Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Blood Wedding #3
The ending is important in Oedipus and Blood Wedding. In both texts, there is a power and relationship aspect. In Oedipus, he and Jocasta are happily married and ruling over Thebes. However, throughout the play the reader learns of Oedipus' twisted fate and his outcome. This play ends in death; Jocasta kills herself due to the anguish of what she has done, and Oedipus gouges out his eyes. Causing for there to be multiple tragic events within the end of the play. Sophocles allows for this play to be ended in a way that a sequel could be created. But, also, Sophocles does not just end the play in a happy way. There is tragedy!
In Blood Wedding, the Bride and Bridegroom are preparing for marriage. Also, there becomes an idea of what transpired between Leonardo and Bride previously. Because of what transpires during the wedding, leads to a tragic ending. Lorca writes the play in a way that allows for the audience to keep guessing. There could be a sequel with the lack of a capped ending. By having both Leonardo and Bridegroom dying in the end, it allows for a story to blossom around Bride.
In Wild Duck, the way Ibsen ends the play is slightly different from both plays by Sophocles and Lorca. Ibsen allows for there to be a sequel, but the primary storyline dies with Hedvig. (Then again do does that of Oedipus and Blood Wedding). However, Ibsen's play is harder to create a sequel for. By having Hedvig die, Ibsen creates more of a rounding off affect. The play isn't as opened out as the other two.
By not rounding off, it allows for relating to the real world and allows for a more branched discussion. By opening out, readers are more likely to relate to the text and grow fonder to it. The more connection that are able to be made, then the more analysis that can come out of it. Opening out allows for more connections to other texts to be made.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Blood Wedding #2
Yes, the plot should be valued more highly that the style. Especially in Oedipus! In Oedipus, the dramatic irony is important in the play, but the plot is even more important. If the plot weren't there, then the play would be completely different and the dramatic irony wouldn't even matter. Without the story line, the dramatic irony would have no affect and would thus be pointless.
Also, the plot should be more valued than the style in Blood Wedding. The poetic feeling of the play and the rich language isn't as important as the plot. Without the plot, there would be no use for literary devices, therefore the plot should be more valued.
In Wild Duck, the plot is important because it's what makes the play a tragedy. However, without the styles used, the play cannot be what we believe it is.
I'm contradicting myself now, but I guess they are both important. The pot is seen as more important, but isn't necessarily because you would not reach the plot without having the style. Without the style, the play would not be a tragedy either. Without the dramtic irony, the play wouldn't be a tragedy.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Blood Wedding #1
Certainty is absurd because there is no way to be certain. However, doubt has a meaning to it and even though it is unpleasant, it has meaning behind it because there is questioning and understanding. Expressions of doubt exist in Oedipus, Wild Duck, and Blood Wedding.
There is doubt in Oedipus when the messenger comes to tell Oedipus that his father had died. Also, when Oedipus was told that he is not his father's son, he wants to believe it so that he can consider it to be true, but he still had doubts. However, there is certainty for Oedipus when the shepherd is called in to tell the whole story of Oedipus' childhood. The shepherd is the only one that knows the truth. With his story, the whole play becomes tragic. Having doubt caused Oedipus to search further to find certainty. But, by finding certainty, Oedipus is led to a tragic downfall.
Doubt is present in Wild Duck when Gregers tells Hjalmar that there was a sexual relationship between Werle and Gina. Hjalmar wants to believe Gregers because he is his best friend. But, Hjalmar still asks Gina to check for certainty. Gina gives him certainty and Hjalmar becomes disgusted with the daughter that he raised for fourteen years. By finding certainty, Hjalmar is crushed, but also he disowns Hedvig. This disowning of Hedvig leads her to kill herself. The search for certainty leads to the tragic downfall of Hedvig.
In Blood Wedding, doubt is present when Mother is hearing rumors about a previous relationship between Bride and Leonardo. Mother shared the rumors with her son Bridegroom. Certainty isn't really sought for in this situation but certainty is somewhat thrust upon them. In the end when Bride goes off with Leonardo on her wedding day the rumors become certain. This leads the Bridegroom to search for Bride, which leads to his tragic downfall. It is tragic because Bridegroom dies while searching for her.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Wild Duck #5
In Wild Duck, I found that the rumors (and gossip) are important because they also created a tragic fall for Hedvig. However, especially in Wild Duck, it is seen that the elite, social, and "upper" class are the ones that primarily spread rumors. Werle tells Gregers that he will marry Mrs. Sorby and a glimpse into the society is seen by the reader; "I'm afraid she won't put up with it much longer/ And even if she did - even if, out of her feeling for me, she ignored the gossip and backbiting and so on" (Ibsen 134). This shows an insight into the gossip of the elite culture. Relationships are affected by rumors and the reactions people have towards them. Also, Werle causes a rumors to form a rift in the relationship between Hjalmar and Gina; "Is it true - can it possibly be that - that there was some kind of involvement between you and Mr. Werle while you were in service there?" (Ibsen 182). This shows that rumors can affect relationships, even those between married couples. This rumor causes Hjalmar to disown Hedvig leading to her tragic downfall.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
IOP #5
Friday, May 14, 2010
Wild Duck #4
Thursday, May 13, 2010
IOP #4
Wild Duck #3
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
IOP #3
Wild Duck #2
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
IOP #2
Wild Duck #1
Monday, May 10, 2010
Blooms Taxonomy Question #2
Blooms Taxonomy Question #1
IOP #1
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Oedipus #4
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Oedipus #3
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Oedipus #2
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Oedipus #1
Today I met with Tiresias. He kept speaking about a man that is both husband and son to his wife. This man is also brother and father to his children. And, he killed his father! Tiresias is so mysterious, whith all his riddles. He is so annoying! How can I solve this one? I cannot allow anyone to find out that I cheated on solving the riddle of the Sphinx.
I need to save the city. I need to find Laius' murderer! I wonder if Tiresias is behind it?! He would be the perfect suspect; the one supplyin gthe city with all the unknown answers for such a great amount of time. His riddles are so tricky. These would be perfect tools to confuse his followers and make him seem knowledgeable and wise.
What if Creon or the Priest killed Laius? What if I was in the murderer's position? Why wqould I have killed Laius? Would I have wanted his title? Would I have been jealous? Envious?
Did Laius fight back? Would I have fought back? Did he have any chance?
Tiresias said, "This day will bring your birth and your destruction". What does this mean? Does this mean that I will be destroyed on my birthday? How will I be destroyed? I bet he was just using me as an example to implant fear into the community. Tiresias would do something like that; he will do whatever makes him look the most wise. I bet he's jealous that I solved the Sphinx' riddle.
But, Tiresias is confusing me because he said that if I find that he has lied, I can forever "call the prophet blind", but he is.... Tiresias is the prophet, and he is blind. I'm confused. Maybe he means that he will no longer be the prophet?!
Well I've spent enough time reflecting. I must get my beauty rest. I have to save the world tomorrow.
-Oedipus