county at fayetteville in 1998, in cleveland at stockton in 1989... it a good example to show the danger of weapons.
Then, if bearing arms is allowed, a new system will rule, no democracy but anarchy. A new system involves new laws: the survival of the fattest and the law of the richest. You are rich, you buy a machine gun, and you are stronger than the poor who has only a little pistol. It lacks coherence.
Moreover, we can see, in the literature with the excellent Victor Hugo for instance, the important combat which lots of people carried out against the death sentence. If you can take the law into your own hands, justice will disappear… “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”, you hurt me, you robe me, I kill you, justice is done… No, it is not the way a society should work.
All in all, in my opinion, there is no doubt that bearing an arm is unacceptable. Our society is becoming more and more violent. Young people play violent games, they kill virtual people, they make virtual wars and on the whole they confuse it with reality. “Why am I allowed to empty my magazine, and kill everybody in my game and not in reality?” Right, it is so confusing… Young people who lack bearing can become evils with weapons.
I will finish thus on this subject: I am convinced that the question of bearing an arm or not in the usa is not solved for political reasons. Which politicians would go so far as to attack the 2nd Amendment?
Copie évaluée par professeur: 17/20
NB: Les fautes sont ici corrigées.
