Zarilli discusses that during the modernist theater era, play writers were interested in knowing the truth and depicting reality on stage. However, they often question whether theatre and plays are capable of depicting the multidimensional truth of real life experiences. As Ibsen states, he often “questioned the representational basis of the theater” (Zarilli, p. 389). He questioned it because he understood that the materialist stage cannot clearly depict spiritual realities. Similarly, for Ibsen, photography cannot fully portray entire scenes or event. As Zarilli puts it, “[photography] has little to reveal about human experience” (Zarilli, p. 389). Those who believe in photography as truthful, according to Ibsen, “are led to sentimental and moral blindness” (Zarilli, p.390). The people Ibsen is calling “blind” are precisely the people living in the Norwegian society who do not question but learn to accept everything (societal norms) that it taught to them as infallible. Through this play, Ibsen hopes to awaken those who are suppressed in the society and show them a way to freedom and learn what is their individual truth. For Ibsen, being free to learn self-truth is what leads to satisfaction and self-fulfillment.

Having learnt of Marx political views, Ibsen believes that one day inequality will be abolished. In order to achieve freedom (to find the truth), the inferior/working class would have to fight or go against the ruling class. Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto, the working proletariat must overthrow the bourgeois class in order to achieve a classless society (The Communist Manifesto). In regards to The Doll’s House, the proletariat can be seen as represented by Nora, and that the Bourgeois class as depicted by Torvald. Torvald controls and exploits Nora, and even calls her his “property” (Ibsen, p.61). This is the Norwegian society for Ibsen – a place where women are subordinate to and controlled by men. In the First Act, Nora accepts societal norms as they are presented, and refuses to share with her husband what she has done to obtain enough money to pay his medical bills. However, she soon learns that when the ‘miracle’ did not happen the only way to be free and learn the truth about her own self and have the power to control her life is if she rids herself from Torvald (Ibsen, p.65). This ‘overthrowing of the dominant class’ is achieved in the end of the play when Nora walks out of her old life with Torvald and her children to lead an independent life free of oppression alone, saying, “I must try to educate myself. I must set about it alone” (Ibsen, p.63). Nora has to stop acting and putting a play to please others and leave her family in order to find herself. The freedom to self-reflect is is what Ibsen terms “transcendence,” after having learnt of the idea from Hegel (Zarilli, p.300).

In The Doll’s House, Ibsen also criticizes the contemporary Norwegian society as being overly obsessed with superficialities. During this time period, appearances were often misunderstood as realities. For Torvald, what was important was not so much having a wife there to support and care for, but a beautiful doll he could claim as his possession. After realizing that Nora had forged her father’s signature to save his life, he told her “you must live as we have always done; but of course only in the eyes of the world” (Ibsen, p.59). Torvald’s emphasis that they would continue to live as they do but only for others illustrates that reputation and appearance are what matters. He would rather pretend that life was as it was than face that fact that his wife, who is supposed to be inferior, had saved his life. Torvald represents the Norwegian society who despite knowing the truth continues to pretend to be blind; and he is therefore, not able to be fully satisfied. Torvald’s emphasis on external characteristics is similarly seen in The Importance of Being Earnest, when Gwendolen was hung up on Ernest’s name. It seems that she was just in love with the idea of marrying a man named Ernest and not really in loved with Jack for who he is.

Some of the questions I am interested in finding out is how Nora’s leaving will allow her to find self-fulfillment? Is finding the truth and reality really better than living in a dream world, then why is there a saying “ignorance bliss”?

Date: 2/15/16

Topic: The Truth of Reality

In Chapter 4 of Revolutions in Communication, Kovarik et al. discuss the history of photography and the ways in which photography has been used “to advance social causes as well as artistic subjects” (Kovarik et al., ebook location: 3513). Through numerous examples, Kovarik suggests that the medium of photography can be used as a way to identify a deeper meaning or truer reality in a contrived setting. In the 1930s, for example, the Farm Security Administration (FSA) was taxed with the job to help “introduce Americans to Americans…by sending photographers and writers out into the country to document the national spirit.” As it turned out, the result of such efforts “was not always a morale-boosting portrait, but rather one of a people struggling to cope and not always managing” (Kovarik et al., ebook location: 3557). With the country functioning under the pretense of strong nationalism, the photographs of these reporters provided an ulterior reality – a vastly more accurate reality – of the American population discovering the falsities of the “American Dream.” Similarly, Kovarik discusses Dorothy Lange’s uncovering of the Migrant Mother which brought to light the reality of poverty in America. Kovarik says, “the Migrant Mother gave no hint that the subjects had brought misery on themselves through any fault of their own. Instead, they portrayed good people as victim’s of a flawed system” (Kovarik, ebook location:3618). Kovarik et al. acknowledge photography’s ability to capture the authenticity of modern life hidden beneath the façade of a disillusioned reality.

Like Kovarik, Zarilli et al.’s examination of Modernism in drama in Chapter 9 of Theater Histories looks at the way in which modernist playwrights, such as Henrik Ibsen and Anton Chekov, “represent the many dimensions of real experience” through their works. As Zarilli discusses, modernist playwrights attempt to “separate realms through which they [can] transcend the problems of modern life… look[ing] to new modes of aesthetic order that could help people [move beyond] the chaos of the industrial city” (388 & 389). Such Kantian ideals are present throughout Ibsen’s A Doll’s House. In A Doll’s House, Ibsen seeks “to confront and change the oppression and obsession of bourgeois culture” through his character Nora, who, the course of the show, puts on many different personas in order to identify (at the end of the play) that she no longer wants to play the role of the doting housewife; she decides to leave her husband and children behind in search of a more fulfilling life. The one room in which the entire play takes place works as a metaphor for Nora being trapped in a home-life that she wants to escape. Having Nora play the overly enthusiastic housewife of her demeaning, patriarchal husband and then seeing her switch to the various different roles she takes on when other characters – Mrs. Linde, Doctor Rank, Krogstad, and even her children – enter the room not only highlights the absurdity and oppressiveness of the bourgeois culture Ibsen attempts to dismantle, but also shows the true repressive reality of the bourgeoisie housewife. Through Nora, Ibsen communicates “real human experience” as not only the modernist drama do, but also other forms of media – photography included – do (Zarilli et al., 389).

Questions:

In what other ways does Ibsen’s A Doll’s House communicate the reality of society in the time of bourgeois culture? How do different forms of media, in particular theater and photography, mediate self and societal understanding? Do you see any connections between the ways in which theater and photography mediate self and societal understanding and the way in which contemporary social media platforms help develop this understanding?

Last class, in examining The Importance of Being Ernest, we discussed the ways in which people change their identity depending on the setting they are in and the people they are with. It seems to me that Nora plays this exact same “hat-switching” game with the various people she encounters throughout the play. What does this say about humans? How is this “identity switching” carried out on social media and what does this show us as individuals (our values?, Our desires?, etc.)?

Phoebe Smukler

Zarilli claims that playwrights in the early 19^th century often, “turned to history for inspiration” (Zarilli, 281). Oscar Wilde, in The Importance of Being Earnest, however, takes a slightly different approach. Through a highly satirical and ironic play, he comments on current life in Victorian England. Prior to the late 19^th century, when The Importance of Being Earnest was written, Zarilli explains that imperialism and a fascination with the exotic dominated theater stages (Zarilli, 280-282). Imperialism or historical plays worked to transcend the elite out of England and, “excite audiences about the temptations of an exotic” (Zarilli, 280). With the strict moral and social codes of the Victorian era, theater could act as a form of release, a time when one could laugh at the crude, smile at the scantily clad body of the “exotic,” and make fun of the rigidity of the time. As explained by Schiller in the Zarilli reading, “theatre and the other arts are necessary to the health of a society” (Zarilli, 285). Therefore, theater almost seems to exist as an outlet for a need to be immoral, ironic, and hypocritical in an otherwise strictly organized and righteous Victorian era.

From the sexualization of cucumber sandwiches to the fixation on “being earnest/Ernest,” word play and innuendo dominate The Importance of Being Earnest. By using word play, Wilde is able to provide commentary on the condition of the time without being overtly inappropriate. For example, the obvious word play with Ernest vs. earnest weaves in an out of the play. Jack creates a second persona “Ernest” who he pretends to be in order to win over Gwendolen, who is absurdly hung-up on the name “Ernest,” and, in doing so, is decidedly NOT “earnest.” Yet in the end, when he finds out that his name was Ernest all along, the fact that his name is actually Ernest seems to trump the truth: that he’d been lying for almost the whole play. Here, the absurdity of the situation mirrors the absurdity with which Victorian culture placed value on social status. Similarly to the characters in the play, Wilde proposes that Victorian England might be more concerned with being “Ernest” as opposed to earnest. In other words, as Wilde poignantly suggests, “ The truth is rarely pure and never simple” (Wilde, Act I, Line 179, pp. 779) and sincerity is over-rated.

The Importance of Being Earnest also works to satirize the private and public lives of the Victorian elite. “Jack in the country and Ernest in the city” (Wilde, Act I, Line 169-170, pp. 779) is repeated throughout the play. It suggests that Victorian elite often create a public and private persona for themselves, as if putting on a theatrical production for friends and society. With the strict moral code of Victorian England, Wilde might be suggesting a need for an immoral outlet in an alter ego. Cecily is infatuated by the immoral; she loves that Algernon might be nefarious and even calls him, “my wicked cousin Ernest” (Wilde, Act II, Line 106, pp. 792). To this, he emphatically defends himself expressing that he isn’t wicked at all. Cecily immediately shows disappointment stating, “I hope you have not been leading a double life, pretending to be wicked and really being good all the time. That would be hypocrisy” (Wilde, Act II, Lines 110-112, pp. 793). This quote is not only highly ironic, as Algernon is in fact living a double life, but shows a fascination with the immoral: that she’d rather him actually be wicked as opposed to just pretending. This turns Victorian values on its head by placing importance on immorality, possibly suggesting that Victorian society is more immoral than they would like to admit.

Combining both the Zarilli reading and The Importance of Being Earnest I began to question:

Why is comedy so necessary in theater and media? To what degree does comedy make us uncomfortable? Is it important that it makes us feel awkward? How do you think The Importance of Being Earnest would have been received in an audience of Victorian elite?

Zarilli suggests that art can “heal the division between reason and feeling” – to what extent is this reflected in The Importance of Being Earnest?

Is reality enough to keep us entertained? The Importance of Being Earnest uses word play, innuendo, hypocrisy, and irony to create a completely absurd and hilarious play that comments on the condition of the time. But can reality, simply as it is, captivate us? Consider this in connection with the ridiculousness that is reality television today.

– Laura Plimpton

Much like Mr. Burns reflects the changing culture surrounding the different time periods in which the play takes place, The Importance of Being Earnest and the Zarrilli reading both show how theatre can reflect the cultural values of the people it portrays and the effect it can have on its audience.
In The Importance of Being Earnest, Oscar Wilde examines the British upper class through a comedic lens. Wilde shows how the Victorian upper class often treats trivial things with seriousness and serious things with triviality (Gainor, pg. 772). Lady Bracknell suggests that “education produces no effect whatsoever,” then later is disappointed to hear that Jack lives in a very nice neighborhood, but “on the unfashionable side” (Wilde, pg. 784-785). This exchange is an example of how the priorities of upper class citizens can be seen as out of place. The source of a lot of confusion for the characters in the play is the character “Ernest.” Ernest is Jack’s alter ego that he uses when he is in London, and it is the name Gwendolen, Algernon, and Lady Bracknell know him by. Cecily and Miss Prism know him by Jack, and to their knowledge Ernest is his reckless brother living in London. Algernon, upon learning that Ernest is not real, shows up to Jack’s country house as Jack’s brother Ernest and becomes engaged to Cecily. To Algernon’s surprise he and Cecily have been engaged for months. Cecily has written herself letters as Ernest before actually meeting Ernest. Cecily pities “any poor married woman whose husband is not called Ernest” (Wilde, pg. 800). Gwendolen’s “ideal has always been to love some one of the name of Ernest” (Wilde, pg. 782). Names like Algernon and Jack simply will not do. These women are so in love with the name Ernest, that, at one point, the reader could reasonably question whether they have any affection towards the actual men they are engaged to. It is of course no mistake that “Ernest” and “Earnest” are pronounced the same way, with the former being the name used in the play to deceive people and the latter meaning to be serious and sincere. A similarity between Mr. Burns and The Importance of Being Earnest is the characters emphasis on remembering the past. Jack is elated is delighted to discover his real name is in fact Ernest, and that Algernon is his younger brother. The characters in Mr. Burns try and see if they can remember lines from The Simpsons, what certain wines taste like, and where they can find a diet coke. The importance in knowing where you came from and having a solid memory of the past is common regardless of the time period or the place.
Theatre can have a large effect on its audience. Zarrilli discusses writers such as Schiller who dreamt “of a theatre that would be a voice of German culture and a force in shaping it” (Zarrilli, pg. 287). While Schiller’s dream “was never realizable,” the attempt made by Schiller to use a form of entertainment as a possible means to enact social change says a lot about the power behind theatre (Zarrilli, pg. 291). While Schiller tried to use his theatre productions to “refine and educate their audiences,” Wilde seems to be doing nothing of the sort in The Importance of Being Earnest (Zarrilli pg. 289). Wilde was a “clever critic” who “subverted the hierarchal values that structured” the Victorian upper class (Gainor, pg. 772). Wilde may not have been trying to accomplish the noble task of bettering his audience, but every play is written for a reason.

What are some similarities between the ways in which Schiller used the theatre, and people today use social media, to try and enact social change?
The Importance of Being Earnest highlighted some flaws in the thinking and values of the Victorian upper class. Do we see our flaws as Americans in satirical shows like South Park and Family Guy?
Can we see any similarities between our culture today and late 19th century British culture?

-Brian Pushie

One of the themes discussed by Kovarik in Chapter 2 is the flourishing of a new type of news media. Prior to the 1800s, “newspapers and books usually focused on great deeds, great ideas and the lives of great men. The daily lives and concerns of ordinary men and women ‘were not dignified by print'” (Kovarik 48-49). The penny press and the advent of papers like The Sun marked a change in publishing, focusing on the drama of the every day, stories that were accessible to the common man both in gaudy interest and in price point. This gained instant popularity with the masses (although still looked down upon by some. It is interesting, then, that this movement in the 1830s seems to have been contemporaneous with the popularization of more accessible theater and the publication of The Importance of Being Earnest in 1895. Theater has always been the media of the masses, but it has gone through many different phases historically. Greek tragedies focused on the deeds of great men in elevated positions (much like Kovarik’s description of early newspapers). They focused on large dramas, often with actions by the gods—things far from the realm of day to day experiences. Moliere and Shakespeare were markers of the movement toward the farce and an enjoyment of the more absurd and mundane, but they were still often written in verse. The Importance of Being Earnest, by contrast, is written in plain text, accessible to all viewers. The characters are not poor or quite common folk, but they are figures that are recognizable. The plot itself hinges on interpersonal dramas, not on the actions of kings and gods. Here viewers could recognize their own lives as the characters undergo romantic tribulations and Cecily drops lines about the “agricultural depression” of the 1870s that viewers would know all too well (Wilde Act II, line 615, page 804). Oscar Wilde made the popular media viewers wanted, and they ate it up. Wilde upturned the order of the Victorian world and created a world of fun and absurdity, almost an escapist world. Sadly for Wilde, he himself was caught up in just the type of scandal that the penny presses loved to exploit. As he wrote Earnest, he wrote about people hiding their identity, just as he was ultimately unsuccessfully hiding his own identity as a gay man. His career ended sadly, as he was arrested and imprisoned for his sexuality and his name was stripped from his most popular plays.

Questions:

1. Why were audiences so charmed by Wilde’s work? How does Earnest set itself apart from other comedies of the time?

2. Why were audiences so quick to turn on the playwright they loved when scandal ensued? For the masses of the time, was any scandal one to be enjoyed, regardless of the target? Or was Wilde an even better target given his success and subsequent status?

-Axis Fuksman-Kumpa

In 1897, New York Sun editor Francis P. Church helped lead the revival and rejuvenation of the Christmas spirit. By responding to the letter of a concerned young girl in Virginia with the famous line, “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus,” Church’s words helped preserve the “enduring spirit of childhood” and also revealed a greater trend of the 19^th and 20^th centuries – the rising power of the press (Kovarik, p. 73). In his writings, Kovarik traces the history of the printing press from the early 19^th century to the late 20^th century. What quickly becomes apparent is the influence the press – and by extent media – holds over multiple aspects of every day. We know how important newspapers and mainstream (social) media are today in 2016, however based off Kovarik’s writings, I noticed that not much has changed since the 1800s. People still love a great story and states (i.e. nations around the world) still feel threatened or empowered by what journalists and media outlets publish. Although the efficiency and speed at which publishers can produce journals, newspapers, etc. has undoubtedly improved and continues to advance, as Kovarik describes, “muckraking, yellow journalism, crusading journalism, (and) objective journalism, etc.” existed in the past just as they do now (Ibid., p. 88).

Oscar Wilde, writer of The Importance of Being Earnest, “sought to separate theatrical art from modern life” (Zarrilli, p. 320). Wilde wanted theatre pieces to be “appreciated on their own terms” and distinguishable from “ugly social realities” (Ibid., 320). A controversial figure in his own right, although Wilde was no William Randolph Hearst or Joseph Pulitzer, he had vision, albeit a different one than the other two men (Kovarik, pp. 95, 89). Wilde however, sought to manifest his ideas through a different medium, using theatre plays as way to achieve the opposite of what the press sought to accomplish. Whereas Wilde hoped his plays could be enjoyed outside the realm of politics, corruption, and social anxieties, the press pushed these subjects into the lives of the masses, hoping to increase sales with both honest and misleading stories. In The Importance of Being Earnest, we follow the story of Jack and Algernon (among others) who rely on lies and dishonesty to achieve their goals. During the climax of the play, it is realized that Jack was actually named Ernest all along, and that his lies were not lies after all. Both Algernon and Jack marry whom they want (Gwendolen and Cecily, respectively) and the play concludes by showcasing the importance of being earnest.

Are Jack and Algernon truly earnest however, if their intents originated from insincere and dishonest actions? Is irony enough to save a liar? I believe Wilde was attempting to teach the public a lesson, and further prompt them to question the changing world around them. Like Jack and Algernon, are reporters of the press innocent when flawed articles are blamed on unreliable sources or misunderstandings? Where Kovarik’s writings and Wilde’s play intersect for me is the way in which they present honesty, sincerity, and what it actually means to be “earnest.” Both the press and the theatre are littered with stories of truth and lies, occasionally mixing the two for a good scoop or interesting showpiece. To what extent was Wilde aware of this when he wrote The Importance of Being Earnest? Could it be that Wilde saw how the press was constantly changing for the better and the worse, and that in seeing so was prompted to raise awareness of the changing meanings of honesty, truth, and sincerity amongst the public? The Importance of Being Earnest has been interpreted in countless ways, however these are the questions that came to mind as I read through Kovarik and Zarrilli’s writings.

– Grégoire Faucher

The Importance of Being Earnest by Oscar Wilde is a multidimensional play that touches on many themes. One theme in particular that stood out to me was the theme of absolute truth. The theme emerges rather quickly in the play, in Act I, when Algernon discovers a different name in Jack’s cigarette case and learns of Jack’s separate identity. Jack responds to Algernon’s confrontation by describing that his name is “Ernst in town and Jack in the country” (Wilde 778). This sets a precedent for the reminder of the play, building its foundation on the premise of alternate truth. In that same vein, Kovarik’s discussion in the Revolutions in Communications of the early stages of the commercial and industrial media revolution relates to this theme of alternate vs. absolute truth as well. This is best seen through the New York Sun’s emphasis on the “human condition, in ways that the elite papers did not” (Kovarik 50). More specifically, the news outlet’s efforts to emphasize one type of story and inherently omit others creates an absence of truth. This is also seen in James Gordon Bennett’s, the founder of the Herald, style of journalism. Described as one the most successful penny newspapers, the paper was famous for its sensationalism where many people were “victims of his pen” (Koravik 52). This kind of reporting and its rhetoric alters the truth as well, mutilating the reality of the news story.

In chapter 5 of Theater Histories, Zarrilli discusses sentimental aspect of theater. Zarrilli states that “sentimental plays sought to evoke a benevolent community in the audience” (Zarrilli 238). Much like sensationalism and selecting certain stories to report in journalism, both mediums of theater and media strive to touch human emotions. Perhaps this was Wilde’s effort in the Importance of Being Earnest when he created a world filled with layers of truth or lack there of. Maybe the lack of truth, specifically in identity, is a commonality of all of us, something everyone experiences. In closing, I still have a couple questions. First, is truthful entertainment possible? Another question of mine is, would you describe the Importance of Being Earnest as a truthful play in terms of our reality and the world we live in? And lastly, how can we relate this idea of truth to social media?

-Hannah Hirschfeld