Stylistic techniques (imagery, figurative language, sensory detail)
After reading Act 3 I picked up on something that I did not in the first two acts. This could mean that Ibsen starting implementing it in the third act or I just missed it in the first two acts. I realized that Ibsen uses references to the ocean or water quite a few times.
On page 164 Gregers and Hedvig are talking about the wild duck and Gregers says, “And actually, she’s been in the depths of the sea” (Ibsen 164). The depths of the sea are something unknown and mysterious, especially in the time period that this play was written. This creates a feeling of mystery around the wild duck and what she has been through. The “depths of the sea” also insinuates something wild, and therefore reinforces the fact that the duck used to live in the wild and is a wild animal. To be in the depths of the sea requires bravery and once back from the depths, others usually look at you with more respect. You have seen things that others will never see. Ibsen said that the wild duck represented Hedvig; therefore she must have seen things that others have not.
Gregers says to Hjalmar, “You’ve plunged to the bottom and clamped hold of seaweed” (Ibsen 170). To “plunge to the bottom and clamp hold of seaweed” is something that could be suicidal. Gregers is hinting that Hjalmar is stupid and what Hjalmar is doing is detrimental. This idea is further developed when Gregers says to Hjalmar, “[Y]ou’ve gone to the bottom to die in the dark” (Ibsen 170). This statement just states what Gregers was hinting at in the previous statement. This flat out statement shows that Gregers is becoming more desperate to get Hjalmar to see the truth of his situation.
On page 163 Gregers and Hedvig are talking about the “flying Dutchman”. This old legend is one about the water. This conversation immediately turns into one about what Hedvig wants to do when she is older and how the things the Dutchman left inspire her. I think that the water inspires her somehow, but it is also made out to be a bad thing. I am not exactly sure what Ibsen is doing with the images of and references to water. I am eager to keep reading and see if the imagery is consistent throughout the play.
I also started noticing this motif around Act 3! I went back to check if there was anything in the first two, and all I could find was when they were talking about the Wild Duck and how she was captured in the sea under the water. More literal imagery but still about the sea! This could be the reason why Ibsen is using images of the sea so frequently - to tie it back into the duck? I'm not sure what that could be doing symbolically, but I think it is definitely something to look into and keep tabbing.
ReplyDelete