Correction of the first exam

Nowadays there are many products which promise us perfect beauty. Fashion, dieting, or a surgery- today you have a very wide choice. But what is the real price we have to pay for beauty? Are there any advantages or disadvantages?

I think there are some important disadvantages to this struggle. At first the risk of bodily harm. There could be a very bad surgeon who makes a botched job and so maybe you’re totally disfigured after such a surgery. In my point of view I also recognize many psychological problems, for instance the “body distortion”. Today also many people suffer from diseases, for example anorexia or bulimia, because they want to be perfect and don’t know that they destroy their own body. In my opinion there’s only a short distinction between the “idea of being beautiful” and the “madness of beauty”.

But on the other hand there are also some important advantages to this struggle. At first the feeling of being accepted an integrated in our society. Fashion makes you feel more self-confident, therefore you’re also more relaxed, because you definitely know what not to wear. Disfigures like blemishes or scars…can be removed when you know what’s trendy. Fashion represents what you like or dislike and it shows also a little bit of your own individuality. In my opinion it’s very important how you look, because that’s what we see at first.

So all in all I think that everyone should do what he wants. In most case I like all people, no matter if they are fat or ugly-dressed. For me the character plays a central role, because only when someone wears a Nike T-shirt this doesn’t mean that he’s also a good friend. I personally believe that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

BBC Campaign Wall Street 44a
0879 London

Sarah Morscher
Blumenweg 4
6988 Berlin

5^th December 2008

Dear BBC – Team!

Letter of complaint

The purpose why I write you is very simple to explain. I only want to complain about an advertisement that I saw on your channel yesterday.

It was around 11pm when I watched your TV channel and I’m sorry to say this, but the advertisement about the new perfume “Love circle” really shocked me! It was like a short pornographically film and all the actresses were naked. Therefore I think this advertisement should be forbidden, because the women were represented in a very tasteless and humiliated way. Can you do anything about this?

I’m convinced that also many young people watch the BBC channel and I’m afraid of this, because, for example, a twelve year old boy shouldn’t see such a scene. In my opinion should be a ban on such provocative advertisement. I also believe that many people will get a wrong impression of women by seeing this spot.

Therefore I hope that you delete this advertisement about the perfume “Love circle”!

Yours sincerely

Sarah Morscher

Group 6 Fashion isn’t Individuality = All are the same!


PRO: You don’t have to think à Just buy what the others wear
You don’t have to be terrified of discrimination, because others wear the same!
You don’t need so many time in the morning!
You just have more self confidence, because when you wear, what the others wear than you’re normally not an outsider!


CON: People buy exactly what the trend is looking for! à Loose your individuality!
It’s a general flavour and not your own style!
There are also many hanger-on’s!
With the same clothes you can still be an outsider (e.g. school uniforms à can see poor and rich)!
You can’t express yourself (your opinion)!
Lower quality (clothes)!


ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS: You can express your individuality also in other ways, for example, by the hair style…!
It`s not sure that you loose your individuality only because you buy your clothes by “H&M”… (Character is also a part of your individuality)!
Not everyone buys his clothes by “H&M”… à some people like, for example, label clothes…
You can wear what you want; you just have to feel comfortable!
You can get attention by clothes / your style!

Angela, Anja and Sarah.M

Countrylife vs. Citylife

Nowadays many people, who are living in a country, want to have more action and entertainment, so they went to a city. But on the opposite there are also many people in a city, who want a life with more silence and more natural environment. In other words- they want to live on the countryside.
City versus country…which is the best place to live?

There are many good aspects for living on the countryside. Firstly the good, clean and fresh air. In contrast to the city has the country no pollution and therefore also no exhaust fumes. So when you live in a country than you also live near the nature. Trees, fields and flowers would be a normal part in your daily lifetime. You also can go walking without seeing cars or anything like that. In most case you can live in a house with an own garden, so you have enough place to create your “own little paradise”. Living in a country means living in silence and in balance with the nature.

Now these arguments about the life in a country sounds nearly perfect…but for many people it’s definitive the wrong place to live. They want no silence and no nature…they want fun and action, nightlife and entertainment. So when you want all these things, then you must go to the city, because it differs a lot form a life in a country. In the city there are many, many shops and restaurants, bars and clubs. The selection of all this is much bigger than in a country. Therefore I understand people who want to live in a city because of the “boring” live in a country.

Now to conclude I think that every human has his own choice, if he wants to live in a country, near the nature, or in a city with full of action and entertainment.

Words: 312

My Style !

I think my style is quite normally, although I like colourful clothes. I love all colours in composition, but the colour I`d like the most is violet, therefore I prefere clothes which are violet, no matter if it`s a trouser, a t-shirt or a beautiful dress. I`m not in a youth group and I also don`t call myself a hippie, a punk or something else. I have my own style, which changes from time to time a little bit, but the main thing for me is that the clothes should be comfortable so that I have a good feeling in it. I don`t like tops with bare midriffs or trousers at the halfmast. Shirts with long sleeves and jeans are my fondnesses and I also like pornaments, for example rings and necklaces. I have a piercing at the left side of my nose and after the matura I would like to have a little tatoo at my right shoulder. For me it`s okay when people have tatoos or piercings, because it`s their own thing how they want to look like. I love people who are a little bit crazy and wear dilly clothes. I think we need such people in the world, because otherwise it would be very boring when everyone wears the same like the others. In my opinion is every youth group interesting, because they all have a different ideology. For example the hippies. They are peaceful and friendly and no one hurt the others. I like them very much. And also the rastas are a very interesting youth group. I also like punks and gothics, although I`m a little bit afraid of them, because some punks are quite aggressive and some gothics had also a scary face. Nevertheless I accept every youth group, except skinheads. I don`t like their ideology and I also don`t like their characters and style, because they are racist and bad and that`s exactly the opposite of my opinion. I don`t want a war or a dictatur, I want a peaceful world, full of love. Mabye someday we achieve this ideology and the result would be a beautiful paradise. Therefore I like the song "Imagine" from John Lennon, because he sings exactly about such a world with love and happiness. I often listen to the Beatles, but my favourite song is from Scott McKenzie, called "San Francisco". I also listen to the music from "The Mamas and the Papas" or from "Simon an Garfunkel". Sometimes I also listen to house music, for instance Dj Antoine with his songs "Arabian adventure" or "Show me love". Now to conclude I think that every human has his own style and his own fondnesses, so we all differ form each other. But deep in our hearts we are nevertheless all the same.
Words: 420

Book Review !

“The Perks of Being a Wallflower” is an epistolary novel written in the 1990s by the novelist Stephen Chbosky. He was born in 1970 and grew up in Pittsburgh. Chobsky studied to be a screenwriter at the University of Southern California. Today he lives in New York City, and “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” is his only novel.

The story takes place in a country of Pittsburgh in 1991. The leading actor is a boy named Charlie who tells us in many letters how it’s like to grow up in high school. He’s confronted with many conflicts, like the first trip on LSD or the first date with a girl. In high school he got friends like Sam, Patrick and Mary Elizabeth. With this people starts a new episode for him. But nevertheless plays “being an outsider” always a central role. He’s not actually involved in things, but he recognizes a lot. For instance, things that people want to hide or feel ashamed about it. But on the contrary he doesn’t know that he also takes a problem around.

All in all I like this book very much, because many emotions are mixed together. Sometimes it’s very sad, but later on, it turns into very funny. While I was reading, I sometimes compared my personality with Charlie’s. So I could understand what he really feels. First I thought it’s a kind of boring book, but later on, it turns into a very interesting story. Everytime I wanted to know how it ends. Honestly, it’s one of the best books I’ve ever read. It’s a pity that Chobsky wrote only this book.

W o r d s : 2 9 1

Describing Charlie !

Charlie is a very shy boy. Many pupils in high school called him “Outsider” or “Wallflower”. He’s honest and also very clever, because he ended up with straight A`s the first school year. I think he recognizes many things that people want to hide, like when his father was crying after the M*A*S*H movie and he saw him in the kitchen. Charlie is very sentimental and sometimes he gets to a point where none of all seems real to him. He just opens his eyes and sees nothing. I believe that he’s a little bit crazy too, but I can understand what he feels. His favourite band is called “The Smiths” and he likes to make mix tapes for his friends or to eat with fingers and off napkins. He loves his parents and his grandmother very much, but the most favourite person was his aunt Helen. His birthday is also very special, because it’s on the 24^th of December. At this day, the whole family puts luminaria up to the street, what he really likes to do. In his letters he also tells us that he likes Brandy and Twinkies and reading books and music magazines. He often reads a book once again, for instance, “To kill a Mockingbird”. His family is consisting of an older brother, an older sister, three cousins from Ohio, two aunts and one uncle. There is also a grandfather in old people’s home and a grandmother, who bakes the best cookies. So all in all I think he’s a very great boy, although they call him “Wallflower”.

Words: 264

ESSAY CORRECTION

Today people are alarmed about all the violence in our society and in the media. Many experts are wondering why it is increasing and they are searching for some solutions. I will address these issues.

I totally agree with Medved when he exposes the four big lies of the media. It simply isn’t true that violent movies are just harmless entertainment and don’t influence society, says Mr. Medved, a British author. And I claim he’s right, because he also gave a convincing example. “On the one hand it doesn’t influence everybody, but on the other hand this does not mean that it doesn’t influence anybody”, he said. For instance a young couple who shot two people, because they saw the film “Natural Born Killers” and thought it was a great movie. And I also thought, duty like Mr. Medved that this couple are nit the only copycat killers out there. Another point is that movie industries suggest that the violence that we see in TV is like the daily violence around us. Mr. Medved talked to a crowd of people who ever witnessed a murder and only one hand went up. Then he asked who recently witnessed a murder on TV- and everybody put their hand up. So this short demonstration shows that real life is no part of a Hollywood movie. And therefore I agree with Michael’s opinion. Nevertheless, the film industry often says that they only give the public what they want. However Mr. Medved doesn’t understand why they praise the violent stuff and not the family entertainment. And he’s right, because I also think that it will be more important to praise the family entertainment.

Now why I think there’s so much violence in our world is, because I think that violence is something that we learn. We hear about it, see it and imitate it. So for me it’s a product of a learning process. Many people learn not to hurt others, but to take it out on things, for example, slam the door. But likewise we can also find harmless ways of acting out our violence, for example in sport. In addition, I also think that violence is a little bit an instinct which we all have, because it’s necessary for survival and always with us. In contrast to these arguments, many scientists say that violence is a result of frustration. When we don’t get what we want, we become frustration and then it will turn into violence. I think that’s not true, because everybody can control himself and we forget very fast what we want but don’t get. So all in all I think that violence is a feeling which we all have.

Many theories claim that children get more violent and that’s simply true. Vandalism and burglary has dropped since 1997 and the most important thing in helping children reject violence is the family life. There should also be more punishment for people who sell alcohol to children, says the “Commission for children and violence”. Alcohol also increases the violent attendance drastically. There should be also a better social environment in which the children can grown-up in peace.

So all in all I don’t think that the world will turn better, because it’s too late. There’s too much destroyed by us human.

W:546

The Pro/Con Essay !!

Violence is such a big part in our society. Today you can see it also in many films. But would it be better when we ban on violence in movies?

Many professors talks about the violence theory, on what they mean “imitation”. For example a ten year old boy who watches such violent films every day, cannot really estimates these scenes which he finds “very cool and exciting”. So at least he also wants to be such a “fighter” but he can’t see the consequences, because he lost his feeling for reality. And I think this is what the professors mean, when they talk about the violence theory. Like fiction turns into cruel reality. I also don’t like such aggressive violent films and furthermore is so much violent not realistic anyway. And however, non violent films, I think, are successful too.

But in contrast to all these arguments are nevertheless many people against such a ban. Because also most films are so unrealistic that a normal person doesn’t copy it. For example “Rambo” (The film runs in many cinemas since last month). Another reason against such a ban is also that we don’t turn into a non-violent society just because we don’t show violence. Because violence is not only in films, you can see it also in your daily life, maybe on the street or in school.

So all in all it’s nevertheless a tender subject and I’m convinced that the world will not be better, despite without violent films.

Words: 255