“Visual action can be as important on the stage as speech.” How far do you agree with this claim? In you answer you should refer to two or three plays you have studied.
I would agree to this claim to a pretty large extent, theater in itself is a visual medium, the audience can the actions taken by individual characters and these movements can inform the plot, characters and even themes. Oedipus the King and The Wild Duck use stage directions of differing magnitudes to achieve separate but substantial effects.
In The Wild Duck, Ibsen's stage directions are very detailed, fully describing both the settings in which the play takes place and almost every action and word spoken by the characters. This excessive direction would, in a theater, give the director and actors very little ability to change their portrayals of the characters and themes and force them to stick to an authentic version of Ibsen's vision. Within the play, especially when reading it, the stage directions serve to create a more fleshed out and detailed scene for the audience to connect with. The directions allow for greater depth in the portrayal of Ibsen's ideas. It is as if you are looking in on an actual family with lives removed from the play rather than watching actors stand and speak with little motion or backdrop.
Oedipus the King is more traditional in regards to the use of stage directions. They are sparse and simplistic and portray mostly the entrances and exits with few descriptions of specific character actions. It is in these actions that I believe we can find significance, for Sophocles to have included them they must of held some sort of importance. An example of this is when Oedipus is questioning a messenger and he references Laius, here the stage directions indicate that "Jocasta turns sharply". This simple action stands out in a play that has little depicted action within it and thus gains importance. Jocasta has not been shown to have any knowledge of the blood relations between herself and Oedipus and here, in the visual action upon the stage, it is suggested the possibility has dawned on her and from this point her attitude toward the whole investigation changes.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Oedipus - Journal 3
Diary,
I know not what I shall do, for my life has become unto the greatest sin. The gods, led me along with that accursed prophecy, mocking my blindness to my fate. And it is now that an an actual blindness has been chosen, in my one act of self determination, as my mortal punishment. Imprisoned within the recesses of my mind I have no sense but all is calm, clear to me. The divine have chosen my soul as a savior and scapegoat, destined my mortal soul to an unknowing horror, whose grand intentions and precautionary measures wither to ruin. And my poor children! Antigone and Eteocles! Ismene and Polynices! Woe to you that has been a product of such a monstrous union of man and mother. I hold no doubt in my breast that no good will come of your lives, the only escape in following blood's course: suicide of the mother or self ordained imprisonment of the father.
Now I become a hermit and nomad, exiled from the ancient land and populace I won through my own merit and skill. There is no path for my eyes or mind to follow in my exile, the gods' prophecy holds no more weight on my actions but the implications of my atrocity will haunt me until the end of my days. The sin bears heavily about me, both physically and within my spirit, it is slowly draining my life but death is my greatest fear and punishment; for to die is to face my parents, my father whom I killed in coldest blood and my mother who I defiled in ignorance. Better to live; deaf, dumb and blind; than to face the judgement of the gods and see those that my prophetic actions have ruined. I must wander, healing and atoning for my misdeeds. I can only hope that my fears concerning my children never come to pass, but this in itself is too great a gift for the divine to bestow on a miserable figure such as myself. I weep for their eventual failures, caused by my tainted blood.
Oedipus
I know not what I shall do, for my life has become unto the greatest sin. The gods, led me along with that accursed prophecy, mocking my blindness to my fate. And it is now that an an actual blindness has been chosen, in my one act of self determination, as my mortal punishment. Imprisoned within the recesses of my mind I have no sense but all is calm, clear to me. The divine have chosen my soul as a savior and scapegoat, destined my mortal soul to an unknowing horror, whose grand intentions and precautionary measures wither to ruin. And my poor children! Antigone and Eteocles! Ismene and Polynices! Woe to you that has been a product of such a monstrous union of man and mother. I hold no doubt in my breast that no good will come of your lives, the only escape in following blood's course: suicide of the mother or self ordained imprisonment of the father.
Now I become a hermit and nomad, exiled from the ancient land and populace I won through my own merit and skill. There is no path for my eyes or mind to follow in my exile, the gods' prophecy holds no more weight on my actions but the implications of my atrocity will haunt me until the end of my days. The sin bears heavily about me, both physically and within my spirit, it is slowly draining my life but death is my greatest fear and punishment; for to die is to face my parents, my father whom I killed in coldest blood and my mother who I defiled in ignorance. Better to live; deaf, dumb and blind; than to face the judgement of the gods and see those that my prophetic actions have ruined. I must wander, healing and atoning for my misdeeds. I can only hope that my fears concerning my children never come to pass, but this in itself is too great a gift for the divine to bestow on a miserable figure such as myself. I weep for their eventual failures, caused by my tainted blood.
Oedipus
Oedipus - Journal 2
To what extent would you agree that plot should be valued more highly than style in the work. In you answer you should refer to two or three works you have studied.
I would agree in some cases that plot is more important than style when regarding a specific work, however this is wholly dependent on the work itself. In the tragic plays we are currently reading I believe the plot needs to be viewed in greater focus due their nature; a tragedy focuses on human suffering and their fall from happiness/power/etc. To do so a playwright must bring attention to the actions and occurrences that brought the individual to ruin. This is evident in Oedipus the King, Sophocles brings much of the focus on the plot. All of the characterization that goes on is based around the driving actions the propel the plot forward, for example Oedipus' well meaning but arrogant nature being explored in his declaration to hunt down Laius' killer. Sophocles use of literary techniques, namely foreshadowing and allusion, also supports this. Admittedly, the techniques are partially a reference to the common knowledge of the audience, but nevertheless they draw attention to the plot's ideas and direction. In contrast would a be a more serious novel such as The Stranger, which is designed to present ideas and views rather than to entertain. Here there is a much stronger case for a greater attention to style; the actual plot of The Stranger seems mundane but it is in the details of the novel that we are able to decipher Albert Camus' worldview. Our ideas and opinions of Meursault are formed to a greater extent through Camus' use of language than the actions taken by the characters; we learn more in Meursault's description of the beach and sun than through his (seemingly random) murder of the Arab. Ultimately it would be a fruitless effort to focus singularly on either plot or style, both must be considered to create a full understanding of the work. Although we may see Oedipus the King as plot driven, it must be understood that Sophocles was neither the first nor last to tell the story of Oedipus, and looking beyond plot can flesh out our understanding of the work.
I would agree in some cases that plot is more important than style when regarding a specific work, however this is wholly dependent on the work itself. In the tragic plays we are currently reading I believe the plot needs to be viewed in greater focus due their nature; a tragedy focuses on human suffering and their fall from happiness/power/etc. To do so a playwright must bring attention to the actions and occurrences that brought the individual to ruin. This is evident in Oedipus the King, Sophocles brings much of the focus on the plot. All of the characterization that goes on is based around the driving actions the propel the plot forward, for example Oedipus' well meaning but arrogant nature being explored in his declaration to hunt down Laius' killer. Sophocles use of literary techniques, namely foreshadowing and allusion, also supports this. Admittedly, the techniques are partially a reference to the common knowledge of the audience, but nevertheless they draw attention to the plot's ideas and direction. In contrast would a be a more serious novel such as The Stranger, which is designed to present ideas and views rather than to entertain. Here there is a much stronger case for a greater attention to style; the actual plot of The Stranger seems mundane but it is in the details of the novel that we are able to decipher Albert Camus' worldview. Our ideas and opinions of Meursault are formed to a greater extent through Camus' use of language than the actions taken by the characters; we learn more in Meursault's description of the beach and sun than through his (seemingly random) murder of the Arab. Ultimately it would be a fruitless effort to focus singularly on either plot or style, both must be considered to create a full understanding of the work. Although we may see Oedipus the King as plot driven, it must be understood that Sophocles was neither the first nor last to tell the story of Oedipus, and looking beyond plot can flesh out our understanding of the work.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Oedipus -Journal 1
Setting: This includes cultural as well as geographical and historical setting. What effect does the setting have on story, character, theme?
Oedipus takes place in the historic and religious lore of Ancient Greece. Sophocles, the playwright, lived in the fifth century BC and the events of the play supposedly took place well before his time. What I find interesting, historically, is the audience to which Sophocles writes. It is evident that he expected to only have the play performed in Greece (rather than surrounding countries such as Italy or Egypt across the Mediterranean) due the enormous amount of references to their mythology and history without any introduction or exposition. This is important to note because it gives an honest account of the ancient Greek worldview and mindset, Sophocles was unrestricted in writing as he catered to an audience of people with an understanding of Greek culture and religion and thus presents an accurate depiction of their values through his writing. The play itself takes place in Thebes, and while Sophocles had no real choice in his depiction of the setting Thebes plays a major role in how characters, specifically Oedipus are viewed. Thebes was one of the major city-states of Greece and one of the more commonly known locations to the average Greek and Oedipus, through his kingship is elevated greatly in importance. This importance is one of the greatest factors in creating the tragedy that befalls Oedipus, Greek Tragedy relies on a fall from power or virtue which would only occur to a much lesser extent if Oedipus was a lord or leader of a smaller town/city. Mythologically Thebes also plays an important role, the average Greek citizen at the time would have a limited knowledge of the locations within Greece so the well known setting provides an anchor point to which individuals can view the play.
Oedipus takes place in the historic and religious lore of Ancient Greece. Sophocles, the playwright, lived in the fifth century BC and the events of the play supposedly took place well before his time. What I find interesting, historically, is the audience to which Sophocles writes. It is evident that he expected to only have the play performed in Greece (rather than surrounding countries such as Italy or Egypt across the Mediterranean) due the enormous amount of references to their mythology and history without any introduction or exposition. This is important to note because it gives an honest account of the ancient Greek worldview and mindset, Sophocles was unrestricted in writing as he catered to an audience of people with an understanding of Greek culture and religion and thus presents an accurate depiction of their values through his writing. The play itself takes place in Thebes, and while Sophocles had no real choice in his depiction of the setting Thebes plays a major role in how characters, specifically Oedipus are viewed. Thebes was one of the major city-states of Greece and one of the more commonly known locations to the average Greek and Oedipus, through his kingship is elevated greatly in importance. This importance is one of the greatest factors in creating the tragedy that befalls Oedipus, Greek Tragedy relies on a fall from power or virtue which would only occur to a much lesser extent if Oedipus was a lord or leader of a smaller town/city. Mythologically Thebes also plays an important role, the average Greek citizen at the time would have a limited knowledge of the locations within Greece so the well known setting provides an anchor point to which individuals can view the play.
Sunday, April 10, 2011
WE - Journal 3, Topic A
"Well, what then? I'm waiting. Choose: the Operation and its hundred-percent happiness or..."
"I can't go on without you, I can't, I must not be without you," I said, or only thought it-- I don't know which-- but I-330 heard it.
"Yes, I know," she answered. And then, her hands still holding me by the shoulders, and her eyes not letting mine go: "In that case--until tomorrow. Tomorrow at twelve. Remember?"
"No. It's put off for one more day... The day after tomorrow..."
"Even better for us. At twelve. The day after tomorrow..."
I walked alone along the dusky street. The wind twirled, carrying and chasing me like a piece of paper. Fragments of cast-iron sky were flying down, flying down through infinity-- but they have a day or two to go... Oncoming unifs grazed against me but I walked alone. It was clear to me: everyone was saved, but there was to be no saving me, I don't want saving. (page 163)
I find this passage to be important because it is the first instance D-503 feels a distinct separation from the one state and understanding of its inherent issues. Before, D-503 acted out of obedience to whatever I-330 said out of love/desire for her, even when he had reservations about his actions. He is still thinking with the logical and precise manner of the One-State. Here, when forced to make a choice between his ideals/thoughts and his desire for I-330 he breaks down and realizes that he does not want to be a part of the society. I believe that he comes to the realization that the main problem with the one-state is that it devalues great portions of the human experience. While it provides happiness it ignores and blocks the rest of human emotions, (desire, sadness, creativity) and so, while he sees the value of the one-state and its "happiness" he understands that it is shallow and ultimately chooses to take a more organic, as well as more painful route.D-503 has shed himself of the mindset that has contained him throughout the novel and throughout his life, which is shown in Zamyatin's portrayal of the environment, near this point the book shifts describing the sky as calm and pristine with blue (representing the one-state) to a turbulent and violent mass (that mirrors his new emotional and turbulent style of thinking)
"I can't go on without you, I can't, I must not be without you," I said, or only thought it-- I don't know which-- but I-330 heard it.
"Yes, I know," she answered. And then, her hands still holding me by the shoulders, and her eyes not letting mine go: "In that case--until tomorrow. Tomorrow at twelve. Remember?"
"No. It's put off for one more day... The day after tomorrow..."
"Even better for us. At twelve. The day after tomorrow..."
I walked alone along the dusky street. The wind twirled, carrying and chasing me like a piece of paper. Fragments of cast-iron sky were flying down, flying down through infinity-- but they have a day or two to go... Oncoming unifs grazed against me but I walked alone. It was clear to me: everyone was saved, but there was to be no saving me, I don't want saving. (page 163)
I find this passage to be important because it is the first instance D-503 feels a distinct separation from the one state and understanding of its inherent issues. Before, D-503 acted out of obedience to whatever I-330 said out of love/desire for her, even when he had reservations about his actions. He is still thinking with the logical and precise manner of the One-State. Here, when forced to make a choice between his ideals/thoughts and his desire for I-330 he breaks down and realizes that he does not want to be a part of the society. I believe that he comes to the realization that the main problem with the one-state is that it devalues great portions of the human experience. While it provides happiness it ignores and blocks the rest of human emotions, (desire, sadness, creativity) and so, while he sees the value of the one-state and its "happiness" he understands that it is shallow and ultimately chooses to take a more organic, as well as more painful route.D-503 has shed himself of the mindset that has contained him throughout the novel and throughout his life, which is shown in Zamyatin's portrayal of the environment, near this point the book shifts describing the sky as calm and pristine with blue (representing the one-state) to a turbulent and violent mass (that mirrors his new emotional and turbulent style of thinking)
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
WE- Journal 2, Topic B
Inaudible, hasty droplets brimming over blue saucers, down her cheeks and words, hastily brimming over, too: "I can't anymore, I must go now... I won't ever come here again, never. But the only thing I want... All I need is a baby from you-- give me a baby and I will go, I'll go!"
I could see: she was all atremble under her unif, and I could feel myself start to -- I put my hands behind me and smiled: "What? Now you're after the machine of the Benefactor?"
And back at me with another word-torrent over a dam: "Fine! But, you see I would still get to feel it inside me. And even if I only get to see it for a few days... Just to see its little wrist-crease, just here-- like that baby on the stage. Just for one day!" (page 99)
With her relationship to D-503, O-90 presents a foil to the relationship between I-330 and D, showing affection rather than desire. There are specific attributes to each Cipher letter we see in the novel and O is consistently described as round in both appearance and in manner. The repeated use of circles and circular objects serves to reinforce D's view of her as simple and childlike, a circle is the simplest of shapes and O-90 is the simplest of the Ciphers in regards to logic and mathematical thinking. D's relationship with O after he meets I-330 is one of affection, he even says later in the novel that his feelings for her are akin to an ancient parent's feelings for their child. By having a childlike figure as one of the main characters, Zamyatin portrays O-90 feelings, emotions and desires and less calculated and more organic (she is also described as pink, which is strongly associated with sex- one of the most instinctual processes). Thus, her desire to create and hold onto a unique experience (Parenthood) is natural. It shows that humans inherently desire to create and produce for themselves. This is further compounded by D-503, who states his journal is created for the state. He, being logical and complex, is the opposite of an analog for innate human desire, and thus it is shown that the desire to create for society is merely a product of that society.
I could see: she was all atremble under her unif, and I could feel myself start to -- I put my hands behind me and smiled: "What? Now you're after the machine of the Benefactor?"
And back at me with another word-torrent over a dam: "Fine! But, you see I would still get to feel it inside me. And even if I only get to see it for a few days... Just to see its little wrist-crease, just here-- like that baby on the stage. Just for one day!" (page 99)
With her relationship to D-503, O-90 presents a foil to the relationship between I-330 and D, showing affection rather than desire. There are specific attributes to each Cipher letter we see in the novel and O is consistently described as round in both appearance and in manner. The repeated use of circles and circular objects serves to reinforce D's view of her as simple and childlike, a circle is the simplest of shapes and O-90 is the simplest of the Ciphers in regards to logic and mathematical thinking. D's relationship with O after he meets I-330 is one of affection, he even says later in the novel that his feelings for her are akin to an ancient parent's feelings for their child. By having a childlike figure as one of the main characters, Zamyatin portrays O-90 feelings, emotions and desires and less calculated and more organic (she is also described as pink, which is strongly associated with sex- one of the most instinctual processes). Thus, her desire to create and hold onto a unique experience (Parenthood) is natural. It shows that humans inherently desire to create and produce for themselves. This is further compounded by D-503, who states his journal is created for the state. He, being logical and complex, is the opposite of an analog for innate human desire, and thus it is shown that the desire to create for society is merely a product of that society.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
WE- Journal 1, Topic C
Again, something's not right here. Again, I've been talking to you, my unknown reader, as though ... well, let's say, as though you were my old comrade R-13, the poet with African lips, a person everyone knows. Meanwhile, you -- on the moon, on Venus, on Mars, on Mercury-- who knows you?
Here's the thing: imagine a quadrilateral-- a living, beautiful square. And this quadrilateral is asked to describe itself, its existence. But you see, the last thing that would occur to the quadrilateral mind would be to mention its four equal angles: it just doesn't see them--They're just a given, every day. Well, that's me, permanently in that same sort of quadrilateral predicament. Whether it's the business of the pink ticket or something similar: to me, it's all the equivalent of four angles, but for you, it may be more vividly evident than Newton's binomial theorem. (page 20)
I find this passage interesting because it helps to reveal deeper ideas within society than first may be assumed. When reading WE there is a strong sense of the conflict between individual and society and how the two interact. D-503 routinely states that everyone thinks and acts alike but the opposite is shown in his descriptions of other Ciphers. Each person he knows has specific attributes, many relating to their Cipher letter, and there is a distinct focus on the same features, (the mouth, for example) in which everyone is described differently. O has a round, pink mouth, R has African lips and I has white teeth. By differentiating between individuals Zamyatin may be suggesting that Individuality is not the main problem with their society. In this passage D-503 then goes on to describe how he cannot describe the society in which he lives precisely because he lives there, the connotations and experience prevent him from objectively explaining things. Because of this it may be possible that Zamyatin is speaking the impossibility of objectively judging society from within a showing an exaggerated case where no can see the problems all around them. I can definitely believe and relate to this, in America, where I have grown up I have trouble recognizing fundamental issues with the way things are designed or run, things have always been that way so I don't even see an alternative, it is as if the problem does not exist.
Here's the thing: imagine a quadrilateral-- a living, beautiful square. And this quadrilateral is asked to describe itself, its existence. But you see, the last thing that would occur to the quadrilateral mind would be to mention its four equal angles: it just doesn't see them--They're just a given, every day. Well, that's me, permanently in that same sort of quadrilateral predicament. Whether it's the business of the pink ticket or something similar: to me, it's all the equivalent of four angles, but for you, it may be more vividly evident than Newton's binomial theorem. (page 20)
I find this passage interesting because it helps to reveal deeper ideas within society than first may be assumed. When reading WE there is a strong sense of the conflict between individual and society and how the two interact. D-503 routinely states that everyone thinks and acts alike but the opposite is shown in his descriptions of other Ciphers. Each person he knows has specific attributes, many relating to their Cipher letter, and there is a distinct focus on the same features, (the mouth, for example) in which everyone is described differently. O has a round, pink mouth, R has African lips and I has white teeth. By differentiating between individuals Zamyatin may be suggesting that Individuality is not the main problem with their society. In this passage D-503 then goes on to describe how he cannot describe the society in which he lives precisely because he lives there, the connotations and experience prevent him from objectively explaining things. Because of this it may be possible that Zamyatin is speaking the impossibility of objectively judging society from within a showing an exaggerated case where no can see the problems all around them. I can definitely believe and relate to this, in America, where I have grown up I have trouble recognizing fundamental issues with the way things are designed or run, things have always been that way so I don't even see an alternative, it is as if the problem does not exist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)