Wild Duck-Journal 2

To what extent would you agree that plot should be valued more highly than style in the work?

            I think that plot is more important in all works of writing, including plays.  If the story of the novel or play is not strong then the style will be building upon nothing.  I believe that the style of a work should build the plot and make it stronger and more interesting.  The style needs to enhance the plot, not overshadow it.

            In Oedipus the King the plot is driven by more details of the plot.  The motifs and figurative language that Sophocles uses, like the motif of blindness, helps develop the plot and build on it, but without the foundation of the plot, all of the literary techniques that Sophocles uses would not be significant.  The motif of blindness would not make sense in all plots, but it helps enhance the plot of Sophocles’ play, because it falls into the plot very well.  If it were in a plot that had nothing to do with blindness to situations or other things, then the motif would not make sense.  The style needs to match the plot or it hurts the play instead of helps.  Ibsen also uses the motif of blindness in Wild Duck.  This motif makes sense in this play because the plot has to do with secrets and things like that.  A lot of the reasons that I stated for Oedipus the King also apply to Wild Duck. 

            Style is more valued in novels, but plays are meant to be performed and watched by an audience.  The audience watching the play cares more about the story line and the plot than they do about syntax and sound manipulations.  It is much easier to recognize literary techniques while reading a piece of writing.  An audience may appreciate things like foreshadowing and motifs while watching a play, but many other literary techniques would not be appreciated in a performed play.  The plot is what drives a play that is being performed.