Department of English                               Gymnasium Steglitz Berlin

Contact

gk2002-4.jpg (8195 Byte)

Home

Table of Contents

The reasons for the success of Segal´s Love Story Rita is happy to get a second chance
Love Story: The Book and the Movie What about America ?
Is it true of our society that we are members of one body? My own Short Story: Silent Love
 
  

The Reasons for the Success of Erich Segal´s "Love Story"

Why has Erich Segal´s book "Love Story" (published in 1970), which I would even just call a "novel", been a bestseller?

It´s a very short book with its 72 pages (that´s why I´d call it an novel!) and not comparable to typical "masterpieces of literature". There´s no demanding style of language in it, the protagonists talk in a very colloquial way. But "Love Story" was such a success that it even had been adapted for the screen! Why? The main reason is that Erich Segal created a story the people can identify with!

He put different strands into the story: There´s the main strand, Oliver Barrett´s and Jennifer Cavilleri´s story, Oliver´s argument with his father is the other one.
Oliver´s and Jenny´s story is told like a "normal student´s love": They meet first at the library, she visits his hockey games, they marry (VERY short version). "Normally" you would expect a happy end like this: they are happy (maybe after a conflict), have children and Oliver and his father are reconciled. It´s not like that (that´s even revealed in the first sentence)!  First Jenny and Oliver cannot have children and then Jenny gets very sick of leukemia and dies. The late reconciliation of father and son Barrett makes the end even more emotional than it already is.

The sad end and the strong love between Jennifer and Oliver Barrett beyond her death are the secrets of "Love Story". It´s a story, a destiny that each of us could experience. Erich Segal wrote his "Love Story" very close to the reality, where not every story has a "happy end".

 

Back to the top of the page                                                                       What´s your view?

 

Love Story: The book and the movie

The very successful book "Love Story" (written by Erich Segal) has even been adapted for the screen. The movie, which bears the same title as the book, also was an enormous success and had been nominated for many awards (it got the "Oscar" for the best music!).

But, of course, it is not possible to turn every detail of the story into a movie. So what are the differences? Is there another plot? Has the story been made more dramatic?

A very important feature to arouse emotions in a movie is the music. For this movie a composer created a very impressing melody that (each time with a little variation) leads through the scenes. The actors´ feelings are more understandable, it´s easier to show tension, love and sorrow.

Often the actors acted in a different way of what the people who read the book first would have expected: There are missing sentences, which are considered to be important for the plot by some people (e.g. at the end of the book Jenny says "Thanks Ollie" when she dies, not so in the movie), there is no reconciliation of Oliver and his father (in the book their argument is the second important strand!) and Jenny´s father "gets" just a little attention in the movie.

All in all I can say about books that "become" movies: It´s up to the reader´s (and of course: the viewer´s) own feeling what he thinks is important or not and the director also is a reader. He can leave out parts and pay more attention to other parts.

"Love Story" is not that kind of movie you watch and say: "I must have read another book…", but in my opinion some important things (see above) were left out.

 

Back to the top of the page                                                                       What´s your view?
 

Is it true of our society that we are members of one body?

poster1.jpg (12394 Byte) J.B. Priestley´s drama "An Inspector Calls" (1947) promotes the idea that all people in the world are members of one body. If someone does something bad it will be bad for the whole "body" and it will change other people´s lives. If someone does something good, it will make the "body" work better. This idea tells you that everyone is important in this world and whatever you do will influence what is happening somewhere else. Of course, in Priestley´s "An Inspector Calls" it is not that general but I want to examine the question if it is true of our society today that we are members of one body.

I will look at Germany especially: I think we are members of one body, but not in the way Priestley described it. If I harm somebody it will not necessarily harm the whole "body", so not everything you do is important for the "body". It is very difficult for single persons to do something for or against the "body" we are members of. Bigger groups e.g. parties, trade unions or big companies are more able to do such things.

If there are strikes the "body" will see the consequences very fast: A special group of people does not go to work, so a special good will not be produced or some necessary labour will not be done. It influences many other things inside of the "body". If e.g. economy as one part of the "body" does not work other parts will also not work as well as they could (or even will not work at all).

It is like a human body: A single blood cell will not change the situation of the whole body if it is not able to transport enough oxygen to the muscles and the heart, but if many blood cells are not able to do that or the lungs do not work the muscles and the heart will also not work. They are dependent on each other, part of one body that wants to live.

I think we are members of one body but only groups of people can change things, can do good or bad things for or against the "body".

 

Back to the top of the page                                                                       What´s your view?
 

What about America ?

In the following essay I will have a look at the immigration to America and deal with the question if the USA still is the land of freedom and refuge for the oppressed people of the world. To do this I will make use of an article that was written by Lawrence H. Fuchs and deals with the immigration to the USA from its earliest forms until today.

About four hundred years ago, in the 17th century, the USA started as a nation of immigration: Many people from Europe came to America to find work, freedom and refuge. But very soon the native Americans became afraid of the "newcomers" to get too many. At that time immigration restrictions were created and there was a continuous development of those restrictions until today. The last "immigration act" was made in 1990 by the government of President Bush.

What has been left of those dreams the early settlers had? Is the USA still open to everybody? Can you find refuge there if you don´t find it anywhere else? I do not think so. America has changed in many ways. From an insignificant country it became a world power. Today the USA has many national and international responsibilities.

You cannot allow people to come and go as they like anymore, in no country. Not even in America. Today´s restrictions tell you an exact number of (legal!) immigrants: 700,000 each year. Considering this fact, in my opinion, we cannot say that the USA is still the land of freedom and refuge for the oppressed people of the world. Just imagine that silly case: What would happen if there were more than 7000,000 people who need refuge and who are searching for freedom? Today they won´t find it in America. And maybe nowhere else.

 

Back to the top of the page                                                                       What´s your view?
 

Rita is happy to have a second chance

Willy Russell´s play "Educating Rita" shows how a girl successfully enters the middle class

Of course Rita is happier than before the completion of her education! It´s easy to say that because Rita was very unhappy when she started her education at the Open University. She was disappointed by her community, her husband and her job, she wanted to change so much. She wanted to change from the inside because that would make her happier. At the end of the play Rita has changed in many ways. With a tone of pride she says: "I´m educated now." She has a new boyfriend, new friends and a new job. All that makes her happy.

Rita did something that only a few people really manage to do: She worked herself up from the working class to the middle class. Not by doing a hard job and earning money but by her intellectual skills. First she did not know any famous author, already after summer school she knew many. Rita used all her hidden potential to make herself more educated and happier. At the end of the play she is able to talk to other students (even her new friend is a student). She would never have thought about that at the beginning of the play. She got a new dose of self-confidence and something like a second chance for her life.

edrita6.gif (3647 Byte)

Her mother must also be happy because she wanted "to sing better songs", which could mean "don´t stay on this level". Finally Rita knows how to sing these songs and I think it makes her even happier than she already is to know that her mother is proud of her.

I do not know what Rita is going to do, but she has the ability to do things better this time: Her new job, her new friends, who do not just want to go to the pub all the time and – perhaps finally - her own family. She knows that and even if it is hard for her and Frank to go separate ways, she is really happy now.

 

Back to the top of the page                                                                       What´s your view?
 

Silent Love

Jules saw her at the library every day. And Roma saw him. They both were students of Medicine. They didn´t know why, but they had a special connection. He liked the way she held her head while reading her scientific literature and he enjoyed watching her chewing on her pen very slowly. He was sure it was love at first sight. She liked the way he held his books so carefully with a kind of honor and respect. And she liked the way he looked in the dim light of the small lamp on his table. She was sure it was love at first sight. They exchanged shy glances whenever they met and one day Jules took the initiative and slipped her a sheet of paper with the address of his favourite café in London and a time for lunch. He did not dare to talk to her. Surprisingly it also was Roma´s favourite café in the busy streets of London. She tried not to show how overwhelmed she was and just smiled. But that smile was the sweetest one she had ever put on her face.

When they had taken their seats in the café and the waiter, who did know both of them, had brought the menues they always ordered, there was a pleasent silence. Jules took a deep breath as if he wanted to hold that moment in his lungs forever. Roma just had the special feeling that he was the one. Without any word spoken they finished their meal, paid their bills and left the café. Outside they had their first kiss. Both of them had never felt as warm and comfortable as in that moment. Then they walked back to the university hand in hand. They loved each other. Jules knew it. Roma knew it. Where was the need for words?

From that day they often went to the café, into the park or the cinema. They did all the things people would do who are in love with one another but there was a difference: They did not speak a word. Jules knew to read her wishes from her eyes and whenever he thought of something he needed she already was on her way to get it for him. Their whole bodies were their mouths and their love was their language. They just understood each other without talking.

Jules and Roma felt so fulfilled with the need to care for the other one and to look after his needs at every moment that they slowly forgot the things they liked about the person they spent their days and nights with. They could no longer see the details they saw at the beginning at the library. Both of them realized the upcoming crisis, but they just tried to be more aware of the partner. Jules was very afraid to talk to her about that. Should he start to communicate with her that way now? Wouldn´t it destroy everything they had? There had never been the need for words. Roma also was not able to express her sorrows. Even if they had talked to each other there would have been no words for their weird situation. So their love came to an end.

Today they sometimes meet at the library or their café and do even say "Hi."
But there is no more room for their love in London.

 

Back to the top of the page                                                                       Do you like the story? Let me know.