Journal #6

The Bride seems to be a character that appears to be miserable. She shows a very negative attitude towards her wedding and even women in general. While talking to the maid, the bride talks about how "we women all waste away" (39). To me, the bride seems to dislike the proper image or role of women. When she says stuff like "And see no other eyes but yours. And have you hold me so tight that even if my dead mother called to me I couldn't pull myself away from you" (55), I get the feeling she just says it because that is what society expects from her. The standards of society stop her from getting what she truly wants, which I am not too sure what it is she wants. Maybe it could be someone who she truly loves, seeing that she runs away with Leonardo. She does not want to be seen as controversial though. When it comes to the wedding, she disapproves of the maid talking about it. When the maid says "You are so lucky! You're going to hold a man in your arms. You're going to kiss him. You're going to feel his weight" (40), she responds with an angry "Be quiet!" (40). As the maid continues to talk about the wedding and refuses to stay quiet, the bride just gets angrier and angrier. Talk about the wedding infuriates her. This conversation reminded me of the conversation early in the book between the bridegroom and his mother, when the mother would keep talking about the dangers of a knife despite her son's demand to stop.

Journal #5

Lorca seems to use the archetype of a woman through the wife and mother-in-law. In scene two, while the wife is talking to Leonardo, the wife asks him, "Would you like some lemonade?" (21). The placing of this question is a little bit weird. They are conversing and kind of randomly, she asks Leonardo if he would like some lemonade. The concept shown here is the wife serving the husband. It is the duty of the wife to serve their husbands and be loyal. By establishing this idea, later when Leonardo runs away with the bride, the scandal is even more controversial now that she is a wife. This is seen again when Leonardo suddenly becomes angry after the girl comes to deliver the message about the bridegroom and his mother. As the wife persistently begs for Leonardo to tell her what's wrong, Leonardo refuses to tell her anything, simply telling her to "Get away!" and "Leave me alone" (25). The mother-in-law's response to this is "(Resolutely, to her daughter) Sssh!" (26). In this situation, the mother-in-law is teaching the wife, her daughter, to be an obedient wife. She must listen to what her husband tells her to do and not enrage him or annoy him. I think this is significant because it is the mother teaching this idea to her daughter. Passing down the "proper" principles for women to stay inferior and submissive is shown in this situation. Ultimately, I think Lorca rejects this archetype. With the bride running off with Leonardo during the wedding ceremony (and not many days or years after), the role of the woman or wife is completely absent and destroyed. Also, knowing that Lorca had some conflicts because of his sexuality, it would be possible that he does not like the idea of archetypes.

Journal #4

The knife is a symbol that is introduced early in scene I. When the mother talks about the knife and how it can bring misfortune to man, the bridegroom consistently begs his mother to stop the rant. However, despite his efforts, the mother continues to denounce the knife. The mother shows an open fear and hatred of the knife. The bridegroom seems to show a different hatred for the knife. He doesn't like that his mother is talking about it and wishes to change the subject. I think it may be that he sees how much sadness and fear the knife brings to the mother and wishes her to avoid the knife and the fear it brings. It seems to be an act of care. The knife also connects the play with the past and the deaths of the bridegroom's father and brother. It introduces the mother's hatred toward the Felixes and the past feud in the families.

Plants were another symbol that I noticed. Flowers were mentioned in describing people such as the "two men who were like two geraniums" (7). Flowers have an image of young, fresh, and beautiful, so by describing people in this way, a certain image is created. I associated plants with the vineyard as well. The vineyard seems like a strong representation of a new life. The bridegroom was finally able to purchase it and it allowed him to get married. In a time where the bridegroom is about to get married, many changes are happening and a new life is waiting. I also noticed that some plants that aren't all that great are mentioned as well. Plants like weeds, vines, and thistles are used. This can show that there are negative sides to things, such as life. Life can be a geranium that is beautiful, but then could eventually die with weeds and vines taking over. With death present in the play, I think it is appropriate that these harmful plants are used as well.

Journal #3

I think the blame for the events happening can't be put on a single character. Many of the main characters of the play each carry some of the blame, even Hedvig who is the victim of all this chaos. I think the whole conflict can be traced back to Gina. If Gina had confronted Hjalmar about her past and made sure everything was clear about who the father of Hedvig was, this conflict would either not have started or would have taken place in a softer manner with the absence of Hedvig. Looking back even further, if Gina had not had any relationship with Werle, none of this would happen. After all, the only reason Gina got married to Hjalmar was to cover up the scandal between Gina and Werle. Gregers can also take some of the blame as well. It isn't until he enters town that things in the Ekdal family start to shake. It is easiest to see when you picture the story without Gregers. Eventually, the truth may find its way out, but Gregers heavily sped up the process. The deep lies from the past were brought up, causing Hjalmar to feel betrayed and to leave the family. If Gregers never entered the story, things may have continued to look fine on the outside, and the lies from the past would stay hidden. Hjalmar's reaction to all this revelation may have also contributed to the death of Hedvig. Hedvig takes Hjalmar's reactions very seriously, devastated at the thought that her "father" no longer loves her. I think that although Hjalmar has some blame, it is less than what Gina or Gregers has. I think Hedvig has the least amount of guilt. She really did not do anything and had no control of being brought into the world in a complicated situation. However, her action of killing herself is the ultimate action of the conflict. Looking beyond the connection of Hedvig being the Wild Duck, it is confusing as to why she killed herself.

Journal #2

I think Ibsen uses the motif of decay, disease, and illness to show the deterioration of the temporary safety or cover a lie creates. Lying can get you out of a sticky situation, but Ibsen shows that this safety or cover inevitably deteriorates as time goes on. The lie in this case is Gina's lie about her past and Hedvig. In many cases, there is a disease or illness within characters. For example, when Hjalmar is talking to Gregers about Hedvig, he mentions that "there's the gravest imminent danger of her losing her sight" (147). With the fact that Werle also having fading eyesight already established, this new information chips away at the "wall of safety" and partially reveals a possible hereditary connection between Hedvig and Werle. When this connection is revealed in the end, the cover that Gina's lie created is gone and the truth is out. The motif shows that the temporary safety a lie creates can also decay in a way eyesight does in the play. Another instance of decay or illness is seen when Relling claims that Gregers is "suffering from an acute case of moralistic fever" (178). Because Gregers plays a major role in the truth being revealed, his "fever" helps reveal the truth that Gina has kept hidden. I think Relling is trying to explain that Gregers may be trying to be morally just by bringing the Ekdal family up from the scandal from the past, but instead the fever has caused the opposite. The family starts to fall apart. When Werle says that Gregers looks at him with "his mothers eyes- which were clouded at times" (135) it is almost as if Gregers' eyes have an illness as well. These clouded eyes always look at Werle in a negative light, which contributes to the revealing of the truth as well. If Werle was looked at in a positive light, there would not be much suspicion. By placing Werle in a negative light, the readers are able to see that there could be some conflict involved with Werle. The lie that involves Gina also involves Werle as well, so this also helps tear down the lie. Overall, this motif of decay, disease, and illness is used to show the deterioration of the temporary cover a lie creates.

Journal #1

Ibsen creates many physical boundaries within the characters. I think this is most clearly seen through the motif of decay or dying away. Both Hedvig and Werle have the physical boundary of fading eyesight. This adds to the motif of decay but also shows the boundary Ibsen creates. By giving them both the same boundary, it is interesting to look at how the other characters respond or react to the same physical boundary. While not much is mentioned about Werle and his eyesight, Hedvig receives much sympathy and care from her parents and even Gregers appears to be interested. Old age can also be seen as a physical boundary. This also adds to the motif of decay and dying away as seen by Ekdal and his diminishing life. Another physical boundary is created through the motif of alcohol. With the consumption of alcohol, a physical and mental boundary is created. From Ekdal to the less important character of Molvik, alcohol is present in many scenes. Alcohol creates a dazed state of mind and alters physical coordination, but I don't see much criticism of the use of alcohol. It is so common that in the eyes of the characters, it probably wouldn't be seen as a boundary.

Journal #3

A different motif seen in the last third of the book. The motif that I previously wrote about is almost gone now. However, the clearness is back. I found the narration less confusing than the second third, but glass isn't mentioned or seen as much. Glass does play an important role at the end with the Bell Jar though. One motif I noticed was laughter. I don't remember seeing anything about laughter until the last third of the book. It can first be seen with I-330 laughing at D-503. While talking, I-330 "burst out laughing, loudly - too loudly. Quickly, in a second, she laughed herself up to some sort of edge - and stepped back, stepped down" (162). I feel like this laughter completely kills the mood. It is very unexpected and almost strange. I think this instance shows the relationship between the two. D-503 has strong feelings for I-330, but I-330 seems to simply use him for the resistance, able to laugh at his thoughts. Another instance of laughter is seen during U's encounter with D after he develops a deep hatred for U for exposing the contents of his journals. In a very intense moment where D has a clear intention of murdering U, laughter kills the mood once again when U misinterprets D's actions. D describes the situation as "so unexpected, so stupid, that I burst into laughter" (184). The last laughter I saw was during D's talk with S. D reveals all that he knows about the resistance only to find out S is a part of the group. All these laughter moments happen during a scene that is quite intense. It really does change the mood of the scene.

Much of the setting is reflected through the weather. It seems the weather is not as sunny or clear as it was in the previous two thirds of the book. I remember reading about the clear blue sky early in the book and how the people really like the spotless, clear sky. Now, images of the wind and cloud are repeatedly seen. I think this is used to show the change that the One State is going through. Before with the clear sky, everything was in order and control was still maintained. The government even had control over the weather. Now, turmoil is slowly accompanying the wind and clouds. It seems D-503 is no longer the only one with an imagination. People are refusing to receive the Operation and the Green Wall has been torn down. All this chaos came along with the change in weather. Nature is now a part of the One State with birds inhibiting the One State. The setting itself does not change much. Much takes place in the One State with a few instances at the Ancient House or outer space when the Integral is launched.

The language, as seen in the second third, does not use much mathematical words anymore. I do see a greater increase in the use of figurative language though. When describing I-330's laughter, he says "she laughed with sparks and joyful flame-tongues in her eyes" (145). This use of figurative language shows the change that D-503 has gone through. Not everything is straight forward like it was with math. With figurative language, there is more room for interpretation, using imagination and creativity in thinking. However, the use of math words is not completely absent. It still appears occasionally, possibly showing the rational, math side of D-503 that will never be absent. He describes his neighbor as having "an enormous yellow parabola for a forehead. Wrinkles on the forehead: a row of yellow illegible lines" (183). He uses math terms to describe his old neighbor. Maybe he only uses this old concept of math words to describe old people and things. At the very end though, after D-503 has received the operation, he concludes by saying "More than that: I know we will win. Because reason should win" (203). It seems the Operation has caused him to finish the full 360 degree turn in his thinking. I think it would be safe to predict that his language will gradually return to math and science terms.