Sunday, November 30, 2008

act of resistance

For my act of resistance I wanted to address food and health issues seeing as we had Thanksgiving this past Thursday. I brainstormed many possible acts of resistance but I settled on boycotting pesticide laced vegetables and hormone injected meats by getting my family to eat a healthy Thanksgiving dinner with only organic produce and a free-range turkey. I did this because in today’s world, the market place is a dangerous one due to the unhealthy products being sold without a second thought on whether it is healthy or not. Personally, this appalls me and I think it needs to stop.
Although I didn’t have the time to make flyers and distribute them outside my local supermarket, I still was bent on conveying the importance of eating healthy to my family by avoiding vegetables that were grown with pesticides and a turkey that was raised in a corral where it was force fed and drugged with hormones to make it grow bigger and fatter.
Before I executed my act of resistance I did a little background research and found that common growth hormones found in meat can cause cancer and that pesticides used to simply keep bugs and other animals away from the vegetables also can cause cancer and neurological defects.
After finding this out I was even more driven to get my family to eat an all-organic Thanksgiving. I went about this task by calling all of my relatives that were going to make food and asked them very politely to only use organic products in their dishes/turkey. Of course all of my family members were more than happy to comply because not only was it healthy for us as a whole but it reduced the sales of harmful groceries sold by a very small percent, but maybe it will add up and help grocers realize that these products are not healthy and that they should not be sold.

Sunday, November 16, 2008

my thoughts on the play

i believe that the play lysistrata is overall a very good play. even though that i think it is a little hard to understand at points, i think that it is a pretty good play. i think that there are other books/plays that i enjoyed more. for example, i liked both hedda gabler and the house of bernarda alba better but i still enjoyed certain parts of lysistrata. 
the whole point of lysistrata however is fantastic. i love the point of this play, make peace through not making love. i think that it is a revolutionary idea and it has broudened my thinking plain.

the woman "peace"

peace, the woman, represents what the men want the most and hate the most. i believe that the women brought peace to the meeting because they wanted to make the idea of peace a more lucrative deal. the women used peace to show that although the men didnt want to make peace, peace (the woman and actual peace) is a beautiful thing. i believe that they used the woman peace to make peace more attractive so that the men would agree to it.
peace the woman  also reinforces the strength of the women's intellectual ability in manipulating the men.

women versus men

the battle between the men and women is of paramount importance in terms of the content of the novel. the whole novel in a nutshell is the struggle that takes place between women and men over dominance and equality. the women want peace, the men want war, in a way they have their own little battle over who will get what they want. 
the men think they can do whatever they want because they are men and they believe that women are weak and that women cannot defeat them. however this is not true seeing as the men lose (they make peace with sparta) and the women win through their superior brain power.

spectacle through clothing

spectacle is important in all novels and plays and is equally imporrtant in lysistrata. spectacle in regards to clothing enforces the theme of nakedness reveals the truth. this is seen in the way that in the beginning of the play every one is clothed and towards the end every one is basically naked. this represents the feelings of both the men and women. for the men, this represents their desires, once they take off their armor all they want is the women and what the women bring. in the case of the women, they shed their clothes to embrace peace and the men.

iraq? global warming?

reading lysistrata and watching the boycott have given me thoughts about why not use this strategy in the real world today. i think that this idea of abstinence is a fantastic idea and i think that it would be very successful in todays world with the war in iraq and global warming. the logic is sound and men crave sex more than anything. if all of the women could come together and make a pact not to have sex with all men i think that these problems could be put to an end.
honestly, if men were cut off from all sexual contact i think that they would crumble under their own lust and give up to the women, making them do something about important issues such as war and global warming.

im dead serious i think they should pass a law

the women

the women of lysistrata are strong, smart, and scheming canivers. they continually outsmart the men, beat them physically, mentally, and through their self control. the woman are far superior in their plan making and their execution. the men simply cannot stack up to the woman in this regard. this emphasizes their mental strength. also, the woman beat the men in the fight of self control, they devise the plan, put it into effect and beat the men. however, there where multiple instances in which the women almost gave up and had sex. this was stopped by lysistrata and the women hung in and beat the men in the game of self control.

the men

the men of lysistrata are arrogant and underestimate the women. they think that they are high and mighty and cant be defeated, especially by women. the men are continually beat by the women physically and mentally. 
physically the men are beaten when the woman thwart off the archers one by one. not to mention when on page 48-50 the men are scared off by the woman and their house hold items.
the men are also mentally weak and are beat simply when the woman refrain from sex for one day!!! overall the men have no back bone and are easily beat by their own sex drive; what does that say about the men.   they are weak!!!

the boycott

last night i went to the modern day form of lysistrata, the boycott. i thought that for only being a one person play she executed it quite well. however, i couldnt tell if she was acting in her introduction of the whole play, even before the play started. this is because i think she was a little cooky. she was crazy!!! she was really weird. 
putting this aside i enjoyed the play more than i anticipated i would. i think that she did a good job of transforming lysistrata into a modern play where modern issues are being tackled. she presented global warming and a funny way of trying to stop it.

i give it one thumb sightly up
in the play, lysistrata, spectacle plays a large part in understanding the depth of the play. for example, this can be seen in the way that house hold items displays the theme - never underestimate the power of a woman. in the play woman use their every day items in there house as weapons to fight off and beat the men. for example, they use their pitchers to put out the mens fire. they also use spindles, chamber pots, lamps, scissors, and other house hold items. all of these examples fit in together to expose the fact that in this play the men underestimated women and you cant do that because woman should not be underestimated, they are strong.

lysistrata versus lisa, from "The Boycott"

lysistrata and lisa, from the boycott, are both extremely similar and different at the same time. lysistrata is a born leader, she wants peace (recognized it by herself) and devised the abstinence protest my herself, which turned out to be a complete success. lisa on the other hand, did not recognize the global warning crisis by herself, she had to be told about. also, she didnt even come up with the plan to stain from sex, she had to be told as well. this brings me to the conclusion that not only is lysistrata smarter than lisa, she is also a stronger person seeing as she didnt break the boycott and lisa did. however in the end they both accomplished what they set out to do.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

how did lovborgs death really go down??!?!?!!?

what actually happened when lovborg died? i find this very interesting because Ibsen leaves this as a gray area. did lovborg actually kill himself? or did some one else kill him. personlly i believe that it was either the madam, or it was a struggle and he was killed when someone pulled the trigger. either way we will never know. however it is entirely possible that it coould have been himself going down there and making a seen out of his suicide. i just find this hard to believe because when people commit suicide it is usually a personal affair because you have nothing left.

im curious to see what you guys think.
plz respond with your thoughts

THE END

the end of hedda gabler is full of death, resolution, and the trade off of roles. for example hedda dies, aunt rina dies and lovborg dies. the end of the play is marked when lovborg dies, this is when things start falling appart. hedda becomes distraught especially when judge brack tries to black mail her underneath his controlled. the rolution is seen in the way that everything comes to a close, every one dies, and other characters take their places. this is seen in the way that after lovborg dies Tesman slides into his place with Thea and starts writing lovborgs book. also, after George rotates over to thea, brack slides into georges postion and tries to be with hedda, which was going to work until she killed herself.

Thea

Thea is an interesting character!!!! she is characterized as being a meek but passionate woman. this brings me to question her relationship with her husband. because of her inability to say "no" (she gives in easily). i believe that she was convinced into her marriage with her husband, which turned out to be an unhappy one. on the other hand her passion led her to run away from home and follow her true love, Lovborg. thea seems to arouse jelousy in Hedda. i believe this is because thea has control over eilert, which hedda desires to have, also thea can be seen as more attractive than hedda. for example hedda has thin brown hair and thea has thick blonde hair.

Saturday, October 4, 2008

judge brack

judge brack is kind of a creepy character. he isnt in a relationship but he tries to make a love triangle with hedda and george, but mostly to get with get with hedda. this is troublesome seeing as he is supposed to be georges friend and he is trying to have a connection with hedda.
another character trait that judge brack has is his struggle for control. he is constantly being seen fighting for power and he finally gets it when he finds out that hedda gave lovborg the pistol and uses that information to potentially blackmail hedda until she kills herself to escape his control and the rest of the problems present in her life.

hedda gabler - themes

since reading all of hedda gabler, i cant help but notice that there has been an overwhelming presence of betrayal. for example, when hedda flirts with other men behind george tesmans back and when she reveals thea's true fears regarding lovborg and even when she burns lovborgs manuscript to end the connection between thea and lovborg in hopes that she could get close to lovborg once again.
also the way that judge brack blackmails hedda under his control using the pistol that she gave lovborg as his instrument.

aunt julie

auntie julie seems to be a very caring and loving aunt that looks after george.
she only seems to be looking out for georges and aunt rinas interests, she isnt even concerned with herself. even when hedda makes passive aggressive attacks on her about her hat and what not, she still takes it in stride because she nows hedda is with george and she wants george to be happy.
also, she continually looks after aunt rina, and when she dies she considers taking in an invalid because she likes to look after others and take care of them.

george and his love?

does george tesman really love hedda gabler?
personally i dont think that he does. true, he worships her and waits on her every word but he simply doesnt show any feeling towards her exept his constant naive excitement.
i think george is simply too involved with his work and his aunts to really care for hedda.
also, george is constantly leaving hedda alone in the house and trying to get other men to spend time with her like brack. even after lovborg dies he looks to spend more time with mrs. elvsted than with hedda; and when she dies he isnt even sad, he is more rapped up in the thought of suicide than he is with hedda being dead.

lovborg

lovborg is everything george wants to be. lovborg is smart and a talented writer. from what i can deduce, lovborg and hedda used to be in a relationship when they were younger but over time they were drawn appart. since lovborg returned he has stirred up alot of controversy. for example, george was worried he was going to lose his job offer, brack thought he was going to be cut out of the triangle, and hedda has been reminising with him.
i believe that lovborg is a smart well intentioned man that gets caught up with hedda and her games and ends up a victim.

Hedda

the character hedda in hedda gabler is not in love with george tesman what so ever!!!!!
she seems to display absolutly no interest in him at all. i think the only reason she is with him is because of his reputation and the fact that he can take care of her and he is supposed to become famous in the near future because of his job. hedda shows more interest in loborg and even brack than she does her own husband.
supporting evidence for this is the fact that she commits suicide after lovborg dies.

Friday, September 19, 2008

hedda gabler act 1

so far in my meanderings in Hedda Gabler i have been thoroughly disappointed. i find this book very unsatisfying to the imagination and creative sides of my brain. so far this play seems to be simply going through the motions of an introduction. i find this very boring and hard to read, not in the sense taht it is complex but in the sense that it is not the slightest bit interesting. i sincerely hope that it will soon traverse into an interesting play full of interesting plot twists and conflicts.