The characters of the Bride, Mother, and Leonardo seem to be in misery throughout the start of the play. The mother's misery is different from that of the Bride and Leonardo because she is sad about her dead husband and son. She knows that she will never be able to fix this, so she is very open about portraying her misery. This is especially apparent in the first scene when she has a break down when the Bridegroom asks for a knife. To deal with her sadness, she projects her emotions on other things, like knives and the Felixes. She knows her anger toward them won't fix anything, but it is just a method for coping with it.
The Bride and Leonardo, however, feel a very different kind of misery. Their misery stems from not being able to see each other, even though they are still in love. Unlike the mother's misery, they believe that the situation causing it can be solved. They meet late at nights, probably to plan their escape. In order to mask this attempt at eliminating their misery, they lie and talk down to their families and friends. This constant lying and harsh language gives them control over the people around them, therefore they can hide their secret. This concealed way of dealing with their misery contrasts the open way that the Mother deals with her misery. Since all three characters did not end up happy at the end of the play, it shows that Lorca was trying to say that there is no correct way to deal with your misery. This conclusion would make sense because Lorca himself suffered from depression, and maybe through this play he was trying to portray how hopeless it seems trying to escape it.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Journal #2: Blood Wedding
Leonardo is the perfect example of an archetypical character. He is very self-centered, which is proven by his tendency to lie to his family and talk down to people. Both of these tendencies are illustrated when Leonardo reacts to the mother-in-law revealing that he was formerly engaged to the bride. "But I stopped seeing her! (To his Wife) Are you going to cry now? Stop it! Let's go see the child" (23). Leonardo blatantly lies about whether he is still seeing the bride, and then follows up the lie by commanding his wife not to cry. His tendencies to lie and talk down to people reveal his self-centeredness, which explains why he was greedy enough to ride of with another person's bride on their wedding day.
The bride is a copy of Leonardo in regards to their personality. She talks down to her maid and lies about knowing whether Leonardo had been by to see her or not. The maid, excited about the wedding, inquires about seeing what the wedding presents were. The bride responds by saying "Be quiet, I said! Let's talk about something else" (37). The deeming tone in the bride's dialogue indicates that she thinks higher of herself than she does of other people. Later on, when the maid expresses that she had seen Leonardo at her window last night, the bride responds by yelling "That's a lie! A lie! What would he come here for?" (38). Her blatant denial of the fact that she had been seeing Leonardo reflects Leonardo's insistence that he had not visited the bride. This, along with both of them having the tendency to talk down to people, shows that the bride's personality is a copy of Leonardo's. This allows Leonardo to persuade the bride to run away from her wedding with him, because there high egos and ability to lie allowed them to get away with it.
The bride is a copy of Leonardo in regards to their personality. She talks down to her maid and lies about knowing whether Leonardo had been by to see her or not. The maid, excited about the wedding, inquires about seeing what the wedding presents were. The bride responds by saying "Be quiet, I said! Let's talk about something else" (37). The deeming tone in the bride's dialogue indicates that she thinks higher of herself than she does of other people. Later on, when the maid expresses that she had seen Leonardo at her window last night, the bride responds by yelling "That's a lie! A lie! What would he come here for?" (38). Her blatant denial of the fact that she had been seeing Leonardo reflects Leonardo's insistence that he had not visited the bride. This, along with both of them having the tendency to talk down to people, shows that the bride's personality is a copy of Leonardo's. This allows Leonardo to persuade the bride to run away from her wedding with him, because there high egos and ability to lie allowed them to get away with it.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Journal #1: Blood Wedding
The symbol of the vineyard represents masculinity. This symbol is repeated many times in the first scene, and it is portrayed as something that one must work hard to earn and maintain. Males in this society were supposed to tend the land and provide for their family, so the work that goes into the vineyard parallels the work of a man. The bridegroom has been preoccupied thinking about his bride when his mother reminds him that he "better hoe the vines over by the little mill. You've been neglecting them" (11). The mother is trying to remind her son not to forget his masculinity in the coming marriage, because masculinity will bring her lots of grandchildren. The vineyard also represents the property that only males can own and maintain in order to provide for their families. Mother expresses her feeling of being out of place in a man's setting when her son asks to take her to the vineyard. "What would an old woman do in the vineyard!" (7) she exclaims, portraying that the vineyard is a man's place and a man's place only. The vineyard represents land that only a man can own, therefore earning him respect and portraying him as a wealthy powerful person. This will come into use later during the marriage because wealth was a big influence in marriage during that time. Lorca uses the symbol of the vineyard to portray that a man earns his power and respect through what he owns.
The symbol of flowers represents innocence. When the mother is ranting about the knife, she describes her murdered husbands as having been "two men who were like two Geraniums" (7). Flowers are connotated as fresh, young, and clean. Given these descriptions, the men could be determined to have been good, hardworking men who were in their prime of life and had not been involved in any criminal business. The tragedy in their death comes with the death of people who were so innocent, and that is what makes the mother so sad. Flowers will likely be used later on in the play to foreshadow whether a character is innocent or not. If the character rejects flowers or doesn't like them, it may mean that they have bad intentions. The flowers create the obvious tension between the Felizes and the mother because the mother hates the Felixes for killing her innocent family members. Seeing flowers may later on remind the mother of those actions and revive her anger at the Felixes. Lorca uses flowers to represent innocence because he thinks that the worst deaths are those of young innocent people.
The symbol of flowers represents innocence. When the mother is ranting about the knife, she describes her murdered husbands as having been "two men who were like two Geraniums" (7). Flowers are connotated as fresh, young, and clean. Given these descriptions, the men could be determined to have been good, hardworking men who were in their prime of life and had not been involved in any criminal business. The tragedy in their death comes with the death of people who were so innocent, and that is what makes the mother so sad. Flowers will likely be used later on in the play to foreshadow whether a character is innocent or not. If the character rejects flowers or doesn't like them, it may mean that they have bad intentions. The flowers create the obvious tension between the Felizes and the mother because the mother hates the Felixes for killing her innocent family members. Seeing flowers may later on remind the mother of those actions and revive her anger at the Felixes. Lorca uses flowers to represent innocence because he thinks that the worst deaths are those of young innocent people.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Journal #3: The Wild Duck
None of the characters are without blame for the tragedy of Hedvig dying except for Hedvig herself. Old Werle was at fault for having the illegitimate child with Gina, who kept it a secret. Gregers tried to reveal the secret and in doing so brought about Hedvig's death. Hjalmar was probably the least to blame out of all the main characters, yet he was the only one to blame himself after the affair was over. The secrets were hidden from him, and one could not blame him for leaving for a short amount of time after being told that his daughter wasn't his. In the chaos he comes to the conclusion that Hedvig faked her love for him. He realized he was wrong after Hedvig died and blames himself. "And I drove her from me like an animal! And she crept terrified into the loft and died out of love for me" (215). Hjalmar believes his actions were the sole cause of her death, yet other people were responsible for making Hjalmar act that way. The other characters blame Gregers for bringing out the truth and ruining the family. Relling says "[o]h, life would be good in spite of all, if we only could have some peace from these damned shysters who come badgering us poor people with their 'summons to the ideal'" (216). Gregers is blamed by most of the characters for Hedvig's death because he revealed the truth. Through this blame, Ibsen is trying to say that the truth should not always be said in every situation..
Journal #2: The Wild Duck
Ibsen used the motifs of decay, disease, and illness to express the revealing of the truth. The motifs of disease and/or illness are most evident in the case of Hedvig's eyesight. The fact that she is doomed to be blind gives evidence to her blood relationship to Werle, who is also going blind. This situation is one that Gina tries to keep a secret, but Hjalmar eventually figures it out on his own. "Don't come near me, Hedvig! Keep away. I can't bear seeing you. Oh, the eyes! Goodbye" (196). Hjalmar made the connection between Hedvig and Werle's eyesight, revealing the truth. Hedvig, because of this, feels that Hjalmar doesn't love her anymore and her eyes reflect the chaos that ensued after the truth was revealed. "(with desperate eyes). He's left us, mother! He's left us! He'll never come back again!" (196). The chaos that happens after the revealing of a truth is also expressed earlier in Act 4 through the motif of decay. Once Hjalmar learns that Gina slept with Werle before they were married he describes his situation with words that have the connotations of decay. "A man's whole moral foundation can crumble under his feet; that's the dreadful thing" (186). The revealing of the truths about Gina's past dealings with Werle and the true father of Hedvig result in the portrayal of the motifs of disease, illness, and decay. Through displaying that the telling of the truth has these negative effects, Ibsen is trying to say that the truth should be kept a secret in certain situations.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Journal #1: The Wild Duck
Option 2:
Hjalmar has a false perception of himself. He views himself and his family as being in a condition which they don't deserve, which may be partially true. However, he claims that he is trying to restore his family's honor by building a great invention, although during the entirety of the play he is never mentioned to have been working on the invention. His time is actually spent attending dinner parties, hunting with his father, and building little contraptions for the wildlife in his attic. These things, along with taking away time that he could spend working on his invention, also distract him from his work. The people who actually do his work are his wife and daughter, who he ironically bans from getting an education and who he labels as the members of the family who take care of the little, unimportant things. "My general rule is to delegate the routine matters to her, and that leaves me free to retire to the living room to think over more important things" (167). This quote captures his arrogant attitude, and his complete unawareness that the women are the ones who actually take care of the house and family.
Hjalmar has misconceptions about the women in his family. He believes that they are dependent and devoted to him. This belief is reinforced by the fact that both Gina and Hedvig act submissive and thankful to him whenever he is around. This gives Hjalmar the feeling of being important and in control, when in reality he doesn't do much to help the family. His job as a photographer is in most cases done by his wife or daughter, who also keep the house clean and keep track of money. When Hjalmar is not around, however, Gina and Hedvig take on the more important roles that Hjalmar pretends to fill. They do his work and Hedvig reads books, an action forbidden by Hjalmar.
Gregers is the only one who realize these misconceptions placed on Gina and Hedvig by Hjalmar. He actively attempts to make them aware of this fact by bringing up circumstances where they do the important jobs that Hjalmar was supposed to do. While Hjalmar is hunting with Old Ekdal, Gregers says to Gina, "[s]o we might say that it's you who runs the business" (165). Gina immediately defends her husband by saying that she does the job when Hjalmar is busy with other things. The truth is that Hjalmar is busy with other things that are not as important as his job. He claims to be working on some big meaningful invention but in reality he is just being distracted by other things. He is unaware to the fact that he doesn't get anything done and that it is the women who get it done for him. Gregers is the only one who notices this and intervenes by trying to make these circumstances obvious to the women.
Hjalmar has a false perception of himself. He views himself and his family as being in a condition which they don't deserve, which may be partially true. However, he claims that he is trying to restore his family's honor by building a great invention, although during the entirety of the play he is never mentioned to have been working on the invention. His time is actually spent attending dinner parties, hunting with his father, and building little contraptions for the wildlife in his attic. These things, along with taking away time that he could spend working on his invention, also distract him from his work. The people who actually do his work are his wife and daughter, who he ironically bans from getting an education and who he labels as the members of the family who take care of the little, unimportant things. "My general rule is to delegate the routine matters to her, and that leaves me free to retire to the living room to think over more important things" (167). This quote captures his arrogant attitude, and his complete unawareness that the women are the ones who actually take care of the house and family.
Hjalmar has misconceptions about the women in his family. He believes that they are dependent and devoted to him. This belief is reinforced by the fact that both Gina and Hedvig act submissive and thankful to him whenever he is around. This gives Hjalmar the feeling of being important and in control, when in reality he doesn't do much to help the family. His job as a photographer is in most cases done by his wife or daughter, who also keep the house clean and keep track of money. When Hjalmar is not around, however, Gina and Hedvig take on the more important roles that Hjalmar pretends to fill. They do his work and Hedvig reads books, an action forbidden by Hjalmar.
Gregers is the only one who realize these misconceptions placed on Gina and Hedvig by Hjalmar. He actively attempts to make them aware of this fact by bringing up circumstances where they do the important jobs that Hjalmar was supposed to do. While Hjalmar is hunting with Old Ekdal, Gregers says to Gina, "[s]o we might say that it's you who runs the business" (165). Gina immediately defends her husband by saying that she does the job when Hjalmar is busy with other things. The truth is that Hjalmar is busy with other things that are not as important as his job. He claims to be working on some big meaningful invention but in reality he is just being distracted by other things. He is unaware to the fact that he doesn't get anything done and that it is the women who get it done for him. Gregers is the only one who notices this and intervenes by trying to make these circumstances obvious to the women.
Monday, April 9, 2012
Journal #3: 1984
Motifs: Orwell uses the motif of food to represent Winston's hope of a better way of life. The higher quality of the food coincides with his beliefs that people are supposed to live a better life. In the beginning of the novel, for example, the quality of the food is very bad. Him and his Party members live off of stale bread and thin soup. This low quality food relates to Winston's belief at the time that their way of life was worse than it should have been, and he believed that at some point in the past it had been better. Later in the book, when Winston starts meeting up with Julia, she starts to smuggle in higher quality food to their hiding place. It is at these times that Winston believes that their style of living was how people were supposed to live. "He wondered vaguely whether in the abolished past it had been a normal experience to lie in bed like this, in the cool of a summer evening, a man and a woman with no clothes on, making love when they chose, talking of what they chose, not feeling any compulsion to get up, simply lying there and listening to peaceful sounds outside" (146). This thought of Winston's comes after he had some of the higher quality food. This prompts him to think that his present lifestyle is of a better quality than what he had previously been experiencing, and that all people should be allowed to live like him. Later in the book after Winston was captured by the thought police, a starving man is placed in the cell with Winston. Another inmate tries to offer him food but the guards stop him. This shows how the Party is controlling the quality of life in the prison. Good food has represented a better, freedom filled lifestyle for Winston so the thought police are depriving him of that by putting him under constant surveillance and depriving him of food altogether. Orwell uses food to represent Winston's hope of a better way of life. The quality of food changed throughout the novel, showing Winston's struggle to find a better way of life, his success in finding a better way of life, and then his loss of that lifestyle when the thought police captured him. Orwell uses food to show this because it is something that is essential for human life, and he believes that a free lifestyle is essential as well.
Setting: The setting in the last third of the book is very restricting. Winston is either physically restricted or under surveillance at all times. This differs from the first two thirds mainly because Winston is now in prison, where he can no longer avoid the eyes of the thought police. The oppressive state of the prison is shown in the first page of part three as Winston is examining his cell. "Concealed flooded it with cold light, and there was a low, steady humming sound which he supposed had something to do with the air supply. A bench, or a shelf, just wide enough to sit on ran around the wall, broken only by the door and, at the end opposite the door, a lavatory pan with no wooden seat. There were four telescreens, one in each wall" (231). The connotations of the words concealed and cold gives off a very oppressed feeling, and that feeling is verified by the fact that there is four telescreens watching Winston at all times. The loss of his ability to express himself due to the restrictive setting takes away Winston's individuality, and allows him to ultimately be brainwashed like all the other Party members. After a long time in confinement, he starts believing the things O'Brien tells him because he doesn't have the option to oppose any argument that he is given. Through this restrictive setting, Orwell is trying to show the reader that an oppressive society is bad because it takes away people's individuality, making them prone to the brainwashing that happens in Totalitarian societies. Orwell included this because he saw parts of the world heading in that direction, and he wanted to warn the world of what might happen.
Language: Orwell uses irony in the description of O'Brien to express the irony within the whole society. Winston has always viewed O'Brien as an intelligent individual who had the mental capacity to see through the lies of the Party. He believes this even more once O'Brien reveals that he is on Winston's side in the battle against the Party. Yet in the end, O'Brien really was with the Party all along, and was blind to the lies which the Party portrayed. Winston first realizes this when he is being interrogated by O'Brien. O'Brien had just destroyed an incriminating piece of paper, and Winston responded "'it did exist! It does exist! It exists in memory. I remember it. You remember it.''I do not remember it,' said O'Brien. Winston's heart sank. That was doublethink" (255). Winston discovers that O'Brien practiced the Party term doublethink, and therefore is not even aware that he is practicing it. This is ironic because O'Brien is portrayed as a very insightful and intelligent man, yet he is blind to how the Party has brainwashed him. This irony is present in the rest of the society in 1984. The people in the society constantly celebrate the successes of the Party, but in reality the quality of life has been deteriorating. Orwell, through his use of irony, has shown how a Totalitarian government could corrupt and brainwash even the most intelligent people into believing the government's ideals. He shows that a whole society could be corrupted as well, and therefore be blind to the fact that their quality of life is slowly getting worse. Orwell opposed Totalitarian governments because of this, and he wrote this book as a warning because he saw such groups as the British Labor Party, USSR, and the Nazis as exhibiting the start of the behaviors that he wrote about in his book.
Setting: The setting in the last third of the book is very restricting. Winston is either physically restricted or under surveillance at all times. This differs from the first two thirds mainly because Winston is now in prison, where he can no longer avoid the eyes of the thought police. The oppressive state of the prison is shown in the first page of part three as Winston is examining his cell. "Concealed flooded it with cold light, and there was a low, steady humming sound which he supposed had something to do with the air supply. A bench, or a shelf, just wide enough to sit on ran around the wall, broken only by the door and, at the end opposite the door, a lavatory pan with no wooden seat. There were four telescreens, one in each wall" (231). The connotations of the words concealed and cold gives off a very oppressed feeling, and that feeling is verified by the fact that there is four telescreens watching Winston at all times. The loss of his ability to express himself due to the restrictive setting takes away Winston's individuality, and allows him to ultimately be brainwashed like all the other Party members. After a long time in confinement, he starts believing the things O'Brien tells him because he doesn't have the option to oppose any argument that he is given. Through this restrictive setting, Orwell is trying to show the reader that an oppressive society is bad because it takes away people's individuality, making them prone to the brainwashing that happens in Totalitarian societies. Orwell included this because he saw parts of the world heading in that direction, and he wanted to warn the world of what might happen.
Language: Orwell uses irony in the description of O'Brien to express the irony within the whole society. Winston has always viewed O'Brien as an intelligent individual who had the mental capacity to see through the lies of the Party. He believes this even more once O'Brien reveals that he is on Winston's side in the battle against the Party. Yet in the end, O'Brien really was with the Party all along, and was blind to the lies which the Party portrayed. Winston first realizes this when he is being interrogated by O'Brien. O'Brien had just destroyed an incriminating piece of paper, and Winston responded "'it did exist! It does exist! It exists in memory. I remember it. You remember it.''I do not remember it,' said O'Brien. Winston's heart sank. That was doublethink" (255). Winston discovers that O'Brien practiced the Party term doublethink, and therefore is not even aware that he is practicing it. This is ironic because O'Brien is portrayed as a very insightful and intelligent man, yet he is blind to how the Party has brainwashed him. This irony is present in the rest of the society in 1984. The people in the society constantly celebrate the successes of the Party, but in reality the quality of life has been deteriorating. Orwell, through his use of irony, has shown how a Totalitarian government could corrupt and brainwash even the most intelligent people into believing the government's ideals. He shows that a whole society could be corrupted as well, and therefore be blind to the fact that their quality of life is slowly getting worse. Orwell opposed Totalitarian governments because of this, and he wrote this book as a warning because he saw such groups as the British Labor Party, USSR, and the Nazis as exhibiting the start of the behaviors that he wrote about in his book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)