Designing Women Essay Research Paper MonetteI watched

Designing Women Essay, Research Paper ?Monette? I watched an older sitcom aired on prime time television in the late 80?s, Designing Women about four typical working ladies. One is a bubble-brain beauty pageant champ. Another is a soft touch and is so easily duped, it seems she also has a soft brain. A third falls in and out of love at the drop of a bathrobe and the fourth has a tongue that makes Howard Stern sound like a Boy Scout.

Designing Women Essay, Research Paper

?Monette?

I watched an older sitcom aired on prime time television in the late 80?s, Designing Women about four typical working ladies. One is a bubble-brain beauty pageant champ. Another is a soft touch and is so easily duped, it seems she also has a soft brain. A third falls in and out of love at the drop of a bathrobe and the fourth has a tongue that makes Howard Stern sound like a Boy Scout. Typical is everything these ladies are not, and as regular viewer I can surely say that every episode clearly proved that.

Each show begins with a concept that can be spun into a script, setting up the conflict between the characters upon which the show is built. The action is centered around “Sugarbakers,” an interior design firm owned and operated by Suzanne (Delta Burke) Sugarbaker, a self-centered former beauty queen who has been clever enough to extract enough alimony funds from her past marriages to open the design business. She is partnered with her older sister Julia (Dixie Carter) Sugarbaker, a jaded, no-nonsense kind of gal who never hesitates to disagree with her younger sister at any time and on just about any topic imaginable. Their partner is the design business is Mary Jo Shively (Annie Potts), a modern woman who’s trying to support herself and her kid and who manages to maintain her sense of balance with her clever and outspoken wit. Charlene Frazier (Jean Smart) is the good-hearted but slow-on-the-uptake receptionist at Sugarbakers. I Felt that the shows writer?s display the women making unrealistic business decisions throughout the episode.

While Suzanne goes on and on about sitting next to an important gentlemen at a benefit the previous night, Charlene receives a telephone call from her high school friend Monette Marlin who has moved to town and bought the old Chadwick mansion. Which is another reason for her calling Charlene — she wants Sugarbaker’s to redecorate the entire structure! The women are as excited at the proposition of the new job as Charlene is about having heard from Monette. Monette was everything Charlene wanted to be…she was sexy and aloof. She claims Monette felt a bond with her because the other cheerleaders had money and they were poor; besides, Monette felt sorry for her because Charlene had a crooked cartwheel.

At the Chadwick mansion, Monette takes the women on a tour of the place though Charlene hasn’t arrived yet. Charlene finally arrives and she and Monette make a fuss and sing each other praises. Monette says that Charlene has the best heart in the world, she just doesn’t have the best taste in men. Monette takes Charlene on her own private tour leaving Julia, Mary Jo and Suzanne to discuss the possibilities of the project. When a man enters asking for Monica (Monette), they tell him she’s busy upstairs, he says he will wait. They try to ignore him, until he asks Julia if he requested her would he be able to have her specifically. She says she doesn’t know what he is talking about, but the answer is no. When he explains that he thought she worked for Monica, Mary Jo inquires if Monica is a you know what? The man says that is what he gathered from his last visit. In reference to being a Madam.

Back at Sugarbaker’s, Charlene is recounting her memories of high school when Mary Jo breaks her mood by telling her what happened while she was touring with Monette. Julia goes on to say that they are NOT going to decorate a house of ill repute. Charlene suggests that they not turn it down until they are absolutely sure about Monette’s occupation and offers to ask her. Monette explains that she originally started looking for affection she missed as a child and found out she could make a lot of money and she is proud of what she has accomplished. Julia goes on how what Monette is doing degrades women, but she believes that getting in touch with Charlene after twelve years, is a sign that she is ready to make a change. With that, Charlene makes Monette promise she will think about changing her profession and to always stay in touch. Though the story line implies that Monette is considering retiring from prostitution, but I remember throughout watching many episodes she makes at least two other appearances over the course of the series in which she is still in the business.

In this particular episode the girls stress that they just cannot complete the job, so they are willing to sacrifice all of the money that they would make to simply to make they?re ?morally correct business decision?. On the other hand how morally correct is it that the Designing Women show is based on a decorating firm that is financially based on Suzanne?s alimony that she has successfully collected from previous marriages to old rich men. Old rich men being her motive to even pursing those relationships. Personally I see that as being as morally incorrect as you can possibly get. Instead these ladies are more concerned about a not decorating a whorehouse.

Typical business?s and typical businesswomen would have most definitely accept a business proposition like the one plotted in this episode. Clearly that was thousands of dollars those ladies lost just because they found it morally incorrect to decorate a house due to the fact that the actions that would go on inside ?degrades women?. I don?t think so. I can account for several occasions when my Mother has had to make several unethical business decisions in her real-estate career. She has taken leads from friends in the same field as her, misled buyers and customers listing houses. In this country or better said as my own personal opinion if money is at stake then morals and what may or may not be ethically correct has no play.

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ