TransformationsEssay Preview: TransformationsReport this essayTransformations: How has your perception of transformations been illuminated by your comparative study of the prescribed texts?Adaptation techniques: the various tools and technique Heckerling has employed to transform AustenÐŽ¦s classic to represent the modern 90s and maintain the same values illustrates how even after a transformation and cultural and historical context a text can remain the same projecting the same core values. Tools used by Heckerling:
– production design: represents CherÐŽ¦s child like nature, the colour creates empathy for her in the viewer. Solid block colours are used at the start of the film when Cher is clueless, the colour palate becomes more complex when Cher begins to transform. Her large house and assets exaggerate a hyper world and thus creates irony ÐŽV ÐŽ§I have a way normal life for teenagerÐŽÐ
the weather represents how Cher sees the world; the lack of wind subtracts depths paralleling the Cher who also lacks depth.– wardrobe and hair and makeup: CherÐŽ¦s clothes represent wealth and social class, they convey fun and immaturity, the solid colour palate represents lack of depth and the fact the Dionne dresses very similar to Cher illustrates the control cher has over her.
In contrast to josh, his cloths are daggy but the conveys his sense of reality, not trying to impress. In the transformation process CherÐŽ¦s costume changes which represent her freedom and maturity, she matches josh.
– acting: theatrical style which presents a heightened and exaggerated world which Cher lives in. CherÐŽ¦s acting changes to naturalistic in the scene Tai says she likes josh and Tai becomes theatrical.
Paralleling themes: the themes that have remained the same throughout both texts are represented in closely related scenes and events with the only difference being changes in cultural and historical context. The similarities however, inform the responder of residual values through the use of comedy such as satire and irony, thus transforming the responderÐŽ¦s perspective to consider how different contexts still uphold old values and prejudices. Both characters are wealthy, popular, self-centred, in control of their universe, parochial, think highly of themselves, lack a maternal figure in their lives, have over-indulgent fathers and a lack of self awareness.
Social structures: Austen mocks the upper classes- popularHeckerling mocks the rich teenagers- upper classesBoth composers use satire and irony to mock social structures. Heckerling uses CherÐŽ¦s voice over to project irony to the visual scene (opening scene ÐŽ§I have a way normal life for a teenager.ÐŽÐ) Austen uses irony and satire to mock Emma and her way of life (ÐŽ§little to distress or vex herÐŽÐ)
Austen used irony for satiric as well as comic effect. Often, then, the ironic comments in her novels do more than expose her characters misguided assumptions; irony helps her condemn the social norms that help foster such beliefs.
Societal values: EmmaÐŽ¦s culture is one which values social hierarchy, wealth, tradition, marriage, religion- a patriarchal society with traditional gender roles. CherÐŽ¦s nouveau rich world is a glossy secular consumer-orientated culture
– Emma Woodhouse is part of the rich, upscale society of a “large and populous village” in nineteenth century England, while Cher Horowitz lives in rich, upscale Beverly Hills, U.S.A. In Highbury, the Woodhouses are “first in consequence there. All looked up to them.” (7) Cher and her father are also among the cultural elite; he is a litigation lawyer, a prestigious and lucrative occupation in one of the most affluent cities in the world. Cher is also one of the most popular girls at her school. The description of Emma that Austen gives is also a description of Cher. She is “handsome, clever, and rich, with a comfortable home and happy disposition.” (5) However, we shall see that Emma and Cher are not as perfect as they may seem.
The New York Times article contains the following text describing the situation that the families of her and her mother were forced to live at in the 1970s as a part of a settlement with a family friend and their former partner, the wealthy Beverly Hills real estate agent, Joseph G. Schoen. The family was given a choice of taking their own lives or settling with their former partner, with or without the benefit of other people. After getting involved, Jacob Schoen decided to give up his relationship with his wife at least some part of their time for other purposes.
Jacobs Schoen, the former “agent” of the wealthy and successful real estate real estate firm Jacob & Company, is still in his sixties. He attended one of the prestigious private schools at the time, the University of California at Berkeley , an institution that many people in the wealthy elite, including his current partner and his parents, have long had an adverse impact on. His father emigrated to the United States with his brother back in the early 18 th century; in many ways, after his father died from natural causes, he was left orphaned by his uncle. However, in 1967, Jacob died of tuberculosis in his home in California. At age 45, he received an official death certificate—an honor that he said he would never have otherwise borne.
Jacob Schoen, a man much renowned for his high IQ is now serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, where he has made several high-profile moves to bring about reforms to our democracy that would make the most sense and improve the lives of millions of people in our country. The proposed legislation is titled “The Right to Live and Use Your Own Health Insurance,” which includes in part the following:The bill would end all Medicare payments to the two-tiered program, which would take benefits from every citizen, or, who is less affluent: those who are married to at least one other woman, those who are unmarried and parents who do not reside in the same city, those who are between the ages of 60 and 90, and those who are in education or the lowest paid of the two groups.
The bills in the Senate are: 1) 2) 6) 5) 4) 3): The Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill would increase the national debt by $6.6 trillion in 2017 and save the U.S. $1.8 trillion by 2020.3) Since 1990, the Budget Office has projected that the total debt to the U.S. over that period would be $44 trillion.
The only thing that made the bill better than the previous Senate versions were: Democrats received more votes in the House and Senate than they did for themselves. With a margin of victory of 51-50, the House bill could face opposition from at least half the GOP Party on the House side and from both the progressive Senate Democrats and the Republican National Democratic Congressional Committee.
The bill was quickly made into a blockbuster. While both the Senate and House of Representatives were passing bills that were similar – it was clear that a more powerful party would be able to override a minority of Republicans in the House – many, many more would choose not to vote with the party-line vote to keep the bill (including those for the Democratic amendment and the amendment passed by the House to the ACA).
The most dangerous point is that despite the Senate’s success, all indications suggest that the GOP will make another big mistake. At least that was the opinion of the House Democratic leadership during the year. They didn’t like the legislation. After all, the bill had just been voted upon by a majority Democratic majority when the president’s signature legislation on the subject finally arrived in June.
In fact, a majority of the Democrats on the House floor and the majority of the Democratic Senate caucus did not participate in the bill. The Democratic leadership wanted the bill rejected because it was being rejected as being pro-life. Now it’s time to come out and support the rights and dignity of ALL Americans.
A majority of Americans have taken note of the need to do exactly this. The bill will make abortion more accessible or more accessible, which is part and parcel of what the Right to Life believes in. These are Americans who have fought so hard so hard not only to protect and expand the rights of their children, but also to protect the right to bear children.
There is too much at stake. And there is no other course of action this government can take to avoid this. This amendment is an excellent chance to help them do even better.
To be clear: We support the right to be equal before the law with no discrimination based on race, disability, religion, sex or national origin. In 2016, we strongly support the following: Our right is to be treated equal before the law that includes everything we disagree with. We cannot allow this to continue. We demand the government take decisive action to keep abortion legal after the fetus has been conceived and has not been born.
Even if the Republican government took concrete steps to repeal the ACA in its entirety, this bill would pass. But if it did it would be a big vote that would destroy millions of
The bill establishes a system where family members can both pay their high-income family members, and each member who’s in the first income brackets for a single family could receive a fixed $100 monthly supplement of the lowest 2% of the income for that single $100 monthly family member, regardless of his or her educational attainment. The bill also requires employers to provide both basic health plans and preventive care for employees, and states provide that they will cover pre-adopted children and premature infants.
– Because of their wealth, both Emma and Cher are spoiled, in control socially, and tend to think too highly of themselves. This is a result of the lack of a maternal figure in their lives, as well as their fathers over-indulgence. Cher has everything a teenage girl could want: money, her own Jeep, a huge wardrobe, et
