Act of Resistance/ Final Response to Lysistrata

For my Act of Resistance, my goal was to protest against an issue that greatly effects the younger generation. Therefore, I wanted to focus on the issue of binge drinking, in general, on college campuses. For those of you who are unaware of what binge drinking is, essentially binge drinking means to drink heavily over a period of several days, however, the term refers to the heavy consumption of alcohol over a short period of time. Individuals binge drink mainly for the purpose to become intoxicated. The main problems that may evolve from the issue of binge drinking include alcohol poisoning, impaired judgment, physical harm to the body (increased likeliness of being overweight and having high blood pressure), mental health problems, and possibly alcoholism.

But, the main question that I raised before publicly protesting the issue of binge drinking was, why do people binge drink? In the search for answering my own question, I came to the conclusion that people binge drink mostly because they have giving in to peer pressure and just want to fit in. Other reasons include that individuals become curious as they want to know to what is like to drink excessively. Individuals look to alcohol as a way to relieve stress and make them feel better, although they are unaware that it may make them feel sick and hung-over. Also, they want to feel older than they actually are.

After I researched and gathered my thoughts on what I already knew about binge drinking, I thought the perfect way to express my protest was on a college campus to college students, as college students seem to be the most effected by this issue. So, my mission was to speak to college students at Ripon College, in which my sisters attend, to see what their opinions on binge drinking were. I mostly spoke to my sisters’ friends and sorority sisters about it. For the most part, they all responded in the same way and mainly suggested that binge drinking is very harmful as they have either witnessed or experienced the effects of binge drinking. As some admitted to binge drinking, they also stated they were unaware of why they choose to binge drink other than the fact that the alcohol was there and it was not hard to get away with it. But, some did say that they were aware of the possible effects and bad consequences from such choices may have had including drinking and driving or having sex. Other people said they like the feeling of being drunk, and that is why they drink, yet they were not sure of what they truly got out of it as binge drinking is never a positive thing.

Personally, I fell that binge drinking is very unsafe and although one may think it is cool when their in the moment, they are often ignorant of that of which will come after their experience of binge drinking is all said and done. I do not see what people get out of binge drinking. I think what shocked me the most about my protest was that some easily admitted to binge drinking, even some who were underage.

In the future, I do not think I would do anything different about my protest. But, for insight to the future, I do wish to continue to educate individuals about binge drinking and address the negative consequences and harm it does to an individual, both mentally and physically. I think I did help the problem. After I completed my act of resistance, I was greatly satisfied with the effect it may have had on others, as I hope they will think twice before binge drinking again.

Final Thoughts on "Lysistrata"

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the play “Lysistrata”. The play was a more difficult read compared to the other plays, “The House of Bernarda Alba” and “Hedda Gabler”. “Lysistrata” was unlike the other plays as it did not end in a tragedy, which is another reason why I like this play more. Also, the language, including the puns/play on words and metaphors, were humorous and made the play easier to want to read. I also like “Lysistrata” better than the other plays because it was more so about the strength of the women, which were displayed in the themes, presented throughout the play. The other plays were more so about the repression of women, not “the power of a woman”. I did not notice any big comparisons between the plays either. Ultimately, the play was pretty okay and I would recommend it to others who are interested in reading a sexual comedy.

The Puns!?!?

When I started to read “Lysistrata” I knew that the play was supposed to be funny and comical as it full of puns. As I was completely the reading each night I did not think the puns were that funny. Perhaps I was just overlooking them or maybe I really did not understand them. Though I thought the play was pretty good, I do not know why I failed to see why the play was so funny, as it was supposed to a sexual comedy.

"Lysistrata" Themes

For the group oral presentation my group is focusing on the themes found throughout the entire play. Aristophanes uses motifs and symbols to represent the majority of the themes that ultimately represent the portrayal of all the women in the play. Aristophanes focuses on household and domestic articles that represent the women including the cleaning supplies, cloth/fabric/thread, and the spindles. These motifs are embedded “below the surface” and ultimately represent the presence, yet in a sense the lack of, women power in the play “Lysistrata”.

Give in, Women!!

An important question was brought up in class and that as whether or not one thought the women would have eventually given in to the oath if the men would not have put down their weapons and given up in the war. The oath I think eventually the women would have given in, especially because some of them were so hesitant into taking the oath to begin with. But, ultimately it was the women’s choice and decision to take the oath. I think the women took the oath because Lysistrata led and convinced the women to take away all sexual favors from the men, unless they decided to end the war. Therefore I think the women were then determined to stay absent from sex. I think if the women were the ones to have give in they would have lasted a lot longer than the men did, especially considering the fact that the men could not go twenty-four hours without sex.

Importance of Women

I think the significance of the women’s disobedience in the play is important to the plot. The overall plot suggests the women are weaker and of lesser value than they men. The role of the women seems to be overshadowed by the importance and strength of the men fighting this war. This would explain why the women take the oath. I think the women were sick of being looked at merely as objects and having this status quo of being only a housewife within the public sphere and they want to prove to the men they are equal. The women want to tell them to never underestimate their power. This all out battle between the sexes ultimately concludes that abstinence does bring about peace. Yet, this does not explain why some of the women were so hesitant in taking the oath. Also, what was the deal when the three women who were making excuses to go home? I think the women missed the men too much and still felt as though they could defeat the men, but Lysistrata convinces them to go through with it and the victory would be theirs.

With or Without Women

I think one of the most important things in the play are the themes. The themes address some important issues that were not only present during the time of this play in Ancient Greece, but the themes are also relevant in today’s society. One of the themes in the play I liked the most is the proverb “life with women is hell, life without women is hell, too” (96). This theme is very true and obviously present throughout the play and this thought raised another question, and that is to whether or not I thought the men truly loved the women. I think at this point in the play the men have realized that they cannot live without the women , not only sexually as they have become frustrated, but also mentally. A scene that exemplifies this is when Kinesias is begging Myrrhine to come down to him and she hesitates and says, “you don’t need me” (82). Kinesias responds to say “I don’t need you? I’m at the end of my rope!” (82). As the women agree to deny their husbands of all sexual favors until the men stop the war, though the men become dismayed, they do realized the cannot mentally, even emotionally, live without the women and that is why they conclude with a truce as they cannot dispute the truth or logic behind this proverb as stated by Koryphaios of Men.

Kinesias and Myrrhine

I thought one of the most interesting characters in the play was Kinesias, Myrrhine’s husband. Myrrhine fell into the same trap as the other women when she married him. Myrrhine says she loves him, in fact she states, “I’m mad about him!” (81). But Myrrhine knows that he does not love her, but he loves her sex and that is why she did swear an oath. When Kinesias returns to Myrrhine she refuses to go home with him unless he agrees to a truce to stop the war. But, she leads him on to believe she will have sex with him. Like the other men Kinesias is unhappy with the sex strike, but he continuously hints for Myrrhine to have sex with him. Kinesias is like all the other stereotypical men in the play, in the sense that he cannot go twenty-four hours without sex. In the end I thought it was pretty amusing how Myrrhine led him on into believing he was actually going to get some, but runs off in the end, leaving Kinesias even more sexually frustrated.

Lysistrata!

Lysistrata is a very powerful character compared to the other characters in the play. The other women are complete opposites as they do not care or want to be involved in politics once sex is revoked. They are playing the stereotypical and traditional sex-driven roles of women at the time. But, Aristophanes shows both sides of the women roles as Lysistrata breaks from the traditional role of a female and takes a stand against the men as she is sick and tired of having to sexually provide for the men. Lysistrata is opposite of the other women at the time as she has no sexual desire and has chosen to abstain from sex. Lysistrata is stronger than the other women as she does not feel the needs to be handled as an object, only serving the purpose of providing sex for the men. In that sense, I think Lysistrata’s characteristics suggest she is more of a masculine than feminine character.

An Oath

Even though an oath was taken, I do not think all of the women will be able to withstand it. Though it was ultimately the woman’s choice to go along with Lysistrata’s idea and actually take an oath, I doubt all of the women will be able to follow through as some of the women were hesitant in taking the oath of total abstinence form sex to begin with. Though Lysistrata has convinced most of the women to take the oath, I think the women are not sure if abstaining from sex will bring peace any sooner and therefore they do not see all of the logic in taking in oath. Ultimately, the oath is what separates the power between the sexes. I think the women are also too afraid of how the men will respond. Hence, some of the women will crack under the pressure as they are too concerned about pleasing the men. Therefore, I think the men would be able to withstand the oath longer than the women.

Introduction to “Lysistrata”

After reading the introduction to “Lysistrata” by Aristophanes, I am thoroughly interested in beginning this play. The introduction to “Lysistrata” seems to suggests it is the complete opposite of the other plays, “The House of Bernarda Alba” and “Hedda Gabler”, in which these plays were essentially about the repression of woman and ended in tragedy. The introduction stressed the idea and importance that “sex is rarely lost of sight” (9) throughout the play. The introduction also suggests there is vital distinction between love, which is the "bond between a husband and wife" (9), and sex, which I think will be important to keep in mind while reading the play. Ultimately the introduction suggests “Lysistrata” is merely about the connection between the abstinence of sex with the sex strike and war for the seizure of the Akropolis.

Overall Opinion

Overall, Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler was a very interesting play. I think it was better than Lorca’s The House of Bernarda Alba, but I do not know why. At the beginning the play seemed to be very slow moving and did not hold my interest right away, but in the end the play was pretty okay. As I got farther into the book and learned more about the characters the book became more interesting. My favorite character was Aunt Julie because to me she seemed to be the sanest character and she has the same name as me…j/k…but Aunt Julie’s character was kind, soft, and caring.…but, my least favorite character was of course.. …Hedda Gabler. Her character was just so manipulating and after a while she just became so predictable and annoying. Though the beginning was slow moving and uninteresting at first, I still liked it better than the ending…I did not like how within the last act three characters died. The ending is not how I imaged it ending although I can not think of an alternative. In the end I thoroughly enjoyed the play and I do recommend it.

Hedda like Bernarda

In several ways Hedda Gabler is similar to The House of Bernarda Alba. One of the biggest comparisons between the two plays is there is an authoritative figure. In Hedda Gabler it is Hedda who is controlling. Hedda finds a way to manipulate others, taking power away from the other characters as she has lost self-control. But,in the end, Hedda's control takes over her own life as she commits suicide. Bernarda is like Hedda as she takes control over her daughters within her house as daughters must mourn the loss of her husband for eight consecutive years. Another way the two plays are similar is that both authoritative characters have maids. Berta and Poncia are controlled by authority. In the end….both plays are tragedies…..three deaths occur in the Hedda Gabler including Aunt Rina, Løvborg, and Hedda...whereas Bernarda Alba’s youngest daughter, Adela, commits suicide.

Act Four is a Tragedy

Three different deaths occur in Act Four. I think the importance of death in the play suggests conflict between the characters and Hedda. The first death is Aunt Rina’s. George tries to encourage Hedda to join him say a last goodbye to Aunt Rina, but she refuses. Hedda’s response to Aunt Rina’s death characterizes Hedda as a selfish individual who does not care about anyone or anything. The second death that occurs is Mr.Løvborg’s. Hedda seems to be amazed and interested in Løvborg’s death as she exclaims, “I’m saying there’s beauty to all of this” (296), referring to his death. Hedda cares more for the “beauty” of his death more so than his well-being. Hedda implies more than once that Løvborg’s death was beautiful. Hedda can be directly related to Løvborg’s death as she is the one who burned his manuscript, which influenced his death. Hedda is also the one who provided the pistols for Løvborg. In the end, Hedda’s confrontational ways take control over her own life. Hedda commits suicide after her own power is taken away from herself. I think Hedda felt as though death was the only escape from her miserable life that she created.

Hedda’s Bored!?!?!

I am not sure if I really fully understand Hedda’s character, besides the fact that she a controlling and authoritative. But, she is constantly complaining of how bored she is. She looks to her pistols as an escape from her boredom. The pistols represent her masculine up bringing as they were a gift from her father, General Gabler. The pistols are one explanation why Hedda’s character is so masculine. And when Hedda pretends to shot Judge Brack, but he gently takes the pistols away from her…what was her motive? Following that incident though, Hedda again precedes to complain to Judge Brack that her honeymoon with George was so boring….and she also tells Judge Brack how much she missed him. But, I still do not know why Hedda always complains so much and feels the need to constantly play with her pistols although the pistols represent Hedda’s dominance.

Hedda loves George?

I do not think Hedda truly loves George Tesman. Hedda is a very controlling character and she learns to manipulate the others including her newlywed husband, George. When Hedda married George I think she was just looking for an opportunity to have control over another person, taking into consideration the fact that she married a man who is of lesser value than herself. It seems as though Hedda must have everything her way, for instance the incident with the piano. When Hedda married George, I do not think she was doing it for love. Instead, Hedda was looking for control and authority. Hedda’s character seems to be stuck in the past. She is used to having the best things in life as she comes from a very wealthy background, being that her father was General Gabler. It seems to me that Hedda has loss all self-control and she looks to marriage as a way to regain power. On the other hand, I think George truly loves Hedda, or at least he wants to try and love Hedda. But, Hedda never shows true love or affection towards George and their marriage. Hedda is making it impossible for George to love her and she has high standards and she seems impossible to please.

Løvborg’s Relationships

I was just wondering what was the importance or the significance of Hedda’s and Mrs.Elvsted’s relationship with Eilert Løvborg? It is evident that Hedda has had a past with Løvborg as she was shocked, yet very interested in finding out he was back in town. It is later implied that Hedda is the woman from Løvborg’s past who threatened him with pistols. This just reminded me of the fact that Hedda is controlling and manipulate as she literally drives him to drink. However, I am not sure if the relationship they had in the past was ever sexual. But it is unclear to me why Hedda is so interested in Løvborg again. Mrs.Elvsted is also interested in Løvborg as she left her husband in order to have an affair with him, who was initially a tutor to her children. Mrs.Elvsted shows great attentiveness towards Løvborg. It seems to be that their relationship is an intimate one. I ultimately think Løvborg’s relationship with both women suggests more conflict within the play.

Hedda vs. Mrs.Elvsted

I noticed a great contrast between Hedda and Mrs.Elvsted thus far in the play. It is apparent that Hedda’s character is stronger than Mrs. Elvsted. Hedda wants complete control and dominance over the other characters as it seems as though she has lost all self-control. Mrs. Elvsted seems to be very weak, as she looks to Hedda for help with her life. When I read both of the character descriptions, it is an obvious contrast, especially between their hair. Hedda’s hair is described as being “an attractive medium brown, but not particularly abundant” (228), which seems to be a symbol to represent Hedda’s boldness and authority. Mrs.Elvsted, on the other hand, is the complete physical contrast of Hedda. Mrs.Elvsted’s soft, pretty features symbolize her meekness. Her hair is "light,almost white-gold, and unusually abundant and wavy" (233). Mrs.Elvsted’s description suggests she is a very feminine woman, unlike Hedda who has masculine features. Ultimately, I think Mrs.Elvsted is an innocent so far, and it looks as though Hedda maybe the more controlling individual who holds authority and control over the other characters.

Who’s Aunt Rina?

What I do know of Aunt Rina is that she is another one George’s aunts who helped raise him. But, I was wondering what the importance of her character in the play was considering her character does not have a speaking role in the play? In Act One it is mentioned several times that Aunt Rina’s character is ill. With that, I am pretty sure Aunt Rina has more of an importance to the rest of the play as it is mentioned she embroidered George’s slippers while ill, which has many memories bound up within them. Besides these few incidents which mention Aunt Rina, I am not sure who her character is or her importance in the play. And it does not look as though she is talked about again in Act Two. I think Aunt Rina’s illness foreshadows what will occur later on in the play. (perhaps her death??????)

Um?…An Observation

An observation that I did not seem to notice, at first, in Act One was George Tesman’s loss for words as he continuously repeats little words like “um”, “hm”, or “eh”. After it was pointed out, I think George’s use of these words stood out to me more while reading more of the play. I agree that in a way the use of these words (if they are even considered real words?!?!) did become a little annoying. But, I think this was just a way for Ibsen to characterize George Tesman and that is just the character George is. I also noticed that whenever George uses any of these words, they usually end in a question mark. This leads me to believe that throughout the play George will become a questionable and/or possibly an unpredictable character. Also, George seems to be unsure of himself and not very confident in himself. George just seems to be an insecure person.

Miss Juliana Tesman!

When reading the beginning of Act One I found Miss Juliana Tesman to be a very interesting and important character in the play thus far. Miss Tesman is characterized as having a “kind and good natured look” (22) in the opening scene. I think these characteristics of Aunt Julie are evident within the first act. I found it interesting that Aunt Julie wants to please her nephew, George Tesman, and she feels the need to satisfy Hedda for George’s happiness. For instance, Aunt Julie suggests, “I bought that for Hedda’s sake” (224). Aunt Julie is referring to the hat she felt the need to buy in order to please Hedda so Hedda would not be ashamed of her. Aunt Julie is very important in George’s life as she had to act as both a mother and father to him. She even took out a mortgage on her and Aunt Rina’s pension o help George out. The relationship between the two seems to be very strong and George will always keep a place in his heart for his Aunt Julie. Aunt Julie feels the same way about George as she states, "I won’t let a day go by without looking in on the two of you” (231). Aunt Julie is ultimately a kind and caring person.