Blanche is likely disliked for being prejudiced, and Stanley garners some favour for being the classic hard-working American. The nuances of speech cement class context, illustrate the differences of social status and education. The very marked differences between Stanley and Blanche are stressed by Stanley's ‘ straight, simple and honest’ non-grammatical, coarse, often slangy speech as against Blanche's high-flown rhetoric often comes across false, ensuring one doesn’t forget of her education. Blanche speaks with an undeniable lyrical quality, although often melodramatic, emphasis largely on her own emotions. Blanche is aware of her aging and fears her fading looks.
In relation, Oodgeroo uses direct address “You” to refer to the intended audience of the poem, White Australians. She also uses antithesis to show indigenous Australians “had so little but had happiness” but White Australians had the complete opposite. This reoccurring motif of happiness is echoed through an emotionless poem that ultimately emphasises indigenous Australians perspective of White Australian Culture to her audience. We can learn from both representations that specific language devices of their chosen form are used to persuade targeted audience’s opinions on the Aboriginal experience. These different devices of representation have intentional effects on targeted audiences that can ultimately change their perspective on the Aboriginal
To what extent do the texts you have studied support this idea? The novel To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee and the film Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner directed by Stanley Kramer, both deal with related themes of racial prejudice. Both texts reveal prejudice to be an adult behavior that is taught or learnt as well as prejudice born from ignorance. Though both texts explore the idea of prejudice being entrenched in society there is hope seen in both text that this prejudice may be overcome. Both texts through differing techniques support the idea that individuals do have the power against prejudice, there individuals are not powerless against prejudice.
But what else does the image of the Inspector as a character represent? From Priestley’s description, it seems he is a voice of conscience for the unrepresented classes, such as Eva Smith, representing their point of view where they can’t against the bourgeoisie – The Birling’s. Priestley’s object is for his play feeling at least somewhat more companionate and conscious for their fellow man. A clever device used by Priestly is the stark contrast between Birling and the Inspector, for example, and he does so to make the polar attitudes of the two of them that much clearer. Birling’s comfortable and privileged world view we see from the beginning is challenged the second the Inspector steps through the door, he almost seems to be coming from a different world, and the image of the girl we are instantly presented with just refuses to fit into their upper-middle class lifestyle and such an image is never let slip as the Inspector continues to reinforce that same image throughout his interrogation.
But both the writers are very effective in expressing there opinions and getting across their individual point. Where ‘Two Scavengers’ shows the division of rich and poor in a society, ‘Nothings Changed’ shows the difference of the white ethnic group and the black ethnic group. They both have better off people and also those who are seen and lesser people in the society scale. The better of people in Nothings Changed are the rich white people and in Two Scavengers it is the two beautiful people. ‘Nothings Changed’ is about the poet going back to an apartheid to see if things are changed.
by character (elected class president) - (Most important tactic: sympathy)-Pathos: avg. by emotion (the others disrespect but gets away) * By Henrich making connections with them to siblings in a family made it easier to distinguish them mentally. Chapter 5-8 (Ethos) 5. Get Them to Like You * Decorum: character-based agreeability; the art of fitting in; tactic in which you earn your audiences love. * Act the way your audience wants you to act not like the audience.
This could be linked to the Marxist idea that would believe that Celie’s circumstances with her father and lack of education is a result of the class she is in, Marxists would believe that her oppression is down to the class she was born into. The oppression between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie could also be linked in with the relationships between men and women within the novel The Colour Purple was made into a film in 1985 with many famous actors and actresses playing the characters, this is an interesting adaptation of the 1982 novel though some critics felt that the director choice of Steven Spielberg was poor for such a complex drama and that the film left out important aspects of the novel, such as the theme of lesbianism. "Well, next time you come you can look at her. She ugly. Don't even look like she kin to Nettie.
This conflict between them causes comedy as there are misunderstandings, which are amusing and the audience feel superiority over the characters who do not understand some of each other’s references. At the start of the play when Rita refers to a poem about “fightin’ death an’ disease”, Frank automatically assumes its “Dylan Thomas” as Thomas’s poem about death is a part of the literary canon. However Rita replies it’s “Roger McGough’s” poem that she’s describing. This misunderstanding conveys to the audience that these characters would not conventionally associate with each other. It could be amusing to the audience as it highlights the absurdity of the situation.
While the media sets the character’s description in stone, after critical analysis, the movie itself exemplifies the gender ramifications present in our society. Furthremore, issues of class can be cited and seen through various sections of the Devil Wears Prada. On the surface, this romantic funny piece of media can generally be seen as lighthearted but it’s ability to continually disregard these issues of gender and class comedically show that there is much to be explored underneath. It then can be asserted that underneath its superficial exterior,The Devil Wears Prada is actually the exemplification of what is wrong with our society through gender and class. Issues of gender are seen throughout the movie with the characters Miranda Priestly and Andy Sachs.
As a result these two Characters Conflict throughout the Play. However, despite their own personal disagreements they are brought together by the injustice that has befallen Ronnie and by the end there is a hope that they could become an item. The two characters are different In almost everyway, on one hand Catharine is a suffragette and is more liberal in thinking and on the other hand Sir Robert is against women getting the vote and is more conservative in thinking. There is a conflict in ideology between the two as well. Catharine first meets sir Robert in act 1 scene 2.