EO/Places and forms of powerCours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais || En bas
Message de capucine1 posté le 01-05-2017 à 16:29:41 (S | E | F)
je passe mon EO du Bac d'anglais dans quelques jours... Si vous pouviez me donner quelques conseils et corrections, j'en serai ravie !
Je vous remercie par avance de votre aide.
Last year there was a terrorist attack in Paris and more precisely at the Bataclan. The day after the attack, Sting decided to make a speech. It was more to tell people that life is made of tears and joy than to recap what went on. He insisted on the fact that even though there are attacks in the world, life goes on. Sting is also enable to made people sympathize about the fact of migrants. He transcend is powerlessness, and he is neither part of artists who could have hide the terrorist attack, nor of the ones who are in moaning. He really encourages people to sympathize but not to moan. So, thank god artists are here to cheer us up after desolation. But right now we can wonder if artists are powerful enough to convey a message.
Firstly, when we think of committed artists we, of course, think of Paul David Hewson, called Bono. Bono is one of a kind insofar as has he uses is fame to bring about changes, he has always been a committed artists. He takes part in a campaign that is fighting for people whom make hands to meet by which I mean poverty. With this campaign he prevents diseases and relieves poverty. When I say “he uses his fame” I mean, Bono has always led a life-long struggle to relieve Africa’s predicament. He raises awareness, indeed he wants people to get involved by signing a petition and donate funds, he even went to Nigeria… Bono is so determined that for him, when there’s a will there’s a way. Actually people know more Bono for his songs than for his campaign, yet he even denounced things in his music, for example “Bloody Sunday” is the story of a massacre.
However, Bono is not the only committed artists, Leonardo DiCaprio is also one. But Leonardo is all the more powerful since he has attracted more and more artists who are now committed to protecting the environment. Contrary to Bono, Leonardo tends to speak at colleges insofar as it’s better to aware people when they are young, especially when it deals with environment. Moreover, he also does tons of documentaries and films to raise awareness on environmental issues. For example, the documentary film “before the flood”, or the discovery channel called “Eco-Town”, nowadays he wants to adapt a TV-series called “Captain Planet”.
Despite all their efforts, many people blame artists for meddling with politics, they disapprove of their interfering in world issues. Indeed, Bono for example, he calls himself the ambassador of the poor while he is a billionaire and economic decision maker. Leonardo DiCaprio, he uses his private jets even for short distances, same with his yacht and so on… So are there really legitimate? Not really… But contrary to the politicians, they are more likely to be listening by every single person, whether we are a child or an old, a girl or a boy, a poor or a rich. Indeed, unlike politicians who are boring for children with their long speech on subject kids don’t really care, artists try to convey a message in their songs, movies, paintings and so on, and according to me a child is more likely to watch a film or listen a song than earing a speech, and if songs can change peoples’ mind, why should they stop? Yet, that was not the feeling of the world in the 50s. At that time, artists were believed to be communists’ spies and threats to the society. For example, McCarthey was supposed to work in the government, so they accused him of being a communist spy and they sent him to jail. Same for Ai Weiwei, because he was against Chinese, he was also sent to jail. But the very fact artists have always been sent to jail, harassed and even tortured, proves that they have a lot of power in the way to raise awareness and even though to convey a message.
Finally, as far I’m concerned, artists are powerful, and using their fame so as to convey a message and change peoples’ mind is a good thing and should not be banned. In the 50s I should have not said that, or I would have been sent to jail. But while they are not as legitimate as politicians, some artists are more and more powerful and listen since the 60s.
Modifié par lucile83 le 02-05-2017 22:05
Réponse : EO/Places and forms of power de imperatrys, postée le 01-05-2017 à 18:15:11 (S | E)
Je sais pas comment c'est dans ton lycée mais normalement il faut donner la notion que tu traites et une définition dès la 1e phrase, puis tu pourras annoncer ton sujet!
Puis dans le développement, il faut t'appuyer vraiment sur des documents précis que tu décris et que tu commentes (en général 1 document par partie/idée), c'est-à-dire texte, films, musiques, etc. Donc que tes parties soient plus centrées sur 1 document que plusieurs exemples!
Modifié par lucile83 le 02-05-2017 22:07
Réponse : EO/Places and forms of power de capucine1, postée le 02-05-2017 à 18:11:37 (S | E)
Bonsoir, en effet c'est la remarque qui m'a été faite par d'autres utilisateurs également.
Au lycée, notre prof nous a dit de faire une problématique basée sur un exemple récent, histoire de se mettre dans le bain direct. Elle nous a conseillé de faire une intro du type "récemment il s'est passé ceci... aujourd'hui on peut donc se demander si... [problématique], pour cela nous allons [annonce du plan]".
Pour ce qui est des documents, je ne dois pas m'appuyer dessus puisque je ne suis pas en L, je dois juste illustrer mes idées par plusieurs exemples... D'après ce que notre prof nous a dit également...
Cours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais