Let's Get This Bread
4. What does Mr. Brocklehurst's analogy between the ill-prepared breakfast and the "sufferings of the primitive Christians... the torments of martyrs... the exhortations of our blessed Lord Himself" reveal about his character? How does this attitude contrast with that of Miss Temple to reveal the author's social message?
Okay, first, let's set the scene. There's our main character, Jane, who's currently a student at the Lowood Institute, a school that boards other girls in the exclusive company of teachers and mentors. Lowood's inhabitants constantly endure meager living conditions in order to transform themselves into "children of Grace", as lovely individual Mr. Brocklehurst asserts. Unfortunately, Brocklehurst is also the arrogant, misogynistic, toe-rag dingleberry who constitutes the governing board of Lowood and who goes all Siddhartha on Miss Temple when he finds out that she's granting the girls certain "privileges"; you know, exaggerated luxuries like actual food and heat and whatnot. All these injustices serve author Charlotte Bronte's subtle presentation of a social commentary on religion and gender roles and a criticism of Brocklehurst's hypocritical attitude. An analysis of these thematic enigmas will arrive in due time, but I'm going to start with the man himself, who's really just pushing my feminist buttons.
Examining Butthole Brocklehurst
First of all, Mr. Brocklehurst legitimately philosophizes that he is satiating the Lord's duties by physically and emotionally depriving Lowood's girls. As he tells Miss Temple: "I have a Master to serve whose kingdom is not of this world...", going on to then severely condemn the 8th deadly sin of curly hair. Prior to that, when his rant still focuses on his Godly doctrines, he states peevishly, "You are aware that my plan in bringing up these girls, is not to accustom them to habits of luxury and indulgence, but to render them hardy, patient, and self-denying." Apparently, Brocklehurst has interpreted the pursuit of Christian living to present as the imposition of pain and suffering unto others, despite living a lavishly comfortable life himself. Whereas Brocklehurst is afforded the doors unlocked by power and wealth, he legitimatizes his behavior by "teaching" the Lowood girls asceticism as justified by the Lord's obvious necessitation of such skills. Yeah, okay. But Brocklehurt's gross, ironic, and hypocritical character provide a platform by which Bronte contrives her social commentary upon, so let's look at Brocklehurst's utility in furthering her message, rather than continuing to ruminate on his icky personality.
Feminism and Religion
Bronte essentially has two questions floating around in the readers' minds throughout the context of this passage. 1) What does it mean to be a good Christian, and 2) what does it mean to be a good person? Bronte's opinion on the former is repeatedly demonstrated by Brocklehurst's dramatic references to his Godly character, his Godly actions, and his Godly mindset because he is a Godly man to whom God is his only Godly priority. (A Godly "Amen" to that!) Towards the end of his monologue about the merits of bread vs. porridge, Brocklehurst exclaims, "Oh, madam, when you put bread and cheese, instead of burnt porridge, into these children's mouths, you may indeed feed their vile bodies, but you think little how you starve their immortal souls!" Well, alrighty. There are definitely a few fallacies in Brocky's argument. Though Brocklehurst may measure that the worth of a human in the eyes of God is the fortitude of their soul, the fact of the matter remains: Lowood's girls are barely surviving on the physical nutrition provided to them, let alone the depravity of love and affection crucial to maturation. Thus, Brocklehurst is missing out on principles key to raising kind and genuine people.
Furthermore, the contrast created between Brocklehurst and Miss Temple supplements Bronte's argument that Christianity simply isn't everything. Miss Temple is the one attempting to craft a living, rather than a mere existence, out of the Lowood girls' presence by occasionally granting them improved freedoms and "privileges" (edible breakfasts). Yet in the eyes of Mr. Brocklehurst, who holds the authority and power, Miss Temple is committing a sin, explicitly opposing God's mandate concerning the caliber of His followers. As a woman, Miss Temple is inherently inferior to Brocklehurst, and as an individual oppositional to Brocklehurst's beliefs, her status is poorly perceived. While she is the one enacting resonating and benevolent change, her actions go unnoticed in lieu of those (Brocky) who label themselves the true Christians.
At the end of the day, Bronte is calling out those in her society who rationalize their actions under the guise of Christianity. Bronte is basically pointing out that good people and good Christians are not mutually inclusive, contrary to popular belief, and is incentivizing her readers to take a good, hard look at their own conduct. Be a Miss Temple- not a Brocklehurst!
Okay, first, let's set the scene. There's our main character, Jane, who's currently a student at the Lowood Institute, a school that boards other girls in the exclusive company of teachers and mentors. Lowood's inhabitants constantly endure meager living conditions in order to transform themselves into "children of Grace", as lovely individual Mr. Brocklehurst asserts. Unfortunately, Brocklehurst is also the arrogant, misogynistic, toe-rag dingleberry who constitutes the governing board of Lowood and who goes all Siddhartha on Miss Temple when he finds out that she's granting the girls certain "privileges"; you know, exaggerated luxuries like actual food and heat and whatnot. All these injustices serve author Charlotte Bronte's subtle presentation of a social commentary on religion and gender roles and a criticism of Brocklehurst's hypocritical attitude. An analysis of these thematic enigmas will arrive in due time, but I'm going to start with the man himself, who's really just pushing my feminist buttons.
Examining Butthole Brocklehurst
First of all, Mr. Brocklehurst legitimately philosophizes that he is satiating the Lord's duties by physically and emotionally depriving Lowood's girls. As he tells Miss Temple: "I have a Master to serve whose kingdom is not of this world...", going on to then severely condemn the 8th deadly sin of curly hair. Prior to that, when his rant still focuses on his Godly doctrines, he states peevishly, "You are aware that my plan in bringing up these girls, is not to accustom them to habits of luxury and indulgence, but to render them hardy, patient, and self-denying." Apparently, Brocklehurst has interpreted the pursuit of Christian living to present as the imposition of pain and suffering unto others, despite living a lavishly comfortable life himself. Whereas Brocklehurst is afforded the doors unlocked by power and wealth, he legitimatizes his behavior by "teaching" the Lowood girls asceticism as justified by the Lord's obvious necessitation of such skills. Yeah, okay. But Brocklehurt's gross, ironic, and hypocritical character provide a platform by which Bronte contrives her social commentary upon, so let's look at Brocklehurst's utility in furthering her message, rather than continuing to ruminate on his icky personality.
Feminism and Religion
Bronte essentially has two questions floating around in the readers' minds throughout the context of this passage. 1) What does it mean to be a good Christian, and 2) what does it mean to be a good person? Bronte's opinion on the former is repeatedly demonstrated by Brocklehurst's dramatic references to his Godly character, his Godly actions, and his Godly mindset because he is a Godly man to whom God is his only Godly priority. (A Godly "Amen" to that!) Towards the end of his monologue about the merits of bread vs. porridge, Brocklehurst exclaims, "Oh, madam, when you put bread and cheese, instead of burnt porridge, into these children's mouths, you may indeed feed their vile bodies, but you think little how you starve their immortal souls!" Well, alrighty. There are definitely a few fallacies in Brocky's argument. Though Brocklehurst may measure that the worth of a human in the eyes of God is the fortitude of their soul, the fact of the matter remains: Lowood's girls are barely surviving on the physical nutrition provided to them, let alone the depravity of love and affection crucial to maturation. Thus, Brocklehurst is missing out on principles key to raising kind and genuine people.
Furthermore, the contrast created between Brocklehurst and Miss Temple supplements Bronte's argument that Christianity simply isn't everything. Miss Temple is the one attempting to craft a living, rather than a mere existence, out of the Lowood girls' presence by occasionally granting them improved freedoms and "privileges" (edible breakfasts). Yet in the eyes of Mr. Brocklehurst, who holds the authority and power, Miss Temple is committing a sin, explicitly opposing God's mandate concerning the caliber of His followers. As a woman, Miss Temple is inherently inferior to Brocklehurst, and as an individual oppositional to Brocklehurst's beliefs, her status is poorly perceived. While she is the one enacting resonating and benevolent change, her actions go unnoticed in lieu of those (Brocky) who label themselves the true Christians.
At the end of the day, Bronte is calling out those in her society who rationalize their actions under the guise of Christianity. Bronte is basically pointing out that good people and good Christians are not mutually inclusive, contrary to popular belief, and is incentivizing her readers to take a good, hard look at their own conduct. Be a Miss Temple- not a Brocklehurst!
ANNE ROSS! Your blog was a pleasure as always. We chose the same question and took it in similar directions, which was cool. I appreciated your connections to psychology, including the concept of maturation, probably in reference to Maslow's Hierarchy of needs. I thought that that was a really interesting way to do that cross-discipline thing our IB teachers (lovingly) try to get us to do. Also, you know I love psych so that was awesome. I also liked that you picked up on the notes of hypocrisy in Mr. Brocklehurst's character. I really liked the commentary that Bronte was making with this aspect of the character. One thing that I included in my blog which I thought highlighted this aspect in particular was the fact that his family(I assumed it was his wife and daughters) walked into the facility in rather posh clothing. It was clear that they were indulging in all of the things Mr. Brocklehurst was trying to "protect" the students at the school from. One of two things is happening here: he thinks his female family members suck or he thinks they are above the law he is trying to enforce in the school.
ReplyDeleteReally good post Anne-Ross! Reading your post was really enjoyable and entertaining. The sense of humor was greatly appreciated. I the two questions that you made in the third paragraph and how you created a temporary TOK moment. I thought you did a phenomenal (<--finally was able to spell that word) job analyzing and pointing out the flaws in the argument. Also, I liked how you created a religion vs natural science scene that paragraph and found it very interesting. Extraordinary well written and enjoyable to read!
ReplyDeleteHey there Anne Ross. First of all I love how I can hear you actually talking through the post, and you don't just sound like some sort of old-age philosopher contemplating the meaning of life. I also love the addition of the words "dingleberry" and "toe-rag" which really make the post funny and entertaining to read. You did a fantastic job of analyzing all of your evidence, and going into enough detail to prove every aspect of your point- even pulling in some outside evidence (such as the maturation article). The contextualization at the beginning of the post also made it much more understandable, especially for someone like me, who used a freebie. The only thing I wish you would have done is included an image of some sort, preferably displaying "butthole Brocklehurst". Overall, I loved it! :)
ReplyDeleteHi!! First of all, not even mentioning how well you crafted your analysis, I love reading blog posts that include a distinct author's style, and I love how you incorporated your voice into the post (when I read "toe-rag dingleberry" I lost it ahaha). I loved the setup of your blog as well- establishing the character of Brocklehurst (*pretends to vomit*) and then diving into your analysis of how he is used as a social commentary. I really don't have any critiques to make this post even better, I thought you did an amazing job and I really look forward to commenting on your future blog posts!
ReplyDeleteHey Anne Ross-
ReplyDeleteFun post here! Love the organization and the voice (and your peers do as well)! Here's further feedback from the blog post rubric:
- Postings provide comprehensive insight, understanding, and reflective thought about the topic (4)
- Postings present a specific viewpoint that is substantiated by supporting examples (3)
- Postings are generally well written with some attempts made to stimulate dialogue and commentary (3)
- Postings are written in a style that is appealing and appropriate for the intended audience and a consistent voice is evident throughout (4)
- Postings reflect the author’s personality through word choices that attempt to bring the topic to life (4)
- All images, media and text created by others display appropriate copyright permissions and accurate citations (4)
- Written responses are largely free of grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. The style of writing generally facilitates communication (3)
25/28