Read the excerpt from act iii of the importance of being earnest. lady bracknell. [with a shiver, crossing to the sofa and sitting down.] i do not know whether there is anything peculiarly exciting in the air of this particular part of hertfordshire, but the number of engagements that go on seems to me considerably above the proper average that statistics have laid down for our guidance. i think some preliminary inquiry on my part would not be out of place. mr. worthing, is miss cardew at all connected with any of the larger railway stations in london? i merely desire information. until yesterday i had no idea that there were any families or persons whose origin was a terminus. [jack looks perfectly furious, but restrains himself.] how can lady bracknell asking miss cardew (cecily) if she is "at all connected with any of the larger railway stations in london" be seen as a reflection of victorian social codes?

Lady Bracknell is referring to Cecily’s guardian- Jack’s background as he was an orphan found in a baby carriage in London railway station.

Explanation:

As appearances were of paramount importance in Victorian society, Lady Bracknell is enquiring if Cecily suits his fiancée’s wealthy status and social class. As a moral guardian of social distinctions, this wealthy lady asks for titles and family names to prevent lower classes climbing the social ladder. If Cecily happens to be a parentless child from a working class, the future bride would lack a suitable financial inheritance or dowry.  

anyone who was dealing with communism in soviet union in his time had an ideal picture of equality, freedom, the struggle of the working class for a better future, the success of the aristocracy's overthrow and the emancipation of subjugation.   however, anyone who would go to soviet union to see the functioning of the communist system, would be convinced that it was about sad people, about everyday bad life, about the brutal attitude of communist leaders, about ill obsession to completely exterminate every thought on aristocracy. thus, orwell wanted to show all the absurdity, the brutality of the system, the unbearable rule of suspicious morality, the ignorant people who try to play professionally.

the answers are: b. and e.

hmm, sadly there is no dialogue. there is no place in the story where he is talking to anyone. it's more of just describing what he eats and where he sleeps. you have to become anne frank, give details of where you are, what other folks look like, how the environment is. have a little bit of dialogue tell of what people are specifically saying. anne frank talked about her entire household including the people, the objects, the lighting, the food they ate, and even the smell in the air. there has to be more to your diary entries, the whole story in its current state is only about peter van daan, the food, the sounds, and where he sleeps. also he seems to be writing only once a year yet more than that happened from day to day. for a friend, i can you write it out, if you want.