Tragedy Journal 11 (Blood Wedding Act 3)

Act 3 of Blood Wedding contains many scenes with minor characters that act as detached spectators to the main events that are occuring in the play. This can be compared to Sophocles' Oedipus, which contains a chorus which is more detached from the rest of the play. Both of these groups express pity for the main tragic character in the play.

The group of woodcutters in Blood Wedding could represent a small chorus in a Greek tragedy, they express pity for the eloping couple:

SECOND WOODCUTTER. They should leave them alone.
FIRST WOODCUTTER. The world is wide - everyone can live in it.
THIRD WOODCUTTER. But they will kill them.
SECOND WOODCUTTER. You must follow your heart. They did well to run away. (Lorca 3.1)

Federico Garcia Lorca utilizes these minor characters to offer feedback about the controversial actions of Leonardo and the Bride. Soceital expectations are being questioned, and Lorca is supporting them through these detached characters. Although Lorca does express the positives of individuality in this passage, he still talks about the hopelessness of going against the grain of society, "But they will kill them".

Sophocles uses a chorus instead of minor characters, and he does make the purpose of the chorus slightly different from Lorca. The chorus plays a very big role in Oedipus, not only to pity Oedipus but also to act as a response to label Oedipus as a tragic hero, "But whether a mere man can know the truth, whether a seer can fathom more than I - there is no test, no certain proof [...] No, not till I see these charges proved will I side with his accusers. [...] saw with our own eyes his skill, his brilliant triumph - [...] Never will I convict my king, never in my heart" (Sophocles 563-572). Because of the chorus's admiration for Oedipus, it accentuates his downfall. Even so, the chorus is shaken by this prophecy that Tiresias delivers. Sophocles mainly focuses on how the chorus is used to heighten the drama in the play instead of delivering a certain opinion or message.

Tragedy Journal 10 (Blood Wedding Act 2)

Prompt: Personal convictions and shared beliefs, the private and the public life, sometimes seem at odds in the modern world. How did you find your chosen works touched on this conflict, and with what effect?



The play Blood Wedding by Federico Garcia Lorca offers several examples of these conflicts. Lorca shows this through private conversations between characters, for example the Bridegroom's mother forces herself to hold back her beliefs about her daughter in-law's family, "I ache down to the end of my veins! On all their faces, I see nothing but the hand that killed what was mine. [...] I am mad - from not having shouted out everything I needed to. I have a scream in my throat - always there - that I have to choke back and hide under my shawl. But they carry off the dead and you must keep silent. Or people will criticize" (Lorca 2.2). Even though the mother has a previous history with the other feuding family, she still holds back because of not only the bride's father advising her to, but also because of societal expectations of her not bringing up the subject during the wedding. (this ends up not working since the Bride elopes with Leonardo, and the Mother separates the guests into their respective feuding sides). Lorca seems to express a feeling of discontent when the truth is not revealed, but it seems to be also necessary to hide the truth until it is the appropriate time.



Ibsen demonstrates a similar idea through his play the Wild Duck, also with two families who instead have tensions between them due to financial issues.

GINA. Well, I think you ought to sleep on it first, anyway.

GREGERS. You're not very anxious to have me in the house, Mrs. Ekdal. [...]

HJALMAR. Yes, Gina, this is really peculiar of you. (Ibsen Act 2)

Gina herself is restricted similarly to the Mother in Blood Wedding, but instead is quieted by her husband, another male figure in the play. The comparison between the public views and private views are evident in Ibsen's plot which leads to a private conversation with Hjalmar and Gina about the hidden tensions between families. The truth of Gina's relationship with Werle results in the destruction of Hjalmar, and because of her personal motives to keep the family united clashed with Hjalmar's expectations of truth in their marraige, Ibsen attempts to express a sarcastic view on revealing the truth in everything.

Tragedy Journal 9 (Blood Wedding Act 1)

Discussion on Literary Topics: Since I noticed that Federico Garcia Lorca emphasizes women's roles in society through marriage in his play Blood Wedding, I thought I should analyze how he shows their roles...

In Blood Wedding by Federico Garcia Lorca, the first scene opens with a mother and her son who is planning to marry. The mother expresses a feeling of hopelessness through the symbol of knives, "If I lived a hundred years, I would talk of nothing else! First, your father. To me he smelled like carnations, and I enjoyed him only three short years. Then your brother. Is it fair? How can it be that something as small as a pistol or a knife can destroy a man who is like a bull? I'll never be quiet. The months go by, and the desperation stings my eyes and the very tips of my hair!" (Lorca 1.1). The woman role in Lorca's tragedy is one of subservience but still based on family hierarchies. One can see this through the influence of the bridegroom's mother and the contrasting influence of the bride:

MOTHER. You better hoe the vines over by the little mill. You've been
neglecting them.

BRIDEGROOM. Whatever you say. (Lorca 1.1)

Because of the mother's high hierarchical status as the remaining parent of the family, she still takes precedence over some decisions that her son makes. This can be easily contrasted to the future bride:

(The BRIDE enters, her hands modestly at her sides, her head
lowered) [...]

MOTHER. No... Just that you all live. Just that! Live!

BRIDE. I will know my duty. (Lorca 1.2)

The detailed stage directions help the reader understand the subservient role of women being portrayed by Lorca. This role is demonstrated in front of a "public" audience i.e. the bride's father and mother-in-law. The bride's real emotions are revealed when only she and the maid are on stage:

MAID. For heaven's sake! All right. you're acting like you don't want to get
married.

BRIDE. (Biting her hand in rage) Oh!

MAID.
Child! My dear! What's the matter with you? Are you sorry you're giving up the
life of a queen? (Lorca 1.2)

This hidden rebelliousness against the society's views gives the impression that Lorca is attempting to show how societal standards are inevitably surpassed especially considering the roles of women. Having that freedom of not being married is one that the Maid describes as the "life of a queen" (Lorca 1.2).

Tracking Journal 1

I am tracking the comparisons between the upper and lower classes in each play. In Oedipus, the difference is clear between the royalty compared to the common people. Although the general population worships both king and god alike, they witness the fall of Oedipus and therefore witness the fall of hubris and powerful people. Also because of Oedipus' blindness towards truth and how even a sheperd has more insight than him on his own life helps express the downfall of the upper class and the rise of the lower class.

Although there is not much of a distinction between higher and lower class in Wild Duck by Ibsen, there is a detailed portrayal of the middle/lower class family in the Ekdals. Because of their debts with Werle, Hjalmar always attempts to be dignified about what he owes and how he will pay the money back. However this sense of dignity goes too far when Hjalmar promises he will pay back all of the family's debts on the account of mainly the invention that he cannot even describe. (he is just awaiting the inspiration for it).

Tragedy Journal 8 (Wild Duck Act 5)

Narrative Structure: How important/effective is the ending? Has everything been revealed by the end or are there unanswered questions? Does this matter?


The ending of Wild Duck by Ibsen is very important to the drama as a whole. It acts as the end of the climax in the play through Hedvig's suicide. Most everything has been revealed by the end mainly through Hjalmar's realizations. For instance, after storming out of the house, Hjalmar returns to his home at first looking to pack his bags and make his final preparations for his departure, but instead realizes that he still requires the care of his wife Gina, through homely items like butter and coffee, "Could I - without being annoyed by anybody - anybody at all - put up in the living room for just a day or two?" (208-209). Hjalmar even expresses his shame after reluctantly gluing back Werle's letter of endorsement, "(Cutting and pasting.) Far be it from me to take liberties with another's property - least of all, a penniless old man's." (209). All of these actions play into the fall of the tragic hero, Hjalmar.

To mention the actual ending of the end of this Act, there is a conversation between Relling and Gregers, both rivals from the Hoidal works, where both argue on whether Hjalmar should still be idolatrized in the sad death of his daughter, "RELLING Oh, life would be good in spite of all, if we only could have some peace from these damned shysters who come badgering us poor people with their 'summons to the ideal'" (5.216). Relling criticizes a societal perspective of idealism that Gregers maintains through the play until the very end. This is also another realization that Gregers failed to peacefully unite the Ekdal family even through he proselytized endlessly to Hjalmar about telling the truth and its dignity in human life.

Tragedy Journal 7 (Wild Duck Act 4)

Readers are attracted to moments of intensity in a writer's work. By what means and with what effect have writers in your study offered heightened emotional moments designed to arrest the reader's attention?

Scandal and affairs are commonly used to heighten emotions in relationships. In Act Four of the Wild Duck, Hjalmar has discovered that his wife Gina has hidden a previous relationship with Werle, "GINA. Well, you might as well know it all. He didn't give up till he had his way. HJALMAR. (with a clap of his hands). And this is the mother of my child! How could you keep that hidden from me!" (Ibsen 183). The fact that Gina has had this previous relationship with an enemy of the Ekdal family drives the emotions deep into Hjalmar. This accentuates the motif of the wild duck and how the Ekdal family represents a wounded wild duck.

In Oedipus, the scandal of Oedipus marrying his mother and bedding down with her is enough to send the traditional audiences in Greece reeling. Sophocles tries to make this realization of the scandal very dramatic, "O god - All come true, all burst to light! O light - now let me look my last on you! I stand revealed at last - cursed in my birth, cursed in marriage, cursed in the lives I cut down with these hands!" (Sophocles 1306-1310). Both characters realize their scandals in different ways, Oedipus brings the burden upon himself, whereas Hjalmar attempts to put the blame on his wife Gina, "it'll be your past, Gina, that killed it" (Ibsen 184).

Tragedy Journal 6 (Wild Duck Act 3)

"Visual action can be as important on the stage as speech."

From the works that I have studied, I believe that this statement is true. Sophocles' Oedipus only occasionally uses stage directions, while Ibsen's Wild Duck makes stage directions pronounced and detailed, allowing script readers to understand more fully the physical actions that the characters carry out. Ibsen uses more detailed stage directions in order to clarify the characters' emotions. Also because of the time that Ibsen wrote the play, it fits the context of modernism and realism where stage directions made the actors act in a more realistic manner.

Ibsen expresses the extent of Old Ekdal's age in these stage directions "(Old Ekdal enters from his room, without his pipe, but with his old military cap on his head; his walk is a bit unsteady)" (Ibsen 149). "(Ekdal stumbles, muttering, over to the sofa." (Ibsen 149). These stage directions make it easier to see what the playwright is attempting to express.

Sophocles expresses very little of the characters through his stage directions as demonstrated in this passage, "Children, where are you? Here come quickly - Groping for ANTIGONE and ISMENE, who approach their father cautiously, then embrace him" (Sophocles 1620-1621). Sophocles only explains what is happening, without providing much detail about character's facial expressions or actions. Because of the extent of which the characters express their emotions through dialogue, Sophocles allows some interpretation to be made by the actor through the words in the script instead of the stage directions.

Tragedy Journal 5 (Wild Duck Act 2)

Diary entry of Gina Ekdal:

Dear diary,

Today started out as a particularly uneventful day. I was looking after Hedvig and while sewing and relaxing. Then comes in Old Ekdal, with even more copying work in his hands. At least he's making his own pocket money, which makes his living with us more pleasant. I feel very worried about Grandpa Ekdal, his usual crankiness and his old age do not go well together.

Soon after Old Ekdal retired to his office, Hjalmar came back. Seems that his dinner party went well with the exception of that nuisance Gregers. That man even came to our home later that evening. How dare he question the years of marraige that my husband and I have shared! I wondered what Gregers ulterior motives were when he sat down with my husband.

The Ekdal men are so fascinated by a lame animal. This wild duck that Old Ekdal shot is just an ordinary animal, made even worse by the fact that Old Werle was involved in putting the duck into our home. Coincidentally, another animal has been brought into our house, Gregers. He even claims to want to be a dog chasing after silly ducks again.

I believe that the Werle family is just plain trouble and that the things that are happening between the father and son will be sorted out in a different place than our home.

Blooms Taxonomy Question 2

In what ways does Sophocles paint a comparison between the societal upper class (royalty) and the lower class (commoners, sheperds, priests)?

Blooms Taxonomy Question 1

In the tragedy of Oedipus, the king ends up blinding himself due to horrible and unimaginable events of fate, do you think that Sophocles wants to express a negative viewpoint of the hopelessness of life and that death is the only outcome to escape pain? Or does he overly dramaticize this to express the opposite view?

Tragedy Journal 4

Characters: How does the writer persuade us to like/sympathize with some characters and dislike others?

Sophocles tries to portray the fall of Oedipus as a very pitiful decline from a proud masterful ruler to a begging blind man, "And you, I command you - I beg you" (1583). By Oedipus hesitating and retracting his previous kingly statement, Sophocles makes a drastic comparison to give the reader a feeling of sympathy for Oedipus. Oedipus retracts his royal title again when asking Creon about his children, "Take care of them, I beg you. Wait, better - permit me, would you? Jus to touch them with my hands and take our fill of tears. Please ... my king. Grant it, with all your noble heart" (1605-1609).

Through Creon's grace and his sympathy for Oedipus, Sophocles also allows the reader to at first take a positive stance on Creon's character, "I haven't come to mock you, Oedipus, or to criticize your former failings" (1557-1558). But then at the end of their conversation, Creon takes away both of Oedipus's children and establishes a mocking tone, "Still the king, the master of all things? No more: here your power ends. None of your power follows you through life" (1675-1677). Creon poses a question which ultimately explains the downfall of Oedipus in a sarcastic tone. Sophocles gives the audience a fair reason to take a negative stance on Creon mainly to justify Oedipus's fall to an exiled blind man, which could be compared to Creon's fall from sympathetic grace to mocking punisher.

Tragedy Journal 3

Themes and ideas:

As a class assignment, we were supposed to pick a certain image or motif or topic that could be used as a comparison between all three dramas. I picked the comparisons between the upper class and the lower class and how they are the same or different. This also includes the view from one of the classes of the other.

Oedipus is a prime example of the elitist upper class, when the messenger brings an important message about Polybus's death, Oedipus refers to the queen first "And who is he? What can he have for me?" (1044). The word choice as well in this passage suggests that Oedipus lacks the seriousness about a lower class messenger as if Oedipus is a king and should not be bothered by minor matters.
Another example of this is when Oedipus realizes with utter disbelief that the messenger played the pivotal role as his caretaker, "My father - how can my father equal nothing? You're nothing to me!" (1115-1117). Oedipus makes instant judgements on a person's background mainly off the basis of their position in society.

The masses can be easily represented by the chorus and throughout the tragedy, their views on Oedipus are almost godlike, "You outranged all men! [...] From that day on we called you king we crowned you with honors, Oedipus, towering over all - mighty king of the seven gates of Thebes" (1320-1330). The lower or middle class public seem to greatly respect the upper class and the king. They even pity Oedipus and the horrible situation fate has brought him. But even the lower class has a depth of understanding that the upper class believes they are incapable of having, "I tell you the truth, you gave me life my breath leapt up in you and now you bring down night upon my eyes" (1348-1349). This is ironic because of the inability for Oedipus to see the truth in events compared to the understanding of the chorus, which furthermore is removed in its involvement in the actual conflict.

In summary to all of this, Sophocles portrays the upper class as being very snobbish even to the extent where they only refer to the masses in accusations or pleas for help. The lower classes in this tragedy tend to integrate themselves with this same view and adopt a perspective giving almost absolute respect and admiration for those who are higher on the societal ladder. Sophocles separates the two classes very distinctly in Oedipus the King.

Tragedy Journal 2

How does the background information on Greek theater and history inform your reading of Oedipus? Use specific examples to explore the connections between context and content.

From the class notes, tragedy can be defined as "a tale of suffering, a drama involving the expulsion of evil, an instance where the powerful fall", this background helps the reader see the characteristics of a tragedy in this drama, Oedipus the King. To compare these notes to the reading, the chorus explains this concept similarly after hearing the coincidental events which could indict Oedipus:

Pride breeds the tyrant

violent pride, gorging, crammed to bursting

with all that is overripe and rich with ruin -

clawing up to the heights, headlong pride

crashes down the abyss - sheer doom! 964-967

Because of previously knowing that tragedies involve characters in power falling from their high position, it was much easier to notice the significance of this passage. Also in our class notes, was that greek drama did change with the seasons,
however a reoccuring topic was that Greece was in a "time of insecurity", this
is also demonstrated in Oedipus the King, "Enough, please, enough! The land's
so racked already or so it seems to me" (757-758). Sophocles not only utilizes
the dithyramb as an outside voice which gives the characters some sort of
societal response, he also expresses that the city is wrecked and that the
people need a leader to build back their pride and joy.

Tragedy Journal 1

A reaction to Tiresias from the perspective of Oedipus:

How dare he! This false prophet, old and senile, yet having that overwhelming desire to bring the powerful down. Is this part of his plot to overthrow my benevolent rule and replace it with such men as Creon?

Talking in such ridiculous riddles! It just is a way to confuse those that seek his incompetent advice. I will find a way to use my own intelligence, along with the help of the gods instead of mere mortals, to hunt down the killler of Laius and restore the city that was once greatly helped by my own hands.

What does he mean by my parents? I don't have time for thinking about this, it is important,
this matter at hand, finding the cure for the plague that has reveled in our city's cries and laments.

IOP Journal 5

Whooo!!! the last journal!!!



Typing up my final analysis outline today....



Just a little skeleton of what will be the full outline....



1. Knowledge and Understanding of Extract or Work(s)

a. I give my audience the chance to learn more about Neruda's political background to better understand the two poems that I am about to give them.



2. Interpretation and Personal Response

a. I am guiding the class through the poem, according to Neruda's political views and using that as the foundation for my interpretation. (needs detail in each poem)



3. Presentation

a. I'm doing overhead transparencies and guiding the class through a discussion in order to analyze two poems.

4. Use of Language

a. I will be referring to the literary terms that we have already learned from class....(what else to say???)

I have all the transparencies ready for tomorrow. (Turns out FedEx Kinko's costed a mere 75 cents per sheet).



Studying all of the political background on Neruda, in preparation for the presentation on Neruda's political life. Making a few note cards to refer to during my presentation. The timing of my presentation will be a little tricky, depending on the amount of feedback that I get from the class.....

IOP Journal 4

AAAHH time is running out! (3 days left)

Now to analyze the poem, "And the City Now Has Gone"

Pablo Neruda is trying to express the hopelessness and inevitability of his entering into hiding, and then going into exile. His exile almost seems like death to Neruda. He relates this poem to his own life and how he is leaving his "pride" behind.

Main techniques:


Motif of the passing of time being relentless (makes things hopelessly inevitable)
Metaphor of time (being temporary and easily faded) - then progresses to suddenly "taking"
the person
Repetition of the word "no" (emphasis on nothingness and having nothing left)

Questions:
What is the personal pronoun "we" represent? (neruda and his wife?) (everyone in general?)

My presentation:

I'm going to offer a class discussion for sure with both this poem and "To the Foot from Its Child". The powerpoint got too complicated and dicey for my mind. Probably going to do the traditional method using overhead transparencies with those overhead markers. By giving the background info first, I hope that I can prove my point about Neruda's ties with these two works and his political views at that time.

IOP Journal 3

In an attempt to organize something like an outline that will accompany my IOP...

for the "To the Foot from its Child" half...

In "To the Foot from its Child", which was published with Neruda's collection of poems in Extravagaria (translates to the vagaries, which is defined as erratic or unpredictable manifestations, actions or notions) in 1957-1958. Neruda, I think, expresses the influences that he has that lead him towards communism and against an overly controlling fascist regime.

1. The foot can be used as a metaphor for either children or younger people. By showing the journey of the foot, Neruda shows how the world/society crushed the dreams and imagination of the people, forcing them to live in a physical/emotional prison (the shoe), unable to express their individuality.

2. Motif of fruit can be seen as a way to represent imagination of the child/individual. Which ends up being told by "the paths in the rough earth" that the foot "cannot be a fruit bulging on the branch". Because of the difficult society, the imagination of the individual is restricted so much that he or she does not even know the intent of society "It never knew [...] if they were burying it so that it could fly or so that it could become an apple".

3. Personification of the foot...(cannot overlap with the metaphor point). Once the foot is captured by the shoe, Neruda describes it as "out of touch with its fellow, enclosed, feeling out life like a blind man". Very much like Neruda's own exile where he came back after years to only find his party and the people in Chile in disarray, not knowing the full details of the incoming coup.

4. Progression and change of the foot to become resilient through the motif of hard items and/or adjectives. "These soft nails of quartz, bunched together, grow hard, and change themselves into opaque substance, hard as horn" "Later they grow calloused and are covered with the faint volcanoes of death, a coarsening hard to accept"

5. Use of punctuation in the 3rd stanza to express the long journey of life for the foot, ending with a line that expresses that it's whole life is controlled by the man, not the foot. "it walks, they walk, until the whole man chooses to stop"

6. Motif of falling and going underground....gives the image that the foot is condemned to be buried and maybe not even walk on the earth again? "it descended underground, unaware, for there, everything, everything was dark"

Well that pretty much covers almost all of the poem. A powerpoint is my most likely path to analyze the poem, although I do want to combine that with a class discussion using an overhead transparency... if not i can always use the powerpoint for this poem and put a transparency up for the "And the City Now Has Gone".

IOP Journal 2

I looked up Pablo Neruda's political views today. It turns out that he immersed himself in Communism only around in the mid to late 1930s. He served as a senator for the Communist party in Chile in 1943 but was removed from office and exiled in 1948 due to his criticism of the Chilean president in "I Accuse" (something that we read earlier). His view on Communism carried itself through the Spanish Civil War as he supported the LEFTIST Republicans in Spain and even published "Spain in My Heart" for Republican troops fighting the nationalist spanish government.

IN SUMMARY to this, Neruda was against fascism and hence the many rising dictators of the world preceding World War II (i.e. Hitler). But he did openly praise Stalin and the Soviet Union despite the terrible acts that Stalin committed. Neruda admired the Soviet Union especially because of its role in the defeat of Nazi Germany. Much later, Neruda also supported the socialist Salvador Allende and the Unidad Popular (Popular Unity party) in the late 1960s until his death (September 23rd, 1973).

Now to relate this background info to his poetry....

I'm still trying to analyze the poem "To the Foot from its Child", although I am considering to switch from XCVII to "And the City Now Has Gone" (also from the Extravagaria) after researching XCVII. It turns out the number is just another number from one of Neruda's 100 Love sonnets and the number 97 signifies its place in that collection.

To the Foot from its Child seems to express a very lecturing tone and the foot is a metaphor, but I'm still not totally sure whether it is a metaphor for children or adults? Maybe it progresses throughout the poem as the child grows up?
There is also a motif of fruit and apples, representing imagination?
The format is somewhat important to the poem, because it does guide the reader through the progression by separating the stanzas according to the foot's defeat, it's adaptation to the shoe, the growth of the foot, works of the foot, then it's "burial"....

I'll sleep on it and do another journal tomorrow....

IOP Journal 1

Since I have the ACTs tomorrow, I decided today would be a good day to organize and brainstorm for my IOP.

Topic Proposal:
I would like to focus on the works of Pablo Neruda, and analyzing one of his more politically focused poems like I am Accused (the actual title is I Accuse). I want to show the correlation between one or two of his poems with his political views.
I would like to analyze two poems as a comparison, looking for similarities between his focus on symbols in nature and the structure of his poems. I could possibly compose a music piece to go along with the poem(s).

Sidenote - The musical piece now that I have thought about it would be incredibly hard to compose as well as perform in such the short amount of time that I have for this IOP...so i'm going to have to rely on my other idea of doing a class/group analysis of at least one poem.

1. I collected all the poems that I have from IB Junior English that were written by Pablo Neruda.
2. I separated his love poems that would be irrelevant and organized the politically inclined poems...(Dodobird, From the Heights of Macchu Picchu, XCVII...To the Foot from its Child?)
3. Out of these poems, Dodobird has very pronounced political message, From the Heights of Macchu Picchu possess many of Neruda's well-known literary techniques (although it's pretty difficult to fathom the meanings), XCVII could be expressed as a political poem expressing the confinement of the society (although the poem's very short and it would a small chunk of time to analyze it), To the Foot from its Child could also be analyzed as a poem criticising the government (the Foot) from Neruda's view (the Child) with a lot of metaphors as well as length.
4. From what I've seen, both To the Foot from its Child and XCVII both have similar motifs and themes in which i could analyze for my IOP!!!

IDEA: Both use metaphors in order to express wandering and being lost with references to the earth. Lots of feet motifs in both poems as well