Author Archives: PATRICIA ALVARADO

‘Watch until Thea Elvsted enters. In a blog entry of 300-400 words, compare the written and film versions of the opening of the play. How might we view the film as an interpretation of Ibsen’s original text? Where has the filmmaker made changes to Ibsen? To what effect? What do we notice when we watch the film that we may have missed’ 

Reading Hedda Gabler in its entirety before watching the film, made the film that much more interesting.  Seeing the parallels between the actors verses the characters in the story really helped me understand why certain characters had certain personalities. Having a face to put to the character I had read about and imagined in my head helped a lot in my understanding of the text. Throughout the film I realized a lot of the interactions are perceived certain ways by the characters due to the way the character things and how they sound wether it is kind or passive aggressive.  

The similarity would be in my opinion the personalities of the characters and the way they act with each other I believe correlated with the plot in the story.  In stories the weather , clothes or other aspects within the story give the reader a clue to the tone of the story. Watching the filmed helped me because since I watched it a couple times before I re read Hedda Gabler , I could then understand and then attach a voice  to each character and read the story in a way that I hadn’t the first time because I could understand the characters personality a bit more the second time. The difference within the film would be the words the actors use in the film than in the story . The film languages seemed to flow more naturally and you could be how well the actors worked together it was as if everything was natural and not rehearsed which I believed added to my interest of the film. Lastly, in Hedda Gabler the film and story compare in the aspect the the characters personalities are the same. The contrast would be the word choice of the writers who chose to adapt Hedda Gabler.

Evanthia Peikidou

                        George Tessman is a very quiet and ordinary man who loves his job. I don’t think that his character is an important one, he doesn’t add anything to the story or the development of the plot. He is trying to please Hedda, by getting her the house he thought she wanted and getting furniture. A character that we have seen in this class and reminded me of Tessman is Damis from Tartuffe. Damis is also a very straight forward character that didn’t really do anything to the plot. He was trying to impress his father by exposing Tartuffe. Both of them have a moment in each story, but I feel like it’s just to help the story move forward rather than an important event. For Tessman the moment was when he brought back Lovborg’s manuscript and Hedda burnt it, that helped the story to get to the next event. And for Damis, when he tried to expose Tartuffe to his father, but he didn’t actually expose him, instead he pushed Elmire to expose him for real. 

                  Eilert Lovborg is the exact opposite of George Tessman. He is a very intelligent and adventurous person. He had a bad habit of over drinking and he is easily seduced by Hedda. There is one character that we have read that I could make a connection with, although they have some differences. The character is from “Bewitched” by Akinari, and his name is Toyo-o. I think the main similar characteristic they both share is that they were both seduced by the “wrong” woman. For Lovborg, Hedda was a bad influence to him, pushing him to go for drinks with other men and she burnt his manuscript. But for Toyo-o, Manago who was a “witch” put him in trouble when she gave him a sword and everybody thought he stole it. But besides that, I feel that they also have in common that they both didn’t do what other men around them did. For example Toyo-o didn’t want to help with the family business like his brother and wanted to do his own thing, and pursue a cultural life in Kyoto, whereas  Eilert Lovborg wanted to finish his new book and was vulnerable to drinking.

Evan Nierman

                 Berta is the maid of the Tesman’s.   It is brought to the audiences’ attention that Berta has long worked for Miss Julie, and has assisted in the upbringing of George Tesman. Berta, once serving Miss Julie, is now the maid of George and Hedda’s household.Her role throughout the play is secondary to the storyline, yet she is introduced immediately. Even before the plays’ main characters. So what is the significance behind Berta?  The maid, as a character, is a component to story development. Berta’s role resembles the function of Dorine, the maid of Mariane, in Moliere’s play, Tartuffe. The initial, and most apparent, connection between the two is that Berta and Dorine are both introduced as the maids of the house in Act I Scene I of their respective plays.  And, both plays take place in the place of residence, entirely. Both maids are of assistance during the introduction and are done so with purpose. Having a maid is a symbol of wealth. Each Maid’s introduction is used to establish the setting of the residence.  Berta and Dorine are present in the opening scene of each play in order to address the aristocratic/boursiousee lifestyle that each play attempts to depict.  

               Miss Juliane Tesman is the aunt of George Tesman. Although she holds status as his aunt, the untimely death of both George’s mother and father has led ‘aunt’ Juliane to act more as a parental figure than an aunt.  In Act I, Tesman says, “For me too. To see you again, Aunt Julie – who’ve been both father and mother to me”(Pg 784). Miss Julie shows characteristics of a traditional style woman. A woman whose focus is on caregiving.  Miss Tesman states, after she rises and lays her hands on his shoulders, “what joy do I have in this world, my dearest boy, other than smoothing out the path for you? You, without a father or mother to take care of you . .  . but we’ve reached our destination my dear”(Pg 786). It is brought to the audience’s attention that Aunt Julie is responsible for the upbringing of George. That is, with the help of Berta, of course. But, since George has grown up and recently wed, caring for Aunt Rina has been Miss Julie’s primary concern. She makes note on how taking care of others has always been her job. She is concerned that after Aunt Rina passes, she will not have anyone to assist in living. It seems caring for others is all that keeps Miss Julie’s existence purposeful. These qualities follow a similar suit to Jean Rousseau’s description of, what he believes makes up,  a fundamental woman. Confessions by Jean-Jaques Rousseau brings attention to the fact that Rousseau, like the fictional character George Tesman, did not follow a traditional upbringing. Neither Rousseau nor Tesman were brought up by their parents, but instead a single woman. Mademoiselle de Lambercier became a maternal figure for Jean-Jaques Rousseau after the passing of his mother and the departure of his father, which Rousseau mentions in Book One of his Confessions. Mademoiselle de Lambercier and Miss Tesman share a few commonalities. First, in their title.  Mademoiselle is a title equivalent to Miss. It is important to take note that Miss Tesman is, in fact, a miss. Such a title addresses the marital status of the women and labels them, both, as not married.   Both Women seem to find purpose in the care taking of others, specifically young boys with no parental guidance. They are, in the romantic sense, traditional women of the utmost accomplishments. That is, their sole purpose of taking care of others. 

             Judge Brack is a friend of both George and Hedda. He is a cynical man, who seems to constantly be intruding in the business of others. His role, although not as prominent, mirrors qualities similar to Tartuffe, the central character is Moliere’s play, Tartuffe.  In Moliere’s play, Tartuffe is constantly intruding on the lives of others.  He is constantly wrapped up in other people’s affairs. He does so in an intrusive fashion. The same could be said about Judge Brack. Although his intentions are less transparent than those of Tartuffe, there are intentions behind his actions nonetheless. For example, in Act II of Hedda Gabler, Judge Brack enters the scene from the garden entrance, which is around the back of the house. He avoids the front entrance to avoid his presence being known for some peculiar reason. He then goes on to converse with Hedda in a very vague conversation about relationships. Both Judge Brack and Tartuffe are cunning in respect to their pursuit. 

Patricia Alvarado

            Hedda Gabler is a very manipulative, unpredictable and miserable person. Growing up in an upper class household her father being a general which was a wealthy occupation at the time Hedda is taught to be a lady and is meant to just sit and enjoy entertaining family and guests much like the woman of that era we’re taught that, that, that was their main purpose in life. Hedda has trouble adjusting to married life and her relationship with her spouse and his family and throughout the story we see issues from her past come to life such as Ejlert Lovborg returning to town. She is miserable and manipulative towards the people around her because she wants them to feel the way she feels trapped and controlled. She is also just seen as a trophy wife and object by her husband. “But, Auntie take a good look at Hedda before you go. Look at how charming and attractive she is” (pg.788). She takes out her emotions and sabotages her acquaintance’s lives because she is miserable on her own. A character that has some parallels to Hedda Gabler is Du tenth, from Du tenth sinks the jewel box in anger , she is a courtesan who is entertaining the thought of a relationship with Li Jia. She is seen as an object by Li Jia as well being used for his sexual pleasure ‘ He took the whole burden of his youthful passion and loaded it on her alone” (pg.501).Both woman are seen as objects and regarded as not having a mind of their own. Yet they are ironically the names of the stories because they are so influential and integral characters in their stories. 

          Mrs.Elvsted is an old romantic partner of George Tesman, she and George have a natural friend like relationship. She is a secondary character in Hedda Gabler . When she visits the Tesman’s she is at a crossroads revealing that she lives in a different area apart from the Tesman’s that her stepchildren’s tutor Eilbert Lovborg became her love interest.  I chose to compare Elvstead to Marianne from Tartuffe. Both characters are secondary characters in their story, yet they are involved in the main plot of the story but in both stories the main characters are helping them with their problems. In Tartuffe , Dorine provoks  Marianne to have a conversation with her fiance to not break off there engagement. In Hedda Gabler, the Tesman’s help elvsted get in touch with Lovborg. They are both characters that a central to the story yet they are overlooked as their own stand alone character , even though the plot of the story is based on their issue. 

” My mother was name Harriet Bailey. She was the daughter of Isaac and Betsey Bailey, both colored and quite dark. My mother was of a darker complexion than either my grandmother or grandfather. My father was a white man. He was admitted to be such by all I ever heard speak of my parentage. The opinion was also whispered that my master was also my father, but of the correctness of this opinion I know nothing; this means of knowing was withheld from me” (pg.236)”

Douglass has a multitude of feeling as he writes his narrative, as a reader you can see how traumatic and hurtful his life was. They’re were multiple roadblocks and hardships he has to go through as a slave. In this quote it is understood that Douglass never had a real relationship with his parents. He describes them as the people who concieved him yet he has no attachment to either parent. The way he describes almost all the ways that black woman and white men can have relations is threw rape. His view is that anything they’re is a child between a slave woman and a white male it is rape. They result of the child is an insult to the white man’s wife and an embarrassment to the slave because that is not how she wanted to have a child. Douglass’ reading portrays the pain and suffering that he had to endure in his life, the suffering that is so life altering to Douglass. It is a generational , cultural and emotional pain that he goes through that he eloquently describes. It is the never ending torture of slavery. The questions reading Douglass passage raise for me are wether we as a country and culture will every get through this hurtful piece of history but also not look down upon the new ways slavery had reshaped itself in our present day area. They’re is and equality issue that very present in American, it is shown in a multiple ways wether it is blatant racism or statistic that 1/3 African American males will get incarcerated within there life time is an abhorrent statement to me.  Americans  still have to face the inequality that is has toward the African American race and the way we treat and label African Americans. America as a hole needs to address it’s issues with colorism and racism, and with that addressed we would thrive as a whole.