Stylistic techniques (imagery, figurative language, sensory detail)
"Blood Wedding" is an interesting play so far. The author, Lorca, uses a lot of interesting conflicts. For example, the conflict between the mother and the Felixes. Since the girl that her son is going to marry was in a previous relationship with a Felix, she is an internal conflict of whether or not to let her son marry the girl. Her son wants to be with her, but the mother doesn't want anything to do with the Felix's. It's also interesting to read the way the mother-in-law and the wife talk. They are talking in metaphors, making it hard to understand. The moter also keeps talking about knives and talks in a very descriptive language. The mother also uses a lot of sensory detail "desperation stings my eyes and the very tips of my hair" (Lorca 7). The bride-to-be is also an interesting case. Lorca has the neighbors and the bridegroom describe the girl as a quiet, nice girl. As soon as they leave, she talks in harsh tones and looks as if she is hiding something. The author uses sensory detail to show this; "(Seizing her by the wrists) Let go!" (Lorca 36). The bride gets really angry all of a sudden and acts as if she is hiding something. The author introduces some mystery in the play by putting this about the bride into the play.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Tracking
I am tracking the image of physical and emotional suffering in the plays.
In "Oedipus the King," there are many images of suffering. Oedipus suffers both emotionally and physically when he learns that the prophecy came true. Jocasta kills herself when she finds out that she married her son and Oedipus gouges out his eyes with the same knowledge. Oedipus gouges out his eyes because of the emotional pain caused by the prophecy. After gouging out his eyes he goes to live alone on the mountains, to live until the end of his days with the knowledge of what he did. He suffers physically from gouging out his eyes. Oedipus also is torn away from his daughters as they are "wrenched" from his hands. This causes him even more emotional suffering because he loved his daughters and was worried about what would happen to them once the city found about him.
In "The Wild Duck," there is a lot more emotional than physical suffering. Gregers suffers emotionally from his relationship with his father. Hjalmar suffers from the knowledge Gregers gives him about Gina and Haakon Werle. He then tries to separate from his family. He distances himself from his daughter, Hedvig. She loved him a lot, and it caused her a lot of pain. This eventually leads her to commit suicide. Hedvig suffered emotionally by her father distancing himself for no explicable reason to her. Hedvig's death causes Hjalmar and Gina both to suffer emotionally from their daughter's death. Gregers was horrified by this turn of events, because he thought she was going to shoot the wild duck. This also leads him to suffer emotionally, but not as much as Hjalmar.
In "Oedipus the King," there are many images of suffering. Oedipus suffers both emotionally and physically when he learns that the prophecy came true. Jocasta kills herself when she finds out that she married her son and Oedipus gouges out his eyes with the same knowledge. Oedipus gouges out his eyes because of the emotional pain caused by the prophecy. After gouging out his eyes he goes to live alone on the mountains, to live until the end of his days with the knowledge of what he did. He suffers physically from gouging out his eyes. Oedipus also is torn away from his daughters as they are "wrenched" from his hands. This causes him even more emotional suffering because he loved his daughters and was worried about what would happen to them once the city found about him.
In "The Wild Duck," there is a lot more emotional than physical suffering. Gregers suffers emotionally from his relationship with his father. Hjalmar suffers from the knowledge Gregers gives him about Gina and Haakon Werle. He then tries to separate from his family. He distances himself from his daughter, Hedvig. She loved him a lot, and it caused her a lot of pain. This eventually leads her to commit suicide. Hedvig suffered emotionally by her father distancing himself for no explicable reason to her. Hedvig's death causes Hjalmar and Gina both to suffer emotionally from their daughter's death. Gregers was horrified by this turn of events, because he thought she was going to shoot the wild duck. This also leads him to suffer emotionally, but not as much as Hjalmar.
Wild Duck Journal #4
Readers are attracted to moments of intensity in a writer's work. By what means and with what effect have writers in your study offered heightened emotional moments designed to arrest the reader's attention?
In "Oedipus the King," Sophocles includes a lot of heightened emotional moments. He shows Oedipus in a state where he is going insane because of the prophecy. Sophocles also has a scene where it seems as if the prophecy about Oedipus did not come true. This is one of the "heightened emotional moments." "JOCASTA: / Bringing the MESSENGER closer. / Listen to him, see for yourself what all those awful prophecies of god have come to" (Sophocles 1042-1043). This shows how hopeful Jocasta is that the prophecy did not come true. Sophocles uses dramatic irony, because the chorus implies that the prophecy has come true. This causes the reader to be more interested in the play.
In "The Wild Duck," Ibsen invokes a feeling of pity in the reader. In Act 5, Relling tells Gregers that Hedvig kills herself, but to Hjalmar and Gina it looks as if the pistol went off. They let Hjalmar keep on believing this because it would keep him sane. Before Hedvig died, Hjalmar was angry and about to leave his house. After she died, he decided to stay with Gina. Her death brought them together again. This scene attracts the reader's attention more, because it is more dramatic then most of the other scenes.
In both "Oedipus the King" and "The Wild Duck," Sophocles and Ibsen have increased the readers' attention by adding more dramatic scenes to the play.
In "Oedipus the King," Sophocles includes a lot of heightened emotional moments. He shows Oedipus in a state where he is going insane because of the prophecy. Sophocles also has a scene where it seems as if the prophecy about Oedipus did not come true. This is one of the "heightened emotional moments." "JOCASTA: / Bringing the MESSENGER closer. / Listen to him, see for yourself what all those awful prophecies of god have come to" (Sophocles 1042-1043). This shows how hopeful Jocasta is that the prophecy did not come true. Sophocles uses dramatic irony, because the chorus implies that the prophecy has come true. This causes the reader to be more interested in the play.
In "The Wild Duck," Ibsen invokes a feeling of pity in the reader. In Act 5, Relling tells Gregers that Hedvig kills herself, but to Hjalmar and Gina it looks as if the pistol went off. They let Hjalmar keep on believing this because it would keep him sane. Before Hedvig died, Hjalmar was angry and about to leave his house. After she died, he decided to stay with Gina. Her death brought them together again. This scene attracts the reader's attention more, because it is more dramatic then most of the other scenes.
In both "Oedipus the King" and "The Wild Duck," Sophocles and Ibsen have increased the readers' attention by adding more dramatic scenes to the play.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
The Wild Duck Journal #3
Conversations between characters and/or authors
I will be doing a conversation between Hjalmar Ekdal and Gregers Werle that happened but wasn't shown in the book.
Gregers: So Hjalmar, I see that Hedvig is doing fine.
Hjalmar: Yes, she is just great.
Gregers: And Gina, too?
Hjalmar: Yes, it was nice of your father to arrange the marriage for us.
Gregers: It was very interesting. My mother used to tell me stories when Gina worked at our house.
Hjalmar: What kinds of stories?
Gregers: My father used to be really interested in her. My mother also said that she also showed some interest.
Hjalmar: She did? I can't believe Gina would do something like that.
Gregers: I came on this walk to tell you how my father really is. You shouldn't trust him. Calculate you own income. Don't be in his debt anymore.
Hjalmar: I will do that. Thank you for letting me know. My invention. What will become of my invention?
Gregers: You should continue working on your invention.
Hjalmar: I will use the money I make from my invention to get out of your father's debt. I will continue my own life. Let us head back. I must talk to Gina about this. I need to find out why she wove this web of deception and lies around me.
Gregers: I will let you be back on your way then. I will meet you there in a little while.
Hjalmar: Thank you for this information Gregers. I will see you back.
I will be doing a conversation between Hjalmar Ekdal and Gregers Werle that happened but wasn't shown in the book.
Gregers: So Hjalmar, I see that Hedvig is doing fine.
Hjalmar: Yes, she is just great.
Gregers: And Gina, too?
Hjalmar: Yes, it was nice of your father to arrange the marriage for us.
Gregers: It was very interesting. My mother used to tell me stories when Gina worked at our house.
Hjalmar: What kinds of stories?
Gregers: My father used to be really interested in her. My mother also said that she also showed some interest.
Hjalmar: She did? I can't believe Gina would do something like that.
Gregers: I came on this walk to tell you how my father really is. You shouldn't trust him. Calculate you own income. Don't be in his debt anymore.
Hjalmar: I will do that. Thank you for letting me know. My invention. What will become of my invention?
Gregers: You should continue working on your invention.
Hjalmar: I will use the money I make from my invention to get out of your father's debt. I will continue my own life. Let us head back. I must talk to Gina about this. I need to find out why she wove this web of deception and lies around me.
Gregers: I will let you be back on your way then. I will meet you there in a little while.
Hjalmar: Thank you for this information Gregers. I will see you back.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
The Wild Duck Journal #2
"What is drama but life with the dull bits cut out?" To what extent do you find this statement applicable in at least two plays you have studied?
I this statement really applicable in both "Oedipus" and "The Wild Duck." In "Oedipus," Sophocles shows just one day of his life. This is the day where he finds out that the horrible prophecy came true. This is just one day of his life that happens to have a lot of importance and drama to it. The play is just Oedipus' life with the drama. Sophocles isn't telling a story of one normal day. He is telling a dramatic day of his life.
In "The Wild Duck," Ibsen is showing "dramatic" days of Hjalmar and Greggers' lives. Ibsen doesn't show Greggers working at the mill or a normal day of Hjalmar. He decided to show the scenes of when Hjalmar first meets Greggers after years apart. He could have just as easily decided to show a normal day on the job. The fact that Ibsen decided to show this, shows that this is the characters' lives with the "dull bits" cut out to make a dramatic play.
In both "Oedipus" and "The Wild Duck," Sophocles and Ibsen have showed the interesting parts of the characters' lives. They have decided against showing the normal every day parts of the characters' lives. Instead they have shown the drama and the dramatic parts of their lives: in "Oedipus" the discovery that the prophecy came true; in "The Wild Duck" the meeting of Hjalmar and Greggers after years and their lives after that.
I this statement really applicable in both "Oedipus" and "The Wild Duck." In "Oedipus," Sophocles shows just one day of his life. This is the day where he finds out that the horrible prophecy came true. This is just one day of his life that happens to have a lot of importance and drama to it. The play is just Oedipus' life with the drama. Sophocles isn't telling a story of one normal day. He is telling a dramatic day of his life.
In "The Wild Duck," Ibsen is showing "dramatic" days of Hjalmar and Greggers' lives. Ibsen doesn't show Greggers working at the mill or a normal day of Hjalmar. He decided to show the scenes of when Hjalmar first meets Greggers after years apart. He could have just as easily decided to show a normal day on the job. The fact that Ibsen decided to show this, shows that this is the characters' lives with the "dull bits" cut out to make a dramatic play.
In both "Oedipus" and "The Wild Duck," Sophocles and Ibsen have showed the interesting parts of the characters' lives. They have decided against showing the normal every day parts of the characters' lives. Instead they have shown the drama and the dramatic parts of their lives: in "Oedipus" the discovery that the prophecy came true; in "The Wild Duck" the meeting of Hjalmar and Greggers after years and their lives after that.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
The Wild Duck Journal #1
"Visual action can be as important on the stage as speech." How far do you agree with this claim? In your answer you should refer to two or three plays you have studied.
I think that visual action is just as important on the stage as speech. Without both, the play would be pretty boring. In Oedipus, there are many scenes where the character would be talking and doing some sort of action. For example, there are a few side notes where it says that the character is doing something or other. "Helping a Priest to his feet" (Sophocles line 9), is one such example. The play goes on with Oedipus talking to this character.
There is also imagery. Throughout the play, there are phrases such as "clinging to your altars" (line 18). If an actor says these lines without acting them out, it seems really weird. If a person says "why are you kneeling?" and the person he/she's talking to is just standing and reciting lines, it doesn't look right. The person should then be kneeling. This shows how visual action is just as important as speech.
Similarly, in The Wild Duck, there are different actions in parentheses right next to the characters names: "Hedvig (making signals). Uh-uh!" (Ibsen 141). Again, the character should be making signals instead of just talking. Just talking would make the play a collection of monologues by characters. Having visual action in the plays makes it more interesting and the actor doesn't just have to stand there, but act out what they are saying.
Doing all the motions while saying the lines makes the play a lot more appealing to the audience. If the actors just stand there talking, then the audience will get bored really fast. Visual action will make the audience more engaged in the play. So, I think that visual action is just as important as speech.
I think that visual action is just as important on the stage as speech. Without both, the play would be pretty boring. In Oedipus, there are many scenes where the character would be talking and doing some sort of action. For example, there are a few side notes where it says that the character is doing something or other. "Helping a Priest to his feet" (Sophocles line 9), is one such example. The play goes on with Oedipus talking to this character.
There is also imagery. Throughout the play, there are phrases such as "clinging to your altars" (line 18). If an actor says these lines without acting them out, it seems really weird. If a person says "why are you kneeling?" and the person he/she's talking to is just standing and reciting lines, it doesn't look right. The person should then be kneeling. This shows how visual action is just as important as speech.
Similarly, in The Wild Duck, there are different actions in parentheses right next to the characters names: "Hedvig (making signals). Uh-uh!" (Ibsen 141). Again, the character should be making signals instead of just talking. Just talking would make the play a collection of monologues by characters. Having visual action in the plays makes it more interesting and the actor doesn't just have to stand there, but act out what they are saying.
Doing all the motions while saying the lines makes the play a lot more appealing to the audience. If the actors just stand there talking, then the audience will get bored really fast. Visual action will make the audience more engaged in the play. So, I think that visual action is just as important as speech.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Oedipus Discussion Questions
1. Do you agree with how Oedipus tried to avoid the prophecy? Could he have done something else to avoid the prophecy or should he have just ignored the prophecy? Wouldn't he have just avoided the prophecy altogether if he hadn't married at all or if he decided against killing anybody? How would these decisions have affected Oedipus' life?
2. What evidence can be listed for the motif and image of physical and emotional suffering? How is this motif significant to the play?
2. What evidence can be listed for the motif and image of physical and emotional suffering? How is this motif significant to the play?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)