Although this semester has been difficult and/or stressful at times, I would have to say that I have gained something from this experience. At the beginning of this year, I did not even know what it meant to "analyze" a quotation. But in these last few weeks in particular, I feel like I've made a really big jump and I feel fairly confident writing a commentary piece or putting together an essay about literature. I understand more about literature and the way that techniques can actually shape meaning other than just what's written in the words. I was definitely frustrated a lot during the class because I felt like I just couldn't get it, but it is rewarding to see all that struggle turn into writing that actually sounds insightful and intelligent. Overall, one of the biggest things that has changed in my writing is the maturity level. When I read things that I wrote in the past, they sound like they were written by a kid. But now, when I read things that I write, they sound mature and less juvenile. I still struggle a bit with organizing my papers and getting the jumble of ideas in my head into something fluid and coherent, but I've improved a lot.
Aside from the actual English portion, it is always a good thing to go through something that is a challenge, as frustrating as it might be for someone who is used to being perfect. It's good to have to struggle sometimes and if you do get that A, it really feels like you earned every last point of it.
I'm not going to say this was my favorite class ever. But it was not a waste of time and I did gain a good sense of self appreciation and self knowledge, as well as a LOT of literary analytic skills. I'm definitely glad that I took the class. And I think anyone who goes through that struggle of taking this class is miles and miles ahead of their peers who chose not to.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Lorca #6
Act I.
1. "I know she's a good girl. That's true isn't it? Quiet, hardworking. She bakes her bread and sews her skirts" (8).
This has a connection to gender roles and how women were viewed in society, their role in the home, etc. She talks about her being "good" which could also connect to the Catholic Church.
2. "One man, some children- and a wall six feet thick, to shut out everything else."
Gender roles again, and the place of women. Also the idea of marriage and it's significance or lack thereof.
3. "The blood was flowing
Stronger than water."
This image of water connects to Surrealism. The artistic movement that Lorca was apart of. And can connect to the idea of the "id" or subconscious.
Act II.
1. "And every time I think about it, there is a new guilt that swallows up the old. But there is always guilt". (47).
This could be a connection to the Catholic Church because a big part of their doctrine is trying to live without sinning and repenting your sins, and confession so that ties into guilt.
2. "But they carry off the dead and you must keep silent. Or people will criticize." (60).
I thought this connected to political aspects, and the Spanish Civil War because it's people feeling like all this unfairness is happening and all this death but they can't speak up.
3. "It has come one again- the our of blood! Two sides! you with your sand me with mine!" (77).
Another reference to the Civil War because it could suggest the splitting of families and friends. And suggest the brutality and intensity of the war that it was able to divide even families.
Act III.
1. "The world is wide-everyone can live in it."
I thought that this could connect to Lorca's sexuality and also the feeling of an outcast. The line really jumped out at me as social commentary on Lorca's part as far as judgement goes. And that the world is big enough for all kinds of people, regardless of how you are and everyone should be able to live at peace.
2. "They both fell dead [...] that's how it was. Nothing more. It was just." (99).
This seems like a connection to war and how there really wasn't anything more, just a lot of death. Also it's interesting how he insinuates that it was fair because both sides died.
3. "Cover your face with a veil.
Your children are children of yours,
Nothing else matters to you.
you must place a cross made of ashes
On the bed where his pillow has been."
This sounds like a possible reference to the church and also gender roles a little bit because this woman just had her husband and the father of her son and "nothing matters".
1. "I know she's a good girl. That's true isn't it? Quiet, hardworking. She bakes her bread and sews her skirts" (8).
This has a connection to gender roles and how women were viewed in society, their role in the home, etc. She talks about her being "good" which could also connect to the Catholic Church.
2. "One man, some children- and a wall six feet thick, to shut out everything else."
Gender roles again, and the place of women. Also the idea of marriage and it's significance or lack thereof.
3. "The blood was flowing
Stronger than water."
This image of water connects to Surrealism. The artistic movement that Lorca was apart of. And can connect to the idea of the "id" or subconscious.
Act II.
1. "And every time I think about it, there is a new guilt that swallows up the old. But there is always guilt". (47).
This could be a connection to the Catholic Church because a big part of their doctrine is trying to live without sinning and repenting your sins, and confession so that ties into guilt.
2. "But they carry off the dead and you must keep silent. Or people will criticize." (60).
I thought this connected to political aspects, and the Spanish Civil War because it's people feeling like all this unfairness is happening and all this death but they can't speak up.
3. "It has come one again- the our of blood! Two sides! you with your sand me with mine!" (77).
Another reference to the Civil War because it could suggest the splitting of families and friends. And suggest the brutality and intensity of the war that it was able to divide even families.
Act III.
1. "The world is wide-everyone can live in it."
I thought that this could connect to Lorca's sexuality and also the feeling of an outcast. The line really jumped out at me as social commentary on Lorca's part as far as judgement goes. And that the world is big enough for all kinds of people, regardless of how you are and everyone should be able to live at peace.
2. "They both fell dead [...] that's how it was. Nothing more. It was just." (99).
This seems like a connection to war and how there really wasn't anything more, just a lot of death. Also it's interesting how he insinuates that it was fair because both sides died.
3. "Cover your face with a veil.
Your children are children of yours,
Nothing else matters to you.
you must place a cross made of ashes
On the bed where his pillow has been."
This sounds like a possible reference to the church and also gender roles a little bit because this woman just had her husband and the father of her son and "nothing matters".
Lorca #5
1. The symbolism of the woodcutter, beggar woman and moon
The woodcutter, beggar woman and moon are all symbols that intertwine. The moon is a symbol for time, and as it comes upon Leonardo and the bride, the moon says "Who is hiding? Come out, I say! No! They cannot escape!" If the moon is representative of time, then this could connect to the idea that no one can run from time and it passes regardless of how we feel. Even when things happen that feel as though time as stopped, no one can escape. Also, if time is connected to the beggar woman who represents death, you could make the connection that death, similar to time, is impartial and affects everyone regardless of status, wealth, love, etc. You could say that the two are immovable forces that come and go as they please.
2. What happens when the runaway couple are caught?
When the runaway are couple are caught, it is not specifically described. But the beggar woman stands with her back to the audience, spread out "like a great bird with immense wings", which implies death. Leonardo and the groom seem to have killed each other. But the bride remains unharmed. So even though the couple tried to run, the moon (time) shone on them and they were caught and the bird (death, beggar woman) found them anyways. So again, death and time are inescapable.
3. What happens to the Mother after the death of her son?
The mother, who has been full of passion and worry for her son throughout the play has been very verbal all of a sudden she is completely at peace. Which is interesting because although it's not a good thing that her son died, because everyone in her life is dead now she has nothing to worry about losing anymore. She's lost everything. And I suppose there is some comfort in knowing that you can't fall any further. All you have to do is wait. This may serve as some sort of "emotional cleansing" but it doesn't really feel right. But if she is at peace after the death, then she seems to have also lost her passion. So this may somehow connect to an idea that you can't have peace and passion at the same time. Where there is passion, there will always be struggle.
4. At least three significant lines of imagery
"And I will lie at your feet-
Guarding what you dream-
Naked, watching the fields
As if I were your dog.
Because I am! I look at you:
Your beauty makes me burn!" (91).
I like this line a lot because there's just so much imagery and passion put into these words. The fact that she is willing to lie at his feet like a dog, you can just see how loyal she is to him and how she will protect him for as long as she lives. Also, the way that she says "Naked, watching the fields" like she is emotionally naked- she's completely exposed her entire heart to him and offers up her whole self. She's not keeping anything hidden- she's open with him. And how his beauty makes her burn is related to this inner fire you can imagine the passion inside her for him.
"The wind blows hard, with a double edge."-Moon
"The same flame destroys
Two stalks of wheat at once". -Leonardo
I thought it was interesting because you see this theme of two sides, and a double edge. And at the end of the play, both sides that were fighting ended up dead. So I feel like it connects to this theme that war takes a toll on both sides and regardless of who "wins" nobody really wins because blood is spilled on either side and this "same fire has destroyed two stalks of wheat at once". This same exact thing- has devastated both sides at the same time.
5. What elements of a tragedy does Lorca incorporate in Blood Wedding?
There are definitely elements of tragedy. One of the things that we read about was sympathy for both sides and I feel like that is true with Lorca's story. Because actually all of his characters are quite relatable and it realy depends who you are and how you feel. Which makes me wonder who the antagonist is in this story? Is it the bride? Because it seems as though depending on your ideals, you could dislike or like her. So it's interesting how he managed to weave a story in which you can see the perspective of all the main players. Also, as far as tragedy goes, there is definitely internal struggle. The most blatant being with the bride as she struggles with her inner desires and the passion in her heart, versus her logic and the security that the groom brings, and expectations. But other characters have it too. Like Leonardo who also seems to struggle with his wife versus his desire for the bride. And also even the mother of the groom who struggles with letting her son go even though she knows it's what has to happen, she wants to keep him safe. I'm not sure about the catharsis in this play. It could be felt I suppose in a variety of places a certain type of relief but I don't know if it's truly "catharsis" or not. For example, I felt relieved when the bride finally gave into her passions and ran away with the groom. But then I suppose others felt relieved when the groom finally caught them. It seems like one of the most subjective plays that I've read as far as who you "like" and who you "dislike".
The woodcutter, beggar woman and moon are all symbols that intertwine. The moon is a symbol for time, and as it comes upon Leonardo and the bride, the moon says "Who is hiding? Come out, I say! No! They cannot escape!" If the moon is representative of time, then this could connect to the idea that no one can run from time and it passes regardless of how we feel. Even when things happen that feel as though time as stopped, no one can escape. Also, if time is connected to the beggar woman who represents death, you could make the connection that death, similar to time, is impartial and affects everyone regardless of status, wealth, love, etc. You could say that the two are immovable forces that come and go as they please.
2. What happens when the runaway couple are caught?
When the runaway are couple are caught, it is not specifically described. But the beggar woman stands with her back to the audience, spread out "like a great bird with immense wings", which implies death. Leonardo and the groom seem to have killed each other. But the bride remains unharmed. So even though the couple tried to run, the moon (time) shone on them and they were caught and the bird (death, beggar woman) found them anyways. So again, death and time are inescapable.
3. What happens to the Mother after the death of her son?
The mother, who has been full of passion and worry for her son throughout the play has been very verbal all of a sudden she is completely at peace. Which is interesting because although it's not a good thing that her son died, because everyone in her life is dead now she has nothing to worry about losing anymore. She's lost everything. And I suppose there is some comfort in knowing that you can't fall any further. All you have to do is wait. This may serve as some sort of "emotional cleansing" but it doesn't really feel right. But if she is at peace after the death, then she seems to have also lost her passion. So this may somehow connect to an idea that you can't have peace and passion at the same time. Where there is passion, there will always be struggle.
4. At least three significant lines of imagery
"And I will lie at your feet-
Guarding what you dream-
Naked, watching the fields
As if I were your dog.
Because I am! I look at you:
Your beauty makes me burn!" (91).
I like this line a lot because there's just so much imagery and passion put into these words. The fact that she is willing to lie at his feet like a dog, you can just see how loyal she is to him and how she will protect him for as long as she lives. Also, the way that she says "Naked, watching the fields" like she is emotionally naked- she's completely exposed her entire heart to him and offers up her whole self. She's not keeping anything hidden- she's open with him. And how his beauty makes her burn is related to this inner fire you can imagine the passion inside her for him.
"The wind blows hard, with a double edge."-Moon
"The same flame destroys
Two stalks of wheat at once". -Leonardo
I thought it was interesting because you see this theme of two sides, and a double edge. And at the end of the play, both sides that were fighting ended up dead. So I feel like it connects to this theme that war takes a toll on both sides and regardless of who "wins" nobody really wins because blood is spilled on either side and this "same fire has destroyed two stalks of wheat at once". This same exact thing- has devastated both sides at the same time.
5. What elements of a tragedy does Lorca incorporate in Blood Wedding?
There are definitely elements of tragedy. One of the things that we read about was sympathy for both sides and I feel like that is true with Lorca's story. Because actually all of his characters are quite relatable and it realy depends who you are and how you feel. Which makes me wonder who the antagonist is in this story? Is it the bride? Because it seems as though depending on your ideals, you could dislike or like her. So it's interesting how he managed to weave a story in which you can see the perspective of all the main players. Also, as far as tragedy goes, there is definitely internal struggle. The most blatant being with the bride as she struggles with her inner desires and the passion in her heart, versus her logic and the security that the groom brings, and expectations. But other characters have it too. Like Leonardo who also seems to struggle with his wife versus his desire for the bride. And also even the mother of the groom who struggles with letting her son go even though she knows it's what has to happen, she wants to keep him safe. I'm not sure about the catharsis in this play. It could be felt I suppose in a variety of places a certain type of relief but I don't know if it's truly "catharsis" or not. For example, I felt relieved when the bride finally gave into her passions and ran away with the groom. But then I suppose others felt relieved when the groom finally caught them. It seems like one of the most subjective plays that I've read as far as who you "like" and who you "dislike".
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Lorca #4
(Question 3: Youth)
I thought it was interesting how many children appear in the play, and in particular the second act. None of them have names or seem to be important characters but there are always children around asking questions and stuff. In general, children represent innocence so it's interesting to have all this innocence contrasted by the harsh past of the two families, where you have lies and cheating and murder.
In one scene, the bride is talking to two little girls and they both want pins from the bride which signify who gets married, kind of like throwing the bouquet at a typical American wedding. And the bride seems really exasperated with all of their questions about who she gave which pin to and who's going to get married first. Finally the bride says "Do you want it so badly?" and the little girl says "Yes." and the bride says "Why?" to which the other girl responds "Well...". It's interesting that they are so excited and anxious to get married but they don't really have an answer for why. This could connect also to Lorca's social commentary. He could be suggesting something about the way that women, even from childhood, are just focused on getting married. Maybe it's not a good thing that marriage is seen as being so important. So he could use these children to represent how these ideals of society start at such a young, innocent age and force women into this specific role that they maybe aren't happy with.
(Question 1: Misery)
The two main characters in misery are the bride and Leonardo. The bride hardly says one positive thing the entire play. At one point, when she speaks to the little girls she says "And I don't care! I have a lot to think about.". The fact that she's raising her voice to a young child simply asking her questions on her wedding day speaks volume about the amount of pain that she is in. She also repeatedly says that she "doesn't know anything". And the stage directions say she is 'restless, in a great inner struggle'. I think that it's most interesting that she is so awful, to her groom and family and so obviously miserable but they all almost pretend not to notice it and act like it's normal. It's almost like people just want everything to go with the societal norms and they don't even really care if she's happy or not. Again, this could be social commentary by Lorca about how the numerous expectations of society cause a persons feelings and desires to take a back seat to what other people want and it simply ends up making people miserable. This is definitely something that can be related to no matter what time, culture or generation a person is from.There's always some form of pressure from society and expectations, whether it's gender related or cultural or whatever, that a person feels like they have to live up to even if it makes them miserable.
I thought it was interesting how many children appear in the play, and in particular the second act. None of them have names or seem to be important characters but there are always children around asking questions and stuff. In general, children represent innocence so it's interesting to have all this innocence contrasted by the harsh past of the two families, where you have lies and cheating and murder.
In one scene, the bride is talking to two little girls and they both want pins from the bride which signify who gets married, kind of like throwing the bouquet at a typical American wedding. And the bride seems really exasperated with all of their questions about who she gave which pin to and who's going to get married first. Finally the bride says "Do you want it so badly?" and the little girl says "Yes." and the bride says "Why?" to which the other girl responds "Well...". It's interesting that they are so excited and anxious to get married but they don't really have an answer for why. This could connect also to Lorca's social commentary. He could be suggesting something about the way that women, even from childhood, are just focused on getting married. Maybe it's not a good thing that marriage is seen as being so important. So he could use these children to represent how these ideals of society start at such a young, innocent age and force women into this specific role that they maybe aren't happy with.
(Question 1: Misery)
The two main characters in misery are the bride and Leonardo. The bride hardly says one positive thing the entire play. At one point, when she speaks to the little girls she says "And I don't care! I have a lot to think about.". The fact that she's raising her voice to a young child simply asking her questions on her wedding day speaks volume about the amount of pain that she is in. She also repeatedly says that she "doesn't know anything". And the stage directions say she is 'restless, in a great inner struggle'. I think that it's most interesting that she is so awful, to her groom and family and so obviously miserable but they all almost pretend not to notice it and act like it's normal. It's almost like people just want everything to go with the societal norms and they don't even really care if she's happy or not. Again, this could be social commentary by Lorca about how the numerous expectations of society cause a persons feelings and desires to take a back seat to what other people want and it simply ends up making people miserable. This is definitely something that can be related to no matter what time, culture or generation a person is from.There's always some form of pressure from society and expectations, whether it's gender related or cultural or whatever, that a person feels like they have to live up to even if it makes them miserable.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Lorca #3
Flower: Flowers come up a lot throughout the book so far and are definitely a motif. They could also be a symbol. In general, flowers could be a symbol of new beginnings. Possibly fragile beginnings, like the beginning of a marriage or the beginning of a life. Since so far there is a marriage about to happen and a baby. There are also specific flowers that get mentioned. For example, "a plant called Jupiter, with blood-red flowers, but then it died". So that could be a beginning that didn't work out. Because the father ended up dying. I think that flower could represent something delicate and new and could be a symbol for life.
Knives: Knives get associated with death a lot in the book and the knife could obviously be a symbol for death. But it could also be a symbol for passion, and for blood since a knife draws blood. It also seems like it could be a symbol for strength. The mother seems to be afraid of knives because of their potential to do harm. but then on the flip side, the son needs the knife because he has to go to the farm and cut the vines and they need those tools to make a living. So it's interesting the contrast between knives being something potentially dangerous but also something that is useful and necessary. So the knife could represent, in the play, something or things which one struggles with because it can be good and it's necessary for well being but it is also potentially harmful. This could apply to numerous things, even relationships.
Horse/ lullaby: A horse needs water in order to live, yet for some reason the horse doesn't want water. So the horse must represent someone or something that is rejecting what they need. And they keep saying for the child to go to sleep and that the horse begins to cry. But it doesn't really make sense why the horse is crying once it's choosing not to drink the water? It also says "don't come! don't enter! go off to the mountain. through the gray valleys. the mare awaits." The mare is the female horse so that's an interesting point that the horse is going off to the mountains to find a female. So isntead of being something that the horse needs which it is rejecting, since a horse is expected to get water, the horse could represent someone who is going against the norms of society. And maybe it's because of love? Or another cause? Then a couple pages later they continue the lullaby and talk about a "Silver dagger" in the horse's eye and blood that is "stronger than water" so if blood represents family or sacrifice maybe that means more to him?
comments:
Courtney's Blog: "It's interesting how you mentioned the child as a possible symbol? I think that is a good idea. What do you think the child could be a symbol of? Possibly innocence or new beginnings?"
Sara's Blog: I like how you mentioned the archetype of the neighbor. I agree it seems really stereotypical of a neighbor to know lots of information. But then a lot of it may or may not be true which is also interesting. I wonder if that will be important as the book goes on and who could a "neighbor" represent in society?
Knives: Knives get associated with death a lot in the book and the knife could obviously be a symbol for death. But it could also be a symbol for passion, and for blood since a knife draws blood. It also seems like it could be a symbol for strength. The mother seems to be afraid of knives because of their potential to do harm. but then on the flip side, the son needs the knife because he has to go to the farm and cut the vines and they need those tools to make a living. So it's interesting the contrast between knives being something potentially dangerous but also something that is useful and necessary. So the knife could represent, in the play, something or things which one struggles with because it can be good and it's necessary for well being but it is also potentially harmful. This could apply to numerous things, even relationships.
Horse/ lullaby: A horse needs water in order to live, yet for some reason the horse doesn't want water. So the horse must represent someone or something that is rejecting what they need. And they keep saying for the child to go to sleep and that the horse begins to cry. But it doesn't really make sense why the horse is crying once it's choosing not to drink the water? It also says "don't come! don't enter! go off to the mountain. through the gray valleys. the mare awaits." The mare is the female horse so that's an interesting point that the horse is going off to the mountains to find a female. So isntead of being something that the horse needs which it is rejecting, since a horse is expected to get water, the horse could represent someone who is going against the norms of society. And maybe it's because of love? Or another cause? Then a couple pages later they continue the lullaby and talk about a "Silver dagger" in the horse's eye and blood that is "stronger than water" so if blood represents family or sacrifice maybe that means more to him?
comments:
Courtney's Blog: "It's interesting how you mentioned the child as a possible symbol? I think that is a good idea. What do you think the child could be a symbol of? Possibly innocence or new beginnings?"
Sara's Blog: I like how you mentioned the archetype of the neighbor. I agree it seems really stereotypical of a neighbor to know lots of information. But then a lot of it may or may not be true which is also interesting. I wonder if that will be important as the book goes on and who could a "neighbor" represent in society?
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Lorca #2
Symbols:
flowers
horse
water
knives
branches
trees
vineyards
Archetypes:
Mother: There's two different mothers, there's the groom's mother and also Leonardo's mother-in-law. Both are portrayed as being nurturing and loving their children and taking care of them. It seems as though Lorca embraces the archetype of a nurturing mother figure. Leonardo's mother in law is helping her daughter take care of the baby and the groom's mother is worrying about her son.
Bride: When the audience first meets the bride it becomes clear that there are certain expectations of a women and that she is supposed to marry, have children and not do much else. Her father brags that she "never speaks". So apparently women weren't really expected to talk much. And the mother warns her and makes sure she knows what she is "giving up" by being a wife. But after the mother and groom leave, the bride changes and becomes more animated and not docile at all. She yells at the maid and acts like she doesn't really even want to be a wife. It seems as though maybe Lorca is rejecting the archetype of a wife from this scene.
flowers
horse
water
knives
branches
trees
vineyards
Archetypes:
Mother: There's two different mothers, there's the groom's mother and also Leonardo's mother-in-law. Both are portrayed as being nurturing and loving their children and taking care of them. It seems as though Lorca embraces the archetype of a nurturing mother figure. Leonardo's mother in law is helping her daughter take care of the baby and the groom's mother is worrying about her son.
Bride: When the audience first meets the bride it becomes clear that there are certain expectations of a women and that she is supposed to marry, have children and not do much else. Her father brags that she "never speaks". So apparently women weren't really expected to talk much. And the mother warns her and makes sure she knows what she is "giving up" by being a wife. But after the mother and groom leave, the bride changes and becomes more animated and not docile at all. She yells at the maid and acts like she doesn't really even want to be a wife. It seems as though maybe Lorca is rejecting the archetype of a wife from this scene.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Ibsen/Anouilh Compare and Contrast
Antigone Pastiche:
Anastasia: So why bother telling me?
William: Would you rather begin a marriage with lies?
Anastasia: I never would have found out. I loved him.
William: So what's next?
Anastasia: I'll go back home. Before the blizzard gets worse.
William: Don't be alone for Hanukkah, Anastasia. Pay a visit to your sister. It will be good for you.
Anastasia:Okay.
William: It's for the best.There will be other men. Marriage is sacred. No place for lies.
Anastasia: Okay.
Ibsen Pastiche.
Father: I wish you would stay with me. I'm been lonely all my life son, but especially now as I begin to age when the cold winter months set in. It would be nice to have someone around-
Son: You have Mrs. Jones.
Father: Yes, I do- I don't know what I'd do without her. She's lovely, smart, she brings a whole new light into the house- that's what I truly need.
Son: Well, then I guess you have everything you need.
Father: Yes, but I don't know if it can continue. You know what people will say about a woman like her. I may as well say, a man doesn't gain anything from it either.
Son: I'm sure a man of your status can afford the risk.
Father: Oh but what about her? She won't stand for it for too long- even if she did- with all the gossip- do you really think-
Comparison:
I agree that Anouilh was easier to work with. His style is very clear and it is more natural to mimic his crisp lines and tones. Ibsen, on the other hand, is a lot more inconsistent. His writing tends to be more choppy, often broken up with dashes which symbolize things the characters don't say. Anouilh doesn't tell things in chronological order because he wants to emphasize the characters motivations rather than the plot. Ibsen tells the story in chronological order, which should be easier to understand but reading Ibsen requires the audience to make a lot of inferences, which can make things confusing. Although characters motivations are important in Ibsen as well. Also Ibsen doesn't have any type of narration or Chorus and Anouilh does. Ibsen has the audience more submerged in the actual actions and events, focusing his main points and what's happening, and who is saying what, etc. Anouilh has a Chorus which makes the audience feel more removed from the actual plot, since that is not really his focus. Even more so, he has the Chorus break the 4th wall and speak directly to the audience, using a lot of metaphors. It definitely switches his focus to be more external than Ibsen.
Anastasia: So why bother telling me?
William: Would you rather begin a marriage with lies?
Anastasia: I never would have found out. I loved him.
William: So what's next?
Anastasia: I'll go back home. Before the blizzard gets worse.
William: Don't be alone for Hanukkah, Anastasia. Pay a visit to your sister. It will be good for you.
Anastasia:Okay.
William: It's for the best.There will be other men. Marriage is sacred. No place for lies.
Anastasia: Okay.
Ibsen Pastiche.
Father: I wish you would stay with me. I'm been lonely all my life son, but especially now as I begin to age when the cold winter months set in. It would be nice to have someone around-
Son: You have Mrs. Jones.
Father: Yes, I do- I don't know what I'd do without her. She's lovely, smart, she brings a whole new light into the house- that's what I truly need.
Son: Well, then I guess you have everything you need.
Father: Yes, but I don't know if it can continue. You know what people will say about a woman like her. I may as well say, a man doesn't gain anything from it either.
Son: I'm sure a man of your status can afford the risk.
Father: Oh but what about her? She won't stand for it for too long- even if she did- with all the gossip- do you really think-
Comparison:
I agree that Anouilh was easier to work with. His style is very clear and it is more natural to mimic his crisp lines and tones. Ibsen, on the other hand, is a lot more inconsistent. His writing tends to be more choppy, often broken up with dashes which symbolize things the characters don't say. Anouilh doesn't tell things in chronological order because he wants to emphasize the characters motivations rather than the plot. Ibsen tells the story in chronological order, which should be easier to understand but reading Ibsen requires the audience to make a lot of inferences, which can make things confusing. Although characters motivations are important in Ibsen as well. Also Ibsen doesn't have any type of narration or Chorus and Anouilh does. Ibsen has the audience more submerged in the actual actions and events, focusing his main points and what's happening, and who is saying what, etc. Anouilh has a Chorus which makes the audience feel more removed from the actual plot, since that is not really his focus. Even more so, he has the Chorus break the 4th wall and speak directly to the audience, using a lot of metaphors. It definitely switches his focus to be more external than Ibsen.
Monday, January 2, 2012
The Wild Duck Journal #5
From what me and my group discussed about the Wild Duck and reading the articles about a tragedy, I didn't feel like The Wild Duck was a tragedy. It seems to have some of the elements of a tragedy but is also lacking in a few areas. Hedvig's death could definitely be called "undeserved suffering" and according to the article, that alone does not make it tragic. It's definitely sad, but I don't know if it's truly a "tragedy". It seems to lack a strong character that could compare to the likes of Hamlet, or Romeo, or Antigone. The closest thing I suppose is Gregers. Plus, as far as catharsis, or emotional cleansing, Gregers sort of realizes the way that he has hurt this family and that maybe his way of thinking and truth isn't right in all scenarios but then again he never comes out and says that. So I don't know if it's really "cleansing". And, it's not even his daughter that died. He ruined someone elses life.
It's interesting that it doesn't exactly seem to fit with the mold of "tragedy" since this play seems like it is more sad than Antigone because the person who dies is completely innocent and naiive and didn't even really understand the situation. She just died for no reason and no good or change really came out of it. Her parents marraige seems like it's worse and Gregers doesn't even really seem to understand any more than he did before. I feel that mostly it lacks a sense of relief and cleansing for the audience.
It's interesting that it doesn't exactly seem to fit with the mold of "tragedy" since this play seems like it is more sad than Antigone because the person who dies is completely innocent and naiive and didn't even really understand the situation. She just died for no reason and no good or change really came out of it. Her parents marraige seems like it's worse and Gregers doesn't even really seem to understand any more than he did before. I feel that mostly it lacks a sense of relief and cleansing for the audience.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)