Canterbury Tales & Jane Eyre

Analyze the author’s use of irony in describing Mr. Brocklehurst’s family in the second passage. How does the author contrast this description with Mr. Brocklehurst’s lecture to Miss Temple to provide social commentary on perceptions of class during this time?

In the provided quote, Mr. Brocklehurst's wife and daughters are described through their luxurious clothing. Unlike the girls that Miss Temple teaches that are only allowed one clean tucker per week, these women appear in extravagant dresses sporting velvet, silk, and animal fur. The school girls must also have straight, tidy hair while his family has "elaborately curled" hair. Author, Charlotte Bronte, uses irony to make the comparison between the two social groups presented. After ranting about Julia Servern's natural curls and how he demands her locks be chopped off, his family glides in with heads of unnatural curls. It is ironic that the man does not demand that his family practice what they preach, as they are allowed to wear pretentious clothing and hair styles with no backlash from authority.

When speaking with Miss Temple about the children, Mr. Brocklehurst's tone is extremely degrading. According to him, the girls are not allowed to wear their hair natural or in braids and if they do, the only option is to cut all of their hair off. This shows that this man, supposedly an authoritative figure, does not regard the school girls of worthy of expressing their own style. Everyone must look the same. Instead of the upperclass appearing as a beacon of hope, they are intimidating and hypocritical. The narrator recognizes this differentiation when she thinks to herself, "They ought to have come a little sooner to have heard his [Mr. Brocklehurst's] lecture" (Charlotte Bronte), referring to him telling Miss Temple about how he wants the girls to be modest. The teacher nor any of the students dare to call out the upperclass visitors about their hypocrisy. The large distinction between social classes went well beyond their access to clothes and food, but to character traits they were allowed to possess. Wealthier individuals controlled society, and therefore could speak their minds and express their diversity through thought. The children, and even Miss Temple, had to simply oblige by their demands, which in a way dehumanizes them. Another important aspect of the scene that reveals evidence of social commentary is the stereotypical gender roles presented. A man is shown to have authority over an educated woman, who is a teacher, which happens to be a very stereotypical job in society for a woman.

7 Deadly Sins- Jake from State Farm

Jake from State Farm:

This State Farm insurance commercial, which was first aired on American television in 2011, has revolutionized something as boring as insurance into something iconic for the American public. 

The video begins with a middle age man in pajamas talking on his cell phone. The lights are dim, in an average looking American type home,  and the man is speaking at a low volume. In the background, a woman comes down the stairs and suspiciously asks who the man is talking to. He replies frankly with "It's Jake from State 

Farm," and goes back to talking to his cell phone about a "great deal." The woman grabs the phone stating that it is 3 in the morning and then asks the receiving end of the telephone call "what are you wearing Jake from State Farm?" Jake replies with "uh khakis" and the woman tells the man that "she sounds hideous." The commercial then ends with a red screen that says "Savings. Even at 3 A.M." with a voiceover. 

When looking closer at the advertisement it is obvious to see that the women is expressing envy. She assumes her husband, the man on the phone, is cheating on her by talking to another woman in the middle of the night. Her thoughts might be justified by the fact that the man seems to be hiding this phone call and says things like "Yeah, I'm married. Does it matter... You'd do that for me?" She was so jealous of this other "woman" that when she spoke with Jake on the phone, hearing his manly voice, she still did not believe her husband. She even insulted the "woman's" appearance, without seeing her, to degrade her even more. This makes the audience wonder why is she so envious? The audience can assume that the man has cheated on her before, or that their relationship is not strong and filled with trust. 

The commercial hints at many key themes that an American audience would pick up on. First, the husband is concerned about his families safety and is losing sleep over it. Second, a stereotype about women is shown; that they are insecure in relationships and jump to conclusions. 

More specifically than Americans, the intended audience is both men and women in the young adult and middle aged adult categories. State farm is attempting to entice young adults, who do not yet have insurance, to invest in it through the use of comedy. The middle aged viewers will relate to the man's worries about he and his families safety. The advertisement is most likely reaching the middle to upper class, who watch TV and can afford insurance. The lower class might watch this commercial, but they are not the target because it is unlikely they can afford an insurance plan. The commercial was first aired on August 11, 2011 during a screening of "Supernaturals" that had nearly 3 million viewers. 

https://youtu.be/47cAxRX3aDg

What's in a name?

My name is a tool that helps describe who I am, though it does not define me. I am much more than a name I was given at birth. A name is a first thing you learn about someone new. It serves as an introduction to a stranger and allows people to make their first judgements about you, this can be taken as a positive or a negative. My first name, Rachel, was chosen because it is a biblical name. Although neither my parents nor I are that religious, it was very important to them that their children's names were found in the bible. (My brothers name is Joshua.) Rachel was the 20th most common name for girls born in 1999, and I am surrounded by Rachels everywhere I go. This is why I believe that my personality, on top of my last name is more defining of who I am. My middle name, Michaela, was chosen after my great grandmother, Minnie, who my mother was very lose with. I never met Minnie, but it is common in Jewish tradition to name a child after someone who has recently passed, but is bad luck to name a child after someone who is still alive. I do not have a lot of information about my last name, Cannon, other than the fact that it is of Irish decent. My mother is the youngest of three sisters and decided to keep her last name, Rose, to keep that portion of the family alive for at least one more generation. When I was about late elementary/middle school age, I decided that I would add "Rose" into my middle name making it "Michaela Rose." I told all my friends about this change and my current passport actually says "Rachel Michaela Rose Cannon." Now, the problem with this is that my birth certificate does not include the "Rose" and therefore, two forms of legal identification have different names for me... Because of this odd situation I think a name is not a reliable way to define someone, especially because I have never really been too fond of my set of names.*

Similarly to how Anna Quindlen states that she is two, I would agree that I am two. I act very differently around my friends and even at school with teachers, than I do at home with my family. At school and with friends, I tend to be more outgoing and say whatever comes to mind. In these situations I often use language that is "hip" and what all my friends are using, like some neologisms, but these are words adults like my parents might not understand. More recently, I started getting closer to my older brother and started showing more of my "friends" Rachel and less of my "family" Rachel. This overlapping of both my personalities has been difficult because it is sometimes difficult to determine where to draw the line. This is the same as with my parents. I have never been that open with them, like I am with my friends, and it feels very odd when a conversations edges closer to the realm of how I speak with friends. The situation becomes the most sticky when I am with friends and my parents at the same time. Another thing that differentiates between my two selves is my responsibilities as each. I have been in situations where a friend is in need of support of some sort but I also has responsibilities at home that cannot be pushed back. When this happens, I have no choice but to listen to my parents and chose my family because they are my #1 priority. In both of my two identities my name remains the same, my parents, my friends, and my teachers (other than Grow, he calls me Cannon) all call me Rachel This is a reason why I believe my name does not define me as much as my personality does.

At least Urban Dictionary knows the real me. "Rachel: A smart, sassy, and sexy young woman who knows things from fashion to film to literature, from Manolo Blanks to Mahatma Gandhi."

*Yes it is Rachel, NOT Rachael. Yes, Cannon with 2 N's like the gun.