I do not really think The Wild Duck was a tragedy because Hedvig's death wrenched the heart more than it did finalize a theme. Also, compared to Antigone where we flat out knew she was going to die, Hedvig was unexpected. Hedvig was also an innocent character, whereas Antigone was guilty and knew she was.
Also, according to the elements of tragedy discussion we had today, undeserved suffering is not tragic. Hedvig did not deserve to die. Another critical thing we discussed was that tragedy required there to be beauty in truth, which was the opposite of what I saw with Hjalmar. When he knew the truth, everything in his life grew ugly and the whole play became quite a mess.
Gregers reaction to Hedvig's death breaks another rule of tragedy. He seems pleased, as if he had succeeded, while the end result of a tragedy is no one emerges victorious. Kinda like Romeo and Juliet where members of Capulet and Montague both died.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Sunday, December 11, 2011
The Wild Duck - Journal #4
Alright, characters who are at fault. There are three that I can see right now:
1. Gregers
2. Werle
3. Gina
Gregers: I was really positive that when I came through that door I'd be met by a transfigured light in both your faces. And what do I see instead but this bloomy, heavy, dismal-
(185)
I put Gregers because it is because of his hand that Hjalmar begins to question the life around him.
Werle because if he did not 'have his way' with Gina, marriage with Hjalmar may not have happened, and Hedvig would not play a factor in Hjalmar's mind.
Gina: Yes, I did the wrong thing; I really should have told you long ago.
(183)
Gina, because she kept all this hidden from Hjalmar.
I believe Werle to be the most blameworthy, as he probably impregnated Gina, and influenced Gregers childhood enough to make him consider helping the Ekdal family as a grown man.
As for a blameless character I would say Hedvig fits the role best. Her life is was a product of past events, and has done nothing to really aggravate the situation. Well, I could argue that because Hjalmar likes her so much it stressed him a whole bunch to find out she may not have been his daughter.
Well, Werle sort of takes responsibility.
Hjalmar: One hundred crowns, as long as he needs it. That means till death of course.
Gina: Well, then he's provided for, poor dear.
Hjalmar: But there's more. You didn't erad far enough, Hedvig. Afterwards this gift passes over to you.
(194)
Although Gregers argues this was a trap to see if Hjalmar could be bought out, this gesture of Werle's can be seen as possibly being an attempt to right his wrong using his resources. Giving the money to care for old Ekdal, who was his scapegoat years ago may have been done out of guilt. Hedvig because she may have been his child.
1. Gregers
2. Werle
3. Gina
Gregers: I was really positive that when I came through that door I'd be met by a transfigured light in both your faces. And what do I see instead but this bloomy, heavy, dismal-
(185)
I put Gregers because it is because of his hand that Hjalmar begins to question the life around him.
Werle because if he did not 'have his way' with Gina, marriage with Hjalmar may not have happened, and Hedvig would not play a factor in Hjalmar's mind.
Gina: Yes, I did the wrong thing; I really should have told you long ago.
(183)
Gina, because she kept all this hidden from Hjalmar.
I believe Werle to be the most blameworthy, as he probably impregnated Gina, and influenced Gregers childhood enough to make him consider helping the Ekdal family as a grown man.
As for a blameless character I would say Hedvig fits the role best. Her life is was a product of past events, and has done nothing to really aggravate the situation. Well, I could argue that because Hjalmar likes her so much it stressed him a whole bunch to find out she may not have been his daughter.
Well, Werle sort of takes responsibility.
Hjalmar: One hundred crowns, as long as he needs it. That means till death of course.
Gina: Well, then he's provided for, poor dear.
Hjalmar: But there's more. You didn't erad far enough, Hedvig. Afterwards this gift passes over to you.
(194)
Although Gregers argues this was a trap to see if Hjalmar could be bought out, this gesture of Werle's can be seen as possibly being an attempt to right his wrong using his resources. Giving the money to care for old Ekdal, who was his scapegoat years ago may have been done out of guilt. Hedvig because she may have been his child.
The Wild Duck - Journal #3
Gregers: Not quite that. I wouldn't say you're wounded; but you're wandering in a poisonous swamp, Hjalmar. You've got an insidious disease in your system, and so you've gone down to the bottom to die in the dark.
(170)
So Ibsen essentially shouts at us that "HEY, HJALMAR IS THE WILD DUCK" here, and Gregers mentions that Hjalmar is "wandering in a poisonous swamp", also making remarks to the fumes in his house. And then the "bottom to die in the dark" part intrigued me. Was it saying that although uninjured, Hjalmar is going to live his life happily until he dies even though his life is a life. This draws connections to the whole web of deception mess Gina caused.
Then there is the disease, which we discussed in class. Almost everyone in the play has a disease, and Gregers has a 'moralistic' one himself begging the question of who is really worse off?
Werle: But what are you going to do, then?
Gregers: Simply carry out my life's mission; nothing else.
(176)
Gregers goes on to talk about how he set aside some of his salary to support his life, but cryptically answers Werle's question of how he will live after the money is gone with: "I think it will last my time" (177)
At first glance, my opinion is that Gregers is probably talking about suicide after he helps Hjalmar. Although I find the notion rather ridiculous and wonder what Gregers intends to do with his life afterwards. I think this a quote that I will have to look back on after the play is complete.
Rellings: All right, I'll tell you, Mrs. Ekdal. He's suffering from an acute case of moralistic fever.
(178)
Rellings tells us here that even Gregers himself has a disease. Moralistic fever is referencing Gregers motivation, his desire to right the wrongs Werle inflicted upon the Ekdal's. Fever here could possibly mean that Gregers himself has grown delusional in a sense, and perhaps just as blind as the man he is trying to help.
Gregers: And actually, she's been in the depths of the sea.
Hedvig: (glances at him, suppresses a smile, and asks). Why did you say "depths of the sea"?
Gregers: What else should I say?
Hedvig: You could have said "bottom of the sea" - or "the sea's bottom"?
(164)
Gregers is referencing the Wild Duck concept again, but Hedvig blows that off and inquires to his word choice. I find this interesting as Gregers has been very cryptic when addressing Hjalmar, and never direct as to what his intentions are. He is obfuscating his words and this may have confused Hjalmar quite a bit when he decides to reveal information to him outside.
Relling: (crossing over to him). Listen, Mr. Werle junior, I've got a strong suspicion that you're still going around with the uncut version of that "Summons to the Ideal" in your back pocket.
Gregers: I've got it written in my heart.
(174)
I did some research and found out that "Summons to the Ideal" was a term used by Ibsen to describe the search for absolute truth. Although Gregers is not searching for the absolute truth here, he thinks he KNOWS the absolute truth. And in response to Relling he says that the search for absolute truth is written in his heart, or in other words ingrained in the fabric of his being. Whether or not he truly embodies this concept is debatable.
(170)
So Ibsen essentially shouts at us that "HEY, HJALMAR IS THE WILD DUCK" here, and Gregers mentions that Hjalmar is "wandering in a poisonous swamp", also making remarks to the fumes in his house. And then the "bottom to die in the dark" part intrigued me. Was it saying that although uninjured, Hjalmar is going to live his life happily until he dies even though his life is a life. This draws connections to the whole web of deception mess Gina caused.
Then there is the disease, which we discussed in class. Almost everyone in the play has a disease, and Gregers has a 'moralistic' one himself begging the question of who is really worse off?
Werle: But what are you going to do, then?
Gregers: Simply carry out my life's mission; nothing else.
(176)
Gregers goes on to talk about how he set aside some of his salary to support his life, but cryptically answers Werle's question of how he will live after the money is gone with: "I think it will last my time" (177)
At first glance, my opinion is that Gregers is probably talking about suicide after he helps Hjalmar. Although I find the notion rather ridiculous and wonder what Gregers intends to do with his life afterwards. I think this a quote that I will have to look back on after the play is complete.
Rellings: All right, I'll tell you, Mrs. Ekdal. He's suffering from an acute case of moralistic fever.
(178)
Rellings tells us here that even Gregers himself has a disease. Moralistic fever is referencing Gregers motivation, his desire to right the wrongs Werle inflicted upon the Ekdal's. Fever here could possibly mean that Gregers himself has grown delusional in a sense, and perhaps just as blind as the man he is trying to help.
Gregers: And actually, she's been in the depths of the sea.
Hedvig: (glances at him, suppresses a smile, and asks). Why did you say "depths of the sea"?
Gregers: What else should I say?
Hedvig: You could have said "bottom of the sea" - or "the sea's bottom"?
(164)
Gregers is referencing the Wild Duck concept again, but Hedvig blows that off and inquires to his word choice. I find this interesting as Gregers has been very cryptic when addressing Hjalmar, and never direct as to what his intentions are. He is obfuscating his words and this may have confused Hjalmar quite a bit when he decides to reveal information to him outside.
Relling: (crossing over to him). Listen, Mr. Werle junior, I've got a strong suspicion that you're still going around with the uncut version of that "Summons to the Ideal" in your back pocket.
Gregers: I've got it written in my heart.
(174)
I did some research and found out that "Summons to the Ideal" was a term used by Ibsen to describe the search for absolute truth. Although Gregers is not searching for the absolute truth here, he thinks he KNOWS the absolute truth. And in response to Relling he says that the search for absolute truth is written in his heart, or in other words ingrained in the fabric of his being. Whether or not he truly embodies this concept is debatable.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
The Wild Duck - Journal #2
Gina's Perception of Hjalmar
Hedvig clearly adores Hjalmar so I figured that was little too easy...
Gina: Are you glad when you have something nice to tell your father when he comes home at night?
Hedvig: Yes, for things here are pleasanter then.
Gina: Well, there's something to that.
(139)
Hedvig's line of "pleasanter then" was the major tip off that something was wrong with the family dynamics. Gina's response of "Well, there's something to that." is rather ambiguous and the tone seems rather tired if that makes any sense. I interpret it as possibly meaning that Gina is happy when Hedvig is happy.
Gina: Really? Oh Hjalmar, you know everything
This is one of the strange things Gina has done so far, ranging from this flattery to her enthusiasm in helping take off his coat. Almost as if she is trying her hardest to make Hjalmar happy.
Gina: (looking at him, becoming wary). Yes no doubt about it.
This was in response to somewhat deeper questioning on Gregers' part regarding how long Gina has been married to Hjalmar. We discussed this in class, but it is a clue regarding the state of Gina's marriage.
All in all, Gina seems to almost fear Hjalmar who behaves rather oddly throughout the act.
Hedvig clearly adores Hjalmar so I figured that was little too easy...
Gina: Are you glad when you have something nice to tell your father when he comes home at night?
Hedvig: Yes, for things here are pleasanter then.
Gina: Well, there's something to that.
(139)
Hedvig's line of "pleasanter then" was the major tip off that something was wrong with the family dynamics. Gina's response of "Well, there's something to that." is rather ambiguous and the tone seems rather tired if that makes any sense. I interpret it as possibly meaning that Gina is happy when Hedvig is happy.
Gina: Really? Oh Hjalmar, you know everything
This is one of the strange things Gina has done so far, ranging from this flattery to her enthusiasm in helping take off his coat. Almost as if she is trying her hardest to make Hjalmar happy.
Gina: (looking at him, becoming wary). Yes no doubt about it.
This was in response to somewhat deeper questioning on Gregers' part regarding how long Gina has been married to Hjalmar. We discussed this in class, but it is a clue regarding the state of Gina's marriage.
All in all, Gina seems to almost fear Hjalmar who behaves rather oddly throughout the act.
Sunday, December 4, 2011
The Wild Duck - Journal # 1
Pardon me if I'm going the complete wrong direction here, but I believe Ibsen established a boundary concerning what characters are willing to speak about. I noticed one near the beginning:
"Oh, Gregers, let's not talk about that." (Ibsen 122)
A rather personal matter, hmm?
Another one I can see is social limitation. Smoking in particular was mentioned several times, as well as the ban that Mrs. Sorby put on it when she said "After the last dinner - when there were certain person here who let themselves exceed all limits."
Oh yeah, just noticed on page 131, more trying to shove personal matters under the carpet. "Acquittal is acquittal. Why do you rake up this ugly old story that's given me gray hair before my time?" (131)
Werle gives some detail on what happened, but does not seem to enjoy the topic being shoved on him by his son Gregers.
"Oh, Gregers, let's not talk about that." (Ibsen 122)
A rather personal matter, hmm?
Another one I can see is social limitation. Smoking in particular was mentioned several times, as well as the ban that Mrs. Sorby put on it when she said "After the last dinner - when there were certain person here who let themselves exceed all limits."
Oh yeah, just noticed on page 131, more trying to shove personal matters under the carpet. "Acquittal is acquittal. Why do you rake up this ugly old story that's given me gray hair before my time?" (131)
Werle gives some detail on what happened, but does not seem to enjoy the topic being shoved on him by his son Gregers.
Antigone - Journal #4
Mini Commentary
"Yes, I am ugly! Father was ugly, too. [Creon releases her arms, turns and moves away. Stands with his back to Antigone.] But Father became beautiful. And do you know when? [She follows him to behind the table.] At the very end. When all his questions had been answered. When he could no longer doubt that he had killed his own father; that he had gone to bed with his own mother. When all hope was gone, stamped out like a beetle. When it was absolutely certain that nothing, nothing could save him." (Anouilh 43)
"Yes, I am ugly! Father was ugly, too."
Very little is given about Antigone's physical qualities, but this is not a line meant to be taken literally. Antigone is referring to the ugliness of her character, and I believe there are absurdist undertones in this passage because of:
"When it was absolutely certain that nothing, nothing could save him."
Rather bleak outlook, and it brings to mind an image of utter defeat followed by acceptance evidenced by the next line, which is not in this selection but very important, "Then he was at peace; then he could smile, almost; then he became beautiful..."
"At the very end. When all his questions had been answered."
Antigone is in a similar situation. She does not know if the unburied body really is that of Polynices, and she probably will never know, so the only solution to put herself at ease is to bury the body anyway. The original question of, 'Is that Polynices', has not been answered, but by burying the body that question ceases to be an issue.
"[Creon releases her arms, turns and moves away. Stands with his back to Antigone.]"
This stage direction here gives the sense that Creon is giving up rather exasperatedly, and by turning his back on her is symbolically beginning to give up on attempting to save her.
"Yes, I am ugly! Father was ugly, too. [Creon releases her arms, turns and moves away. Stands with his back to Antigone.] But Father became beautiful. And do you know when? [She follows him to behind the table.] At the very end. When all his questions had been answered. When he could no longer doubt that he had killed his own father; that he had gone to bed with his own mother. When all hope was gone, stamped out like a beetle. When it was absolutely certain that nothing, nothing could save him." (Anouilh 43)
"Yes, I am ugly! Father was ugly, too."
Very little is given about Antigone's physical qualities, but this is not a line meant to be taken literally. Antigone is referring to the ugliness of her character, and I believe there are absurdist undertones in this passage because of:
"When it was absolutely certain that nothing, nothing could save him."
Rather bleak outlook, and it brings to mind an image of utter defeat followed by acceptance evidenced by the next line, which is not in this selection but very important, "Then he was at peace; then he could smile, almost; then he became beautiful..."
"At the very end. When all his questions had been answered."
Antigone is in a similar situation. She does not know if the unburied body really is that of Polynices, and she probably will never know, so the only solution to put herself at ease is to bury the body anyway. The original question of, 'Is that Polynices', has not been answered, but by burying the body that question ceases to be an issue.
"[Creon releases her arms, turns and moves away. Stands with his back to Antigone.]"
This stage direction here gives the sense that Creon is giving up rather exasperatedly, and by turning his back on her is symbolically beginning to give up on attempting to save her.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)