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 completely agree with the claim of visual action being just as important on stage as speech is. I would love to back this up between the books of "Blood Wedding" and "The Wild Duck". I think they both show that stage directions give out a huge part of their plays and at times, when reading the stage directions, the reader will feel more into the story picturing what is actually happening. Also, the audience watching probably sees the intensity of what is going on rising through certain scenes with visual action.
"The Wild Duck" uses stage directions very detailed. On page 181 in "The Wild Duck", the stage directions say he is walking around without looking up. They say him just walking around and pacing himself. These visual actions help the audience depict how Hjalamar is feeling instead of through just his words. His words are misleading and without seeing Hjalamar's action, it would be difficult to see how he is truly feeling. These stage directions help show that Hjalamar is very uneasy and that he has something on his mind that he does not like. These visual actions of Hjalamar show his emotions instead of his speech.
In "Blood Wedding", you can see the emotions and feel the intensity rising when the Bride is about to be married through her visual action. Without words, you can tell she feels uncertain and does not like the situation she is in through her action in the stage direction of, "Restless, in a great inner struggle" (Lorca 68). Her voice and her visual actions feed off of each other to make the audience feel the restlessness, and the nervousness the Bride is feeling. The visual action here creates a stronger image than just her talking because you can picture her feeling the way she is feeling. It is easier to relate to images than to words.
Overall, I feel that visual action is just as important, if not more important than the speech in these plays. I think, for an example, silent movies. Watching movies with no sound are easier to follow and feel closer to than just the sound. Well, I think so at least. Also, visual action and the speech feed off of each other. With both together, the playwrights create a wonderful image and feeling to their plays.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Comments
I was also thinking about this, but you were able to explain it a lot better then I could, so good job! I like your outerman and inner man support of the public vs private life. I think there is more support needed in Oedipus the King to show the effect of keeping private life secret. -Isabella
Well I think this is pretty neat, maybe not be so cliche with the whole ignorance is bliss, but this is a journal and think you got the general concepts. In my opinion at least. -Matthew Merkling
hahahahahahah best journal I read. Very entertaining and nice job clearly expressing your opinions. I think the plot plays a big role in both plays, not just Oedipus. There is lots of foreshadowing, which I think is a big part of the plot and the audience loves that. I disagree with you and people can hear consonance. In fact, I can tell consonance better aloud than just reading it. But oh well, very humorous and delightful to read Mr. T. -Travis Eurick
Well I think this is pretty neat, maybe not be so cliche with the whole ignorance is bliss, but this is a journal and think you got the general concepts. In my opinion at least. -Matthew Merkling
hahahahahahah best journal I read. Very entertaining and nice job clearly expressing your opinions. I think the plot plays a big role in both plays, not just Oedipus. There is lots of foreshadowing, which I think is a big part of the plot and the audience loves that. I disagree with you and people can hear consonance. In fact, I can tell consonance better aloud than just reading it. But oh well, very humorous and delightful to read Mr. T. -Travis Eurick
journal #6
A dramatist often creates a gap between what the audience knows and what the characters know. With reference to at least two plays, discuss how and to what effect dramatists have used this technique.
In the stories of "The Wild Duck" and "Oedipus the King", both writers used a gap of what the reader knows and what the characters know to create foreshadow and dramatic irony. Foreshadow is created when the audience gets to understand the characters more and can tell how they will react to a certain event that the audience knows, but the actual character doesn't. In "Oedipus the King" there was obvious foreshadow when the mother is trying to warn Oedipus from trying to figure out who is mother is. The audience knows that she is already his wife/mother, but Oedipus doesn't. From earlier in the story, Sophocles makes Oedipus seem like a heroic, but flawed character who gets too worked up and the audience know that with the wife warning him, there is going to be something huge about to happen. Likewise, in "The WIld Duck", Ibsen creates foreshadow of Hjalamar going to freakj out when he realizes Hedvig probably is not his child. This is shown with the wife warning Hjalamar not to go on a talk with Gregers and that Greger's dad is blind and has poor eyesight, which Hedvig also has poor eyesight. So there is this gap of knowledge from the reader and character because the audience can see a conflict building up, while the characters cannot.
Dramatic irony is used in "Oedipus the King" when the audience knows more than the characters do. this creates a funny situation because the audience knows Oedipus is very liking going to screw everything up and can see that Oedipus can easily prevent things from happening, but it is humerous seeing Oedipus dig himself into holes. Ibsen is more serious then Sophocles. He does not really create humor, he makes the audience feel sad. When Ibsen talked about the fully loaded gun and how Hedvig just wanted Hjalamar to be happy, the audience knew what was going to happen. It is irony though because Hjalamar was just talking about how Hedvig probably does not love him until he realized the gun was gone and thought he heard a shot. But still, he thought the opposite thinking Hedvig actually killed the WIld and she was happy, but really, she was dead. This is very sad. but ironic.
In the stories of "The Wild Duck" and "Oedipus the King", both writers used a gap of what the reader knows and what the characters know to create foreshadow and dramatic irony. Foreshadow is created when the audience gets to understand the characters more and can tell how they will react to a certain event that the audience knows, but the actual character doesn't. In "Oedipus the King" there was obvious foreshadow when the mother is trying to warn Oedipus from trying to figure out who is mother is. The audience knows that she is already his wife/mother, but Oedipus doesn't. From earlier in the story, Sophocles makes Oedipus seem like a heroic, but flawed character who gets too worked up and the audience know that with the wife warning him, there is going to be something huge about to happen. Likewise, in "The WIld Duck", Ibsen creates foreshadow of Hjalamar going to freakj out when he realizes Hedvig probably is not his child. This is shown with the wife warning Hjalamar not to go on a talk with Gregers and that Greger's dad is blind and has poor eyesight, which Hedvig also has poor eyesight. So there is this gap of knowledge from the reader and character because the audience can see a conflict building up, while the characters cannot.
Dramatic irony is used in "Oedipus the King" when the audience knows more than the characters do. this creates a funny situation because the audience knows Oedipus is very liking going to screw everything up and can see that Oedipus can easily prevent things from happening, but it is humerous seeing Oedipus dig himself into holes. Ibsen is more serious then Sophocles. He does not really create humor, he makes the audience feel sad. When Ibsen talked about the fully loaded gun and how Hedvig just wanted Hjalamar to be happy, the audience knew what was going to happen. It is irony though because Hjalamar was just talking about how Hedvig probably does not love him until he realized the gun was gone and thought he heard a shot. But still, he thought the opposite thinking Hedvig actually killed the WIld and she was happy, but really, she was dead. This is very sad. but ironic.
Journal #5
Setting: This includes cultural as well as geographical and historical setting. What effect does the setting have on story, character, theme?
In the story, "Wild Duck", a family lives in a little home called a studio. This setting plays a huge impact on the story. A Studio is like a mini apartment and is fairly small with not much room for a family of 4 or more people to live in. The Ekdal's have Hjalmar, Edvig, Gina, grandpa (Ekdal), and a new person outside of the family, Gregers living in this small little area.
This setting helps create the character, Hedvig on who she is. She is very childish and the setting helps portray this. Children tend to want their mom and dad to be close to them all the time. They get homesick very easily. This setting makes Hedvig appear very childish because Hedvig claims she never wants to leave the house., When Greegers asks her if she wanted to explore outside and see what it is like, Hedvig surprises him in a way and says she has all these books read about what life outside her home is like. She likes being contained within the home.
This setting can create a theme suggesting that people are uncomfortable going beyond their limits. People do not like stretching and trying something new, Hedvig likes the idea of exploring, but she is to nervous to actually do it. This proves that the setting reveals how people get very uncomfortable trying new things and going outside their typical life and experiencing something new.
In the story, "Wild Duck", a family lives in a little home called a studio. This setting plays a huge impact on the story. A Studio is like a mini apartment and is fairly small with not much room for a family of 4 or more people to live in. The Ekdal's have Hjalmar, Edvig, Gina, grandpa (Ekdal), and a new person outside of the family, Gregers living in this small little area.
This setting helps create the character, Hedvig on who she is. She is very childish and the setting helps portray this. Children tend to want their mom and dad to be close to them all the time. They get homesick very easily. This setting makes Hedvig appear very childish because Hedvig claims she never wants to leave the house., When Greegers asks her if she wanted to explore outside and see what it is like, Hedvig surprises him in a way and says she has all these books read about what life outside her home is like. She likes being contained within the home.
This setting can create a theme suggesting that people are uncomfortable going beyond their limits. People do not like stretching and trying something new, Hedvig likes the idea of exploring, but she is to nervous to actually do it. This proves that the setting reveals how people get very uncomfortable trying new things and going outside their typical life and experiencing something new.
Monday, May 23, 2011
journal #4
What is drama but life with the dull bits cut out?” To what extent do you find this statement applicable in at least two plays you have studied?
Drama is very interesting. Without the dull bits, it is very dramatic and has lots of excitement. It is life without the dull bits. From two plays ive been reading, "Oedipus the King" and "The Wild Duck", they both have some sort of a dramatic lifestyle to it. There is always something going on within the people during the play, which creates emotions at a high level.
sophocles does this with "Oedpus the King" by having an interesting prophecy Oedpus is always thinking about. With this prophecy, this creates humor and dramatic irony because the reader knows exactly what is happening, but Oedipus does not. There is no dull bits in it. If there was, this would be too realistic and boring. Oedipus always has a problem and he turns everyhting like it is out to get him. If he was completely normal, there would be no point to this story.
In "The Wild Duck", Ibsen does have some dull parts at first, but as you keep reading, you realize these conversations between all of these characters are possibly foreshadowing furture events or revealing any secrets in the book. This story creates dramatic irony, just like ":Oedip[us the King". Although, emotions aren't all high in humor. This story is more serious.It seems this has some dull parts, but one can argue it is very important conversations that do not make it dull when looked back upon.
Drama is very emotional. The dull bits cut out intensifies the emotions in the plays. If the dull bits were included, people watching the plays would also dull out their emotions. Playwriters try to always make sure there is something interesting or funny happening in order to enguage the people and do this by attracting certain emotions.
Drama is very interesting. Without the dull bits, it is very dramatic and has lots of excitement. It is life without the dull bits. From two plays ive been reading, "Oedipus the King" and "The Wild Duck", they both have some sort of a dramatic lifestyle to it. There is always something going on within the people during the play, which creates emotions at a high level.
sophocles does this with "Oedpus the King" by having an interesting prophecy Oedpus is always thinking about. With this prophecy, this creates humor and dramatic irony because the reader knows exactly what is happening, but Oedipus does not. There is no dull bits in it. If there was, this would be too realistic and boring. Oedipus always has a problem and he turns everyhting like it is out to get him. If he was completely normal, there would be no point to this story.
In "The Wild Duck", Ibsen does have some dull parts at first, but as you keep reading, you realize these conversations between all of these characters are possibly foreshadowing furture events or revealing any secrets in the book. This story creates dramatic irony, just like ":Oedip[us the King". Although, emotions aren't all high in humor. This story is more serious.It seems this has some dull parts, but one can argue it is very important conversations that do not make it dull when looked back upon.
Drama is very emotional. The dull bits cut out intensifies the emotions in the plays. If the dull bits were included, people watching the plays would also dull out their emotions. Playwriters try to always make sure there is something interesting or funny happening in order to enguage the people and do this by attracting certain emotions.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Journal #3
Dear Diary,
What shall I do? Where do I go? I am a mess. I no longer have my eyes, so i could not see my two daughters. I found out that I killed Laius, who i found out was my real dad, and that i figured out my wife is my mom! Now she is dead! I tried running way not to see them because their is a prophecy of me killing them. I panicked and I left my home town and travelled to Thebes, where I saw my dad. I did not know at the time and I thought he was just some pesky person, so I killed him. Everything is not going the way I want it to be! My mom just died and I am falling apart.
Although everything is not going my way, I will blame myself and myself only. My father's death is my fault. My mother's death is my fault. Creon was right, he did not kill Laius, I did. Now I should be driven out of Thebes in exile. But I want my children with me. Creon is taking my power away, and that includes my kids. He is taking my children away from me, but I wanted them. I do not want to be in Thebes anymore though. I think Colonus is going to be my new destination.
What shall I do? Where do I go? I am a mess. I no longer have my eyes, so i could not see my two daughters. I found out that I killed Laius, who i found out was my real dad, and that i figured out my wife is my mom! Now she is dead! I tried running way not to see them because their is a prophecy of me killing them. I panicked and I left my home town and travelled to Thebes, where I saw my dad. I did not know at the time and I thought he was just some pesky person, so I killed him. Everything is not going the way I want it to be! My mom just died and I am falling apart.
Although everything is not going my way, I will blame myself and myself only. My father's death is my fault. My mother's death is my fault. Creon was right, he did not kill Laius, I did. Now I should be driven out of Thebes in exile. But I want my children with me. Creon is taking my power away, and that includes my kids. He is taking my children away from me, but I wanted them. I do not want to be in Thebes anymore though. I think Colonus is going to be my new destination.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Journal #2
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?
By comparing Oedipus and 1984, they both heighten emotional moments in similar ways, but also different. Some similar ways these two stories do this is by, first, dialogue. When the chorus in Oedipus is speaking, it is similar to the narration in 1984, from what I remember atleast. They are not too entirely emotional. Although, when dialogue between two characters is present, the writers create tension. In Oedipus the King, Creon and Oedipus were talking. They were in an argument against eachother and this created a high emotional dialogue seen. In 1984, Winston and the other doude in the ministry of Love? were in this intense conversation. This created a huge sense of intensity during the scene, like the conversation in Oedipus the King.
These writers do create intensity of emotions with other ways though. At times, in 1984, Winston talks to himself. He expresses all of his thoughts in such a strong, powerful, and negative tone that raises the readers emotions.Sophocles never really uses tone to build this feeling. He mainly uses dialogue and weird techniuques, like irony, to develop annoyance or humour over Oedupus. Like, irony when Oedipus is complaing over not knowing his mom and his real mom tells him to not worry, but he keeps talking about it. 1984 does not do this at all, it uses some narration and long conversation to build up high emotions.
By comparing Oedipus and 1984, they both heighten emotional moments in similar ways, but also different. Some similar ways these two stories do this is by, first, dialogue. When the chorus in Oedipus is speaking, it is similar to the narration in 1984, from what I remember atleast. They are not too entirely emotional. Although, when dialogue between two characters is present, the writers create tension. In Oedipus the King, Creon and Oedipus were talking. They were in an argument against eachother and this created a high emotional dialogue seen. In 1984, Winston and the other doude in the ministry of Love? were in this intense conversation. This created a huge sense of intensity during the scene, like the conversation in Oedipus the King.
These writers do create intensity of emotions with other ways though. At times, in 1984, Winston talks to himself. He expresses all of his thoughts in such a strong, powerful, and negative tone that raises the readers emotions.Sophocles never really uses tone to build this feeling. He mainly uses dialogue and weird techniuques, like irony, to develop annoyance or humour over Oedupus. Like, irony when Oedipus is complaing over not knowing his mom and his real mom tells him to not worry, but he keeps talking about it. 1984 does not do this at all, it uses some narration and long conversation to build up high emotions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)