As I was reading the first act of The Wild Duck, it occured to me that a recurring motif/theme in the play is lies and a desire to find out the truth.
The character Werles, for example, has decieved his son for the 17 years that he has been gone. He has not fully explained Hialmar's mairrage, and has only briefly mentioned it. When Werles arrives home, he is surprised that it is to Gina. In addition, it is unclear on whether Werles himself had an affair with Gina, but if he did, then he is decieving his son again. If he did not, then his wife was the one decieving herself and Gregers. Werles is also decieving Hialmar, not telling him the truth of Gina and his relationship, if there was one. His interest and support of Hialmar and Gina suggest that there is some sort of deciet going on.
Gregers, arriving home, is the one who is trying to discover the truth of what has been going on in his absence. When he and his father talk, he finds out who exactly Hialmar married and is suspicious of his father's role in this.
Overall it seems like Werles is maintaining this web of lies and manipulation, and that Gregers is trying to see through it. It seems like a pretty strong theme/motif.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
Question 2
Should Oedipus have attempted to find out if he murdered his father, or should he have just lived in ignorant bliss?
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Well I'm feeling better about the IOP tomorrow, but I will still probably practice it a few times in the morning. Here is the basic script of what I'm going to say:
For my IOP I will be looking at how cultural and historical events of the time period are processed by the author and appear in We
First some background on the author, Yevgeny Zamyatin
He studied naval engineering in St. Petersburg from 1902-1908, and during this time he joined the Bolsheviks
In the 1905 revolution, he was arrested, but he returned to St. Petersburg illegally and began writing fiction as a hobby
He was arrested and exiled a second time in 1911 but was given amnesty in 1913
He was tried again the next year for his story At World’s End, which criticized the military.
During this time he also contributed to various socialist newspapers
After graduating as a naval engineer he worked in England to supervise the construction of icebreakers
When 1917, came Zamyatin supported the October revolution that brought the Bolsheviks to power, but he opposed the system of censorship that they brought with them.
As time went on, his works became increasingly critical of the soviet union, such as the book We.
He once stated “…” This antiestablishment mindset pervades We, by satirizing the folly of the totalitarian state
Because Zamyatin was living in the Soviet Union, he was heavily influenced by the totalitarianism going on there. This totalitarinism shows up in a number of way in the book
This was the name of the Secret Police in the early years of the Soviet Union. Like in We, the Cheka basically served as the arm of the state, eliminating anyone who did not conform to the state’s idea of a perfect society. It policed labor camps, ran the gulag system, subjected political opponents to torture and execution, and put down rebellions and riots by workers and peasents
One way in which totalitarianism appears is through the secret police. In We the Office of the Guardians functions as the secret police for the One State
This first passage shows the nature of the secret police and surveillance that the numbers of the One State go through. In addition, it shows that the secret police is portrayed as being positive, and is viewed as being “lovingly protecting”. This passage really shows the sarcastic tone that Zamyatin is taking. He is basically saying that the secret police is a good thing sarcastically to criticize the Soviet Union. This is a result of Zamyatin’s oppression from the Soviet Union
This second passage shows some of the power of the secret police-it is required that numbers who have seen a crime report to the office of the guardians
In We, the One State is ruled by the Benefactor, who is all powerful. This is basically a criticism of the early leaders of the soviet union, especially Lennin. Like the benefactor lennin was an autocrat who was loved by most of the citizens.
In this passage, like the other, Zamyatin is really using a sarcastic tone to satirize the soviet union. He compares the Benefactor to “white robed Spider” who has “bound us”, and yet he still supports the benefactor because he has been brainwashed his entire life
In We, the Benefactor is reelected unanimously every year on Unanimity Day. This is pretty much a criticism of the nature of democracy in the Soviet Union’s early years. Although people in the soviet union could vote, they could only vote for people selected by the Communist Party. In fact, until 1987, candidates in the Soviet Union usually received about 99% of the vote.
In We the structure of life is controlled for maximum effeciency. There are extensive mathematical metaphors that go along with this.
Zamyatin was working as a shipbuilder during this time, and the workplace was starting to focus on increasing efficiency and production. A lot of this is due to one man: Fredrick Winslow Taylor.
Taylor was an industrial engineer who sought to improve industrial effeciency. He thought that by analyzing a work cycle, one could find “one best way to work”. He would do this by breaking a job into its component parts and measuring each to the hundredth of a second.
For example, he found that the most efficient shovel could carry 21 and a half pounds, and he designed shovels to carry that amount
In We the numbers have an entire philosophy of Taylorism that they have applied to every aspect of their lives. Like in the other instances, Zamyatin’s personal experience has motivated him to be critical of totalitarianism, in this case, the totalitarianism of Taylor.
The revolutionary leader Lenin was also a supporter of Taylor. So overall Zamyatin’s featuring of Taylorism in We is to criticize its controlling nature when applied to the workplace and the soviet union. He does this by looking at an exaggerated version of it and satirically supporting it.
In We, the One State is constructing a spaceship, the Integral, to conquer other planets and spread their way of life. This is basically a criticism of the Marxist view of a global Communist State, of one group forcefully spreading their idea of a perfect society to other cultures for their own good.
The basic view of a marxist international communist revolution is that a revolution in one country will be followed by revolutions in other countries as the workers rise up and take power. When this didn’t happen the Soviet union was trying to “export communism” so to speak, and spread their idea of a perfect society.
This is where the integral comes in. The integral basically symbolizes this desire of the soviet union to spread the perfect society, except it is going to be spread to other planets, not other countries.
Given Zamyatin’s history with the Soviet Union, it is not surprising that he would criticize them, as he has before.
This quote shows the marxist ultimate goal of a global communist state
For my IOP I will be looking at how cultural and historical events of the time period are processed by the author and appear in We
First some background on the author, Yevgeny Zamyatin
He studied naval engineering in St. Petersburg from 1902-1908, and during this time he joined the Bolsheviks
In the 1905 revolution, he was arrested, but he returned to St. Petersburg illegally and began writing fiction as a hobby
He was arrested and exiled a second time in 1911 but was given amnesty in 1913
He was tried again the next year for his story At World’s End, which criticized the military.
During this time he also contributed to various socialist newspapers
After graduating as a naval engineer he worked in England to supervise the construction of icebreakers
When 1917, came Zamyatin supported the October revolution that brought the Bolsheviks to power, but he opposed the system of censorship that they brought with them.
As time went on, his works became increasingly critical of the soviet union, such as the book We.
He once stated “…” This antiestablishment mindset pervades We, by satirizing the folly of the totalitarian state
Because Zamyatin was living in the Soviet Union, he was heavily influenced by the totalitarianism going on there. This totalitarinism shows up in a number of way in the book
This was the name of the Secret Police in the early years of the Soviet Union. Like in We, the Cheka basically served as the arm of the state, eliminating anyone who did not conform to the state’s idea of a perfect society. It policed labor camps, ran the gulag system, subjected political opponents to torture and execution, and put down rebellions and riots by workers and peasents
One way in which totalitarianism appears is through the secret police. In We the Office of the Guardians functions as the secret police for the One State
This first passage shows the nature of the secret police and surveillance that the numbers of the One State go through. In addition, it shows that the secret police is portrayed as being positive, and is viewed as being “lovingly protecting”. This passage really shows the sarcastic tone that Zamyatin is taking. He is basically saying that the secret police is a good thing sarcastically to criticize the Soviet Union. This is a result of Zamyatin’s oppression from the Soviet Union
This second passage shows some of the power of the secret police-it is required that numbers who have seen a crime report to the office of the guardians
In We, the One State is ruled by the Benefactor, who is all powerful. This is basically a criticism of the early leaders of the soviet union, especially Lennin. Like the benefactor lennin was an autocrat who was loved by most of the citizens.
In this passage, like the other, Zamyatin is really using a sarcastic tone to satirize the soviet union. He compares the Benefactor to “white robed Spider” who has “bound us”, and yet he still supports the benefactor because he has been brainwashed his entire life
In We, the Benefactor is reelected unanimously every year on Unanimity Day. This is pretty much a criticism of the nature of democracy in the Soviet Union’s early years. Although people in the soviet union could vote, they could only vote for people selected by the Communist Party. In fact, until 1987, candidates in the Soviet Union usually received about 99% of the vote.
In We the structure of life is controlled for maximum effeciency. There are extensive mathematical metaphors that go along with this.
Zamyatin was working as a shipbuilder during this time, and the workplace was starting to focus on increasing efficiency and production. A lot of this is due to one man: Fredrick Winslow Taylor.
Taylor was an industrial engineer who sought to improve industrial effeciency. He thought that by analyzing a work cycle, one could find “one best way to work”. He would do this by breaking a job into its component parts and measuring each to the hundredth of a second.
For example, he found that the most efficient shovel could carry 21 and a half pounds, and he designed shovels to carry that amount
In We the numbers have an entire philosophy of Taylorism that they have applied to every aspect of their lives. Like in the other instances, Zamyatin’s personal experience has motivated him to be critical of totalitarianism, in this case, the totalitarianism of Taylor.
The revolutionary leader Lenin was also a supporter of Taylor. So overall Zamyatin’s featuring of Taylorism in We is to criticize its controlling nature when applied to the workplace and the soviet union. He does this by looking at an exaggerated version of it and satirically supporting it.
In We, the One State is constructing a spaceship, the Integral, to conquer other planets and spread their way of life. This is basically a criticism of the Marxist view of a global Communist State, of one group forcefully spreading their idea of a perfect society to other cultures for their own good.
The basic view of a marxist international communist revolution is that a revolution in one country will be followed by revolutions in other countries as the workers rise up and take power. When this didn’t happen the Soviet union was trying to “export communism” so to speak, and spread their idea of a perfect society.
This is where the integral comes in. The integral basically symbolizes this desire of the soviet union to spread the perfect society, except it is going to be spread to other planets, not other countries.
Given Zamyatin’s history with the Soviet Union, it is not surprising that he would criticize them, as he has before.
This quote shows the marxist ultimate goal of a global communist state
Today I got some work done on the powerpoint, but I had some trouble figuring out how to get it to work, so it still has a long way to go. I will be pretty busy tomorrow finishing it up. I still have no idea if it is going to be within the time limit or not, so I will have to figure that out as well. After it is done, I will probably practice presenting it a few times. I really don't feel ready to do it on Monday, but I probably will by tomorrow.
Friday, May 7, 2010
IOP journal 3
So far I have made a pretty detailed outline of what I am going to do on Monday. I will start off talking about totalitarianism, then rationalization of labor, and finally the concept of exporting revolution. I think I will presenting this in the form of a powerpoint, so I will make it tomorrow and fill in all the details and quotes that I still need to find. I will edit the powerpoint on Sunday and probably add in some more analysis, and then I will be ready to present on Monday. So overall I think I'm set for the IOP
Oedipus is told from the third person point of view. There is no narrator that describes what is happening, each of the characters just say there lines and there is no special focus on any of them.
When Teiresias addresses Oedipus he says:
"He shall be proved the brother and the sire,
Of her who bare him son and husband bother,
Co-partner, and assasin of his sire.
Go in and ponder this, and if thou find
That I have missed the mark, henceforthe declare
I have no wit nor skill in prophecy"
(Exuent Teiresias and Oedipus)
This is an example of the third person point of view that is used. No character in specific is focused on, and after Teiresias is done him and Oedipus exit, and the audience is focused instead on the chorus. When the characters speak, there is no reason that they would be concealing information from the audience, and the narrative is reliable.
Because this is a play, the audience sees each of the characters speak, the audience gets to know the characters more than if it were told from the first person point of view. Each of the characters is well-presented, and they are credible and believable, at least from the ancient greek perspective. The authour wants the audience to sympathize especially with Oedipus, becuase he is the main character and the play is a tragedy. The author mainly gets the audience to sympathize Oedipus through characterization: he is a noble, benevolent king who cares about his subjects and is trying to accomplish a task given to him by the gods. In addition, other characters such as the supplicants, the chorus, or his subjects, like and respect Oedipus.
When Teiresias addresses Oedipus he says:
"He shall be proved the brother and the sire,
Of her who bare him son and husband bother,
Co-partner, and assasin of his sire.
Go in and ponder this, and if thou find
That I have missed the mark, henceforthe declare
I have no wit nor skill in prophecy"
(Exuent Teiresias and Oedipus)
This is an example of the third person point of view that is used. No character in specific is focused on, and after Teiresias is done him and Oedipus exit, and the audience is focused instead on the chorus. When the characters speak, there is no reason that they would be concealing information from the audience, and the narrative is reliable.
Because this is a play, the audience sees each of the characters speak, the audience gets to know the characters more than if it were told from the first person point of view. Each of the characters is well-presented, and they are credible and believable, at least from the ancient greek perspective. The authour wants the audience to sympathize especially with Oedipus, becuase he is the main character and the play is a tragedy. The author mainly gets the audience to sympathize Oedipus through characterization: he is a noble, benevolent king who cares about his subjects and is trying to accomplish a task given to him by the gods. In addition, other characters such as the supplicants, the chorus, or his subjects, like and respect Oedipus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)