In the first chapter, which is actually the last chapter, of “The Death of Ivan Ilyich”, it mainly shows the reactions of the people in his life. By having the ending where Ivan is actually said to have died first, it allows the reader to make his or her own conclusions about what type of person Ivan must have been. Everyone who finds out about the death of Ivan does not look at it with sorrow or pity, but rather with an idea of turning it into something beneficial for himself or herself. Ivan was a member of the Court of Justice. The thoughts of his co-workers, “and so the first thought that occurred to each of the gentlemen in this office, learning of Ivan Ilyich’s death, was what effect would have on their own transitions and promotions of those of their acquaintances” (page 36). They did not even feel that bad about it. His co-workers just wanted to know which of them would be getting a promotion. Even Pyotr Ivanovich, one of Ilyich’s closest friends, made a small joke about it, “I must put in a request to have my brother-in-law transferred from Kaluga … Now my wife won’t be able to say I never do anything for her family” (page 36). Everyone had the same reaction. The most sorrow that any of the co-workers had, was when they had realized that they had “fulfill the tedious demands” of going to visit Ilyich’s wife. The men just complained that it is so far away and it would be too much of a hassle. Also, it was not just the fact that Ivan himself had died, but rather that one of them had not, “Well isn’t that something—he is dead, but I am not,” was what each of them thought or felt (page 37). Pyotr Ivanovich had gone to the funeral service at Ilyich’s house. There he saw a man by the name of Schwarts. Schwarts had made a gesture to Pyotr to talk to him, which Pyotr knew, was about the nightly bridge game. Schwarts had said, “In no way can the incident of this funeral service for Ivan Ilyich be considered sufficient grounds for canceling the regular session; that is, nothing can prevent us from meeting tonight an flipping through a fresh deck of card…” (page 40). Even at an event as serious as a funeral, they decide to find out whereto play a little card game.
Even Ivan’s wife had made it seem as if she did not care too much about his death. She was talking to Pyotr about the constant pain that Ivan was going through during his last hours of his life. But she made it seem as if he was a nuisance. “You could hear his screaming 3 rooms away…” which makes it seem like she was not being very supportive. Also, while she was speaking to Pyotr, she made it seem as if she was asking him about the grant from the government but in fact, she knew exactly how big of a pension she could milk out from them. But what made it even worse, was the fact that she asked him if he knew of a way to get even more. Even his own wife was trying to gain benefits from his death, which in my point of view, is not the kindest thing. In the first chapter, there is only one person who seemed to have truly cared about Ivan’s death, his son. His son is barely mentioned in the first chapter, but is said to have a great resemblance to his father. But he is seen by Pyotr with bright red eyes from crying so much, and “had a look common boys of thirteen to fourteen whose thoughts are no longer innocent” (page 46). It did not seem like Ivan Ilyich had the biggest crowd of people who loved him, which means he had must have been some sort of a tyrant during his life.
(668)
Monday, September 24, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Anti-GONE
Starting on line 705, Creon and his son, Haemon, begin to have their argument about the fact that Antigone, Haemon’s fiancé, is going to be put to death. The conversation started with Creon giving a small opening speech with Haemon agreeing with his father. Haemon also stated that he would choose his father’s side over any other. Haemon soon contradicts his father’s decision by saying, “… she couldn’t bear to leave him dead, unburied, food for the wild dogs or wheeling vultures. Death? She deserves a glowing golden crown!” (Line 777-782). The argument begins to heat up with stabbing remarks towards one another. Haemon says his father would be a great king on a desert island; because he would be all alone and treat it as his island, just like he is the city. Within this argument, you can see the roles between the two slowly switch. Haemon’s arguments become more of adults and Creon’s become more and more childish the longer and longer the conversation goes. It also seems that Creon always has a different interpretation than the person who has said it, and vis-à-vis. Haemon had said, “Then she will die … but her death will kill another” (line 842). But Creon believes that Haemon was threatening to kill him if he let Antigone die, which wasn’t the real intention of Haemon. Earlier Creon was telling a blatant lie to Haemon about Antigone. In line 731, Creon told Haemon, “I caught her in naked rebellion!” trying to make it seem that Antigone had committed adultery. Luckily, Haemon either did not hear the remark or he did not pay much attention to it. Haemon then rushes out of the room, because he cannot stand the sight of his father.
Creon is soon thereafter visited by Tiresias, the blind prophet, who has more news to speak of. He came to tell Creon about visions and warnings that he had seen. While sitting in the augury, Tiresias had witnessed to great birds fighting, which never happens unless it is a sign. Tiresias then tried to light the alter, which carried the sacrifice, but nothing lit. Tiresias then said, “never stab a fighter when he’s down. Where’s the glory, killing the dead twice over?” (Line 1135). Which, I believe to be directed towards Antigone and Ismene, because they have already dealt with the loss of their brother and the fact that they could not give him a proper burial. But also, if Creon kills Antigone, she must deal with her own death and Ismene must deal with the loss of both her sister and brother. Creon just responds with harsh remarks towards Tiresias’ wisdom, somewhat like Oedipus in his conversation with him also. After Tiresias leaves with the boy, the leader of the chorus convinces Creon to let Antigone go and to o it himself or else the gods will do what is planned. Shortly after Creon had left with his entourage of men to free her, a messenger came by with news of Haemon. Haemon had killed him self because he could not deal with the death of Antigone. Creon returns, carrying the head of his dead son. After speaking of how he was the killer and how it was entirely his fault, the messenger gives him more bad news. His wife, the queen, is also dead. She had killed herself on the alter. Going back to Tiresias’ saying of, “where’s the glory, killing the dead twice over,” came back to bit Creon. His son and wife had both committed suicide leaving Creon with nothing but agony as the prophet had stated.
(609)
Creon is soon thereafter visited by Tiresias, the blind prophet, who has more news to speak of. He came to tell Creon about visions and warnings that he had seen. While sitting in the augury, Tiresias had witnessed to great birds fighting, which never happens unless it is a sign. Tiresias then tried to light the alter, which carried the sacrifice, but nothing lit. Tiresias then said, “never stab a fighter when he’s down. Where’s the glory, killing the dead twice over?” (Line 1135). Which, I believe to be directed towards Antigone and Ismene, because they have already dealt with the loss of their brother and the fact that they could not give him a proper burial. But also, if Creon kills Antigone, she must deal with her own death and Ismene must deal with the loss of both her sister and brother. Creon just responds with harsh remarks towards Tiresias’ wisdom, somewhat like Oedipus in his conversation with him also. After Tiresias leaves with the boy, the leader of the chorus convinces Creon to let Antigone go and to o it himself or else the gods will do what is planned. Shortly after Creon had left with his entourage of men to free her, a messenger came by with news of Haemon. Haemon had killed him self because he could not deal with the death of Antigone. Creon returns, carrying the head of his dead son. After speaking of how he was the killer and how it was entirely his fault, the messenger gives him more bad news. His wife, the queen, is also dead. She had killed herself on the alter. Going back to Tiresias’ saying of, “where’s the glory, killing the dead twice over,” came back to bit Creon. His son and wife had both committed suicide leaving Creon with nothing but agony as the prophet had stated.
(609)
Monday, September 10, 2007
Oedipus The King
What qualities do people attribute to Oedipus? What attributes does he give himself? And besides from saving Thebes, what is Oedipus called on to do?
The People of Thebes view Oedipus as a natural born savior. The people say that he cannot equal the gods, but that his people rate him first of men. Because he had saved them from the Sphinx, without and training or knowledge from the people of Thebes, they viewed it as if a god was with him bringing Oedipus luck and power. Oedipus is the closest thing to a physical embodiment to a good as Thebes has. Oedipus does not see himself as such. “…Not one is sick as I. Your pain strikes each one of you alone, each in confines of himself, no other. But my spirit grieves for the city…” (Page 162, Lines 71-75). Oedipus is slightly modest in this quote, but also very arrogant in saying that he has a connection/suffers with all his people. Just because he has the crown, it does not mean that he feels pain of everyone. It seems that he felt that he needed to say that because it was a competition in suffering (?), and OF COURSE Oedipus had to win. Also, besides having to save the town from quote un-quote destruction, Oedipus must now deal with the riddle of “who killed Laius?” Also, from what I know about the previous play with Oedipus, (which is not a lot), is that he had to solve the riddle of the Sphinx. In Oedipus the King, Oedipus is now forced to solve yet another riddle of who killed Laius?
Why does Tiresias initially refrain from divulging the truth to Oedipus and assembled others? How does Oedipus try to get the truth from Tiresias? How is Oedipus' attitude towards Tiresias and the kind of knowledge he represents inconsistent?
I believe that Tiresias does not tell Oedipus and the others the truth because the prophet believes that Oedipus and the rest would be blinded by the truth. Tiresias says, “How Terrible—to see the truth only when the truth is only pain to him who sees!” (page 176, Lines 358-360). Meaning, that those who do not feel pain from the truth at all can only see the truth, which in this case, is not Oedipus. At first Oedipus starts out by complementing Tiresias about the noblest of work that Tiresias was about to show. Tiresias said that he did, in fact know who killed Laius, but he would not say. Tiresias answered in very murk, short ways to all of Oedipus’ questions, which angered and confused Oedipus. Tiresias continued to be very rude to the King without Oedipus even knowing why. Oedipus then became very angry with the prophet, which did not help persuade the prophet’s previous decision to not say whom was the murderer. After Oedipus re-asked Tiresias to repeat what he has said, Tiresias says that The King is the murderer you hunt. Believing the prophet to be insane. Oedipus challenged the prophet’s powers of prophecy; Tiresias then began to speak in riddles, because of Oedipus’ knowledge far beyond the prophet’s. Enraging Oedipus, due to the fact that he himself could not figure out what the prophet had meant, commands the prophet to leave at once. In the end resolving nothing.
After revealing to Oedipus that he himself is he murderer in which they are searching, Oedipus then calls upon the fact that the prophet is blind and cannot be held useful or wise anymore. Oedipus is associating eyesight with knowledge and, previously in the play, power, and because the prophet has no sight to speak of, he must be unequal to Oedipus. The association between sight and knowledge came up many times throughout this scene in the play, which means that is must have some relevance to the story.
(645)
The People of Thebes view Oedipus as a natural born savior. The people say that he cannot equal the gods, but that his people rate him first of men. Because he had saved them from the Sphinx, without and training or knowledge from the people of Thebes, they viewed it as if a god was with him bringing Oedipus luck and power. Oedipus is the closest thing to a physical embodiment to a good as Thebes has. Oedipus does not see himself as such. “…Not one is sick as I. Your pain strikes each one of you alone, each in confines of himself, no other. But my spirit grieves for the city…” (Page 162, Lines 71-75). Oedipus is slightly modest in this quote, but also very arrogant in saying that he has a connection/suffers with all his people. Just because he has the crown, it does not mean that he feels pain of everyone. It seems that he felt that he needed to say that because it was a competition in suffering (?), and OF COURSE Oedipus had to win. Also, besides having to save the town from quote un-quote destruction, Oedipus must now deal with the riddle of “who killed Laius?” Also, from what I know about the previous play with Oedipus, (which is not a lot), is that he had to solve the riddle of the Sphinx. In Oedipus the King, Oedipus is now forced to solve yet another riddle of who killed Laius?
Why does Tiresias initially refrain from divulging the truth to Oedipus and assembled others? How does Oedipus try to get the truth from Tiresias? How is Oedipus' attitude towards Tiresias and the kind of knowledge he represents inconsistent?
I believe that Tiresias does not tell Oedipus and the others the truth because the prophet believes that Oedipus and the rest would be blinded by the truth. Tiresias says, “How Terrible—to see the truth only when the truth is only pain to him who sees!” (page 176, Lines 358-360). Meaning, that those who do not feel pain from the truth at all can only see the truth, which in this case, is not Oedipus. At first Oedipus starts out by complementing Tiresias about the noblest of work that Tiresias was about to show. Tiresias said that he did, in fact know who killed Laius, but he would not say. Tiresias answered in very murk, short ways to all of Oedipus’ questions, which angered and confused Oedipus. Tiresias continued to be very rude to the King without Oedipus even knowing why. Oedipus then became very angry with the prophet, which did not help persuade the prophet’s previous decision to not say whom was the murderer. After Oedipus re-asked Tiresias to repeat what he has said, Tiresias says that The King is the murderer you hunt. Believing the prophet to be insane. Oedipus challenged the prophet’s powers of prophecy; Tiresias then began to speak in riddles, because of Oedipus’ knowledge far beyond the prophet’s. Enraging Oedipus, due to the fact that he himself could not figure out what the prophet had meant, commands the prophet to leave at once. In the end resolving nothing.
After revealing to Oedipus that he himself is he murderer in which they are searching, Oedipus then calls upon the fact that the prophet is blind and cannot be held useful or wise anymore. Oedipus is associating eyesight with knowledge and, previously in the play, power, and because the prophet has no sight to speak of, he must be unequal to Oedipus. The association between sight and knowledge came up many times throughout this scene in the play, which means that is must have some relevance to the story.
(645)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)