Thursday, January 16, 2020

Due Thursday, January 16th - Mid-term Essay on "Lady Windermere's Fan" by Oscar Wilde


Directions: Please compose an essay and post it to Turnitin.com.


Prompt:  The following passage is an excerpt from ACT I of Lady Windemere’s Fan, a play by Oscar Wilde, produced in 1892. Read the passage carefully. Then write a well-organized essay in which you analyze how the playwright reveals the values of the characters and the nature of their society through symbolic characters (Hint:  Do these characters resemble characters from The Importance of Being Earnest? How can you apply this knowledge to this essay?)


From Lady Windermere's Fan by Oscar Wilde - ACT I

Duchess of Berwick. [Coming over and shaking hands.] Dear Margaret, I am so pleased to see you. You remember Agatha, don’t you? [Crossing L.C.] How do you do, Lord Darlington? I won’t let you know my daughter, you are far too wicked.

Lord Darlington. Don’t say that, Duchess. As a wicked man I am a complete failure. Why, there are lots of people who say I have never really done anything wrong in the whole course of my life. Of course they only say it behind my back.

Duchess of Berwick. Isn’t he dreadful? Agatha, this is Lord Darlington. Mind you don’t believe a word he says. [Lord Darlington crosses] No, no tea, thank you, dear. [Crosses and sits on sofa.] We have just had tea at Lady Markby’s. Such bad tea, too. It was quite undrinkable. I wasn’t at all surprised. Her own son-in-law supplies it. Agatha is looking forward so much to your ball to-night, dear Margaret.

Lady Windermere. [Seated] Oh, you mustn’t think it is going to be a ball, Duchess. It is only a dance in honour of my birthday. A small and early.

Lord Darlington. [Standing] Very small, very early, and very select, Duchess.

Duchess of Berwick. [On sofa] Of course it’s going to be select. But we know that, dear Margaret, about your house. It is really one of the few houses in London where I can take Agatha, and where I feel perfectly secure about dear Berwick. I don’t know what society is coming to. The most dreadful people seem to go everywhere. They certainly come to my parties—the men get quite furious if one doesn’t ask them. Really, some one should make a stand against it.

Lady Windermere. I will, Duchess. I will have no one in my house about whom there is any scandal.

Lord Darlington. Oh, don’t say that, Lady Windermere. I should never be admitted! [Sitting.]

Duchess of Berwick. Oh, men don’t matter. With women it is different. We’re good. Some of us are, at least. But we are positively getting elbowed into the corner. Our husbands would really forget our existence if we didn’t nag at them from time to time, just to remind them that we have a perfect legal right to do so.

Lord Darlington. It’s a curious thing, Duchess, about the game of marriage—a game, by the way, that is going out of fashion—the wives hold all the honours, and invariably lose the odd trick.

Duchess of Berwick. The odd trick? Is that the husband, Lord Darlington?

Lord Darlington. It would be rather a good name for the modern husband.

Duchess of Berwick. Dear Lord Darlington, how thoroughly depraved you are!

Lady Windermere. Lord Darlington is trivial.

Lord Darlington. Ah, don’t say that, Lady Windermere.

Lady Windermere. Why do you talk so trivially about life, then?

Lord Darlington. Because I think that life is far too important a thing ever to talk seriously about it. [Moves up]

Duchess of Berwick. What does he mean? Do, as a concession to my poor wits, Lord Darlington, just explain to me what you really mean.

Lord Darlington. [Coming down back of table.] I think I had better not, Duchess. Nowadays to be intelligible is to be found out. Good-bye! [Shakes hands with Duchess.] And now—[goes up stage] Lady Windermere, good-bye. I may come to-night, mayn’t I? Do let me come.

Lady Windermere. [Standing up stage with Lord Darlington.] Yes, certainly. But you are not to say foolish, insincere things to people.

Lord Darlington. [Smiling.] Ah! you are beginning to reform me. It is a dangerous thing to reform any one, Lady Windermere. [Bows and exits.]



Scoring Guide for Prompt on Lady Windermere's Fan by Oscar Wilde

General Directions: The score that you assign should reflect your judgment of the quality of the essay as a whole—its content, its style, its mechanics. Reward the writers for what they do well. The score for an exceptionally well-written essay may be raised by one point above the otherwise appropriate score. In no case may a poorly written essay be scored higher than a (C-).

(A Essays) 
These essays offer a persuasive analysis of how the playwright reveals the values of the characters and the nature of their society. The writers make a strong case for their interpretation of character and situation, developing the relationship between language and values. The writers consider literary and dramatic elements such as characterization, diction, and tone, engaging the text through apt and specific references. Although these essays may not be error-free, their perceptive analysis is apparent in writing that is clear, precise, and effectively organized. Generally, essays scored a (A) reveal more sophisticated analysis and more effective control of language than do essays scored an (A-).

(B Essays)  
These essays offer a reasonable analysis of how the playwright reveals the values of the characters and the nature of their society. The writers provide a sustained, competent reading of the passage, with attention to literary and dramatic elements such as characterization, diction, and tone. Although these essays may not be error-free and may be less perceptive or less convincing than (A) essays, the writers present their ideas with clarity and control and refer to the text for support. Generally, essays scored a (B+) present better-developed analysis and more consistent command of the elements of effective composition than do essays scored a (B/B-).

(C Essays) 
These essays respond to the assigned task with a plausible reading of the passage, but they tend to be superficial or undeveloped in their treatment of how the playwright reveals the values of the characters and nature of their society. While exhibiting some analysis of the passage, implicit or explicit, the discussion of how literary elements contribute to the author’s purpose may be slight, and support from the passage may be thin or tend toward paraphrase. While these writers demonstrate adequate control of language, their essays may be marred by surface errors. generally, essays scored a (C) lack the more effective organization and the more sustained development characteristics of (B) papers.

(D Essays)  
These essays fail to offer a less than thorough understanding of the task or a less than adequate treatment of how the playwright reveals the values of the characters and the nature of their society. Often relying on summary or paraphrase, the writers may fail to articulate a convincing basis for understanding the relationship between language and the values of the characters and the nature of society. They may misread the passage or may present an unfocused or repetitive reading characterized by an absence of textual support or an accumulation of errors. Generally, essays scored a (D+) exhibit better control over the elements of composition than those scored a (D/D-).
(F Essays)  
These essays compound the weaknesses of the papers in the (D) range. They may persistently misread the passage or be unacceptably brief. They may contain pervasive errors that interfere with understanding. Although an attempt has been made to respond to the prompt, the writers’ ideas are presented with little clarity, organization, or support from the passage.

Friday, January 10, 2020

Due Wednesday, January 15th - Close Reading Critical Analysis Essay for "Ghosts" by Henrik Ibsen


Directions:  Please compose an essay and post it to Turnitin.com.

The following passage is an excerpt from Ghosts, a play by Henrik Ibsen, produced in 1881. Read the passage carefully. Then write a well-organized essay in which you analyze how the playwright reveals his values with regard to the nature of the society through symbolic characters.  Your essay should include an introduction, at least three body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Use direct quotations of the passage in your essay. Suggested time - 60 minutes


OSWALD. My stay is indefinite, sir.-But, ah! It is good to be at home!
MRS. ALVING. [Beaming.] Yes, isn't it, dear?
MANDERS. [Looking sympathetically at him.] You went out into the world early, my dear Oswald.
OSWALD. I did. I sometimes wonder whether it wasn't too early.
MRS. ALVING. Oh, not at all. A healthy lad is all the better for it; especially when he's an only child. He oughtn't to hang on at home with his mother and father, and get spoilt.
MANDERS. That is a very disputable point, Mrs. Alving. A child's proper place is, and must be, the home of his fathers.
OSWALD. There I quite agree with you, Pastor Manders.
MANDERS. Only look at your own son--there is no reason why we should not say it in his presence--what has the consequence been for him? He is six or seven and twenty, and has never had the opportunity of learning what a well-ordered home really is.
OSWALD. I beg your pardon, Pastor; there you're quite mistaken.
MANDERS. Indeed? I thought you had lived almost exclusively in artistic circles.
OSWALD. So I have.
MANDERS. And chiefly among the younger artists?
OSWALD. Yes, certainly.
MANDERS. But I thought few of those young fellows could afford to set up house and support a family.
OSWALD. There are many who cannot afford to marry, sir.
MANDERS. Yes, that is just what I say.
OSWALD. But they may have a home for all that. And several of them have, as a matter of fact; and very pleasant, well-ordered homes they are, too.

[MRS. ALVING follows with breathless interest; nods, but says nothing.]

MANDERS. But I'm not talking of bachelors' quarters. By a "home" I understand the home of a family, where a man lives with his wife and children.
OSWALD. Yes; or with his children and his children's mother.
MANDERS. [Starts; clasps his hands.] But, good heavens--
OSWALD. Well?
MANDERS. Lives with--his children's mother!
OSWALD. Yes. Would you have him turn his children's mother out of doors?
MANDERS. Then it is illicit relations you are talking of! Irregular marriages, as people call them!
OSWALD. I have never noticed anything particularly irregular about the life these people lead.
MANDERS. But how is it possible that a--a young man or young woman with any decency of feeling can endure to live in that way?--in the eyes of all the world!
OSWALD. What are they to do? A poor young artist--a poor girl-- marriage costs a great deal. What are they to do?
MANDERS. What are they to do? Let me tell you, Mr. Alving, what they ought to do. They ought to exercise self-restraint from the first; that is what they ought to do.
OSWALD. That doctrine will scarcely go down with warm-blooded young people who love each other.
MRS. ALVING. No, scarcely!
MANDERS. [Continuing.] How can the authorities tolerate such things! Allow them to go on in the light of day! [Confronting MRS. ALVING.] Had I not cause to be deeply concerned about your son? In circles where open immorality prevails, and has even a sort of recognized position--!
OSWALD. Let me tell you, sir, that I have been in the habit of spending nearly all my Sundays in one or two such irregular homes--
MANDERS. Sunday of all days!
OSWALD. Isn't that the day to enjoy one's self? Well, never have I heard an offensive word, and still less have I witnessed anything that could be called immoral. No; do you know when and where I have come across immorality in artistic circles?
MANDERS. No, thank heaven, I don't!
OSWALD. Well, then, allow me to inform you. I have met with it when one or other of our pattern husbands and fathers has come to Paris to have a look round on his own account, and has done the artists the honour of visiting their humble haunts. They knew what was what. These gentlemen could tell us all about places and things we had never dreamt of.
MANDERS. What! Do you mean to say that respectable men from home here would--?
OSWALD. Have you never heard these respectable men, when they got home again, talking about the way in which immorality runs rampant abroad?
MANDERS. Yes, no doubt--
MRS. ALVING. I have too.
OSWALD. Well, you may take their word for it. They know what they are talking about! [Presses his hands to his head.] Oh! That that great, free, glorious life out there should be defiled in such a way!
MRS. ALVING. You mustn't get excited, Oswald. It's not good for you.
OSWALD. Yes; you're quite right, mother. It's bad for me, I know. You see, I'm wretchedly worn out. I shall go for a little turn before dinner. Excuse me, Pastor: I know you can't take my point of view; but I couldn't help speaking out. [He goes out by the second door to the right.]


Scoring Guide for Prompt on Ghosts by Henrik Ibsen 


General Information: The score that you are assigned will reflect the quality of the essay as a whole—its content, its style, its mechanics. I reward the writers for what they do well. The score for an exceptionally well-written essay may be raised a half step above the otherwise appropriate score (i.e. from an A- to an A). In no case may a poorly written essay be scored higher than a D.

A

These essays offer a well-focused and persuasive analysis of the assigned prompt. Using apt and specific textual support, these essays fully explore all three characters, analyzing their symbolic qualities and demonstrating what it contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole. Although not without flaws, these essays make a strong case for their interpretation and discuss the literary work with significant insight and understanding. Generally, essays scored an A reveal more sophisticated analysis and more effective control of language than do essays scored an A-.

B

These essays offer a reasonable analysis of the assigned prompt, and what it contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole. They may only zero in on one or two of the characters, but they clearly define the symbolic significance. Therefore, these essays show insight and understanding, but the analysis is less thorough, less perceptive, and/or less specific in supporting detail than that of the A essays. Generally, essays scored a B+ present better developed analysis and more consistent command of the elements of effective composition than do essays scored a B or B-.

C

These essays respond to the assigned task with a plausible reading, but they tend to be superficial or underdeveloped in analysis. Perhaps they describe the characters, but do not actually define their symbolic significance. They may discuss characterization and meaning, but only with regards to the plot. Or they may describe the symbolic significance, but never actually explain why it is significant or bother to walk us through the rest of the passage. As a result they may often rely upon plot summary that contains some analysis, implicit or explicit. Although the writers attempt to discuss the assigned prompt and how the relationship contributes to the work as a whole, they may demonstrate a rather simplistic understanding of the work and/or the question at hand. The essays demonstrate adequate control of language, but they may lack effective organization and may be marred by surface errors.

D

These lower-half essays offer a less than thorough understanding of the task or a less than adequate treatment of it. They reflect an incomplete or over simplified understanding of the work, or they may fail to address the assigned prompt directly. They may not address or develop a response to how it contributes to the work as a whole, or they may rely on plot summary alone. Their assertions may be unsupported or even irrelevant. Often wordy, elliptical, or repetitious, these essays may lack control over the elements of composition. Essays scored a D- may contain significant misreading and demonstrate inept writing.

F

Although these essays make some attempt to respond to the prompt, they compound the weaknesses of the papers in the D range. Often, they are unacceptably brief or are incoherent in presenting ideas. They may be poorly written on several counts and contain distracting errors in grammar and mechanics. The writer’s remarks are presented with little clarity, organization, or supporting evidence.

Monday, January 6, 2020

Due Monday, January 13th - Do you believe in Ghosts!


Overview: In class, we have been viewing, analyzing, and discussing Henrik Ibsen's Ghosts. If you have not done so, please read Act II.  Please, take this opportunity to review the text by reading and reviewing the play. Please use the three experiences on the right-hand side of the blog: text, audio and performance.

Assignment: When have you experienced Ghosts in your lives? Think back on your lives. Look at the decisions and experiences. Where have voices from the past impacted your decisions? Have there been times when you could not tell if you believed something to be true, or that you were supposed to believe? Think about the news. Do you see ghosts "in between the lines of the newspaper"?  In this blog space, please share these experiences. Begin your post with 1-2 direct quotations from Ghosts that match the feelings you are sharing, so we can see the direct parallels and engage with the text. I provided some moments from Act II, below, to help you get started.  I look forward to your responses.  Your post should be 300-400 words.

Quotations from Act 2
  • Ghosts! When I heard Regina and Oswald in there, it was as though ghosts rose up before me. But I almost think we are all of us ghosts, Pastor Manders. It is not only what we have inherited from our father and mother that "walks" in us. It is all sorts of dead ideas, and lifeless old beliefs, and so forth. They have no vitality, but they cling to us all the same, and we cannot shake them off. Whenever I take up a newspaper, I seem to see ghosts gliding between the lines. There must be ghosts all the country over, as thick as the sands of the sea. And then we are, one and all, so pitifully afraid of the light.
  • Yes--when you forced me under the yoke of what you called duty and obligation; when you lauded as right and proper what my whole soul rebelled against as something loathsome. It was then that I began to look into the seams of your doctrines. I wanted only to pick at a single knot; but when I had got that undone, the whole thing ravelled out. And then I understood that it was all machine-sewn.
  • Oh, wait a minute!--now I recollect. Johanna did have a trifle of money. But I would have nothing to do with that. "No," says I, "that's mammon; that's the wages of sin. This dirty gold--or notes, or whatever it was--we'll just flint, that back in the American's face," says I. But he was off and away, over the stormy sea, your Reverence.
  • It only shows how excessively careful one ought to be in judging one's fellow creatures. But what a heartfelt joy it is to ascertain that one has been mistaken! Don't you think so?
  • At last he said: "There has been something worm-eaten in you from your birth." He used that very word… He said, "The sins of the fathers are visited upon the children." No other explanation was possible, he said. That's the awful part of it. Incurably ruined for life--by my own heedlessness! All that I meant to have done in the world--I never dare think of it again--I'm not able to think of it. Oh! if I could only live over again, and undo all I have done! [He buries his face in the sofa.]
  • I only mean that here people are brought up to believe that work is a curse and a punishment for sin, and that life is something miserable, something; it would be best to have done with, the sooner the better…But in the great world people won't hear of such things. There, nobody really believes such doctrines any longer. There, you feel it a positive bliss and ecstasy merely to draw the breath of life. Mother, have you noticed that everything I have painted has turned upon the joy of life?--always, always upon the joy of life?--light and sunshine and glorious air-and faces radiant with happiness. That is why I'm afraid of remaining at home with you.

Thursday, January 2, 2020

Due Wednesday, January 8th - "Ghosts" by Henrik Ibsen - Act I

Directions: Please re-read Ghosts by Henrik Ibsen, Act I. You can find links to the complete play, audio, and film in the right-hand margin of the blog. Next, compose a comprehensive blog response (300-400 words). Please use the questions below as a guide to your response. You may choose one quotation and explore it in depth, choose a combination of questions, or explore symbols listed in question 11. Please use at least 2-3 major quotations in your response. I provided a cross-section of quotations to help you begin.

  
Study Questions
  1. How do the stage directions for Ghosts set the mood for the play?
  2. Given the realistic setting of the garden room Ghosts, what other components of realism should the audience or reader expect?
  3. How is Regina representative of mobility between the classes?
  4. How does the behavior of Regina Engstrand and Engstrand toward each other in show that Henrik Ibsen is challenging conventional expectations?
  5. What role do Regina Engstrand and Engstrand fill in the development of the plot?
  6. How does Pastor Manders's treatment of Regina Engstrand change over the course of Act I?
  7. How do the two mysteries raised early in the conversation in Act I contribute to suspense in the plot?
  8. What do Mrs. Alving's comments about the books she is reading in Act I suggest about the society she lives in?
  9. How do Mrs. Alving's and Pastor Manders's responses to the books Mrs. Alving is reading define each character?  Who would Ibsen side with in this case?
  10. How does Henrik Ibsen use Pastor Manders's ideas about insuring the orphanage to deepen his characterization of the pastor?
  11. How are the following used as symbols in the play:  Orphanage, Ghosts, Artist, Priest, Sailors, Captains, Men. Woman, the characters themselves?
Quotations
  • Regina:  Yes, you may be sure we'll see about it! Me that have been brought up by a lady like Mrs. Alving! Me that am treated almost as a daughter here! Is it me you want to go home with you?--to a house like yours? For shame!
  • Engstrand:  Then never mind about marrying them. You can make it pay all the same. [More confidentially.] He--the Englishman--the man with the yacht--he came down with three hundred dollars, he did; and she wasn't a bit handsomer than you.
  • Mrs. Alving:  Well, I seem to find explanation and confirmation of all sorts of things I myself have been thinking. For that is the wonderful part of it, Pastor Minders--there is really nothing new in these books, nothing but what most people think and believe. Only most people either don't formulate it to themselves, or else keep quiet about it.
  • Pastor Manders:  Object to in them? You surely do not suppose that I have nothing better to do than to study such publications as these? … I have read enough about these writings to disapprove of them.
  • Pastor Manders:  When Oswald appeared there, in the doorway, with the pipe in his mouth, I could have sworn I saw his father, large as life.
  • Mrs. Alving:  Oh, how can you say so? Oswald takes after me.
  • Pastor Manders:  But how is it possible that a--a young man or young woman with any decency of feeling can endure to live in that way?--in the eyes of all the world!
  • Oswald:  Well, then, allow me to inform you. I have met with it when one or other of our pattern husbands and fathers has come to Paris to have a look round on his own account, and has done the artists the honour of visiting their humble haunts. They knew what was what. These gentlemen could tell us all about places and things we had never dreamt of.
  • Mrs. Alving:  Soon after, I heard Alving come in too. I heard him say something softly to her. And then I heard--[With a short laugh]--oh! it still sounds in my ears, so hateful and yet so ludicrous--I heard my own servant-maid whisper, "Let me go, Mr. Alving! Let me be!"….It was my purchase-money. I do not choose that that money should pass into Oswald's hands. My son shall have everything from me--everything.
  • Mrs:  Alving:  Ghosts!

Monday, December 16, 2019

Due Friday, December 20th - Alternate Ending of "A Doll House" by Henrik Ibsen


Overview and Directions:  We discussed Ibsen's play A Doll House and viewed the end of Act III. Nora leaving Torvald is famously called, "The door slam heard around the world."  At the time, the powers that be forced Ibsen's hand, and he reluctantly changed the ending in order to avoid the outright ban on his play.  Below, view the original ending and read the alternate ending.  How does this new ending make you feel?  How does it alter Ibsen's message and intent?  Ibsen wrote Ghosts as rebuttal to this ending and the public 's reaction.  What can we expect to see in Ghosts?  Explore. I look forward to your responses.

Original Ending of A Doll House



Alternate Ending of A Doll House 

NORA. ... Where we could make a real marriage out of our lives together. Goodbye. [Begins to go.]

HELMER. Go then! [Seizes her arm.] But first you shall see your children for the last time!

NORA. Let me go! I will not see them! I cannot!

HELMER [draws her over to the door, left]. You shall see them. [Opens the door and says softly.] Look, there they are asleep, peaceful and carefree. Tomorrow, when they wake up and call for their mother, they will be - motherless.

NORA [trembling]. Motherless...!

HELMER. As you once were.

NORA. Motherless! [Struggles with herself, lets her travelling bag fall, and says.] Oh, this is a sin against myself, but I cannot leave them. [Half sinks down by the door.]

HELMER [joyfully, but softly]. Nora!

[The curtain falls.]


Tuesday, December 10, 2019

Due Friday, December 13th - Background on Henrik Ibsen

Directions: 1) Please read the background material on Henrik Ibsen. 2) In a blog post, please comment on the following: How did Ibsen's life impact his plays? How did Ibsen change modern drama? In the article, below, there are several quotations by Ibsen or about Ibsen. Choose 1-2 quotations, cut and paste them into your response. Next, explain its significance to Ibsen and to you as a scholar of drama. I look forward to your responses. We will be reading his play Ghosts.



Major Plays

“Only by grasping and comprehending my entire production as a continuous and coherent whole will the reader be able to receive the precise impression I sought to convey in the individual parts…I therefore appeal to the reader that he not put any play aside, and not skip anything, but that he absorb the plays…in the order in which I wrote them.” - Henrik Ibsen

1850 - Catiline (Catilina)
1850 - The Burial Mound also known as The Warrior's Barrow (Kjæmpehøjen)
1851 - Norma (Norma)
1852 - St. John's Eve (Sancthansnatten)
1854 - Lady Inger of Oestraat (Fru Inger til Østeraad)
1855 - The Feast at Solhaug (Gildet paa Solhoug)
1856 - Olaf Liljekrans (Olaf Liljekrans)
1857 - The Vikings at Helgeland (Hærmændene paa Helgeland)
1862 - Digte - only released collection of poetry
1862 - Love's Comedy (Kjærlighedens Komedie)
1863 - The Pretenders (Kongs-Emnerne)
1866 - Brand (Brand)
1867 - Peer Gynt (Peer Gynt)
1869 - The League of Youth (De unges Forbund)
1873 - Emperor and Galilean (Kejser og Galilæer)
1877 - Pillars of Society (Samfundets Støtter)
1879 - A Doll House (Et Dukkehjem)
1881 - Ghosts (Gengangere)
1882 - An Enemy of the People (En Folkefiende)
1884 - The Wild Duck (Vildanden)
1886 - Rosmersholm (Rosmersholm)
1888 - The Lady from the Sea (Fruen fra Havet)
1890 - Hedda Gabler (Hedda Gabler)
1892 - The Master Builder (Bygmester Solness)
1896 - John Gabriel Borkman (John Gabriel Borkman)
1899 - When We Dead Awaken (Når vi døde vaagner)


Background Material by Professor Bjorn Hemmer, University of Oslo

Introduction

Henrik Ibsen (1828-1906) published his last drama, "When We Dead Awaken", in 1899, and he called it a dramatic epilogue. It was also destined to be the epilogue of his life's work, because illness prevented him from writing more. For half of a century he had devoted his life and his energies to the art of drama, and he had won international acclaim as the greatest and most influential dramatist of his time. He knew that he had gone further than anyone in putting Norway on the map.

Henrik Ibsen was also a major poet, and he published a collection of poems in 1871. However, drama was the focus of his real lyrical spirit. For a period of many hard years, he faced bitter opposition. But he finally triumphed over the conservatism and aesthetic prejudices of the contemporary critics and audiences. More than anyone, he gave theatrical art a new vitality by bringing into European bourgeois drama an ethical gravity, a psychological depth, and a social significance which the theater had lacked since the days of Shakespeare. In this manner, Ibsen strongly contributed to giving European drama a vitality and artistic quality comparable to the ancient Greek tragedies.

It is from this perspective we view his contribution to theatrical history. His realistic contemporary drama was a continuation of the European tradition of tragic plays. In these works he portrays people from the middle class of his day. These are people whose routines are suddenly upset as they are confronted with a deep crisis in their lives. They have been blindly following a way of life leading to the troubles and are themselves responsible for the crisis. Looking back on their lives, they are forced to confront themselves. However, Ibsen created another type of drama as well. In fact, he had been writing for 25 years before he, in 1877, created his first contemporary drama, "Pillars of Society".


Life and Writing

Ibsen's biography is lacking in grand and momentous episodes. His life as an artist can be seen as a singularly long and hard struggle leading to victory and fame - a hard road from poverty to international success. He spent all of 27 years abroad, in Italy and Germany. He left his land of birth at the age of 36 in 1864. It was not until he was 63 that he moved home again, to Kristiania (now Oslo), where he would die in 1906 at the age of 78.

In lbsen's last drama, "When We Dead Awaken", he describes the life of an artist that in many ways reflects on his own. The world renowned sculptor, Professor Rubek, has returned to Norway after many years abroad, and in spite of his fame and success, he feels no happiness. In the central work of his life, he has modeled a self-portrait titled "Remorse for a ruined life" During the play he is forced to admit that he has taken the pleasure out of his own life as well as spoiling others'. Everything has been sacrificed for his art - he has forsaken the love of his youth and his earlier idealism as well. It follows that he has actually betrayed his art by relinquishing these essentials. It is none other than his old flame Irene, the model who posed for him in his youth, who goes to him in his moment of destiny and tells him the truth: it is first when we dead awaken, that we see what is irremediable that we have never really lived.

It is the tragic life feeling itself that gives Ibsen's drama its special character, the experience of missing out on life and plodding along in a state of living death. The alternative is pictured as a utopian existence in freedom, truth and love - in short - a happy life. In Ibsen's world the main character strives toward a goal, but this struggle leads out into the cold, to loneliness. Yet the possibility of opting for another route is always there, one can chose human warmth and contact. The problem for Ibsen's protagonist is that both choices can appear to be good, and the individual does not see the consequences of the decision.

In "When We Dead Awaken" the chill of art is contrasted with life's warmth. In this perspective, art serves as a prison from which the artist neither can, nor wishes to escape. As Rubek says to Irene:

"I am an artist, Irene, and I take no shame to myself for the frailties that perhaps cling to me. For I was born to be an artist, you see. - And, do what I may, I shall never be anything else."

This is not an acceptable excuse for Irene, whom he has betrayed. She sees things from a different angle. She calls him a "poet", one who creates his own fictitious world, neglecting his humanity and that of the people who love him. Ella Rentheim, in "John Gabriel Borkman" (1896) makes the same complaint against the man who sacrificed her on the altar of his career. The tragic element in Ibsen's perspective is that for the type of people that concern him, this seems to be an insoluble conflict. Yet this fact does not exonerate them from the responsibility or their own decisions.

Although "When We Dead Awaken" criticizes the egocentricity of the artist, it would be going too far to view the drama as the writer's bitter self-examination. Rubek is not a self-portrait. However, some Ibsen researchers have seen him as a spokesman for the author's standpoint on the question of art. At one point, Rubek says that the public only relates to the external realistic "truth" in his human portrayal. What people do not understand is the hidden dimension in these portraits, all the deceitful motives that hide behind the respectable bourgeois facades. In his youth, Rubek had been inspired by an idealistic vision of a higher form of human existence. Experience has turned him into a disillusioned exposer of people, a man who believes he portrays life as it really is. It is the animal governing man that dominates his vision; this is Rubek's version of Zola's "La béte humaine", and he explains the changes in his art in the following way:

"I imagined that which I saw with my eyes around me in the world. I had to include it (...) and up from the fissures of the soil there now swarm men and women with dimly- suggested animal-faces. women and men - as I knew them in real life."

Understandably, some students of Ibsen have fallen into the temptation of drawing a parallel between life and art, and see this work as a merciless self-denunciation. Once again, "When We Dead Awaken" is by no means auto-biographical. Rubek's relationship with the writer has to be sought on a deeper level - in the conflicts that Ibsen, toward the end of his life, saw as a general and essential human problem.


Ibsen the Psychologist

In the work of the aging writer we meet a number of people who are experiencing similar conflicts. John Gabriel Borkman sacrifices his love for a dream of power and honor. Master builder Solness wrecks his family's lives in order to be regarded as an "artist" in his trade. And Hedda Gabler resolutely changes the fates of others in order to fulfill her own dream of freedom and independence. These examples of people who pursue their own goals, involuntarily trampling on the lives of others, are all drawn from the playwright's last decade of writing. In Ibsen's psychological analyses, he reveals the negative forces (he calls them "demons" and "trolls" in the minds of these people. His human characterization in these latter dramas is extremely complex - a common factor shared by all his last works, starting with "The Wild Duck" in 1884. In his last 15 years of writing, Ibsen developed his dialectical supremacy and his distinctive dramatic form - where realism, symbolism, and deep-digging psychological insights interact. It is this phase of his work that has prompted people to call him - rightly or wrongly - a "Freud of the theater." In any case, Freud and many other psychologists have made use of Ibsen's human portraits as a basis for character analysis or even to illustrate their own theories. Especially well known is Freud's analysis of Rebekka West in "Rosmersholm" (1886), a portrayal he discussed in 1916 together with other character types "who collapse under the weight of success." Freud sees Rebekka as a tragic victim of the Oedipus complex and an incestuous past. The analysis reveals perhaps more about Freud than about Ibsen. But Freud's influence, and the sway of psychoanalysis in general, have had a considerable effect on the way the Norwegian dramatist has been regarded.

Interest in Ibsen as a psychologist can too readily obscure other, equally important, sides of his art. His account of human life is from an acute social and conceptual perspective. Perhaps this is the essence of his art - that which turns it into existential drama exploring many facets of life. This concerns everything he wrote, even prior to his emergence as an international dramatist around 1880.


A Desperate Drama

Ibsen's work as a writer represents a long poetic contemplation of people's need to live differently than they do. Thus there is always a deep undercurrent of desperation in his work. Benedetto Croce called these portrayals of people who live in constant expectation and who are consumed by their pursuit of "something else" in life, "a desperate drama".

It is precisely this distance between what they can achieve and what they want to achieve that is the cause of the tragic (and in many cases the comic) aspect of these people's lives. Ibsen felt that this contradiction between will and real prospects was at the root of his art. Looking back on 25 years of writing in 1875, he declared that most of what he had written involved "the contradiction between ability and aspiration, between will and possibility". In this conflict he saw "humanity's and the individual's tragedy and comedy simultaneously." - A decade later, he created the tragicomic constellation of the priest Rosmer and his scruffy teacher Ulrik Brendel. These two men, who are reflections of each other, both end up on the brink of an abyss where all they see is life's total emptiness and insignificance.

In Ibsen's 12 modern contemporary plays, from "Pillars of Society" (1877) to "When We Dead Awaken" (1899), we are led time and again into the same milieu. His characters' are distinguished by their staunch, well-established bourgeois lives. Nevertheless, their world is threatened and threatening. It turns out that the world is in motion; old values and previous conceptions are adrift. The movement shakes up the life of the individual and jeopardizes the established social order. Here we see how the process has a psychological as well as a conceptual and social aspect. Yet what starts the whole process is the need for change, something springing forth from the individual's volition.

In this sense, Ibsen is a powerful conceptual writer. This does not mean that his main concern as a dramatist was the didactical use of theater, or the waging of an abstract ideological debate. (Some of his critics, contemporary and later, have made this accusation - and it's fairly obvious that Ibsen was drawn towards the didactic.) However, the basis of Ibsen's human portrayal is his characters' conceptions of what makes life worth living - their values and their understanding of existence. The concepts they use to describe their position may be unclear; their self-understanding may be intuitive and deficient. A good example of this is Ellida Wangel's description of her ambivalent attraction to the sea in "The Lady from the Sea" (1888). But for a long time, in Ellida's consciousness, a desire has grown for a freer life coupled with a need for other moral and social values than those dominating Dr. Wangel's bourgeois existence. And this discovery within her creates shockwaves on the psychological and the social plane.


The Human Conflicts

Ibsen himself has given the best characteristic of his approach to drama. This was as early as 1857 in a theater review:

"It is not the conscious strife between ideas parading before us, nor is this the situation in real life. What we see are human conflicts, and enwrapped in these, deep inside, lay ideas at battle - being defeated, or charged with victory."

This undoubtedly touches upon something essential in Ibsen's demands to dramatic art: it should as realistically as possible unify three elements: the psychological, the ideological and the social. At its best, the organic synthesis of these three elements is at the heart of Ibsen's drama. Perhaps he only succeeds completely in a few of his plays, such as "Ghosts", "The Wild Duck", and "Hedda Gabler". Interestingly, he considered his major work to be "Emperor and Galilean" (1873), contrary to everyone else. This could indicate how much emphasis he put on ideology, not overt, but as a conflict between opposing views toward life. Ibsen believed that he had created a fully "realistic" rendering of the inner conflict in the abandoned Julian. The truth is, however, that Julian is too marked by the dramatist's own thoughts - what he calls his "positive philosophy of life." Ibsen first succeeded as a theatrical writer when he seriously took another approach - the one he described in connection with "Hedda Gabler" (1890):

"My main goal has been to depict people, human moods and human fates, on the basis of certain predominant social conditions and perceptions."

Ibsen took many years, after "Emperor and Galilean", to orient himself in this direction. Five years after that great historical dramatization of ideas came "Pillars of Society", the starting point for lbsen's reputation as a European theatrical writer.


Ibsen's International Breakthrough

In 1879, Ibsen sent Nora Helmer out into the world with a demand that a woman too must have the freedom to develop as an adult, independent, and responsible person. The playwright was now over 50, and had finally been recognized outside of the Nordic countries. "Pillars of Society". had admittedly opened the German borders for him, but it was "A Doll's House". and "Ghost" (1881) which in the 1880s led him into the European avant-garde.

"A Doll's House" has a plot which he repeated in many subsequent works, in the phase when he cultivated "critical realism". We experience the individual in opposition to the majority, society's oppressive authority. Nora puts it this way: "I will have to find out who is right, society or myself."

As noted earlier, when the individual intellectually frees himself from traditional ways of thinking, serious conflicts arise. For a short period around 1880, it appears that Ibsen was relatively optimistic about the individual's chances of succeeding on his own. Although her future is insecure in many ways, Nora seems to have a real chance of finding the freedom and independence she is seeking. Ibsen can be criticized for his somewhat superficial treatment of the problems a divorced woman without means would face in contemporary society. But it was the moral problems that concerned him as a writer, not the practical and economic ones.


A Singular Success

In spite of Nora's uncertain future prospects, she has served in a number of countries as a symbol for women fighting for liberation and equality. In this connection, she is the most "international" of lbsen's characters. Yet this is a rather singular success. The middle-class public has enthusiastically applauded a woman who leaves her children and husband, completely breaking off with the most important institution in the bourgeois society - the family!

This points to the basis of Ibsen's international success. He took deep schisms and acute problems that afflicted the bourgeois family and placed them on the stage. On the surface, the middle-class homes gave an impression of success - and appeared to reflect a picture of a healthy and stable society. But Ibsen dramatizes the hidden conflicts in this society by opening the doors to the private, and secret rooms of the bourgeois homes. He shows what can be hiding behind the beautiful façades: moral duplicity, confinement, betrayal, and fraud not to mention a constant insecurity. These were the aspects of the middle-class life one was not supposed to mention in public, as Pastor Manders wished Mrs. Alving to keep secret her reading and everything else that threatened the atmosphere at Rosenvold in "Ghosts". In the same manner, the social leaders in "Rosmersholm" put pressure on Rosmer to keep him from telling that he, the priest, had given up the Christian faith.

But Ibsen did not remain silent, and the spotlights of his plays made contemporary aspects of life highly visible. He disrupted the peace of the lives of the bourgeoisie by reminding them that they had climbed to their position of social power by mastering quite different ideals than tranquillity, order and stability. The bourgeoisie had betrayed its own motto of "freedom, equality, and brotherhood", and especially after the revolutionary year 1848 they had become defenders of the status quo. There was, of course, a liberal opposition within their class, and Ibsen openly joins these ranks in his first modern contemporary drama. He considered this movement for freedom and progress to be the true "European" point of view. As early as 1870, he wrote to the Danish critic Georg Brandes that it was imperative to return to the ideas of the French revolution, freedom, equality, and brotherhood. The words need a new meaning in keeping with the times, he claimed. In 1875 he writes, again to Brandes:

"Why are you, and the rest of us who hold the European viewpoint, so isolated at home?"

Eventually, as Ibsen grew older, he had trouble accepting certain extreme forms of liberalism which overemphasized the individual's sovereign right to self-realization and to some extent radically departed from past norms and values. In "Rosmersholm", he points out the dangers of radicalism built solely on individual moral norms. It is obvious here that Ibsen is concerned with European culture's basis in a Christian inspired moral tradition. One has to build on this, he indicates, even though one has given up the Christian faith. This is certainly the conclusion that Rebekka West reaches.

Simultaneously, this drama, like "Ghosts", is a painful clash with the melancholic, killjoy aspects of the Christian bourgeois tradition which subdues the human spirit. Both these works contain, for all their despair, a warm defense of happiness and the joy of life - pitted against the bourgeois society's emphasis on duty, law, and order.

It was in the 1870s that Ibsen oriented himself toward his "European" point of view. Even though he lived abroad, he continually chose a Norwegian setting for his contemporary dramas. As a rule, we find ourselves in a small Norwegian coastal town, the kind Ibsen knew so well from his childhood in Skien and his youth in Grimstad. The background of the young Ibsen certainly gave him a sharp eye for social forces and conflicts arising from differing viewpoints. In small societies, such as the typical Norwegian coastal town, these social and ideological conflicts are more exposed than they would be in a larger city.

Ibsen's first painful experiences came from such a small community. He had seen how conventions, traditions, and norms could exercise a negative control over the individual, create anxiety, and inhibit a natural and joyful lifestyle. This is the atmosphere of the "ghosts" as Mrs. Alving experiences it. According to her, it makes people "afraid of the light."

This was the atmosphere of his youth that formed the basis for his writing and world fame. As an insecure writer and man of the theater in a stifling Norwegian milieu, he set out to create a new Norwegian drama. He began with this national perspective. At the same time, from his first journey abroad, he oriented himself toward the European tradition of theater.


lbsen's Years of Learning

In the history of drama, early in the 1850s Ibsen carried on the traditions of two highly dissimilar writers, the Frenchman Eugéne Scribe (1791-1861) and the German Friedrich Hebbel (1813-63). For 11 years the young Ibsen was occupied with day to day practical stagework, and it follows that he had to keep himself well informed about the latest contemporary Euro-heatrical art. He worked with rehearsals of new plays and was committed to writing for the theater.

Scribe could teach him how a drama's plot should be structured in a logically motivated progression of scenes. Hebbel provided him with an example of the way drama could be based on life's contemporary dialectics, creating a modern conceptual drama. Hebbel's pioneering work was his conveyance of the ideologicalconflicts of his day into the theater where he created "a drama of issues" pointing forward. He also knew how the Greek tragedy's retrospective technique could be used by a modern dramatist.

In other words, Ibsen was in close contact with the art of the stage for a long uninterrupted period. His six years at the theater in Bergen (1851-57) and the following four or five years at the theater in Kristiania from 1857 were not easy. But he acquired a sharp eye for theatrical techniques and possibilities.

During a study tour to Copenhagen and Dresden in 1852, he came across a dramaturgical work newly released in Germany. It was Hermann Hettner's "Das moderne Drama" (1852). This programmatic treatise for a new topical theater deeply affected Ibsen's development as a dramatist. In Hettner too, we see the strong influence of Scribe and Hebbel, combined with a passionate interest for Shakespeare. Ibsen also gleaned knowledge from other writers, most notably Schiller and the two Danes Adam Oehlenschleger (1779-1850) and John Ludvig Heiberg (1791-1860).

Ibsen's apprenticeship was long, lasting about 15 years, and included theater work he later would claim to be as difficult as "having an abortion every day." There was a strong pressure to produce hanging over him; one that led to fumbling attempts in many directions. He experienced a few minor artistic victories - and numerous defeats. Very few believed that he had the necessary gift to become more than a minor theatrical writer with a modicum of talent.

In spite of this insecurity, it is a determined young writer we see during these years. His goal was clearly national. Together with his friend and colleague Bjornstjerne Bjornson (1832-1910), he founded "The Norwegian Company" in 1859, an organ for Norwegian art and culture. They had a joint program for their activities. Ibsen was especially concerned with the role of theater in the young Norwegian nation's search for its own identity In these "nation-building" pursuits, he gathered his material from the country's medieval history and perfected his art as a dramatist. This is prominent in the work that caps Ibsen's period of apprenticeship, "The Pretenders" from 1863. The story takes place in Norway in the 1200s, a period marked by destructive strife. But Ibsen's perspective is Norway of the 1860s when he has the king, Haakon Haakonsson, express his thoughts on national unity:

"Norway was a kingdom, now it will be a nation (... ) all shall be as one hereafter, and all shall know in themselves that they are one!"

"The Pretenders" was Ibsen's breakthrough, yet he had to wait a few years before being recognized as one of the country's leading writers. This honor came in 1866 with "Brand" "The Pretenders", constitutes the end of his close relationship with Norwegian theater. It was also his farewell performance - he now started his long exile. In the years that followed, he turned away from the stage and sought a reading public.


The Great Topical Dramas

Both the great dramas for reading, "Brand" (1866) and "Peer Gynt" (1867), were based on Ibsen's problematic relationship with his country of birth. Political developments in 1864 led him to lose his optimistic belief in his country's future. He even began to doubt whether his countrymen had a historical raison d'être as a nation.

What he had earlier treated as a national problem of identity now became a question of the individual's personal integrity. It was no longer sufficient to dwell on an earlier historical era of greatness and focus on the continuity of the nation's life. Ibsen turned away from history, and confronted what he considered the main contemporary problem - a nation can only rise up culturally by means of the individual's exertion of will. "Brand" is mainly a drama with a message that the individual must follow the path of volition in order to achieve true humanity In addition, this is the only way to real freedom - for the individual, and it follows, for society as a whole.

In the two rather different twin works "Brand" and "Peer Gynt", the focus is on the problem of personality, Ibsen dramatizes the conflict between an opportunistic acting out of an unnatural role, and a dedication to a demanding lifelong quest. In "Peer Gynt", the dramatist created a scene which artistically illustrates this situation of conflict. The aging Peer, on his way back to his Norwegian roots is forced to come to terms with himself. As he looks back upon his wasted life, he peels an onion. He lets each layer represent a different role he has played. But he finds no core. He has to face the fact that he has become "no one", that he has no "self".

"So unspeakably poor, then, a soul can go back to nothingness, in the misty gray. You beautiful earth, don't be annoyed that I left no sign when I walked your grass. You beautiful sun, in vain you've shed your glorious light on an empty house. There was no one within to cheer and warm; - The owner, they tell me, was never at home."

Peer is the weak, spineless person - Brand's antithesis. But it is precisely in Ibsen's living portrayal of a personality's "dissolution" in changing roles, that some historians of the theater see the harbinger of a modernistic perception of the individual. The British drama researcher Ronald Gaskell puts it this way: "Peer Gynt" inaugurates the drama of the modern mind", and he continues: "Indeed, if Surrealism and Expressionism in the theater can be said to have any single source, the source is undoubtedly "Peer Gynt".

Thus does this early Ibsen drama though very "Norwegian" and romantic claim a central position in theatrical history, even though it was not written for the stage. In fact, it is "Peer Gynt" that in modern times has helped Ibsen to retain his position as a vital and relevant writer. Thus it was not only his contemporary plays that have made him one of the most towering figures in the history of the theater. Although it was mainly these works the well-known Swedish researcher in drama, Martin Lamm, had in mind when he claimed:

"Ibsen's drama is the Rome of modern drama: all roads lead to it - and from it."

Even though Ibsen withdrew from his Norwegian starting point in the 1870s and became "a European," he was always deeply marked by the country he left in 1864, and to which he first returned as an aging celebrity. It was not easy for him to return. The many years abroad, and the long struggle for recognition, had left their indelible stamp. Towards the end of his career, he said that he really was not happy with the fantastic life he had lived. He felt homeless - even in his mother country.

But it is precisely this tension between the Norwegian and the foreign (an element of freer European culture) in Ibsen that characterized him more than anything else as an individual and a writer. His independent position in what he called "the great, free, cultural situation" provided him with the broad perspective of distance, and freedom. Simultaneously, the Norwegian in him created a longing for a more liberated and happier life. This is the longing for the sun in the grave writer's poetic world. He never denied his distinctive Norwegian character. Toward the end of his life, he said to a German friend:

He who wishes to understand me, must know Norway. The magnificent, but severe, natural environment surrounding people up there in the north, the lonely, secluded life - the farms are miles apart - forces them to be unconcerned with others, to keep to their own. That is why they become introspective and serious, they brood and doubt - and they often lose faith. At home every other person is a philosopher! There, the long, dark, winters come with their thick fogs enveloping the houses - oh, how they long for the sun!

Wednesday, December 4, 2019

Due Tuesday, December 10th - The Artificial Artist: Writing in the Style of Oscar Wilde

Talent borrows, genius steals – Oscar Wilde

Directions: Write a review of a novel, film, artwork, or other medium as if you were Oscar Wilde (you may also focus on an author, artist, or musician if you wish). This is an exercise in exploring style, as well as substance, which is to say that this will be about nothing, which is everything. This will count as a writing grade.  Please post your completed work in this blog space AND on Turnitin.com for a formal grade.  I look forward to your responses!



Part I: Reading Criticism 
The public have an insatiable curiosity to know everything, except what is worth knowing.

– Oscar Wilde

Peruse the following collection of Oscar Wilde's reviews: A Critic in Pall MallRead “Dinner and Dishes” which is supposed to be a review of an actual book, but Wilde plays on the words and gives a review of his favorite dining areas well as the ones about Shakespeare to get a sense of his critical voice and wit.

Part II: Research 

The one duty we owe to history is to rewrite it. – Oscar Wilde

Choice of subject. Choose something, which will lend itself to Wilde’s Wit. Further, if you are to be a critic, you must be knowledgeable. Know your subject inside and out. Content should look like a major essay. Introduce your subject in some way, the body of the document must have detailed evidence and be a pleasure to read with smooth transitions, and a conclusion.


Part III: The Art of the Review 

The difference between literature and journalism is that journalism is unreadable and literature is not read. – Oscar Wilde

My advice is to look up modern examples for reviews to help get the basic structure. For example, if you are writing a review of the film like Jaws (1975) look for Roger Ebert’s Movie Reviews or The New Yorker, something with a critical eye.


Part IV: Language and Style 

If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they will kill you. – Oscar Wilde

Try to capture the voice and style of Oscar Wilde. Review and read some of his prose. He will get into your head and come out of your pen. Review his epigrams in our previous blog post on Oscar Wilde's Background or visit Goodreads.

Above all, it must be beautiful and adhere to the tenants of Aestheticism.

1) Art never expresses anything but itself.
2) All bad art comes from returning to Life and Nature, and elevating them into ideals.
3) Life imitates Art far more than Art imitates Life.
4) Lying, the telling of beautiful untrue things is the proper aim of Art.



Part V: Grading Your Work 

One can only give an unbiased opinion about things that do not interest one, which is no doubt the reason an unbiased opinion is always valueless. The man who sees both sides of a question is a man who sees absolutely nothing. – Oscar Wilde

Use the following list to help guide you in the writing process.  I will be thinking about the following elements when I evaluate your review:
  • What point is the author getting across in the review? Did the students choose a subject that will help showcase the ideas and voice of Oscar Wilde?
  • Does the author have a clear knowledge of the piece being reviewed and makes direct references in the review? 
  • Did the students do the proper research?
  • Does the review showcase the development of idea from the beginning of the argument to the end? Again, does it model modern reviews as well as the reviews of Oscar Wilde?
  • Does the piece sound like Oscar Wilde, consistently?
  • Does the review present the elements of Aestheticism? 
  • Is there an advanced use of vocabulary and diction?
  • Does the author utilize and create epigrams and make proper use of paradox? These tools must be used consistently throughout the piece.
  • Is it funny...in an Oscar Wilde way?