Vurderte eksamenssvar i SPR3010 Samfunnsfaglig … eksamenssvar i SPR3010 Samfunnsfaglig engelsk, eksamen vår 2015 Eksamenssvara er frå eksamen våren 2015. På finn du • eksamensrettleiing

Vurderte eksamenssvar i SPR3010 Samfunnsfaglig engelsk, eksamen vår 2015 Eksamenssvara er frå eksamen våren 2015.

På http://www.udir.no/Vurdering/Eksamen-videregaende/ finn du • eksamensrettleiing med kjenneteikn på måloppnåing *• førebuing til eksamen• eksamensoppgåver

* Karakterane er grunngjevne ut frå kjenneteikn på måloppnåing ieksamensrettleiinga.

Elevsvar med vurdering og grunngjeving for karakter (Klikk for å få fram ei einskild vurdering eller eit einskilt elevsvar)

Eksempel på karakter 2

Grunngjeving for karakter s. 2

Eksamenssvaret s. 5



Eksamenssvaret s. 16










http://www.udir.no/Vurdering/Eksamen-videregaende/

Task 1

Short answers

Answer both 1a and 1b.

1a

In the box below you will find an extract from a speech given by David Cameron just prior to the September 18, 2014 Scottish independence vote.

Comment on some of the language features and literary devices in his appeal and how they enhance his message. Support your answer by giving examples from the text.

We meet in a week that could change the United Kingdom forever. Indeed, it could end the United Kingdom as we know it. On Thursday, Scotland votes, and the future of our country is at stake. On Friday, people could be living in a different country, with a different place in the world and a different future ahead of it. This is a decision that could break up our family of nations, and rip Scotland from the rest of the UK.

And we must be very clear. There’s no going back from this. No re-run. This is a once-and-for-all decision. If Scotland votes yes, the UK will split, and we will go our separate ways forever.

I want to speak directly to the people of this country today about what is at stake. I speak for millions of people across England, Wales and Northern Ireland – and many in Scotland, too, who would be utterly heart-broken by the break-up of the United Kingdom. Utterly heart-broken to wake up on Friday morning to the end of the country we love, to know that Scots would no longer join with the English, Welsh and Northern Irish in our Army, Navy and Air Force, in our UK-wide celebrations and commemorations, in UK sporting teams from the Olympics to the British Lions.

The United Kingdom would be no more. No UK pensions, no UK passports, no UK pound. The greatest example of democracy the world has ever known, of openness, of people of different nationalities and faiths coming together as one, would be no more.

This would be the end of a country that people around the world respect and admire. The end of a country that all of us call home. And we built this home together. For the people of Scotland to walk away now would be like painstakingly building a home – and then walking out the door and throwing away the keys.

We are on a constant mission to change our country for the better. The question is: how do you get that change? For me it’s simple. You don’t get the change you want by ripping your country apart. You don’t get change by undermining your economy and damaging your businesses and diminishing your place in the world. But you can get real, concrete change on Thursday: if you vote No.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-full-text-of-david-camerons-no-going-back-speech-9735902.html

Vurderte eksamenssvar i samfunnsfaglig engelsk Side 2 av 46

SPR3010 Samfunnsfaglig engelsk, eksamen vår 2015Eksempel på karakter 2

1b

Comment briefly on the irony suggested in the political cartoon below.

http://thetypewriter.org/scottish-referendum-top-10-political-cartoons-on-the-issue/

Task 2

Long answer

Choose one of the alternatives a), b), c) or d) below.

2a

The protest song has a strong tradition in American society.

Read the lyrics from the two songs in Appendix 1 and discuss what the writers of the lyrics suggest about American society and institutions.


Beskrivelser av vist kompetanse

Innhold 1a. Oppgavesvaret viser liten kjennskap til språklige virkemidler og består i stor grad av oppsummering og kommentarer av innholdet i den vedlagte teksten. Svaret er derfor på siden av oppgaven.

1b. Innholdet i oppgavesvaret mangler sammenhengende resonnement.

2a. Oppgavesvaret består i stor grad av oppsummering av innholdet og viser mangelfull innsikt i amerikanske sosiale samfunnsforhold og budskapet i sangtekstene.

Tekststruktur 1a, 1b og 2b. Tekststrukturen i svarene er fragmentarisk og preget av gjentakelser. Svarene fremstår som ufokuserte og mangler indre sammenheng.

Språk Språket i svarene har mange formelle feil og begrenset ordforråd, men kommuniserer greit.

Beskrivelser av karakterer i forskrift til opplæringsloven

• Karakteren 6 uttrykkjer at eleven har framifrå kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 5 uttrykkjer at eleven har mykje god kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 4 uttrykkjer at eleven har god kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 3 uttrykkjer at eleven har nokså god kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 2 uttrykkjer at eleven har låg kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 1 uttrykkjer at eleven har svært låg kompetanse i faget.

Oppsummering av samlet kompetanse og karakter

Tekstene i eksamenssvaret viser liten faglig innsikt. Innholdet er på siden av oppgaven mens språket kommuniserer greit.

Eksamenssvaret viser lav kompetanse og er samlet vurdert til karakter 2.


Task 1a

Short answers

David Cameron says NO

David Cameron gave a speech just prior to the September 18, 2014 Scottish independence

vote. The main goal with his speech was to encourage the people of Scotland to vote NO. He

expresses his opinion about the election through the language he used.

He starts by saying “we meet in a week that could change the United Kingdom forever. Then

he goes on with “and we must be very clear”. By this, I can already tell that Cameron is using

emphatic language for effect. He involves the audience, and he is making it seem like he and

the people of Scotland are on the same page, a big team that is aiming for the same.

He draws attention by the examples he gives. “If Scotland votes yes, the UK will split”, “No

UK pensions, no UK passports, no UK pound”, “This will be the end of a country that people

around the world respect and admire”. He creates images for the readers by giving those

examples, and he involves the audience in thoughtful consideration of the question, with no

answer expected.

Cameron is very convincing and good at expressing his thoughts, by highlighting the

differences to create an emphasis of a pair of things. Those emphasis has been both positive,

to not rip the country apart by voting NO, and negative, that there is no going back from this,

no re-run. He also draws attention to some words by intentional repeating of key phrases and

words.



Task 1b

Short answer

SPOT THE DIFFERENCE

To understand this political cartoon, one must spot the difference so that they might can

understand the irony behind it. As you can see the first picture to the left, shows The United

Kingdom of Great Britain and Northland’s flag. The second picture, on the right, shows

Scotland’s flag. After minutes of trying to spot what other differences that might be appear on

these two pictures, I finally found it. They both look tired, but the picture on the right, number

two, he has a little smile showing off.

I personal think that the irony behind it has something to do with what happened in 18.

September 2014, when it was the Scottish independence vote. Because of that, people could

be living in a different country with different future ahead of it.

In the first picture, I think that the person in picture is sad that the break-up of the United

Kingdom did not happen, 45% wanted the split. The second picture tells me that the he is

happy that the break-up of the United Kingdom did not happen, 55% was against it.


Task 2a

Long answer

Strong tradition in American society?

A protest song!

“Dirty Boulevard” by Lou Reed in 1989 and “Let’s Impeach the President” by Neil Young in

2006, are two different songs, which is, protest songs. They have a strong message and is a

tradition in the American society.

The first protest song, which is called “Dirty Boulevard” is written by Lou Reed in 1989. The

song is talking about the struggle of living in America. He talks about a person named Pedro,

which lives out of the Wilshire. He lives in a“house” that has window without glasses, and

the walls are made of cardboard. He also mentions that Pedro does not have a good

relationship with his father at all.

He has a big family, which is brought up on their knees. He dreams that he might one day in

the future kill his old man, but that does not look bright for him though. The song goes on,

and now we are in another subject. It mentions in paragraph three, that no one dreams of one

day becoming a lawyer, a doctor or anything. The only thing that they can dream of is dealing

on the dirty boulevard.

This song tells us what many people have been gone through in America. They live poor, with

no education, no hope, just trying to survive, and really do not get any help from the

American society. The sad part is when Pedro finds a book on Magic in the garbage can, he

looks at the pictures. “At the count of 3” he says, “I hope I can disappear.” This shows how

sad it must have been in America. It is hard to imagine living that poor, with no help from no

one.

The second song, which is called “Let’s Impeach the President”, is written by Neil Young in

2006. It’s obvious to understand that this protest song has something to do with the President

of the United States.


The song is talking about a person that has been accused for lying, misleading their country

into war, shipping all their money out the door, breaking every law in the country and

dividing their country into colors. This person is no one but the President, at that time. Neil

Young must have been very angry with the President, maybe because of what he has done to

him or the people close to him. Of course, it is always two sides of a story. However, this

protest song sounds very trustworthy, what will happen if Young is talking the truth?

Unfortunaly, so many people do not dare to talk the truth. They are out there just trying to

survive. However, these two men did not want to be quite about those problems that has been

going on. They want to reach out to everybody, so that they might can have in-sight look on

how bad the American society really is. They suggest about their institutions through the

lyrics, which is quite mindful. That way it can reach to everyone.

The main reason with these two protest song being performed, might have been because of

they wanting to give the world a reality check of what has been going on. It is very normal in

places to demonstrate and protest if they are unhappy with something that has been going on

for a while. And the fact that they actually dared to speak up in the way that they did, that

shows us that they might have been really exhausted of everything. Now… They want the

truth to come out. What better way is it to do that, but making a song out of it?

Another aspect of these protest song, is that they value fairness. They want fairness. How can

it somewhere out there in 1989 be a “landlord” laughing until he wets his pants, while a small

kid is standing by the Lincoln Tunnel, trying to sell plastic roses? In addition, how can it be

that the President be breaking very law in the country?

These two men clearly made a sound out there, and they have really done all that they might

have been able to do. They want fairness!


Source List

Gyldendal undervisning: Societies in Focus – Samfunnsfaglig engelsk vg3

S. 389 - 398

Utdanningsdirektoratet: Eksamen

[03.06.2015]

NDLA: http://ndla.no/en/node/20476?fag=71082&meny=125792

[Read:03.06.215]

Wikipedia: http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skottland

[Read:03.06.2015]

Wikipedia: http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storbritannia

[Read:03.06.2015]

Wikipedia: http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institusjon

[Read.03.06.2015]


http://ndla.no/en/node/20476?fag=71082&meny=125792

http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skottland

http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storbritannia

http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institusjon

Task 1

Short answers


1a












1b



Task 2

Long answer


2b

Using the information about the art work “Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red at the Tower of London”, the poem “Poppies” by Jane Weir and the pictures in Appendix 2 discuss how involvement in major wars has impacted British society.


SPR3010 V2015 Appendix 2

Page 1 of 2

“Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red at the Tower of London”

http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2014/07/tower-of-london-poppies/

The major art installation “Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red at the Tower of London” marked one hundred years since the first full day of Britain's involvement in the First World War. Created by artists Paul Cummins and Tom Piper, 888,246 ceramic poppies progressively filled the Tower's famous moat between 17 July and 11 November 2014. Each poppy represented a British military fatality during the war. http://poppies.hrp.org.uk/about-the-installation Remembrance

How did the distinctive red poppy become such a potent symbol of our remembrance of the sacrifices made in past wars? Scarlet corn poppies grow naturally in conditions of disturbed earth throughout Western Europe. The destruction brought by the Napoleonic wars of the early 19th Century transformed bare land into fields of blood red poppies, growing around the bodies of the fallen soldiers. In late 1914, the fields of Northern France and Flanders were once again ripped open as World War One raged through Europe's heart. Once the conflict was over the poppy was one of the only plants to grow on the otherwise barren battlefields. The significance of the poppy as a lasting memorial symbol to the fallen was realised by the Canadian surgeon John McCrae in his poem In Flanders Fields. The poppy came to represent the immeasurable sacrifice made by his comrades and quickly became a lasting memorial to those who died in World War One and later conflicts.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/remembrance/how/poppy.shtml SPR3010 V2015 Appendix 2

Page 2 of 3

Poppies

Three days before Armistice Sunday* and poppies had already been placed on individual war graves. Before you left, I pinned one onto your lapel, crimped petals, spasms of paper red, disrupting a blockade of yellow bias binding around your blazer.

Sellotape bandaged around my hand, I rounded up as many white cat hairs as I could, smoothed down your shirt's upturned collar, steeled the softening of my face. I wanted to graze my nose across the tip of your nose, play at being Eskimos like we did when you were little. I resisted the impulse to run my fingers through the gelled blackthorns of your hair. All my words flattened, rolled, turned into felt,

slowly melting. I was brave, as I walked with you, to the front door, threw it open, the world overflowing like a treasure chest. A split second and you were away, intoxicated. After you'd gone I went into your bedroom, released a song bird from its cage. Later a single dove flew from the pear tree, and this is where it has led me, skirting the church yard walls, my stomach busy making tucks, darts, pleats, hat-less, without a winter coat or reinforcements of scarf, gloves.

On reaching the top of the hill I traced the inscriptions on the war memorial, leaned against it like a wishbone. The dove pulled freely against the sky, an ornamental stitch. I listened, hoping to hear your playground voice catching on the wind.

by Jane Weir

* Armistice Sunday or Remembrance Sunday as it is also called is celebrated to pay tribute to those Britons who have fought in wars.


http://www.theguardian.com/books/2009/jul/25/war-poetry-carol-ann-duffy


Page 3 of 3

Unexploded V2 bomb during WW II

http://www.warhistoryonline.com/featured-article/ britain-at-war-in-colour-1939-1945.html

Rule Britannia

http://scraptrident.org/britain-at-war-the-never- ending-story/

Defending British territories Fighting in Iraq

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2011/10/30/patrick-cockburn-the-army-won-t-face-the-truth-about-afghanistan-and-iraq.html

http://www.pdfmagazines.org/magazines/military/71341-britain-at-war-magazine-special-edition-first-world-war.html



Innhold 1a. Oppgavesvaret består av noen relevante språklige virkemidler og forklaringer av deres påvirkning i den vedlagte teksten, men bruken av fagterminologi er stort sett fraværende.

1b. Innholdet i oppgavesvaret er nokså relevant og viser noe innsikt.

2b. Oppgavesvaret har noe relevant innhold og viser noe faglig innsikt, men er i sin helhet preget av oppramsing og mangler et gjennomgående drøftingsperspektiv.

Tekststruktur 1a, 1b og 2b. Tekststrukturen i svarene er noe fragmentarisk. Svarene kommuniserer med en viss tilpasning til kommunikasjonssituasjonen, men er preget av oppramsing og er noe overflatiske.

Språk Språket i svarene kommuniserer godt, men er preget av mange formelle feil. Lite variasjon i setningsstrukturen.


• Karakteren 6 uttrykkjer at eleven har framifrå kompetanse i faget.• Karakteren 5 uttrykkjer at eleven har mykje god kompetanse i faget.• Karakteren 4 uttrykkjer at eleven har god kompetanse i faget.• Karakteren 3 uttrykkjer at eleven har nokså god kompetanse i faget.• Karakteren 2 uttrykkjer at eleven har låg kompetanse i faget.• Karakteren 1 uttrykkjer at eleven har svært låg kompetanse i faget.


Tekstene i eksamenssvaret viser noe refleksjon og faglig innsikt. Innholdet er relevant, men mangler utdyping og drøftingsperspektiv. Det er gjennomgående en del formelle språkfeil i eksamenssvaret.

Eksamenssvaret viser nokså god kompetanse og er samlet vurdert til karakter 3.


A Speech that Convince

The speech given by David Cameron, September 18 2014, is an inspirational and convincing

speech. But what is it that makes a speech good? Which literary devices does Cameron use

and what mood does the speech has? To find out, we have to dig deeper.

The speech given by Cameron has a free structure, which is a good thing when you are going

to held it in public, it makes it more formal. The mood in the speech is inspirational, honest,

reflective and convincing. It has an overall tone that makes us believe in the words he say, he

has good facts and talk in a way that makes us understand his point of view. For example,

“The United Kingdom would be no more. No UK pensions, no UK passports, no UK pound.

The greatest example of democracy the world has ever known, of openness, of people of

different nationalities and faiths coming together as one, would be no more.” The use of

pathos makes us believe in what he says. The message of the speech is presented

throughout the speech, with convincing words, and a punchy line in the end: “But you can

get real, concrete change on Thursday: if you vote No.”

Cameron compares UK with a family and a couple. “This is a decision that could break up our

family of nations...” “..and many in Scotland, too, who would be utterly heart-broken by the

break-up of the United Kingdom.” Utterly heart-broken to wake up on Friday morning to the

end of the country we love...” Cameron says “family of nations” and “the break-up of the

United Kingdom”, these words gives us a bad feeling, a feeling of losing something dear. No

one like to lose something they love, it is a terrible feeling. And by giving us associations

between the split of UK and the spilt of a family, it makes us want to fix the problem. We are

human with feelings, and by using pathos in the speech, is it easier to control the feeling we

are left with after hearing the speech. Cameron also includes one metaphor in the speech.

“For the people of Scotland to walk away now would be like painstakingly building a home-

and then walking out the door and throwing away the keys.” He uses a metaphor to give us a

feeling of what it would be like to choose the other alternative. But this metaphor gives us a

bad feeling, and it therefore a good and effective literary device.



Cameron knows exactly which words he has to use, to get us on his side. He uses ethos and

pathos as literary devices, and speaks in a formal tone. It is these language features that

make it a good speech. You have to appeal to feelings and emotions, and leave the audience

behind with a feeling of understanding and satisfaction.

Sources:

- New Reflections, H. Aschehoug & Co. (W. Nygaard), 2013, Bjørg Brauteset og Margareth

Reiersen, page 350-351

Task 1b.)

Political cartoon

This kind of irony is called “dramatic irony” and is based on a situation where the characters

have less information than the reader. The reader has to use the updated facts about the

situation to understand the irony. What is it that is supposed to be humorous? In this

cartoon they ask: “Spot the difference!” The difference between to two pictures is the flag in

the window case; all the other things are the same. It is the same person in the chair, the

same TV-show and the same queen in the picture on the wall. And that is the humor in this

political cartoon. It is not so much difference between the two countries; in the matter of

fact, it is only the flag.

Sources:

- New Reflections, H. Aschehoug & Co. (W. Nygaard), 2013, Bjørg Brauteset og Margareth

Reiersen, page 348


Task 2b.)

Involvements lead to 888,246 poppies

Britain has always been one of the major superpowers in the world. They have participated

in the wars, not only for themselves, but also helping others. They were leading in the

industrial revolution and had colonies all over the world. Britain is a powerful and influential

country, but what impact have these involvements had on the British society? What were

the sacrifices for the British people? And how is the society honoring the people who

sacrificed their life for the country, today?

The industrial revolution started in Britain and lasted from 1750-1850. Britain was the

perfect land to start with; it had resources and a system of government that could handle a

revolution like this. They developed weapons and bombs over the years, in case of a war

should break out. But the revolution had effects on the British society. Urbanization and

slums emerging were some of them. These problems are still in Britain today, but they have

decreased. However, Great Britain was the leading country in many years. Patriotism was in

the hearts of the British people and many people would sacrifice a lot for the country. Not

only would they fight for them self, they would also help countries in need. For example

were Britain fighting in Iraq, they sent military forces down and helped. They sacrificed their

beloved once for helping other countries. The same did they when they were defending

their territories. Many people got hurt during these times. Today Britain is a part of NATO;

they signed their membership in 1949, right after the Second World War. This means that

other countries, that are members in NATO, can depend on Britain if something should

happen, and the same way around. This is a military cooperate we have to ensure that

countries never will be standing alone, and to bypass new wars. Britain is a land of piece, but

they fight if they believe in the result. Britain has been involved in many wars and always

had a big role in the world, but how has this affected the people?

With war, it come sacrifices, and Britain is not an exception. Britain would be a different

society today if the history was changed. They would not have achieved the same things, not

be a superpower for many years and not be such an industrialized country as Britain is today.

On the other hand, many more people would not have lost their life in war. People would

have known their grandfathers and families would be complete. There is no war without


people in uniforms and people fighting each other. And as we learn from kindergarten, not

everyone can win. People have lost their life in war and fought for their country in decades,

and for that, Britain is grateful.

“Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red at the Tower of London” is an art memorial in London,

created by artists Paul Cummins and Tom Piper. It consists of 888,246 ceramic poppies,

where each poppy represents a British military fatality during the war. The memorial marked

one hundred years since the first full day of Britain´s involvement in the First World War.

Poppies have become a symbol of our remembrance of the sacrifices in the past wars.

Poppies can grow naturally on disturbed earth and have therefor become a symbol of

strengthen. “The destruction brought by the Napoleonic wars of the early 19th Century

transformed bare land into fields of blood red poppies, growing around the bodies of the

fallen soldiers.” The memorial in London is for all to see, and reminds people of the once

who lost their lives in the war. One day a year, Britain has something called the “Armistice

Sunday”, which is a Sunday where you pay tribute to those British who have fought in wars.

There has been written many songs and texts about this theme. One writer who has written

a poem about this theme is Jane Weir. She has written a poem called “Poppies”. She writes

about the loss of a dear one, and how the poppies are a symbol of the people who lost their

life in a war. “Three days before Armistice Sunday and poppies had already been placed on

individual war graves.” The British society has been changed because of the involvement in

wars, but how? Because of all the losses, people grow up learning to be loving and caring. In

addition to take care of each other, people learn to love their country. Patriotism is a word

that describes British way of thinking, they are proud of being a part of UK. But I think that

British people are more aware of the consequences now, than they were before. British

society has been affected by the involvements in big wars in both positive and negative

ways.

Britain has always been one of the major superpowers in the world. They have participated

in wars and fought for what they believe in. But, not only good things have come out of the

involvements. People have lost their family, and the society has gone through changes.

Involvements are a good thing; people are fighting to make the world a better place. But the

sacrifices on the other hand, that’s the thing we have to live with.


Task 1

Short answers


1a












1b



Task 2

Long answer


2c

Discuss the outcome of the American mid-term elections and what this has meant for the current political climate in the USA. In your answer you should include ideas based on the information in the text, the cartoon and the statistics below.

The Republican gains in the mid-term election may open a period of deep frustration for President Obama. The Republican tide was stronger than projected. Mr. Obama now faces a daunting challenge in reasserting his relevance.

Anita Dunn, a former White House adviser to Mr. Obama, noted that voters in polls on Tuesday were just as negative about Republican leaders as they were about Mr. Obama. In the end, she said, voters were eager not for more failure but for progress by both parties. “The message for anybody who’s in power is that voters are looking for a change in how they approach getting things done,” Ms. Dunn said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/us/president-obama-left-fighting-for-his-own-relevancy.html




Innhold 1a. Oppgavesvaret viser kompetanse i å analysere språklige virkemidler og gir eksempler. Det er enkelte misforståelser knyttet til terminologibruk.

1b. Innholdet i oppgavesvaret er relevant og viser god innsikt til tross for manglende fokus på detaljer.

2c. Oppgavesvaret har en del relevant innhold og viser god faglig innsikt, men fokuserer for mye på det politiske systemet og overser det vedlagte materialet til dels.

Tekststruktur 1a, 1b og 2c. Tekststrukturen i svarene er rimelig god, og tekstene har rimelig god indre sammenheng. Tekstene viser at eleven behersker noe ordforråd til å kommunisere om samfunnsfaglige emner.

Språk Språket i svarene er godt og til dels idiomatisk og variert, men noen formelle feil forekommer.


• Karakteren 6 uttrykkjer at eleven har framifrå kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 5 uttrykkjer at eleven har mykje god kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 4 uttrykkjer at eleven har god kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 3 uttrykkjer at eleven har nokså god kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 2 uttrykkjer at eleven har låg kompetanse i faget. • Karakteren 1 uttrykkjer at eleven har svært låg kompetanse i faget.


Tekstene i eksamenssvaret viser refleksjon og faglig innsikt. Innholdet i langsvaret er til dels mindre fokusert på oppgaveordlyden. Eksamenssvaret viser god kompetanse og er samlet vurdert til karakter 4.


Task 1a

This extract is from a speech given by David Cameron prior to the September 18, 2014

Scottish independence vote. The British Prime Minister introduces the recipient by explaining

what the root of problem is. Contrast between Thursday and Friday can be enormous if

Scotland votes yes to independence. Cameron has a clear message: “There’s no going back

from this. No re-run.” Due to the Prime Minister’s word choice, the recipient understand that

there is only one chance to achieve change.

As well as using convincing language, language features are used as a device to underline the

message. In the third paragraph, anaphora is a language feature. “Utterly heart-broken” are

the words that are repeated. In addition, the fourth paragraph features the sentence: “No UK

pensions, no UK passports, no UK pound!” Whether or not this language feature is anaphora

or epizeuxis is not certain. However, this sentence stands out and a guess is that Cameron was

emphasising these words in his speech. In addition, a language feature where you compare

two things using the word “like” or “as”, called simile occur in the fifth paragraph. “For the

people of Scotland to walk away now would be like painstakingly building a home – and then

walking out the door and throwing away the keys.” This comparison shows that the Prime

Minister thinks that if Scotland becomes independent, many years of valuable collaboration

would be a waste. Cameron want Britain to be together and uses pathos, which appeals to our

emotions when he talks about Britain as one not separate.

Not only does Cameron think it would be a waste if Scotland were to become an independent

country he uses hypophora where he asks the question “How do you get that change?”

Following his own opinion, when answering it and saying that it is impossible to achieve

change by “ripping your country apart”. In conclusion the British Prime Minister allege that

“you can get real, concrete change on Thursday: if you vote No.” David Cameron’s point of

view regarding the Scottish independence vote shows his political point of view, he is the

leader of the Tories.

Task 1b

This political cartoon is from the United Kingdom. When the reader interprets the headline,

he or she thinks it is one of those games they used to play when they were children. However,

after a closer look that is not the case. Picture 1 is the same as the second picture, or is it? On



the top of the TV, there are two flags. A British flag is in the picture on the left, whereas a

Scottish flag is spotted in the picture to the right.

Due to the two different flags, the political cartoon refers to the Scottish independence vote on

September 18, 2014. While some people think an independent Scotland would be different,

the artist behind this cartoon is clear that it will not be a big difference. As seen in the

pictures, the only thing different will be the flag.

Therefore, the irony of this political cartoon is that the United Kingdom and Scotland is so

similar, and the question is, what is the reason for becoming and independent country?

Task 2c

Long answer

The Lame Duck

With one and a half year left as the President of the United States, Barack Obama is now

considered a “lame duck.” Since his political carrier is in some terms behind him, the

outcome of the mid-term election made Obama’s position as a democrat even harder. Since

the Republican Party control both the House of Representatives and the Senate, Obama will

not be able to carry out his policies. To understand what Barack Obama is struggling with

until he is finished as President of the United States in 2016, the American system of

government needs to be up for discussion. America’s system of government effects the

President, therefore the thesis in this text is: “What was the outcome of the American mid-

term election and what has this meant for the current political climate in the USA?”

When the Founding Fathers wrote, the American Constitution they made sure that it would be

impossible for one person alone to have too much power. After fighting a war against King

George III, Americans demanded that power needed to rest with the people and therefore they

created a representative democracy. After deciding to have a representative democracy, the

Founding Fathers divided the federal government into three branches. The Executive branch,

headed by the President, the Legislative branch with the House of Representatives and the

Senate creating Congress, and the last branch, the Judicial branch headed by the Supreme

Court. For this reason, it was impossible for one person to become absolute. Although it

seemed impossible for one person to have all the power with these three branches, a system


called checks and balances was invented to make sure, the power rested with the people. This

is why the checks and balances system struck Obama hard after the mid-term election in

November 2014. As a result, of checks and balances, Congress can refuse to pass legislations

suggested by Barack Obama. As wells as override a presidential veto with a two-thirds

majority in both the House and the Senate. Therefore, the Republicans can stop most of the

Presidents suggestions due to the system of government that is in a never-ending conflict with

itself thanks to the Founding Fathers.

Pre mid-term election, the Democratic Party controlled the Senate. The Democrats had 53

seats, whereas the Republicans only had 45. After the election, the Republicans gained 8 seats

in the Senate giving them 53 seats, total. On the contrary, the Democrats lost 9 seats which

now gives them a total of 44 seats in the Senate. People predicted a Republican victory, and

on the map, you can see that the Republican Party gained Senators in 8 out of the 33 states

that were up for election. Whereas for the Democrats, they did not gain any Senators, instead

they had a run-off in Louisiana. In addition, in the House of Representatives, the Republicans

gained 13 seats.

As a result, Barack Obama is forced to cooperate with his opponent, the Republicans.

However, is it possible for politicians to collaborate with other politicians who does not share

the same political view? Presidents have done it many times before when the majority in

Congress was from the opposite party as the President himself. The cartoon of Obama

expresses the Presidents excitement for corporation between the Executive and the Legislative

branch. The cartoon refers to the Republicans as the Grand Old Party, in which refers to the

stereotypical Republican. “Now that the GOP has control of Congress, we’ll be working

together” is the sentence in the political cartoon. The second picture where the text “we’ll be

working together” is written, Obama has a big smile on his face. The smile can emerge as

fake and therefore the text can be interpreted ironic. However, Obama’s only choice is

perhaps to corporate and negotiate with Congress. Although, some Democrats might think

that if Obama collaborates too much with the Republicans, he will go against his own political

program.

In the extract from the New York Times, it is written, “The Republican tide was stronger than

projected. Mr. Obama now faces a daunting challenge in reasserting his relevance.” For this

reason, two questions are vital. Why was the Republican tide so strong? In addition, is

Obama’s relevance still important? First, one reason for the strong Republican tide can be that


the American people are done with the Democrats. For almost eight years, the United States

have had a Democratic President. Therefore, Americans are open to change, new ways and

new reforms. On the other hand, in the second paragraph of the New York Times extract,

Anita Dunn explains that the American people voting “were just as negative about

Republican leaders as they were about Mr. Obama.” This gives an indication that Americans

do not care whether or not they have a Democratic or Republican President. Americans want

progress forward, not the other way around. This attitude among Americans is maybe a call

for change. The two-party system where both party shoots for the centre is perhaps outdated.

Developing more parties that can gain support in America can be a solution. If four or five

parties could be in the run of having their candidate become the Presidential candidate, more

options and variety would be emerged to the people. However, changes like these do not

occur after five years. USA have a political and electoral system with long history and change

can therefore be though.

Similar to other American Presidents, Barack Obama will be remembered for his actions.

Obama-care, improving the relationship between Cuba and America. He was also the first

African-American President when he was elected in 2008.

Despite this, Obama ended up as a “lame duck”, his days as the United States President are in

some ways, numbered, although he still has over a year left as President. The mid-term

election did not only make President Obama a “lame duck” but made the current political

climate in the USA quite cold due to the Republican Party having the majority in both the

House of Representatives and the Senate.

Bibliography

Task 2

- Access to English: Social Studies, Cappelen Damm AS 2008 (Anthony, Burgess,

Mikkelsen, Sørhus)

- http://access-

socialstudies2014.cappelendamm.no/binfil/download2.php?tid=1610292&h=2bfcc324c3

ac9d1b0541d47a7c514dc0 January 23. 2015


http://access-socialstudies2014.cappelendamm.no/binfil/download2.php?tid=1610292&h=2bfcc324c3ac9d1b0541d47a7c514dc0



Task 1

Short answers


1a












1b



Task 2

Long answer


2a





Page 1 of 2

Dirty Boulevard Pedro lives out of the Wilshire Hotel He looks out a window without glass And the walls are made of cardboard, newspapers on his feet And his father beats him 'cause he's too tired to beg He's got 9 brothers and sisters They're brought up on their knees It's hard to run when a coat hanger beats you on the thighs Pedro dreams of being older and killing the old man But that's a slim chance He's going to the boulevard He's gonna end up on the dirty boulevard This room cost $2,000 a month You can believe it, man, it's true Somewhere there's a landlord's laughing till he wets his pants No one dreams of being a doctor or a lawyer or anything They dream of dealing on the dirty boulevard Give me your hungry, your tired, your poor I'll piss on 'em That's what the Statue of Bigotry says Your poor huddled masses Let's club 'em to death And get it over with and just dump 'em on the boulevard Get 'em out on the dirty boulevard Goin' out to the dirty boulevard Outside it's a bright night There's an opera at Lincoln Center Movie stars arrive by limousine The klieg lights shoot up over the skyline of Manhattan But the lights are out on the mean streets A small kid stands by the Lincoln Tunnel He's selling plastic roses for a buck The traffic's backed up to 39th Street The TV whores out to try their luck And back at the Wilshire, Pedro sits there dreaming He's found a book on Magic in a garbage can He looks at the pictures And stares up at the cracked ceiling "At the count of 3," he says, "I hope I can disappear." And fly, fly away from this dirty boulevard


I want to fly from the dirty boulevard

Lou Reed 1989

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/l/lou+reed/dirty+blvd_20085219.html (slightly adapted)


Page 2 of 2

Let's Impeach the President

Let's impeach the President for lying And misleading our country into war Abusing all the power that we gave him And shipping all our money out the door Who's the man who hired all the criminals The White House shadows who hide behind closed doors They bend the facts to fit with their new stories Of why we have to send our men to war Let's impeach the President for spying On citizens inside their own homes Breaking every law in the country By tapping our computers and telephones What if Al Qaeda blew up the levees Would New Orleans have been safer that way Sheltered by our government's protection Or was someone just not home that day? Flip - Flop Flip - Flop Flip - Flop Flip - Flop Let's impeach the president for hijacking Our religion and using it to get elected Dividing our country into colors And still leaving black people neglected […]

Neil Young, 2006

http://www.azlyricsk.com/lyrics/neilyoung/letsimpeachthepresident.html



Innhold 1a. Oppgavesvaret viser god kompetanse i å analysere retoriske og språklige virkemidler og gir gode eksempler. Enkelte definisjoner og forklaringer kunne være tydeligere.

1b. Innholdet i oppgavesvaret er relevant og viser god innsikt til tross for manglende fylde.

2a. Oppgavesvaret fremstår som selvstendig med eksemplarisk henvisning til kildene, både inn i teksten og på slutten av svaret. Svaret gir en meget god analyse av amerikanske samfunnsforhold og de vedlagte sangtekstene.

Tekststruktur 1a, 1b og 2a. Tekststrukturen i svarene er gjennomgående god, og alle tekstene har god indre sammenheng

Språk Språket i svarene er godt, idiomatisk og variert selv om det forekommer enkelte unøyaktigheter. Tekstene viser at eleven behersker relevant ordforråd for å kommunisere om samfunnsfaglige emner.




Tekstene i eksamenssvaret viser høy grad av refleksjon og faglig innsikt. Alle oppgavene er besvart presist og effektivt. Svarene 1a og 1b har noen innholdsmessige begrensninger og når ikke samme nivå av kompetanse som langsvaret.

Eksamenssvaret viser meget god kompetanse og er samlet vurdert til karakter 5.


Task 1A

In his speech prior to the September 18, 2014 Scottish independence vote, David

Cameron relies mostly on pathos. He tries to awaken emotions in people by using hyperbole

such as “[the Scottish independence vote] could end the United Kingdom as we know it” and

“the future of our country is at stake”. He also uses metaphors. With phrases such as “our

family of nations”, and “we built this home together”, he creates an image of the United

Kingdom as a family who would be unhappy if they were to split up.

Logos is also used, as a way of convincing the audience that Scotland would be worse

off without the rest of the UK. Cameron states that if Scotland were to become independent,

there would be “No UK pensions, no UK passports, no UK pound”. Similarly, he his own

question on how you change your country for the better by stating it would not be by “ripping

your country apart, [...] undermining your economy and damaging your businesses and

diminishing your place in the world”. There is also a certain rhythm to his speech, by

repeating phrases and words, such as UK. By repeating UK, he is emphasizing that the

country is a United Kingdom, and without Scotland that would no longer be the case.

Task 1B

In the cartoon “Spot the difference!” the irony is that there are really only two

differences: the flag on the television is Scottish instead of British, and the man is smiling

slightly more. The man, who represents either Scotland or the Scottish people, is still a

member of the EU, still has pound notes tucked under his arm, still gets the BBC, and the

border to England is still open. This is to suggest that the only real changes that will happen is

Scotland gained its independence, is that the Scottish people will be slightly happier, and

Scotland will no longer officially be in the UK – in reality, they will retain all the privileges

they have now.

Task 2A

Protest songs have a strong tradition in the USA, from Joe Hill’s songs for workers’

rights in the early 20th

century, to the anti-racism and anti-police brutality chants we see in

protests in the States today. Such songs can point out the injustice in a society, or be a call to

action to change these injustices. Two examples of protest songs are Dirty Boulevard by Lou

Reed and Let’s Impeach the President by Neil Young.



The first song, Dirty Boulevard, is about the stark contrast between rich and poor in

American society, especially in the urban parts of the United States, as it is set in New York.

It tells about Pedro, a boy who grows up in poverty, with nine siblings and a father who beats

them. The lyrics “He looks out a window without glass/And the walls are made of cardboard,

newspapers on his feet” shows just how little they can afford. Pedro is without hope: he

wishes to disappear, but knows he will “end up on the dirty boulevard”, either to beg or to

deal drugs. He is a representation how bad the situation of poor people in the US is – or was,

as this song was written 26 years ago – and that they are without opportunity to escape from

poverty.

Dirty Boulevard was written in 1989. That was the end of Ronald Reagan’s two terms as

president, and the beginning of George Bush Senior’s first term. Reagan accomplished what is

known as the “Reagan Revolution”: he led the United States into a period of economic

prosperity, with decreased unemployment and falling inflation. On the other hand, his

economic politics led to a budget deficit, of which increased homelessness and poverty was a

result (Langeland et al., 2012). Lou Reed contrasts the extremely rich with the extremely poor

in verse six, where he depicts a brightly lit opera and movie stars arriving in limousines. He

also comments on racial poverty, and how the odds are unfairly against People of Colour in

the US. Pedro is a Hispanic name, and in verse four there is a mention of the Statue of

Bigotry, a parody on the Statue of Liberty. Traditionally, the Statue of Liberty is a welcome

sign to immigrants arriving from abroad to the Land of the Free. The Statue of Bigotry says

“Give me your hungry, your tired, your poor I’ll piss on ‘em”, showing that the Land of the

Free does not care much for those in need.

The second song, Let’s Impeach the President by Neil Young, is a more direct attack

on the president and the institution he represents. It was written in 2006, during George Bush

Junior’s presidency. To impeach the president would mean to accuse him of an unlawful act.

In his song, Young lists a number of acts he believes to be unlawful, as well as an abuse of the

president’s power. Among them are surveillance, racism, initiating war and forging facts.

Young uses a very deliberate vocabulary to condemn the president’s alleged actions, such as

“misleading our country into war” instead of “leading”.

Bush initiated many controversial acts as a result of the terror attacks on September 9, 2001.

The most infamous among them are the War on Terror and the USA PATRIOT Act. Both of

these are alluded to and condemned in Young’s song: “misleading our country into war” and

“They bend the facts to fit with their new stories/Of why we have to send our men to war” is


about the war in Afghanistan and Iraq (a consequence of the War on Terror); the entirety of

verse three is about the USA PATRIOT Act, which gave authorities greater leeway to conduct

searches and surveillance without informing the people involved. Young wants direct

consequences for what, in his opinion, is a breach of trust on the president’s side.

Both of these songs are modern protest songs, although they are different both in

content and what they wish to convey. Dirty Boulevard is about how American society has

failed the poor, especially children in poverty. It is a general comment on how the economic

boom of the eighties had a real, negative impact on many people. Let’s Impeach the

President, however, is a direct call out of the government, on how the president of the time

abused the power given to him by the people. Both are critical of American society, but while

Young’s song demands direct action, Reed’s song is a comment, a condemning observation.

REFERENCES SECTION:

Langeland, Åse Elin et al. (2012, August 7). The Seventies and the Eighties. Retrieved June 2,

2015 from http://ndla.no/en/node/99065?fag=71082&meny=125587


http://ndla.no/en/node/99065?fag=71082&meny=125587

Task 1

Short answers


1a












1b



Task 2

Long answer


2a





Page 1 of 2

Dirty Boulevard Pedro lives out of the Wilshire Hotel He looks out a window without glass And the walls are made of cardboard, newspapers on his feet And his father beats him 'cause he's too tired to beg He's got 9 brothers and sisters They're brought up on their knees It's hard to run when a coat hanger beats you on the thighs Pedro dreams of being older and killing the old man But that's a slim chance He's going to the boulevard He's gonna end up on the dirty boulevard This room cost $2,000 a month You can believe it, man, it's true Somewhere there's a landlord's laughing till he wets his pants No one dreams of being a doctor or a lawyer or anything They dream of dealing on the dirty boulevard Give me your hungry, your tired, your poor I'll piss on 'em That's what the Statue of Bigotry says Your poor huddled masses Let's club 'em to death And get it over with and just dump 'em on the boulevard Get 'em out on the dirty boulevard Goin' out to the dirty boulevard Outside it's a bright night There's an opera at Lincoln Center Movie stars arrive by limousine The klieg lights shoot up over the skyline of Manhattan But the lights are out on the mean streets A small kid stands by the Lincoln Tunnel He's selling plastic roses for a buck The traffic's backed up to 39th Street The TV whores out to try their luck And back at the Wilshire, Pedro sits there dreaming He's found a book on Magic in a garbage can He looks at the pictures And stares up at the cracked ceiling "At the count of 3," he says, "I hope I can disappear." And fly, fly away from this dirty boulevard


I want to fly from the dirty boulevard

Lou Reed 1989

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/l/lou+reed/dirty+blvd_20085219.html (slightly adapted)


Page 2 of 2

Let's Impeach the President

Let's impeach the President for lying And misleading our country into war Abusing all the power that we gave him And shipping all our money out the door Who's the man who hired all the criminals The White House shadows who hide behind closed doors They bend the facts to fit with their new stories Of why we have to send our men to war Let's impeach the President for spying On citizens inside their own homes Breaking every law in the country By tapping our computers and telephones What if Al Qaeda blew up the levees Would New Orleans have been safer that way Sheltered by our government's protection Or was someone just not home that day? Flip - Flop Flip - Flop Flip - Flop Flip - Flop Let's impeach the president for hijacking Our religion and using it to get elected Dividing our country into colors And still leaving black people neglected […]

Neil Young, 2006

http://www.azlyricsk.com/lyrics/neilyoung/letsimpeachthepresident.html



Innhold 1a. Oppgavesvaret viser god kompetanse i å analysere språklige virkemidler og gir gode eksempler. De to første avsnittene i svaret fremstår som noe ufokuserte.

1b. Innholdet i oppgavesvaret er relevant og fyldig. Svaret viser meget god innsikt og selvstendig refleksjon.

2a. Oppgavesvaret fremstår som selvstendig. Svaret gir en meget god analyse av amerikanske samfunnsforhold og de vedlagte sangtekstene. Svaret viser at eleven mestrer eksemplarisk sangtekstanalysen parallelt med samfunnsrefleksjonen.

Tekststruktur 1a, 1b og 2a. Tekststrukturen i svarene er gjennomgående god, og alle tekstene har god indre sammenheng. Svaret på oppgave 2a har en god innledning.

Språk Språket i svarene er godt, idiomatisk og variert. Tekstene viser at eleven behersker et relevant ordforråd for å kommunisere om samfunnsfaglige emner.




Tekstene i eksamenssvaret viser høy grad av refleksjon og selvstendighet, samt meget god faglig innsikt. Svarene på oppgavene 1b og 2a kompenserer for manglende fokus i svar 1a.

Eksamenssvaret viser fremragende kompetanse og er samlet vurdert til karakter 6.


WRITTEN EXAM IN ENGLISH SOCIAL STUDIES, 3rd of June 2015

SHORT ANSWERS

1A

In the speech given prior the 18th of September 2014, the day of the Scottish independence

referendum, David Cameron expresses his concern and fear for the future of the United

Kingdom. The tone of the speech is very serious, stressing the graveness of the situation and

the menace that the splitting of the Union would represent for the country. This is visible

right from the very beginning when Cameron says “We meet in a week that could change

the United Kingdom forever”. Later on he adds “On Thursday (…) the future of our country is

at stake”. Cameron makes it very clear that he considers the Scottish fight for independence

a threat for the entire country. “This would be the end of the country that people around

the world respect and admire”, he says.

The language used in the speech is formal, emphasizing the gravity of the situation. What is

more, Cameron addresses his audience directly “I want to speak directly to the people of this

country today (…). I speak for millions of people across England, Wales and Northern

Ireland”. This visibly lessens the distance between the audience and the speaker, and makes

it clear that the matter concerns absolutely every UK citizen. The composition of the text

seems to be of great importance as well. The speech is logically structured, with an

informative introduction and a concrete, coherent conclusion. It is in the conclusion that

Cameron’s message truly is revealed. The Prime Minister argues that bringing a positive

change to the UK is not to be achieved by splitting the country and undermining the

economy. Quite the opposite, it is achieved by voting “no” in the referendum and keeping

the nation united.

Another important component of the speech is David Cameron’s use of pronouns. In the

text, the Prime Minister consistently uses the pronoun “we”. This seems to play an

important role when it comes to the overall message of the speech – despite all the



differences within the country, both the Scots, the English, the Irish and the Welsh share the

same home which is the United Kingdom. It is this unity that is at the core of the country’s

strength and it needs to be sustained. As another important literary device used in the text,

one could also mention repetition. Both the pronoun “we” and the word “UK” are frequently

repeated throughout the entire speech, emphasizing the Prime Minister’s message. In

addition, Cameron also uses many metaphors to illustrate his points. For instance, he refers

to the UK as “the family of nations” and compares Scotland withdrawing from the union to

“painstakingly building a home – and then walking out the door and throwing away the

keys”. All these devices help David Cameron to convey his message and persuade the

audience that the Scottish independence would mean an end to the UK as we know it today.

Sources: The attachment to the exercise - excerpt of David Cameron’s speech given on 18 September 2014: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-full-text-of-david-camerons-no-going-back-speech-9735902.htm

Task 1b

In the political cartoon presented in the task, the author expresses their opinions on the

recent debate concerning the Scottish independence. The cartoon consists of two seemingly

similar pictures presenting the leader of the Scottish National Party, Alex Salmond,

comfortably sitting in an armchair in his living room. The room is filled with what one could

call the very symbols of Britishness – there is a portrait of the Queen hanging on the wall,

the Union Flag is proudly standing on top of the TV, while Salmond himself is watching a BBC

programme with a rather grim expression on his face. Outside the window it is raining, while

Alex Salmond is dressed in a traditional Scottish kilt. The headline above the two cartoons

encourages the readers to spot the difference between the two pictures.

The only visible difference however, is the SNP leader’s facial expression and the flag

standing on the TV. On the second picture there is a smirk of satisfaction on Salmond’s face,

as well as there is a Scottish flag instead of the Union Jack on the TV. All the other objects in


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-full-text-of-david-camerons-no-going-back-speech-9735902.htm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-full-text-of-david-camerons-no-going-back-speech-9735902.htm

the background remain the same. The cartoon shows us in an ironical way that Scotland’s

withdrawal from the UK would not lead to any drastic, real changes. According to the author,

everyday life in the country would to a great extent remain the same. Despite all the

differences between the nations of the United Kingdom, there are certain things that bond

them together, for instance the BBC or the general love for the British monarch. These things

might seem to be of little significance, but they are in fact components of the common

cultural heritage for most people in the UK. In other words, the cartoon makes an important

political statement – the debate on the Scottish independence is pointless, as it will not lead

to any realistic, tangible change or improvement in the country.

Sources: The cartoon attached to task, “Spot the difference!”: http://thetypewriter.org/scottish-referendum-top-10-political-cartoons-on-the-issue/

Long answer

Task 2a

PROTEST SONGS – THE MOST POWERFULL WEAPON?

“Dirty Boulevard” by Lou Reed and “Let’s Impeach the President” by Neil Young are two

songs expressing similar criticism towards the American society. Even though “Let’s Impeach

the President” (2006) war written almost two decades after “Dirty Boulevard” (1989), they

both depict the same resentment and anger connected to various social problems in the

United States. Both songs express a great amount of distrust towards the American

politicians and institutions, as well as their hypocrisy and indifference towards the most

needy in the society. The enormous chasm between the richest and the poorest in the

American is another subject raised in both songs. At the same time “Dirty Boulevard” tells a

story from the perspective of an individual, while “Let’s Impeach the President” seems to

express the discontent of the masses. Nevertheless, the fact remains that many issues raised

in both songs are still present in the American society today.




As mentioned before, the song “Dirty Boulevard” expresses anger and criticism towards

many problems in the American society, but also tells an individual story. The protagonist in

the text is a young man of apparently Hispanic descent, named Pedro. He lives under

extremely difficult conditions, with 9 brothers and sisters and an abusive father “The walls

are made of cardboard, newspapers on his feet/and his father beats him ‘cause he’s too

tired to beg”. The problem of domestic violence is clearly raised in the lyrics “They’re

(Pedro’s brothers and sisters) are brought up on their knees/it’s hard to run when a coat

hanger beats you on the thighs.” At the same time, the main character in the lyrics

experiences extreme mental pressure, leading to drastic emotions and impulses “Pedro

dreams of being older and killing the old man”. One can say that the figure of Pedro

illustrates the damage and harm caused by domestic violence. At the same time, it is clear

that the young man and his family live under extreme poverty. This can be interpreted as

criticism towards the ineffective social systems and the widening social gap between the

richest and the poorest in the American society.

Another important issue raised in both songs is the immense distrust towards the American

politicians and institutions. This bitterness is clearly tangible in Neil Young’s lyrics to “Let’s

Impeach the President”. When referring to the American president, he asks “Who’s the man

who hired all the criminals/the White House shadows who hide behind closed doors”. The

author seems to be accusing American politicians of being dishonest and corrupt. “They

bend the facts to bend with their new stories”, he says in the second verse of the lyrics. One

can find the same sort of misgiving towards the American institutions in “Dirty Boulevard”.

Here, the author refers to the way that the poorest and the neediest are treated by the

system “Your poor, huddled masses/Let’s club ’em to death/And get it over with and just

dump ’em on the boulevard”. This excerpt illustrates politicians’ indifference towards urgent

social challenges and the marginalisation of the problems of for instance those living below

the poverty line. One can also interpret this excerpt as indirect criticism towards the

American economic system that entrenches the differences between the rich and the poor.


At the same time, Neil Young gives much more specific examples to ground his distrust

towards the American politics and government. In the song “Let’s Impeach the President”,

he refers to the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, as a response to the September 11

terrorist attacks in 2001 “Let’s impeach the President for lying/ And misleading our country

into war”. By using the word “misleading” in the excerpt, Young suggests that the war

started under George Bush’s time of office as the US President was aimless and futile. In

other words, the author points out that the breaking out of the war was caused by false

pretences of fighting terrorism, and turned out to be ineffective and more deadly than

anyone suspected.

What is more, Neil Young raises yet another issue in his song “Let’s impeach the President

for spying/ On citizens inside their own homes”. Here, the author refers to the scandal of the

Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency’s surveillance of people the

US territory, in order to collect information necessary for the fight against terrorism

(Wikipedia, NSA warrantless surveillance (2001-07)). As it was revealed in 2006, the FBI and

NSA used amongst others various tapping devices on civilian’s cell phones to navigate

suspects. The disdain of the author is tangible for instance in that line “Breaking every law in

the country/By tapping our computers and telephones”.

Another issue raised in both songs is the hypocrisy of the American politicians. In the “Dirty

Boulevard” Lou Reed says “Give me your hungry, your tired, your poor I’ll piss on ’em/That’s

what the Statue of Bigotry says”. Here, the author uses a metaphor to illustrate the

degradation of American ideals and religious hypocrisy. He compares the Statue of Liberty,

which is the very symbol of American virtues and principles, to a statue of bigotry, meaning

someone intolerant of any belief or opinion that differs from one’s own. This can refer to the

fact that it is often considered positive to be religious when participating in a campaign as a

politician, since it often makes it easier to get elected and win votes. What Reed is trying to

point out here, seems to be that the religious principles of helping others for instance are

only used during the campaign, and are not applied in practice. This sort of accusation is also

visible in the song of Neil Young. Here the author says, “Let’s impeach the president the


president for hijacking/Our religion and using it to get elected/Dividing our country into

colours/And still leaving black people neglected”. In this excerpt yet another important issue

is raised, namely the problem of racism still being present in the American society.

Both the song “Dirty Boulevard” and “Let’s Impeach the President” make important political

statements through their lyrics and tell us a lot about conditions in the modern, American

society. Both songs show many challenges and problems that the United States have

struggled and still struggle with today. The lyrics of the Lou Reed’s song express the

constant, everyday struggle of people living in poverty, consistently trying to make the ends

meet. Bearing in mind the structure of the American health care system, it is not surprised

that many people do not receive the help that they need, simply because they cannot afford

it. Another challenge often connected to poverty is violence that can leave painful marks on

its victims for the rest of their lives. The widening gap between the richest and the poorest in

the American society, may contribute the image of the corrupt and dishonest politicians,

trying to take advantage of American citizens. As another problem that is still present in the

American society today, one could also mention more or less direct racism. A perfect

example of that are the statistics on for instance police violence against blacks or the

difference between the basic pay of white and coloured people. Bearing all these issues in

mind, I think it is correct to say that both songs remain relevant to many problems that the

American society faces today.

SOURCES:

Songs:

“Dirty Boulevard”, Lou Reed, 1989 http://www.lyricsfreak.com/l/lou+reed/dirty+blvd_20085219.html

« Let’s Impeach the President », Neil Young, 2006 http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/neilyoung/letsimpeachthepresident.html

Textbook: Anthony, John, Burgess, Richard, Mikkelsen, Robert, Acces to English: Social Studies, Cappelen Damm, Oslo 2014

Websites: Wikipedia, NSA warrantless surveillance (2001-07) Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_%282001%E2%80%9307%29 (03.06.15)


Documents

Vurderte eksamenssvar i SPR3010 Samfunnsfaglig … eksamenssvar i SPR3010 Samfunnsfaglig engelsk, eksamen vår 2015 Eksamenssvara er frå eksamen våren 2015. På finn du • eksamensrettleiing