Read the passage carefully, and then answer Question 1 on the Question Paper.

The writer of this passage has a daughter, Isabelle, aged 8. The family has recently relocated to the area
and Isabelle has been at her new school for six weeks.

Friendship Contracts

I search my daughter’s schoolbag for the much-anticipated party invitation from that ‘nice-little-girl- she-
sits-by-in-class’. I’m relieved to discover an invitation to the latest, coolest activity. However, the form
clipped to the invitation is a shock. A chatty note from the birthday girl’s parents explains that their
daughter mentioned Isabelle was new to the area, so they (thoughtfully) popped in a copy of a Friendship
Contract for her to fill in and send back with her acceptance slip before the party.

What?

The contract for Isabelle to complete and sign begins, ‘Hi (child’s name), I’d love to be your friend. I agree
to always be there when I say I will, to invite you to my parties and share nicely with you. I’ll always keep
a secret and never be mean or hurt your feelings...’.

The gist of it seems to be, ‘Be nice to me, or else. Oh and by the way, if you don’t turn up to my party after
I’ve booked your place, we’ll send your parents the bill.’.

Other parents don’t seem to have a problem with the idea – responsibility, not letting each other down, they
nod wisely. Even Isabelle’s teacher insists that learning about friendship is part of the curriculum in
schools. ‘Drawing up a ‘job description’ for a friend might even be lesson one,’ she smiles.

Websites promoting this whole crazy idea of Friendship Contracts explain their relevance in the grown- up
world. ‘All successful partnerships have rules and expectations. Setting these out in a document makes
friendships easier. Signing the contract means you both agree to the same terms, objectives and desired
outcomes for the friendship.’

Am I the only person to think this is weird? Surely friendship evolves organically, not by written
agreement? Anyway, what’s the birthday girl going to do if we don’t sign – never play with Isabelle in the
playground again? Gulp. And if we do sign? I don’t want to be threatened with legal action if on the day
Isabelle’s too shy to attend that party after all.

‘You can choose your friends, not your family,’ my gran would say. It’s precisely this lack of obligation
that’s at the heart of true friendship, reinforcing a positive view of ourselves. Friends are proof we’re
desirable, connected, fun to be around.

Then again, making friends is no more a free choice than other life decisions. We buy property according
to where we are and what happens to be available when we’re looking. Making friends can be just as
affected by market values. Membership of friendship groups for youngsters often depends on their taste in
music or proficiency at sport. Some friendships tail off without explanation and others end with more
spectacular, public fallings-out. Might a contract beforehand help it all to be more ... civilised?

Many of us idealise friendship – friends are the new family, we argue. We’re so keen on the idea we
haven’t stopped to consider what it might really involve, what it means to us, and our friends, to be friends.
Perhaps the idea of friendship itself has changed. For some, in a world where family is less cohesive, the
value of friendship has increased, making it something to invest in more wisely. Others argue that instant
online access devalues that currency – put simply, friends aren’t what they used to be.

Possibly friendships were different in the past. My parents still visit friends in hospital and deliver birthday
gifts in person. Friendship to them has its own set of unspoken obligations. Meanwhile, I’ve a fairly wide
portfolio of friends, if not the time or inclination to see them more regularly. These include business friends
from earlier jobs, current-special-interest friends, as well as neighbours willing to drop off my offspring in
return for watering their plants. Perhaps we do need to think harder about what we mean when we call
someone a friend and what we expect of them?

Few of us, according to research, are really happy with our friendships. Many would like more friends, or
more reliable ones, than they have now. Humans, though, can’t cope with social circles larger than 150.
This makes the 1000 ‘friends’ my teenage stepson boasts about on social networks look faintly ridiculous
and strengthens the case for adding a pre-selection interview to this whole friendship- contract process.

I’m tempted to check terms and conditions before deciding whether to sign. Is there a time limit specified
or the possibility of a temporary position – a month perhaps, until Isabelle finds a more suitable long-term
option?
Read carefully the article in the Reading Booklet Insert and then answer Section 1, Question 1 on this
Question Paper.

Question 1

Section 1: Directed Writing

Imagine you are Isabelle’s parent. You have made a decision about whether to let her sign the contract or
not.

Write a letter to the parents of the birthday girl in which you:

• identify and evaluate the issues you think the Friendship Contract raises about the nature of friendship

• explain why, or why not, you will let Isabelle sign the contract and any concerns you might have.

Base your letter on what you have read in the article, but be careful to use your own words. Address
each of the bullet points.

Begin your letter, ‘Dear Mr and Mrs Dubois...’.

Write about 250 to 350 words.

Up to 10 marks are available for the content of your answer, and up to 15 marks for the
quality of your writing.
Read the passage carefully, and then answer Question 1 on the Question Paper.

The writer of this article describes the ongoing debate about graffiti and gives examples of the widely
differing reactions to it in various parts of the world.

Graffiti: street art – or crime?

On the face of it, we all seem to be a little mixed-up when it comes to ‘graffiti’, as you call it if you work
cleaning it up, or ‘street art’ as you say if you’re wielding the spray can.

But the confusion now runs deeper. Recently, a court delivered its verdict – members of a graffiti crew
were jailed after admitting criminal damage in 120 night-time attacks on stations and trains in London,
Paris, Amsterdam and the Czech Republic.

By contrast, just down the road, a prestigious modern art gallery had been covered in giant murals by six
urban artists with international reputations, from Bologna to Barcelona, in the first display of street art at a
major museum.

The courtroom and the museum were so close that supporters of the men on trial popped down to the
gallery to do a bit of retouching during one lunchtime adjournment. ‘There is a huge irony in the
juxtaposition of the two events,’ said one of the artists.

The man to credit for bringing street art into established gallery spaces is Banksy. A few years ago he was
sneaking his work into galleries. Now galleries sell his book in their gift shops. His works go for high
prices worldwide. He, more than anyone else, has legitimised the genre and spawned a new generation of
young imitators.

Next week, another famous gallery launches an exhibition based on the work of the convicted graffiti crew,
asking whether the men are criminals or artists.

‘It is a question which prompts different answers in different parts of the world,’ says the museum’s
curator. ‘There are countries that are more relaxed about it,’ he says. ‘In parts of Australia, people really
hate graffiti and tags (a sort of graffiti signature) on vans and trains, but in Melbourne some van drivers
compete with each other as to whose is more decorated.’

They have similarly split responses in other nations too. In Toronto, police have just hired a street artist to
paint walls to help find a criminal. Elsewhere in Canada, a court has ruled that, after a police crackdown on
graffiti artists, a 28-year-old man is only allowed to venture into town if he is accompanied by his mother.
Street art, you see, is a highly polarising phenomenon. On one hand, there are those who insist that ‘artists
who paint on the street are merely expressing themselves, not hurting anyone’ and should not be punished
‘but appreciated and celebrated’. Then there are those who describe the activities of crews as ‘self-
indulgent campaigns to damage property on an industrial scale’.

How can this problem be resolved?

One street artist, Bob, concedes, ‘You can’t let people run wild. If there’s a clash of rights obviously those
of the owner of the wall take precedence.’ He adds, ‘There’s room for debate, but jail sentences shouldn’t
be part of that. They should just have to do youth work, or clean up ugly tags.’

Some community leaders agree. They commission crew members to lead street art workshops as tutors for
young and vulnerable people.

‘Street art starts with kids doing ugly tags,’ Bob says. ‘When a kid starts learning to play music only the
next-door neighbours hear, but with street art the whole neighbourhood sees him not being very good when
he starts out.’

The trouble is there’s a whole lot of ‘learning’ going on. Some 85 per cent of graffiti is just tags, according
to US sociologists who survey this kind of thing.

The money men will not help much, for all their attempts to cash in on street art. Big brands have
incorporated graffiti into their marketing campaigns. A global paint firm has even developed a new line of
spray paint aimed at street stencillers, with colours named after well-known graffiti artists.

Even the trial judge admitted, ‘It would be wrong of me not to acknowledge that some examples of your
handiwork show considerable artistic talent,’ but concluded, ‘the trouble is that it has been sprayed all over
other people’s property without their consent and that is simply vandalism.’ The bill for the graffiti crew’s
spree must have run into millions.

If art is defined by the artist’s intent then vandalism must be determined by the response of the owner of
the thing vandalised. One community recently tried to find a compromise. It erected two, huge graffiti
boards to allow artists to express themselves freely.
Read carefully the article in the Reading Booklet Insert and then answer Section 1, Question 1 on this

Question Paper.

Question 1

Section 1: Directed Writing

There has been a proposal for an area to be designated for street art and for street art workshops to be run
for young people where you live.

Write a letter to the local newspaper giving your views.

In your letter you should:

• explain and evaluate the different opinions about graffiti or street art in the article

• give your own views on how far you think the proposal will benefit the local area.

Base your letter on what you have read in the article, but be careful to use your own words. Address
each of the bullet points.

Begin your letter, ‘Dear Editor...’.

Write about 250 to 350 words.

Up to 10 marks are available for the content of your answer, and up to 15 marks for the
quality of your writing.