weareliterarycritics

Debate with other literary critics.

Archive for the category “literature”

Who is your favorite mystery writer?

Advertisements

Quote of the Day: Toni Morrison

English: Toni Morrison, Miami Book Fair Intern...

Image via Wikipedia

“All water has a perfect memory and is forever trying to get back to where it was” (Toni Morrison, BrainyQuote)

Hello everyone,

I am going to try to post a quote every day again now that I am used to my schedule for the second semester.  I chose a quote by the author Toni Morrison who is well-known for her novels Song of Solomon and Beloved.  I read Beloved over break, but I admit I did not like it as much as the previous book mentioned.  I respected the form of the novel and how the story flowed, but overall I do not think it was as beautifully written as Song of Solomon.  The above quote I feel shows how Morrison can write in a deep moving way and still talk about a serious subject.  Morrison, like many other African-American writers, focus their stories around people finding their roots and understanding their past.  In my opinion, this quote can tie into these themes and shows the importance of ancestry.

Q: What do you think this quote means?  Do you think that Morrison may be talking about the importance of knowing one’s past?

Thanks for reading, please post your comments below!

My Analysis of Ibsen’s A Doll’s House

Hello everyone,

I am sorry about my sudden departure from WordPress about a month ago during  my school’s winter break.  I came home and after all the stress from school  I just felt like I needed a break from everything and spent the month relaxing.  I am happy to report that I will post every day again, yay!  I will start with my analysis of A Doll’s House, if you have any comments/questions please post them below.  Thank for reading!

Ibsen’s A Doll’s House

Background on Ibsen

Ibsen was born in Skien, southern Norway on March 20, 1828.  He was born to a prominent merchant family and had great pride in his heritage.  However, when Ibsen was seven years old his family’s fortunes dwindled and they eventually became bankrupt.  His father turned to alcohol for comfort shortly after, and his mother became a recluse who sought relief in prayer.    His parents would later on influence his writings and most of his plays focus around financial difficulties and moral conflicts (The Hutchinson Unabridged Encyclopedia, 1).

Connections To The Play

Financial concerns and moral conflicts were major themes in A Doll’s House. Nora and Doctor Rank especially voice their concerns about money and moral conflicts within the play.  The character Krogstad is also talked about when discussing moral conflicts.

Rank to Nora: “Certainly.  However wretched I may feel, I want to prolong the agony as long as possible.  All my patients are like that.  And so are those who are morally diseased; one of them [Krogstad], and a bad case too, is at this very moment with Helmer” (Ibsen 25).

Doctor Rank is a character in this play that is especially against immoral behavior because of the way his family handled their obligations and financial needs when he was growing up.  Doctor Rank’s childhood past is very similar to the life Ibsen led as a child.  Rank voiced his disappointment in his father and blamed him for being sickly growing up.

Rank to Nora: Oh, it is a mere laughing matter, the whole thing.  My poor innocent spine has to suffer for my father’s youthful amusements” (Ibsen 48).

Q: Why do you think Ibsen included concerns of his past in his plays?  Do you think he intentionally did this because he was “bitter” about his circumstances, or do you think he truly wanted to make people aware of the problems with the human race?

The characters Nora and Krogstad in the play both committed the crime of forgery and have to struggle with the actions they took.  Krogstad’s reputation is ruined by this act and Nora, though she is not punished, begins to understand the consequences of her actions and it changes her life.

Background (continued)  

 

The remainder of his life shaped who Ibsen became and fueled his writing.  He became an apprentice at 15 for a pharmacist when he was forced to leave school due to financial reasons.  At age 18 he had an illegitimate child with a servant and paid for the boy’s expenses until his teenage years.  Ibsen never met his son, but supported him because of his sense of moral obligations. Ibsen went to Christiania, later renamed Oslo, to study and better himself.  However, he did not pass all his entrance exams and committed himself to writing.  The first play he ever wrote, Catiline, was published when he was twenty, but it was not performed or received well.

It was not until he wrote his play, Peer Gynt, that he received any recognition from his works.  In the next several years he wrote more than 145 plays, but still did not receive tremendous success as a playwright.  The finest work that Ibsen wrote is called The Wild Duck which was written in 1884.  Ibsen, masters the use of irony in this play and conveys complex issues well, especially his idea of truth and what it means to the human race.  Other works Ibsen wrote were An Enemy of the People, Hedda Gabler, The Master Builder and Ghosts.  On May 23, 1906, Ibsen died in his home at Arbins gade from a series of strokes.  His final words he spoke were, “On the contrary” (The Hutchinson Unabridged Encyclopedia, 1).

Q: What were you thoughts on A Doll’s House?  Do you think the issues that he brings up in the play are relevant to today’s audience?  Could you relate to any of the characters in the play?

Critical Reception of the Play

Responses to A Doll’s House in Scandinavia and Germany (1879-1880)

The play was published in 1879 and within a month 8,000 copies of the play had been sold out, and reprinted by Ibsen’s Danish publisher”(Durbach13).

The play was mentioned in homes everywhere and was received by the public.  In fact, it was so scandalous that many prominent people banned it from being mentioned in the house.

“Such furious discussion did Nora rouse when the play came out, writes Frances Lord, “…that many a social invitation given in Stockholm during that winter bore the words, ‘You are not requested not to mention Ibsen’s Doll’s House!” (Durbach 13)

Debates and differences in opinion were often the responses to Ibsen’s play.  Ibsen was asked to make an alternative ending to the play for the first German production because playhouses were unsure of how the audience would react.  Many women at the time even found the play to be horrid.  A famous actress at the time named Hedwig Niemann-Raabe refused to play the part of Nora stating, “I would never leave my children!”  In the alternate ending of Ibsen’s play Nora sinks to her knees at the doorway of her children’s bedroom and decides not to leave for their own good.  Ibsen however was not fond of this ending and went so far as to call it a “barbaric outrage” only to be used in emergencies.

It is interesting to note that this play did not spark debates about feminism, women’s rights, or male domination.  The only question people would ask is why would a wife and mother leave her family?  Many critics at the time identified with Helmer and reinforced his bias against Nora’s “unnatural” behavior (Durbach 14, 15)

Q: It is clear that the people of the 19th century thought that the ending was horrific and that no mother would leave her children and husband.  How did you personally feel about the ending of this play?

Responses to A Doll’s House in England/America

The people in England had the same reaction to the play as the people in Germany and Scandinavia. Some people in England went so far as to rewrite the play to make it more suitable for the audience.  One of these plays was entitled,  Breaking a Butterfly, which the author Durbach described as “a model of gobblegook” (Durbach 17).

There were some people in England however who greatly supported Ibsen’s ideas and wanted everyone to better understand what Ibsen’s messages were in the play.  Karl Marx’s daughter Eleanor would invite a select gathering to her house to discuss this play and the supporters of Ibsen called themselves Ibsenites (Durbach 18).

“For Marxists, A Doll’s House envisioned the emancipation of men and women would be joined in free contract, mind to mind, as a whole and completed entity” (Durbach 18).

There were people though, such as Shaw, who supported Ibsen’s ideas but did not necessarily think he was a socialist.  In fact, Shaw says that Ibsen did not support any form of politics, religion, government, etc., but wanted to reject these ideas (Durbach 19).

The play overall in America was not widely received and some people felt it was “un-American” and represented old gloomy Europe.  Robert Schanke, a critic, shared words that many Americans felt about Ibsen’s plays.  He states, “Ibsen’s gloom belonged to the pessimistic European past, to the Old World that Americans had put behind them” (Durbach 21).

Q: Why do you think this play was “better” received in England than in Scandinavia/Germany/America?

Q: Today, the play is widely accepted, but scholars disagree on whether it is or is not a feminist play.  When/Why do you think the “shift” was made to accept Ibsen’s play?

Criticism of the play

Many scholars when taking a modern approach to this play seem to shy away from looking at A Doll’s House as a feminist play. 

A Doll House is no more about women’s rights than Shakespeare’s Richard III is about the divine right of kings, or Ghosts about syphilis…Its theme is the need of every individual to find out the kind of person he or she is and to strive to become that person” (M.Meyer 457).

Though some scholars may argue that Ibsen’s play have feminist ideas, Ibsen admits himself that he did not work to support the women’s rights movements.  He does state that it is important to solve the woman problem, but his task in creating this play was to describe humanity and better humanity as a whole. (Ibsen, Letters 337).

Many feminists however argue that it may not have been his intention to write a feminist play, but what he produced is accepted to have feminist ideas by many scholars.  Even though the author stated that A Doll’s House is not a feminist play it can be difficult for some people to not see the feminist ideas in the play.  Also, working towards improving the equalities of the sexes can be seen as a humanist idea and therefore Ibsen could be promoting feminist ideas in his plays.

Many people when approaching this play today either do not talk about feminism or monitor it to keep it linked with the text (Shafer, Introduction 32).

“Removing the woman question from A Doll House is presented as part of a corrective effort to free Ibsen from his erroneous reputation as a writer of thesis plays, a wrongheaded notion usually blamed on Shaw, who, it is claimed, mistakenly saw Ibsen as the nineteenth century’s greatest iconoclast and offered that misreading to the public as The Quintessence of Ibsenism.  Ibsen, did not stoop to “issues,” but was a poet of the truth of the human soul” (Templeton 28).

Some critics, such as Else Host, do not think that Nora can be the “newly-fledged feminist” because she is silly, childish and carefree.  Also, critics do not like Nora’s use of vocabulary and see her as unintelligent air-head.  The use of “baby talk” is especially hated and looked down upon (Templeton 30).  Also, critics do not like how dependent Nora is on her husband in the beginning.  For example, Nora often asks her husband for money by flirting with him and using “baby talk.”  She will also spend her money unwisely at times and is not “scolded” because of her “airy” nature.

Nora: [playing with his coat buttons, and without raising her eyes to his].  If you really want to give me something you might-you might-

Helmer: Well, out with it!

Nora: [speaking quickly].  You might give me money Torvald.  Only just as much as you can afford; and then one of these days I will buy something with it (Ibsen 13).

In the beginning Nora may seem like an air-head, but in the end she does seem to have a change in her demeanor.  She finally understands that she was only a play thing for her husband and that she never learned or talked about anything that would engage the mind.

Nora:…I have existed merely to perform tricks for you, Torvald.  But you would have it so.  You and papa have committed a great sin against me.  It is your fault I have made nothing of my life (Ibsen 76).

Q: Do you think that Nora is a strong female character in the play?  Does she change in the end?  Do you think she will be able to be an independent person?

Ibsen and Feminism

“The view supporting Ibsen can be seen to lie along a spectrum of attitudes with Ibsen as quasi-socialist at one end and Ibsen as humanist at the other.  Proponents of feminism might point to an amateur performance of A Doll’s House in 1886 in a Bloomsbury drawing room in which all of the participants were not only associated with the feminist cause but had achieved or would achieve prominence in the British socialist movement” (McFarlane 89).

Even though Ibsen made a speech famously stating that he did not “work for the women’s rights movement,” it does not mean he did not concentrate on the issues of women in society.  In fact in notes written for A Doll’s House in 1878 he writes, “A women cannot be herself in contemporary society, it is an exclusively male society with laws drafted by men, and with counsel and judges who judge feminine conduct from the male point of view” (Ibsen 436).

Ibsen had many relations with feminists in his life including his wife, Suzannah Thoresen Ibsen, Camilla Collett and Magdalene Thoresen.  He often had passionate talks with these people about feminism and therefore it must have influenced his ideas and works.  Ibsen was even widely credited with inventing the emancipated woman in the last Act of A Doll’s House (McFarlane 91).

Ibsen in his notes again may show that he is sympathetic to the feminist cause.  “A mother in modern society is like certain insects who go away and die when she has done her duty in the propagation of race” (Ibsen 437).

In A Doll’s House we do see a transformation in Nora’s character but it isn’t done as “smoothly” as some critics would like.  In the first two acts Nora is childish and is Helmer’s little skylark.  However, after Krogstad threatens to reveal her crime she becomes nervous and feels she might go mad.  We can see Nora’s “madness” when she rehearses the tarantella” (McFarlane 98).

“Rank sits down at the piano and plays.  Nora dances more and more wildly.  Helmer has taken up a position behind the stove, and during her dance gives her frequent instructions.  She does not seem to hear him; her hair comes down and falls over her shoulders; she pays no attention to it, but goes on dancing” (Ibsen 58, 59).

The tarantella’s origins are in southern Italy, where it serves as a form of hysterical catharsis, allowing women to escape reality and give themselves over to the music.  Nora’s final transformation is of course at the end of the play where she decides she wants to live her own life and be dependent from her husband and children (McFarlane).

Q: Did you personally see this play as a feminist work or did you see it as a humanist play like Ibsen intended? 

 

Works Cited

Durbach, Errol. A Doll’s House, Ibsen’s Myth Of Transformation. Boston: Twayne Pub, 1991. 13-23. Print.

“Ibsen, Henrik (Johan) (1828-1906).” The Hutchinson Unabridged Encyclopedia with Atlas and Weather Guide. Abington: Helicon, 2010. Credo Reference. 4 Jan. 2011. Web. 17 Jan. 2012.

Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll’s House, Unabridged. Clayton: Prestwick House, Inc., 2007. Print.

Ibsen, Henrik, Letters and Speeches, Ed., and trans. Evert Sprinchorn, New York: Hill, 1964.

McFarlane, James. The Cambridge Companion to Ibsen. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994. 89-106. Print.

Meyer, Michael, Ibsen, Garden City: Doubleday, 1971.

Shafer, Yvonne, ed.  Approaches to Teaching Ibsen’s A Doll’s House: New York, 1985.

Templeton, Joan. “The Doll House Backlash: Criticism, Feminism, and Ibsen.” Modern Language Association. 104.1 (1989): 28-40. Web. 17 Jan. 2012.

The results are in…

The Cloud Shadow (Anti-Crepuscular Rays)

Image by Jason A. Samfield via Flickr

Hey guys,

Using the poll from this site and an online literary forum I have decided that I will read The Time Machine by H.G. Wells over break!  I will also read Beloved by Toni Morrison and A Doll’s Houseby Ibsen because I have to read these works for my seminar class.  I will write posts based on these three works and will of course continue to do the quote of the day.  Hope you all are having a great night!

Quote of the Day: Leo Tolstoy

portrait of Leo Tolstoy

Image via Wikipedia

“Art is not a handicraft, it is the transmission of feeling the artist has experienced” (Leo Tolstoy, BrainyQuote).

Hi everyone,

Today I thought I would post a quote about art and writing.  Many artists and writers claim that they become inspired to do their work and that the results comes from their feelings.  Feelings and inspirations lets the artists, writers and musicians create works of art.  However, there are creative individuals who would argue against this claim.  Octavia Butler, one of the most prominent female science-fiction writers thinks that good writing is produced by habit.   In her short story, “Furor Scribendi”, she states what she thinks is important about writing.  “First forget inspiration.  Habit is more dependable.  Habit will sustain you whether you are inspired or not.  Habit will help you finish or polish your stories.  Inspiration won’t.  Habit is persistence in practice.  Forget talent.  If you have it, fine.  Use it.  If you don’t have it, it doesn’t matter.  As habit is more dependable than inspiration, continued learning is more dependable than talent” (Butler, 141).

Do you think feeling and inspiration are important?   Is habit?  Is there another factor that is more important?  

Thanks for reading, please post your comments below!

Butler, Octavia. Furor Scribendi. New York: Seven Stories, 1996. Print.

What book/play should I read over winter break?

Hello,

Since almost everyone said they wanted to wait to read a book as a group, I decided that I will read a book over break and give my synopsis and thoughts on the chapters I read for that day.  I have a poll listed below that has the options I chose but first I will give a synopsis of every book/play in case you are unfamiliar with the text.  Please click on the hyperlink text if you wish to read a more in-depth synopsis of the book/play.

Lady Chatterley’s Lover- The story concerns a young married woman, Constance (Lady Chatterley), whose upper-class husband, Clifford Chatterley, has been paralyzed and rendered impotent. Her sexual frustration leads her into an affair with the gamekeeper, Oliver Mellors. This novel is about Constance’s realisation that she cannot live with the mind alone; she must also be alive physically (wikipedia).

The Inferno-The book is an allegory telling of the journey of Dante through what is largely the medieval concept of Hell, guided by the Roman poet Virgil. In the poem, Hell is depicted as nine circles of suffering located within the Earth. Allegorically, the Divine Comedy represents the journey of the soul towards God, with the Inferno describing the recognition and rejection of sin (wikipedia).

The Time machine- The book’s protagonist is an English scientist and gentleman inventor living in Richmond, Surrey, identified by a narrator simply as the Time Traveler. The narrator recounts the Traveller’s lecture to his weekly dinner guests that time is simply a fourth dimension, and his demonstration of a tabletop model machine for travelling through it. He reveals that he has built a machine capable of carrying a person, and returns at dinner the following week to recount a remarkable tale, becoming the new narrator (wikipedia).

Macbeth The plot summary for this play is too dense and I do not want to give away the ending for the people who have not read it.  Please go to wikipedia if you wish to learn more about this play, but be careful not to read the whole summary because it gives away the ending.

The Hunger Games– In the ruins of a place once known as North America lies the nation of Panem, a shining Capitol surrounded by twelve outlying districts. Long ago the districts waged war on the Capitol and were defeated. As part of the surrender terms, each district agreed to send one boy and one girl to appear in an annual televised event called, “The Hunger Games,” a fight to the death on live TV. Sixteen-year-old Katniss Everdeen, who lives alone with her mother and younger sister, regards it as a death sentence when she is forced to represent her district in the Games. The terrain, rules, and level of audience participation may change but one thing is constant: kill or be killed (amazon.com).

Thank you for your feedback!

Book reading for the month of December?

books

Hi everyone,

I apologize for the lack of posts this week, but I am finally done with my big exam!  Now that I am done I only have a ten page paper to write and two more exams, which is nothing compared to the amount of work my classmates have.  I can now give my blog, and my viewers, my full attention.

I wanted to ask if anyone would be interested in reading at least one book with me for the month of December and perhaps, part of January.  I go back to school January 12th so unfortunately I would have to stop reading any major works by then.  I have a couple of suggestions, but I wanted to see if anyone would be interested in doing this with me first.  We could set a deadline where we have certain chapters done and talk about the chapters we read on my blog, it would be similar to a book club.  If there are any current book reading “contests” going on that anyone knows about we can also sign up for that since those contests usually provide book suggestions.  I will be reading at least one book over break and will comment on it, but I thought it would be more fun with other people. 🙂  Please let me know if you want to participate in this “book club” and post any suggested reading in the comments, thank you!    

Which book is your favorite from the Harry Potter series?

Hey guys,

In honor of the 25 days of Christmas on abc family, I thought I would post a poll and ask, what is your favorite book from the Harry Potter series?  There was a marathon on this weekend and there are still other great movies that will be playing the whole month of December.  Do not feel bad if you missed it, I didn’t get to see it either and will probably not watch a movie until I go back home on the 17th.  Hope you all had a great day.

Quote of the Day: Charles Dickens

“There is a wisdom of the head, and a wisdom of the heart” (Charles Dickens, BrainyQuote).

Today I wanted to post on wisdom and different views regarding rationality and emotion.  Charles Dickens seems to be asserting that wisdom is not just found in the head or heart, but in both areas.  A person cannot just think with their head and disregard their emotions.  Many ancient Greeks discouraged people from letting their emotions take over and said wisdom came from the heart.  Many literary figures, especially of the Romantic Era, put more value in emotions instead of wisdom from the head.  This argument has been ongoing for many centuries, but I personally have to agree with Charles Dickens that the head and the heart are both equally wise.

I have posted about this debate many times and have found that depending on the point of view and the way it is displayed, one could argue over the importance of the head and the heart.  Certain views may sway minds to the opposite point of view, but I think when scrutinizing each point it is almost impossible to prove if the head or heart has more wisdom.  Dickens may have made a “safe” choice by saying they are both equal, but also may realize that it is difficult to say which is more valuable.  A person is incomplete if they simply follow only their heart or head.  We were given both a heart and brain for a reason and therefore we must use both equally.

Q: Do you agree with Charles Dickens point of view?  What do you think has more wisdom, the heart, the head, or both?

Thanks for reading! 

My analysis of Pirandello’s With Other Eyes

Hey guys,

Today I will do a cultural analysis of Pirandello’s, “With other Eyes.”  For your benefit, I will post a summary so you can understand the short story if you have not read it.

Summary

Anna, Vittore Brivio’s wife of three years, gets her husband’s clothes ready when she discovers a portrait.  The portrait is of Brivio’s first wife who had an affair during the marriage.  She is first disgusted with the portrait and sees no similarities between her and the beautiful woman pictured.  She wonders why her husband would marry to completely different people.  As she looks more and more at the picture she realizes she is not that different from the woman in the photograph.  She tries to recall some things about the woman and remembers that Brivio challenged the wife’s lover to a duel.  The lover refused saying he would not fight a mad killer.  The wife, Almira, supposedly committed suicide.  “Anne had very vague information about the dead woman: she knew only that Vittore, when the betrayal was discovered, had, with the impassivity of a judge, forced her to take her own life” (Pirandello 150).

She at first could not relate to this woman who would cheat on the man she holds so dear, but then, realizes that Vittore does not love her back.  Her father did not approve of the marriage but Anna fell into despair and sickness until her father “agreed” to let her marry him.  After the marriage she never saw her family again and still hasn’t for three years.  She realizes how alone she really is and that her husband never appreciated the sacrifices she made.  She then sees herself in the portrait and feels that the portrait is pitying her.  “And it then seemed to her that those kindly eyes, intense with passion and heartbreak, were pitying her in their turn, were condoling her over the abandonment, the unrequited sacrifice, that love which remained locked up in her breast like a treasure in a casket to which he had the keys but would never use them, like a miser” (Pirandello 155).

Based on the summary, I will now share my analysis on Pirandello’s With Other Eyes.

Background

Luigi Pirandello is an interesting writer of the “Great Enlightenment” period that may have drawn from his own experiences in life to write his stories.  In the story we see the focus around Anna and her first husband’s dead wife.  Pirandello had many hardships in his life, but one of his greatest tragedies occurred when his wife slowly descended into madness for fourteen years.  The central theme that Pirandello often focused on in his work was the search to distinguish reality from illusion (Columbia Encyclopedia).  “Since truth was not ascertainable, man was condemned to live in moral and cultural confusion, or even anarchy.  These alienated beliefs may partly explain Pirandello’s acceptance of Mussolini as a man of order” (Columbia Encyclopedia).  There was obvious unrest during World War II and many political ideas in the world.  Pirandello, since he did not want anarchy, might have seen Mussolini as a “hero” that would unite the Italian people and end the chaos in the world.

Culture context

Marriage and adultery were central themes in many 20th century writing. Before the 20th century, women were often beaten and publically humiliated if they committed the crime of adultery.  By the 19th and 20th century the punishment for adultery became less of a concern and by the mid-20th century adultery just became grounds for divorce (sexuality-encyclopedia).  However, even though the grounds for punishment may have grown more lenient over the ages men were often afraid of becoming a “cuckold.”  If a woman cheated on a man in this time it could ruin a man’s reputation.  Most men in society would lose respect for the man who was cuckolded and make fun of his misfortune.  Brivio, rather than have his good named tainted, would think it would be justifiable to murder his wife.  If anyone suspected that Brivio was the cause of his wife’s suicide it would be punishable and not be considered an honor killing.

“Anna had very vague information about the dead woman: she knew only that Vittore, when the betrayal was discovered, had, with the impassivity of a judge, forced her to take her own life” (Pirandello 150).

It seems rather strange in this case that nothing was done to Brivio for murdering his wife.  Other things may have been done to cover up the murder, but we only know what we read from the text.  It could be perhaps that because the story is set in the late 19th century that a crime like this could be overlooked.  However, it could just be an assumption that Vittore murdered his wife, but it is interesting to note that there was no evidence that he did this.  Forensics was not very well-developed in the 1900’s and perhaps the authorities could not prove he caused her suicide.  Again, we do not have any detail into the death other than what Anna tells the readers.

Q: Can we assume it is only rumored that Brivio murdered his wife?  If not, why do you think he wasn’t punished?  Do you think that he said cruel things that eventually made her kill herself?

Dueling in the 20th century

Dueling was very common at this time and was often done to protect the honor of the family name.  There were many movements to discourage and band dueling starting in the early 19th century.  Many of the people in support of these movements considered honor killings murder and suicide.  The supporters thought that honor killings disrupted the social order and would lead to a never-ending cycle of duels between feuding families (Richard 383).  In the 20th century dueling was still common so it was not odd for Brivio to challenge his wife’s lover to a duel.

“She knew that[Arturo Valli] had married a few years later as if to prove his innocence of the blame that Vittore wanted to ascribe to him, that he had vigorously declined Vittore’s challenge to a duel, protesting that he would never fight with a mad killer” (Pirandello 134).

Q: Did you see Valli’s reason for not fighting as cowardly?  Why do you think he didn’t fight? (Did he not value the love he shared with Almira enough to fight in a duel, or maybe, did he not believe in duels?)      

BELL, RICHARD. “The Double Guilt Of Dueling: The Stain Of Suicide In Anti-Dueling Rhetoric In The Early Republic.” Journal Of The Early Republic 29.3 (2009): 383-410. Academic Search Complete. Web. 30 Nov. 2011.

ENotes. ENotes.com, 2011. Web. 29 Nov. 2011. <http://www.enotes.com&gt;.

“Pirandello, Luigi.” Credoreference. 2008. Columbia Encyclopedia. Web. 26 Nov. 2011.

Pirandello, Luigi. “With Other Eyes.” Great Short Short Stories. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, 2005. 149-55. Print.

SparkNotes. Sparknotes, LLC, 2011. Web. 29 Nov. 2011

Thanks for reading, please post your comments below!

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: