Blood Wedding. Journal 3: Comparison.

This play is different from the rest in a way that it uses a different style of language and it uses heavy symbolism. This makes it harder for me to figure out how it connects to the other plays. But, one common thing I, and the rest of the class, have noticed about all three plays is that there is a theme of eyes and blindness.

In Oedipus he stabs his eyes out, literally. Also he is blind to what is really happening in his life. Sophocles uses irony by making the blind prophet "see" more than Oedipus.

In the wild duck, Hedvig is going blind. This makes the father very sad and it dampens his spirits. The father in a sense is also blind too, in a way that he cannot see past his rage to do what is good for the family. In a way this is also ironic because Hedvig is really sensible and can "see" what is right while the father can't.

In Blood Wedding there is a reference to daggers/knives in the eyes. This shows how rage and anger/evil blinds people. All of these plays in a sense use eyes to show how people will do the wrong thing if they are overcome by their emotions.

Blood Wedding. Journal 2: Comparison.

In both Blood Wedding and The Wild Duck, the parents idolize their children. Hjalmar adores Hedvig and tries to please her whenever he can. He is selfish though and uses her to help him out and does not realize the harm he causes her accidentally (or on purpose in the end). In Blood Wedding I noticed that the parents talk highly of their children, but their vision is clouded and it is mainly due to self impowerment. Like The Wild Duck, the parents use their children. Hjalmar uses Hedvig to help him out with his photography and to make him feel good, while the parents in Blood Wedding use their kids to talk of how highly ranked they are and as self images. In one line of blood wedding the mother talks about how she licked her sons blood because it was her own. She lives through her children, those of her blood, but she does not live through herself. The same with Hjalmar. He merely uses Hedvig to gain self confidence and to make him happy. He does not care about her feelings when he is angry with his wife. He also forgets about her (when he promises to bring treats). Though he feels bad about it he only makes empty promises in return to make up for it.

In Oedipus, this is similar but shown in an opposite way. The parents dispose of their child because they are ashamed and scared of his destiny. They do not wish him to ruin their names and there for act out selfishly against him. This is what, in turn causes their demise.

Blood Wedding. Journal 1: Lit Techniques

One thing that really stuck out to me while reading this book was the symbolism. I feel like this author is uses a lot of it. Lorca uses it with things that occur in nature such as grapes. In one passage it is stated how the son wants to go eat some grapes, which is where his brother, I believe, was murdered. The mom is completely against this and goes on a rant about knives. I feel like knives are a recurring symbol throughout this play. In one line it states how kives shined in his eyes. I feel like this foreshadows him killing someone. Since the mom is completely terrified by knives and has been tramatized by what they have done, I feel like knives symbolize the evil in the world. But, not just any evil, an evil that isn't recognized straight out. This is because a knife you would think of to use to cut things such as grapes, and it is only when a twisted mind grabs ahold of one when they are used to harm.

Also, there is a lot of references to nature in this play. This could be interpreted as naturalism or it could be interpreted as symbols. I want to keep an eye on Lorca's use of possible symbols such as; horses, grapes and trees. Trees I feel are a symbol of health. Not only physical, but mental. It is only when the set is moved to a place with no trees when the chaos begins.

The Wild Duck. Journal 4: Comparison.

I've noticed something about all of the tragedies that I have read so far, and that is that they all end in death. Someone dies at the end of Othello, Romeo and Juliet, Oedipus, and The Wild Duck. Coincidence? I think not.

Since a tragedy has to do with extreme reactions and not just what it is that happens to a person I believe that death is one of the most suitable ways to show this. In all except Othello someone ends up committing suicide, the ultimate sign that a person's life has gone to utter disaster.

But what does this show? I believe it shows how people are incapable of dealing with issues that they cannot resolve. By having a person take their own life, this shows the ultimate "give up" a person can do. They quit life.

Through this point it is easier to fully determine what an essential piece of tragedy is, and that is the inability for humans to accept that they cannot control every aspect of life. Reinert states this in one of his points in saying that tragedy happens when a person tries to control things and change things based on their moral standards, but is blocked due to a corrupt society.

Also, in the end of each play, the characters end up regretting what they did. This shows a basic human flaw that we all have (except a few), and that is remorse. The people in the tragedy's feel guilty for their rash actions and realize that they are wrong. In Oedipus, he realizes he shouldn't have tried to defy the Gods. In The Wild Duck, Hjalmar realizes that he should have dealt with the family in the tough situation instead of running away. In Romeo and Juliet, the parents realize that they should have let their children be together. And lastly in Othello, Othello regrets killing his one true love, Desdemona.

Tragedies I believe are meant to show the extremeness of human behavior and to warn us against making rash decisions because they can affect a person's life forever.

The Wild Duck. Journal 5: Creative.

Dear Diary,

I wonder what I can do to please Daddy. I pray for him and Mom and Grandpa and the wild duck every night. Our family is truly blessed. We all are kept busy which is nice so that we're not bored and Daddy's invention is going to make him famous and rich. I think Daddy wants to be well known and rich. I think he will be. He is a wonderful person. If I could help him with his inventions like I do with the retouching for the photography I would. I am want to be able to help him in any way possible.

Today mom and I got some more butter. We go through butter so much! It is almost impossible to keep a stick in the house for more than a few days. Bread and butter is our main meal though. I used to not like it very much but now I have grown to love it. Every once in a while we have meat. And that's a real treat! My favorite kind of meat is rabbit. Grandpa is very good at shooting the rabbits upstairs and occasionally we get one for dinner.

Rabbits are grandpa's one true hobby. He spends everyday upstairs in the loft shooting the animals up there. Except the wild duck, he told me that he wouldn't shoot the wild duck. He would never do that. He loves the wild duck too much, same with everyone in our family.

I would like to end this day with a prayer that grandpa, dad, mom and the wild duck all fare well and succeed.

-Hedvig

The Wild Duck. Journal 3: Comparison.

Some of the ideas in the wild duck and oedipus are the same. For instance, the fact that there is an external factor that causes them to do wrong and end up in tragedy. For example; Gregers in the wild duck, and apollo in oedipius. I believe that this shows how the people in the stories, try as they might, cannot control what is happening to them. This is shown in Oedipus when he tries to go as far away from Corinth as possible in order to not slay his father and sleep with his mother but he ends up doing just that. And this is also shown in the wild duck when Hjalmar believes that he is doing the right thing by leaving the family and that everyone will be much better off without him. This of cours, is not the case because Hedvig ends up killing herself.

I believe that both of these plays try and prove the fatal flaw in human nature, and that is striving for the impossible. Because humans strive for the impossible they are only destined for failure and their life will end in tragedy.

The Wild Duck. Journal 2: Lit Topics

I noticed that in this play, Ibsen uses metaphors a lot. He has this ongoing metaphor of the wild duck and even has one of his characters, Gregers, verbally compare the Ekdal's to a wild duck. By doing this he foreshadows what might happen in the play and it also brings about his theme of failure/strained survival in the play.

I also feel like there's maybe a motif of food in this play. They are always talking about bread and butter and not having enough. They talk about how they go through butter fast and not to spread it too thin. I feel like this is important to keep an eye on. Maybe Ibsen is comparing the bread and butter to the lifestyle people. I don't know yet it's just an idea and I am going to watch this throughout the book to see if it amounts to anything.

The Wild Duck. Journal 1: Comparison.

In both Oedipus and The Wild Duck, I have noticed that the visual actoin is key to how the dialogue is interpreted. For example when "Jocasta turns sharply" when she hears Oedipus and the messenger talking. This shows that she knows/has a feeling of what's going on and is emotional and has some interest in it.

In The Wild Duck visual action is important in one instance after Gregers leaves and Gina is left a bit distraught. Gina "gazing into space, her sewing in her lap" (155), this shows how distraught/disturbed Gina is by the fact that Gregers is going to be rooming with them. It hints that she may know something more about Gregers and why he shouldn't be rooming with them.

The visual actions in both of these books helps to emphasize and enlighten the points that the authors are trying to make.

Booms Taxonomy 2

How is, in comparison to Oedipus, the underplayed role of Jocasta significant to the sexism in Greek society?

Blooms Taxonomy 1

How does making the antagonist, Goldilocks, a pretty, young, blonde, girl affect the reader and how does it show sexism and racial preference throughout the story?

Oedipus: Lit Topics. Journal 4.

First of all I want to say that I really enjoyed this play a ton!! It was a lot of fun to read and it went by quick.

I have noticed that throughout Oedipus Parallel structure is used a lot. I wonder if this is parlty cultural or if its because a point is trying to be emphasized or both. This is a lone where parallel structure is used: "If I'd been present then, there would have been no mystery, no long hunt without a clue in hand" (171). In this quote the use of parallel structure is used to make everything even. It adds emphasis to the whole entire sentence instead of just one part. It shows how all the events would have occurred and they are all of equal value.

I also noticed that parallel structure in this story is used when there are long, meaningful passages. A lot of times the chorus will use it and also whenever someone goes on a long rant it is used. I feel like the parallel structure in this story is important to pay attention to in this story because it highlights the main passages that Sophocles wants the reader/viewer to pay attention to.

Oedipus: Lit Topics. Journal 3.

Setting can say a lot about a story. This story is set in ancient Greece. In ancient Greek culture they epitomized the essence of a human being. The individual was the most important thing in their culture and they strived to have everyone be their own individual self. Also, it was hard to travel around because of all of the mountains and valleys so there were multiple kingdoms on this small country due to the difficulties of traveling. Traveling also played a role in the fact that it didn't just make everyone become specialists, it made them masters. This is because in each small region everyone had to play their part and play it well in order for the society to survive. In Greek culture family is very important, as is the class of that family. There is very much so a social hierarchy in the Greek life.

In the story of Oedipus, all of these things are demonstrated. Oedipus, along with everyone in this story, strive to please the Gods and to be the epitomy of humanity. When Oedipus finds out that his life is all a terrible series of unknown treacheries (i.e. killing his father and marrying his mother) he feels no reason to live and therefore gouges out his eyes. Also this is shown when he tries to push the blame on Creon early on when he claims that this is all Creon's fault and that Creon is trying to overthrow him. He does this to make himself look more honorable because he is supposed to be the person that everyone looks up to and everyone wants to be. Tragedies show the worst that could happen in the Greek culture.

Since Greece is a very small place everyone in the society plays an important role in each kingdom. The place is very tight knit. This is why when the prophet says that the person who killed the king was thought to be an outsider but is really from Thebes, and nobody has a clue to who it is, Oedipus gets angry and calls them all liars and cowards for not coming forward. Since the culture is so tight knit everyone knows everyone else's secrets and this is how Oedipus is uncovered as the murderer.

When Oedipus says that he doesn't care if his mother is a prostitute, he just wants to know who his mother is, he says this in hopes that it is not Jocasta and that he doesn't care how low she is as long as he hasn't coupled with her. This is a grand statement given the social hierarchy of the Ancient Greek society. He only wishes to preserve his name and even justifies this statement by saying that he is the chosen one and he is the lucky one etc.

I would have to say that setting is very important for this play because in order to know how much importance a simple statement or action holds, one must know the culture first.

Oedipus: Comparison. Jaournal 2.

I am going to compare Oedipus to Othello. Othello is a treagedy where jealousy drives him mad and he ends up killing his love. I don't remember too much from this book. I remember that there was symbolism used in it, for the handkerchief. I also remember that it was written with flowery language, like most Shakesperian plays.

One thing that is similar for these two stories is that the woman in each play is given an innocent feel and they seem to be wise. In Othello, Desdemona was an innocent girl, she died a virgin and always does what she thinks is best for Othello. In Oedipus, thoug Jocasta is not the classical version of innocent, her words have a tone that emphasize her wisdom and kindness to all. This is similar to Desdemona because they both wish to do what is best, though they may not always make the right decisions.

Something that is different between these two plays is that Othello realizes that he is wrong in the very end and the suspense is built up all the way to the end of the play. In Oedipus the audeince is given the accusation and the drama and then a possible (and probable) answer is immediately posed. The reason for this may be because the Greek tragedies were the starting blocks that the rest of the tragedies throughout history come from, therefore they are the starting blocks and aren't as developed as the later ones.

In both stories there is always an antagonist, but in Othello the antagonist, Iago, is purely evil, while in Oedipus, the antagonist is only the antagonist because the king wrongly accused him. In Oedipus this shows that people should account for their enemies as their own mistakes, while in Othello it shows that your enemies are made and there is virtually nothing that a person can do about it.

It is hard for me to remember other comparisons between these two books because I read Othello about a year ago. If I come up with any more I will add on to this.

Oedipus: Characters. Journal 1.

First of all, I am enjoying this book a lot. It is very interesting to me since I like ancient Greek history. It is easier for me to read it fast since the pages aren't very long. This is nice because I'm an incredibly slow reader.

What I noticed about Oedipus is that he is very strong-willed. He takes matters into his own hands, for instance, deciding to kill the people that murdered the previous king and resting at no costs. Also, when things don't go his way he seems to be disrespectful and has an awful temper. When the oracle told him to mind his own business: "You bear your burdents, I'll bear mine. It's better that way, please believe me" (pg. 177, lines 364-366) Oedipus gets angry that he is not conforming to his needs, even though the oracle speaks from the Gods. This shows Oedipus' narcicism (spelling?) and foreshadows how it will get in the way of the future good.

Another thing that I noticed about Oedipus is that he easily blames others, but he avoids blaming himself. This is shown when he talks about how his "loyal friend" Creon must be trying to thwart him by telling the oracle to say these nasty things about him and that is the only reason why the oracle would state Oedipus' faults.

I feel like from the start of this tragedy we are introduced quickly to the faults of Oedipus and are only told about the good he does, so far we haven't encountered him behaving in a kind manner.

The Night Before the IOP!!!!!!!!

Tonight, I rehearsed my speech, which without the class interaction, took exactly ten minutes so I am really hoping that I won't talk too fast. I also tried to refine my speaking a little more but caught myself saying "uh" three times. Woops.

I also decided what to do for my art piece and finshed that. I like it well enough though it isn't the best work I have done. It uses a lot of symbolism in order to depict the poem.

I wrote up both of my outlines but found that there was no assignment due on turnitin.com, which will hopefully have changed by tomorrow. I did print both of them out though. The outlines helped me organize myself a bit better and to realize in full what exactly I wanted to say about everything. After all of this I wrote out my notecards which have some bullet points and some full on paragraphs in order to save me if I get nervous and completely blank on the IOP.

I am worried about controlling the class talk and about how much time everything will take. I am just nervous about how everything is going to go and it doesn't help that I'm first. But, at least I'll have it over with, which makes me very happy.

This is the last day that I'm working on this. Yayyy. I'm going to rest up now so that I'm not completely dead during the presentation and will recite it multiple times during first period tomorrow.

Fourth Dayyy IOP

Today I got home from work and was really tired so I didn't work on it too much. I recited the analysis a couple of times and timed it, trying not to talk so fast. I got ten minutes this time. I also tried to watch myself on the fillers and cut back on those, which is very very hard to do. I just have to remember to pause instead of saying "like" or "um/uh".

I read through the analysis again before I went to bed and brainstormed ideas about the art piece, which I think I made a break through but it is going to take awhile. I'm thinking of drawing the back of a man on a balcony and you can see him writing and in one hand he is holding a heart. It is night time and there are two white trees that are far off in the distance. I am making everything in the picture symbolic of the poem, but I think that this may take up too much time. I'll have to recite it tomorrow and see.

Thirddd Dayyyyy IOPPPP

Today I decided to sit down, re-read the poem and write down all my analysis on it, connecting it back to Neruda's life. I saw a TON of connections that I could easily make to his childhood, his relations with Terusa, and add in some fun facts. I could relate it to their relationship through the reasons why they split up, such as her family and the fact that it was a long distance relationship.

After I wrote everything down I rehearsed it. Just this analysis took about 8 or 9 minutes. This makes it easier for me to figure out what I am going to do for the rest of the time. I think that in the beginning of class I am going to ask them what they already know about Pablo Neruda's relationships, in order to see what they already know. Then I am going to read the poem and then go into the analysis of the poem. I am going to need an overhead copy of the poem possibly. I think I am also going to do the art piece still if I really need more time but I'm not sure anymore.

Second Dayy IOP

Today I googled more about Pablo Neruda to see if I could find anything new about him. I actually found less than what was in the book which kind of annoyed me because I wanted to learn more about his relationship with Terusa. I wish that there was a more thorough background on him online. I also did not want to use wikipedia.

After I googled him I started to brainstorm about how I am going to present the project. I hope that I can get it done in a cool way. I am planning on overpreparing, meaning doing more than ten minutes of speech over the weekend because when I get nervous in front of the class I tend to talk faster.

How I brainstormed ideas is by getting a blank, white piece of paper and then writing everything that pops into my mind down in pen. By doing this I think that I might do an art piece since I like doing art and it would be interesting to do for this poem. I think that I might do it in either charcoal or dark colored pencils to represent the night. I also want to give the work a circular composition because Neruda's pain doesn't end and neither do circles. I want to incorporate a heart in the picture somewhere but am not sure how.

First day of really working on the IOP

So today I started working on the IOP. I rented the book Pablo Neruda a passion for life by Adam Feinstein. I got to page 30 or so and so far am really liking it. Neruda led a very interesting life and there are lots of things that I would have never learned if I just stuck to working with the internet. I think I might stop reading it though because I have found all the information about his love life and his childhood that I need in order to analyze one of the poems.

When reading this book it mentioned poem 20, which happens to be one of our poems, and how he wrote it for his beloved Terusa. It also gave me lots of details about his and Terusa's relationship. This led me to decide that I am going to analyze poem 20 through Neruda's personal life with Terusa.

Since I decided what I was going to do with the poem I started to analyze it since I never payed much attention to it when we did it in class. I noticed a plethera of things about it, for instance that once you know what it is about/who he is writing it for the meaning to the poem becomes much clearer.

One thing that I am having trouble with is how I am going to present it. I want to do it in a creative and effective way and have it be interesting but I'm not sure if I can do that.

Well this is all I have to say for my first day. Thanks.