Charlotte Brontes Jane Eyre - Confronting Repression, Achieving Progression :: Jane Eyre Essays

Jane Eyre: Confronting Repression, Achieving Progression Jane Eyre tells the story of a woman progressing on the path of acceptance. Throughout her journey, Jane encounters many obstacles to her intelligence. Male dominance proves to be the biggest obstruction at each stop of Jane's journey: Gateshead Hall, Lowood Institution, Thornfield Manor, Moor House, and Ferndean Manor. As she grows, though, Jane slowly learns how to understand and control repression. Jane's journey begins at Gateshead Hall. Mrs. Reed, Jane's aunt and guardian, serves as the biased arbitrator of the rivalries that constantly occur between Jane and John Reed. John emerges as the dominant male figure at Gateshead. He insists that Jane concede to him and serve him at all times, threatening her with mental and physical abuse. Mrs. Reed condones John's conduct and sees him as the victim. Jane's rebellion against Mrs. Reed represents a realization that she does not deserve the unjust treatment. Jane refuses to be treated as a subordinate and finally speaks out against her oppressors. Her reactions to Mrs. Reed's hate appear raw and uncensored, and foreshadow possible future responses to restraints. This rebellion also initiates the next phase of her journey. Lowood Institution represents the next step in Jane's progression. Her obstacle here appears in the form of Mr. Brocklehurst, the operator of the "respectable" institution. He made his first appearance at Gateshead Hall in order to examine Jane and verify her evil qualities (according to Mrs. Reed). At Lowood, Mr. Brocklehurst exemplifies the perfect hypocrite. He constantly preached for the denial of "luxury and indulgence" (p.95), though his values conflict with these ideas. His wife and daughters personify the meanings of luxury and indulgence in that "they were splendidly attired in velvet, silk, and furs" (p.97). He extends his hypocrisy in quoting bible passages to support his preachings, though these preachings and passages do not apply to his own life. He says, " I have a master to serve whose kingdom is not of this world: my mission is to mortify in these girls the lusts of the flesh, to teach them to clothe themselves with shamefacedness and sobriety, not with braided hair and costly apparel. . ." (p.96). Although she must learn to deal with Brocklehurst's complete dominance, Jane changes a lot during her years at Lowood, due mainly to the teachings of Helen Burns and Miss. Temple. Through their instruction, Jane learns how to control her anger over Mr.

Appeals Compare and Contrast Essay Essay

In William Shakespeare’s Rendition of Julius Caesar death, the character Brutus must persuade the audience into believing his murder of Caesar was justified. To be sure that he is imprinted as a â€Å"heroine† for saving the roman empire he makes Mark Anthony go, knowing that the audience will believe him for he was Caesars best friend. Brutus makes sure that he implies him as a good guy by giving him restrictions on what he could and could not say, but ultimately Brutus fails with his plan for he did not listen to Anthony’s speech which was one of his most grave mistakes, and Anthony wins over the audience while Brutus is forced to flee from the roman empire. In Brutus’s speech he enlightened the audience through his use of logos by demonstrating the true sense of capability they would have faced if Caesar would have continued as a tyrannical ruler as he says â€Å"would u had Caesar were living, and die slaves†. Brutus stressed the oppressing future and eventual demise of the roman empire as long as Caesar had remained in power, hence his reasoning behind his actions. As Brutus using pathos to persuade the audience as he says â€Å"who here is so vile that will not love his country† Brutus expresses his feelings for the empire and how he cares trying to make the audience feel the dreadful for thinking that his killing of Caesar was a betrayal to the empire. The Biggest flaw was that his speech was too short he never really explained the crimes or tyranny that Caesar had committed and that would eventually be his downfall. As mark Anthony approaches the audience he had to find a way to oblige to Brutus’s rules of not saying anything negative of him. He announces to the audience using logos by expressing his sadness for Caesars death, as he speaks he quotes the conspirators as â€Å"honorable men† as he repeated the quote over and over the audience began to rally up and shout, the more he said it the more the audience realized how Brutus lied to them. Anthony had shown the audience of the Brutus’s betrayal without saying he wasn’t a honorable man. As Anthony says â€Å"He [Caesar] hath brought many captives home to Rome whose ransoms did the general coffers fill† showing that Caesar had cared for the city trying to bring wealth to the empire, but then Anthony says â€Å"but Caesar is ambitious† making the audience praise more for Caesar for he had brought wealth to the empire. Anthony shows the audience of Brutus’s act of violence which ultimately gave Anthony the audience and the upper hand. Anthony showed Brutus as a â€Å"hero† as brutus wanted, but brutus did not expect Brutus fails of his plans to make the audience belive caesars death was justified, Anthony shows the audience in anthonys words, that he was telling the truth from his sadness and tone, while Brutus was failed as he only said a few words and left Anthony all by himself. Ultimately making the audience team up with Anthony, as Brutus flees the empire.

Essay about Finding Hope in James Muyskens The...

Finding Hope in James Muyskens The Sufficiency of Hope Most people hope the world is the way they believe it is. That is, most people hope that their view of the world is right. They usually do not hope for the truth about things to be much better than what they suppose it is. Sometimes the hope is a factor in causing the belief; sometimes the hope stems from the desire to be right about ones belief; and in some cases the hope may follow the belief, i.e., one becomes accustomed even to an austere view of the world and finally comes to prefer it. It seems that most people, especially most philosophers, would rather be right than have the world turn out to be even a better place than their theory allows. They might not admit this†¦show more content†¦Certainly many people believe in him who are sure that their manner of life puts them in danger of his wrath. There have always been many people who believe that there is inadequate evidence for supernature, whether God or the afterlife. Supposing there is indeed little evidence for God, this raises the intriguing question, would there be anything epistemologically sinful in permitting oneself, not to believe in Gods existence, but to hope for his existence? James Muyskens, in his book, The Sufficiency of Hope, makes a curious argument to the effect that such hope is not only epistemologically permissible, but also an agnostic may actually be a full-fledged Christian based upon this hope. According to Muyskens, an agnostic who honestly does not know what to think on the subject of God, who does not believe there is enough evidence to make a judgment either way, is entitled to do two things: first, he can hope Christianity is true; and second, if he does hope that Christianity is true, he can be a Christian, a full-fledged, praying, worshiping Christian, based merely upon his hope and without at all believing in God as we usually think of the term believing. This is a strange but important thesis. The agnostic Christian says, I do not know if God exists; I neither believe nor disbelieve in his existence, but I do hope he exists, and Ill pray to him,