Norwegian playwright and theatre director
She's been a novelist, a playwright, a critic, an essayist, a memoirist, a journalist, a writer for cinema and a historian of theatre -- in both English and Marathi. Shanta Gokhale joins Amit Varma in episode 311 of The Seen and the Unseen to talk about her remarkable life and times. (For full linked show notes, go to SeenUnseen.in.) Also check out: 1. Shanta Gokhale on Amazon, Wikipedia and her own website. 2. One Foot on the Ground -- Shanta Gokhale. 3. Living With Father: A Memoir -- Shanta Gokhale. 4. आमची आई : इंदिरा गोपाळ गोखले -- Shanta Gokhale. 5. The Engaged Observer: The Selected Writings of Shanta Gokhale -- Edited by Jerry Pinto. 6. Rita Velinkar (Marathi) (English) -- Shanta Gokhale. 7. Tya Varshi/Crowfall (Marathi) (English) -- Shanta Gokhale. 8. Playwright at the Centre: Marathi Drama from 1843 to the Present -- Shanta Gokhale. 9. Shivaji Park: Dadar 28: History, Places, People -- Shanta Gokhale. 10. Satyadev Dubey: A Fifty-Year Journey Through Theatre -- Edited by Shanta Gokhale. 11. The Scenes We Made: An Oral History of Experimental Theatre in Mumbai -- Edited by Shanta Gokhale. 12. Avinash: The Indestructible -- Shanta Gokhale. 13. Smritichitre: The Memoirs of a Spirited Wife -- Lakshmibai Tilak (translated by Shanta Gokhale). 14. The Loneliness of the Indian Man — Episode 303 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Nikhil Taneja). 15. The Adda at the End of the Universe -- Episode 309 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vikram Sathaye and Roshan Abbas). 16. Caste, Capitalism and Chandra Bhan Prasad — Episode 296 of The Seen and the Unseen. 17. The Never Never Nest -- Cedric Mount. 18. The Life and Times of Mrinal Pande — Episode 263 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Mrinal Pande). 19. The Female Eunuch -- Germaine Greer. 20. The Second Sex -- Simone de Beauvoir. 21. A Godless Congregation — Amit Varma. 22. Agarkar's Donkeys: A Meditation on God — Amit Varma. 23. The Life and Times of Urvashi Butalia — Episode 287 of The Seen and the Unseen. 24. The Kavita Krishnan Files — Episode 228 of The Seen and the Unseen. 25. Films, Feminism, Paromita — Episode 155 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Paromita Vohra). 26. The Will to Change — bell hooks. 27. The Loneliness of the Indian Man — Episode 303 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Nikhil Taneja). 28. The Three Languages of Politics — Arnold Kling. 29. Memories and Things — Episode 195 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Aanchal Malhotra). 30. History of European Morals — WEH Lecky. 31. The Expanding Circle: Ethics, Evolution, and Moral Progress — Peter Singer. 32. The Nurture Assumption — Judith Rich Harris. 33. Phineas Gage. 34. Don't think too much of yourself. You're an accident — Amit Varma's column on Chris Cornell's death. 35. The Rooted Cosmopolitanism of Sugata Srinivasaraju — Episode 277 of The Seen and the Unseen. 36. Dnyaneshwar, Tukaram, Arun Kolatkar and Dilip Chitre. 37. GN Devy on Amazon and Wikipedia. 38. Navyug Vachanmala and Arun Vachan -- PK Atre's series for elementary school and middle school respectively. 39. The State of Our Farmers — Episode 86 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Gunvant Patil). 40. Varun Grover Is in the House — Episode 292 of The Seen and the Unseen. 41. Hussain Haidry, Hindustani Musalmaan — Episode 275 of The Seen and the Unseen. 42. Storytel. 43. Pu La Deshpande, Raag Darbari and Kashi Ka Assi on Storytel. 44. The Refreshing Audacity of Vinay Singhal — Episode 291 of The Seen and the Unseen. 45. Stage.in. 46. A Doll's House -- Henrik Ibsen. 47. Looking for Ibsen in Maharashtra -- Shanta Gokhale. 48. The Vintage Book Of Indian Writing 1947 - 1997 -- Edited by Salman Rushdie and Elizabeth West. 49. The Picador Book of Modern Indian Literature -- Edited by Amit Chaudhuri. 50. Episodes of The Seen and the Unseen on the creator ecosystem with Roshan Abbas, Varun Duggirala, Neelesh Misra, Snehal Pradhan, Chuck Gopal, Nishant Jain, Deepak Shenoy and Abhijit Bhaduri. 51. 1000 True Fans — Kevin Kelly. 52. 1000 True Fans? Try 100 — Li Jin. 53. Namdeo Dhasal on Amazon and Wikipedia. 54. Alice Munro on Amazon and Wikipedia. 55. Squid Game on Netflix. 56. Yada Kadachit (Part 1) (Part 2) -- Written and directed by Santosh Pawar. 57. Sakharam Binder (Marathi) (English) -- Vijay Tendulkar. 58. A Cricket Tragic Celebrates the Game -- Episode 201 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Ramachandra Guha). 59. सप्तरंगी कोरिया एक अनुभव -- Sudha Hujurbajar-Tumbe. 60. Suyash Rai Embraces India's Complexity -- Episode 307 of The Seen and the Unseen. 61. Alice in Wonderland -- Lewis Carroll. 62. Charles Dickens, William Wordsworth, JB Priestley, George Bernard Shaw and William Shakespeare on Amazon. 63. The Lost Daughter -- Elena Ferrante. 64. The Lost Daughter -- The film by Maggie Gyllenhaal. 65. The Shadow Lines -- Amitav Ghosh. 66. Enid Blyton on Amazon. 67. This Life At Play: Memoirs -- Girish Karnad. 68. Sunil Shanbag and Shanta Gokhale in conversation with Girish Karnad. 69. Aranyer Din Ratri -- Satyajit Ray. 70. Messy: How to Be Creative and Resilient in a Tidy-Minded World -- Tim Harford. 71. A Room of One's Own -- Virginia Woolf. 72. A Passage to India -- EM Forster. 73. Kumar Shahani on Wikipedia and IMDb. 74. Middlemarch -- George Eliot. 75. Anna Karenina -- Leo Tolstoy. 76, Far From the Madding Crowd -- Thomas Hardy. 77. Vanity Fair -- William Makepeace Thackeray. 78. Ulysses -- James Joyce. 79. Picnic at Hanging Rock -- Peter Weir. 80. Why Read the Classics? -- Italo Calvino. 81. The Memoirs of Dr Haimabati Sen — Haimabati Sen (translated by Tapan Raychoudhuri). 82. Hercule Poirot on Amazon, Wikipedia and Britannica. 83. The Golden Age of Murder — Martin Edwards. 84. PG Wodehouse on Amazon, Wikipedia and Britannica. 85. A Meditation on Form — Amit Varma. 86. The Creative Process: A Symposium -- Edited by Brewster Ghiselin. 87. Nissim Ezekiel and Satyadev Dubey. 88. Avadhya -- CT Khanolkar. 89. Masaan — Directed by Neeraj Ghaywan and written by Varun Grover. 90. Tanjore Painting and Prabhakar Barwe. 91. Profit = Philanthropy — Amit Varma. 92. Where Have All The Leaders Gone? — Amit Varma. 93. What Have We Done With Our Independence? — Episode 186 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Pratap Bhanu Mehta). 94. The Gentle Wisdom of Pratap Bhanu Mehta — Episode 300 of The Seen and the Unseen. 95. Memoirs -- Habib Tanvir. 96. Sulabha Deshpande on Wikipedia and IMDb. 97. Sunil Shanbag on Wikipedia, IMDb and Instagram. 98. Atul Pethe on Book My Show and Facebook. 99. Shanta Gokhale's cameo in Ardh Satya (at 1:36:10). 100. My Friend Sancho -- Amit Varma. 101. Bend it Like Beckham -- Gurinder Chadha. 102. We Should Celebrate Rising Divorce Rates (2008) — Amit Varma. 103. Indira Sant on Amazon and Wikipedia. (And a translation of Ekti by Vinay Dharwadkar.) 104. The Loneliness of the Indian Woman — Episode 259 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Shrayana Bhattacharya). 105. Desperately Seeking Shah Rukh — Shrayana Bhattacharya. 106. Private Truths, Public Lies — Timur Kuran. 107. Ranjit Hoskote, Arundhati Subramaniam and Jerry Pinto on Amazon. 108. Alt News, The News Minute and Scroll. 109. The Reflections of Samarth Bansal — Episode 299 of The Seen and the Unseen. 110. The Intellectual Foundations of Hindutva — Episode 115 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Aakar Patel). 111. Aakar Patel Is Full of Hope — Episode 270 of The Seen and the Unseen. 112. Narendra Modi takes a Great Leap Backwards — Amit Varma (on Demonetisation). 113. Enabled by technology, young Indians show what it means to be a citizen — Amit Varma. 114. Beware of Quacks. Alternative Medicine is Injurious to Health — Amit Varma. 115. The Life and Times of Teesta Setalvad -- Episode 302 of The Seen and the Unseen. 116. Madame Bovary -- Gustave Flaubert. 117. The Brothers Karamazov -- Fyodor Dostoevsky. 118. The World as India -- Susan Sontag. In addition to the links above, Shanta recommended: Books: Women in Love (DH Lawrence), Metamorphosis (Franz Kafka), Ways of Seeing (John Berger), 84, Charing Cross Road (Helene Hanff), The Old Man and the Sea (Ernest Hemingway), The Tin Drum (Gunter Grass), The Shadow Lines, The Glass Palace, Hungry Tide (all Amitav Ghosh), Solo (Rana Dasgupta), The Unbearable Lightness of Being (Milan Kundera), Respected Sir (Naguib Mahfouz), One Hundred Years of Solitude (Gabriel Garcia Marquez), Midnight's Children (Salman Rushdie), The Sense of an Ending, Flaubert's Parrot, The Noise of Time, Levels of Life (all Julian Barnes). Hindustani Classical Vocal: Bade Ghulam Ali Khan, Ustad Amir Khan, Bhimsen Joshi, Padma Talwalkar, Dinkar Kaikini, Venkatesh Kumar, Ulhas Kashalkar, Uday Bhawalkar (dhrupad), Mukul Shivputra. Carnatic Vocal: MS Subbulakshmi, DK Pattamal, TM Krishna, Sanjay Subrahmanyan. Instrumental: TR Mahalingam (flautist), Lalgudi Jayaraman (violin). Others: Geet Varsha (Kumar Gandharva), Aaj Jaane Ki Zid Na Karo (Farida Khanum), Dnyaneshwari (Lata Mangeshkar). This episode is sponsored by CTQ Compounds. Check out The Daily Reader and FutureStack. Use the code UNSEEN for Rs 2500 off. Check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing. And subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter. It's free! Episode art: ‘Reading the World' by Simahina.
Welcome to the Comics Course, a podcast distributed form of Graphical Literature in Society & History, Lit 209 from Miskatonic University's remote education program. We are presented by Professor Hamby and his T.A. Rowan. A Game of You is many's least popular arc of Sandman and my favorite. Join us as Ibsen's themes which touched on Doll's House come front and center here. And a magical bird tries to hijack dreams, that too.Everything you need is right here from web site to social media to all the ways you can listen: https://linktr.ee/profhamby Intro music The Rock from https://www.youtube.com/c/ejravfx
Einführung in das Werk des norwegischen Naturalisten und Symbolisten Henrik Ibsen am Besipiel seiner Dramen Peer Gynt, Nora, Gespenster, Hedda Gabler, Die Frau vom Meer und die Wildente. Im Mittelpunkt stehen die Konflikte zwischen Persönlichkeits Entwicklung und gesellschaftlicher Konvention, Emanzipation und Lebenslüge.
I årets juleepisode gyver vi løs på den mest kjente Grimstad-beboer gjennom tidene, apoteker, grinebiter og dramatiker Henrik Ibsen (1828-1906), og hans skuespill En folkefiende fra 1882. Vi forsøker å svare på det eldgamleste og eksistensielleste spørsmålet: Hvis vi skal gjøre revolusjon, bør vi gjøre det med måte? Eller gir vi full gass og håper på det beste? Ibsen, som vel kjent er, gir ingen svar, men han stiller mange gode spørsmål, og i denne episoden utforsker vi noen av dem. BILLING Hurra; det blir krig, det blir krig! DOKTOR STOCKMANN – jeg skal slå dem til jorden, jeg skal knuse dem, rasere deres fæstningsværker for hele den retsindige almenheds øjne! Det skal jeg gøre! ASLAKSEN Men gør det endelig moderat, herr doktor; skyd med mådehold – BILLING Nej da; nej da! Spar ikke på dynamiten! DOKTOR STOCKMANN vedbliver uforstyrret For nu er det ikke bare dette med vand værket og kloaken alene, ser De. Nej, det er hele samfundet, som skal renskes, desinficeres – Anbefalt og omtalt litteratur i episoden: Jorge Luis Borges, Labyrinter Neal Stephenson, Anathem August Fletcher, Wonderworks Øyvind Børven, Hvordan skape en god skole? Og selvsagt noen stykker av Ibsen da. ---------------------------- Logoen vår er laget av Sveinung Sudbø, se hans arbeider på originalkopi.com Musikken i denne episoden er laget av Lars ---------------------------- Takk for at du hører på. Ta kontakt med oss på vår facebookside eller på firstname.lastname@example.org Det finnes ingen bedre måte å få spredt podkasten vår til flere enn via dere lyttere, så takk om du deler eller forteller andre om oss. Både Lars og Pål skriver nå på hver sin blogg, med litt varierende regelmessighet. Du finner dem på disse nettsidene: https://paljabekk.com/ https://larssandaker.blogspot.com/ Alt godt, hilsen Lars og Pål
L'émission 28 Minutes du 07/12/2022 Au programme de l'émission du 7 décembre 2022 ⬇ Avec le collectif Tg STAN, Molière prend l'accent belge Au collectif théâtral Tg STAN, il n'y a pas de hiérarchie. Le principe démocratique prévaut : tout le monde participe aux choix des textes, des costumes, du décor, et même des éclairages et des affiches. Cofondée par les comédiens et metteurs en scène Jolente De Keersmaeker et Damiaan De Schrijver, la compagnie belge offre un répertoire riche et varié, qui fait la part belle aux œuvres d'auteurs dramatiques classiques comme Tchekhov, Gorki, Schnitzler, Ibsen, Bernhard ou Pinter, placées dans un contexte contemporain. À l'occasion de l'Année Molière qui fête ses 400 ans de naissance, la troupe joue "Poquelin II", un "best of Molière" librement inspiré de "L'Avare" et du "Bourgeois gentilhomme". À retrouver du 8 au 19 décembre au théâtre de la Bastille. Pour en parler, Jolente De Keersmaeker et Damiaan De Schrijver sont sur notre plateau. Retraite à 65 ans : les Français sont-ils prêts à l'accepter ? La réforme des retraites sera officiellement présentée le 15 décembre aux partenaires sociaux, même si Elisabeth Borne en a déjà annoncé les grandes lignes qui semblent peu négociables. L'âge de départ en retraite du régime général passera de 62 à 65 ans. Dans la fonction publique, les actifs dits "de terrain" qui partent aujourd'hui à la retraite à 52 ou 57 ans, comme la police, verront également leur âge de départ repoussé. Quant aux régimes spéciaux (RATP, EDF…), ils seront supprimés, mais pour les nouveaux recrutés uniquement. C'est la fameuse "clause du grand-père". La réforme entrera en vigueur dès l'été 2023, et la première génération concernée sera celle née au second semestre de 1961. Selon une enquête IFOP en septembre dernier, seuls 22 % des sondés se disent favorables à un recul de la retraite à 65 ans. À l'Assemblée, le 49.3. pourrait être dégainé si aucun terrain d'entente n'est trouvé. Dans un contexte social et économique tendu, la réforme des retraite ne risque-t-elle pas d'être une bombe ? On en débat avec nos invités. Enfin, retrouvez également les chroniques de Xavier Mauduit et Alix Van Pée. 28 Minutes est le magazine d'actualité d'ARTE, présenté par Elisabeth Quin du lundi au vendredi à 20h05. Renaud Dély est aux commandes de l'émission le samedi. Ce podcast est coproduit par KM et ARTE Radio. Enregistrement : 7 décembre 2022 - Présentation : Élisabeth Quin - Production : KM, ARTE Radio
ELLIDA, 85min., Switzerland, Drama/Relationships Directed by Leon Mitchell Producer/Star: Katrina Syran Writer: Birgit Syran Myaard Based upon Henrik Ibsen's famous play, The Lady From The Sea. It's set in a timeless period shot south of Norway where Munch painted his masterpiece The Sun. We follow the journey of Ellida's world of loss, love and passion, heightened with the compositions of Grammy winner Mark Thomas and cinematography of Bafta-nominated Ian James Gray. From Katrina Syran: Being Norwegian I've grown up with Ibsen and I have played many of his roles, Gerd from Brand, Hilde from The Master Builder, Nora from The Dolls House & I have even translated for U.K. big theatre director Mike Alfreds the play, Ghosts. After writing 3 of his plays into monologues, Hedda Gabler,The Dolls House & The Lady From The Sea and producing & directing them I realised The Lady From The Sea is a very visual play and could work beautifully as a movie. Interview conducted by Matthew Toffolo Playing on the Film Festival Streaming service later this month. You can sign up for the 7 day free trial at www.wildsound.ca (available on your streaming services and APPS). There is a DAILY film festival to watch, plus a selection of award winning films on the platform. Then it's only $3.99 per month. Subscribe to the podcast: https://twitter.com/wildsoundpod https://www.instagram.com/wildsoundpod/ https://www.facebook.com/wildsoundpod
Oggi a Cult: Etienne Reymond presenta la nuova stagione delle Prove Aperte della Filarmonica della Scala, Valentino Villa introduce "Au bord" che va in scena con Monica Piseddu a Triennale Teatro, Liv Ferracchiati parla di "Hedda.Gabler. Come una pistola carica" da Ibsen in prima assoluta al Piccolo teatro Studio Melato, Barbara Sorrentini in collegamento dal Torino Film Festival 2022... Cult è condotto da Ira Rubini e realizzato dalla redazione culturale di Radio Popolare. Cult è cinema, arti visive, musica, teatro, letteratura, filosofia, sociologia, comunicazione, danza, fumetti e graphic-novels… e molto altro! Cult è in onda dal lunedì al venerdì dalle 11.30 alle 12.30. La sigla di Cult è “Two Dots” di Lusine. CHIAMA IN DIRETTA: 02.33.001.001
durée : 00:11:10 - Le Grand Courbe de Peer Gynt - par : Marianne Vourch - À la veille de ses 40 ans, Ibsen n'est plus le même homme. L'accueil fait à Brand, son grand poème dramatique et son premier chef d'oeuvre… l'a transformé. - réalisé par : Sophie Pichon
Disillusionment with war and how you sue for peace are at the heart of Shaw's drama Arms and the Man, being staged in Richmond this autumn. Whilst in Bath a touring production of Mrs Warren's Profession stars Caroline Quentin and her daughter Rose Quentin as the former prostitute and her disapproving daughter. Anne McElvoy is joined by director Paul Miller, Professor Sos Eltis who has edited Shaw's work and theatre critic and writer Mark Lawson to look at Shaw's ability to construct arguments on stage and the resonances of his plays now. Arms and the Man runs at the Orange Tree Theatre in London directed by Paul Miller from 19 November 2022 – 14 January 2023 Mrs Warren's Profession directed by Anthony Banks runs at the Bath Theatre Royal from 9th - 19th November starring Caroline Quentin and her daughter Rose Quentin as Mrs Warren and her daughter Vivie. It then tours to the Richmond Theatre from 22nd November to 26th November 2022 and goes on to visit theatres including the Chichester Festival Theatre, the Hall for Cornwall, the Yvonne Arnaud in Guilford. My Fair Lady - a production from the Lincoln Centre directed by Bartlett Sher - is at the Cardiff Millennium Centre from November 8th to 26th and it then tours to Edinburgh, Southampton, Sunderland, Bristol, Birmingham and Manchester. Producer: Ruth Watts You can find other Free Thinking conversations about drama past and present including discussions about Moliere, Ibsen, the playwright Rona Munro, John McGrath's Scottish drama, in a collection called Prose, Poetry and Drama https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p047v6vh
"Uzskatu sevi par piederīgu Nacionālajam teātrim, jo tur esmu nostrādājis 46 gadus, pat vairāk. Četri gadi bija Valmierā, bet Nacionālajā teātrī tiešām pagājusi mana dzīve. Kā tai Raiņa dzejolī - "Tur putekļi, tur lampas kūp, tur lēni mana dzīve drūp". Lai gan mana dzīve nedrupa, nē. Radošā darbā dzīve paiet ļoti ātri un ļoti interesanti. Lai arī ne vienmēr tik ideāli un skaisti, kā šķiet no malas – bijuši arī sāpīgi un dramatiski brīži. Bet neskatoties uz to, sevi uzskatu par piederīgu Nacionālajam teātrim," prāto aktieris un režisors Edmunds Freibergs, kurš 23. novembrī "Spēlmaņu nakts" ceremonijā kopā ar kolēģi Ainu Matīsu tiks sumināts par mūža ieguldījumu. Gunda Vaivode: Manuprāt, vairāk nekā sešdesmit gadus tu esi darbojies pie radio mikrofona. Kas bija tas, kas tevi pamanīja un atveda uz Latvijas Radio? Edmunds Freibergs: Tā bija toreizējā radio režisore Herta Lapsa, kura pēc tam gan mainīja uzvārdu un bija Herta Naudiņa. Viņa ieradās mūsu skolā, kur mums bija dramatiskais pulciņš. Tobrīd mēģinājām kādu ludziņu, un tieši tajā dienā liela daļa no bērniem bija saslimuši, tāpēc attēloju visas lomas arī slimo bērnu vietā: skraidīju pa skatuvi no viena gala uz otru, runāju augstākā un zemākā balsī, tādā un šitādā. (smejas) Un Hertai Naudiņai tas patika – viņa teica: "Bērniņ, nāc uz radio, tu varēsi piedalīties radioraidījumos!" Sākumā uzdevumi bija ļoti vienkārši: "Pionieru radio avīzē" bija jālasa visādi tekstiņi, piemēram, "Cīravas pamatskolas pionieri piedalījušies metāllūžņu vākšanā un savākuši divas tonnas metāllūžņu!" Bet mana karjera gāja uz augšu! (smejas) Vienreiz parādījās tāds kā feļetons, ko vajadzēja lasīt, tad arī "Pionieru radio avīzē" parādījās humora lappusīte – ilgus gadus tiešām arī tos lasīju. Uz pirmā feļetona ieskaņošanu gan bija maziņš konkursiņš, kur vairākiem bērniem vajadzēja lasīt, bet rezultātā mani uzskatīja par piemērotāko izpildītāju šim humora sacerējumam, un tā mana karjera attīstījās. Pēc tam jau piedalījos raidlugās – slavenajā Gorkija "Pepē", kur dziedāja Loreti, "Čuks un Geks" un vēl, un vēl. Balss lūzums man bija diezgan nemanāms, ar to nebija lielu problēmu. Tā ka sākumā bija soprānīgā balss, bet arī pēc balss lūzuma turpināju savu karjeru radioteātrī... Un turpini līdz šai dienai! Jā, jā! Un tagad jau pēdējos divus trīs gadus, pateicoties Mārai Eglītei, kura mani uzaicināja, esmu pārkvalificējies par režisoru. Lai gan turpinu arī ierakstīt dažādus raidījumus kā aktieris. Man šis darbs ir ļoti mīļš un tuvs – man ir tāda sajūta, ka mums ar mikrofonu ir labas attiecības. Tā tas patiešām ir. Bet es pati tevi atceros no 1979. gada, kad biji Emīls izrādē "Emīls un Berlīnes zēni" un skraidīji pa skatuvi. Tad jau biju liels onkulis. (smejas) Un nebija nemaz tik viegli! Jau sāka mazliet sirmot mati, un ļoti baidījos, vai kāds no bērniem neteiks – kāpēc tas lielais onkulis izliekas par bērnu. Bet ko tādu nedzirdēju. Tā vietā no bērniem saņēmu ļoti daudz skaistu vēstuļu. Bet līdz tam bija tavs Valmieras periods. Saki, vai tu sevi identificē ar kādu teātri? Un cik vispār ir svarīga kopības apziņa – kad kāds kurss kopā aug, veidojas, un kur pēc tam tas paliek? Vai arī katrs talants ir īpašs un nonāk tur, kur tam jānonāk? Ir ļoti dažādi. Piemēram, Jaunajā Rīgas teātrī šobrīd ienāk vesels kurss un viņi ir teātra nākotne – viņi visi kopā ir spēks. Kad mēs beidzām, mūs sadalīja pa teātriem – bija tā saucamais pieprasījums jeb sadale. Man gan bija piedāvājums gan no Jaunatnes teātra, gan Liepājas teātra, bet izšķīros par Valmieru, jo tur aizgāja mani kursa biedri – Dzintra Klētniece, Līga Rubene un vēl citi; man tas likās drošāk. Bet tur bija ļoti labi! Esmu tik pateicīgs valmieriešiem... Jo tādas iespējas – uzreiz nospēlēt galveno lomu Gogoļa "Precībās", nospēlēt Hamletu. Otrajā sezonā – to var izdarīt tikai dulli cilvēki! – uzticēja man režiju. Līdz ar to dabūju ļoti labu atspērienu. Bet kas attiecas uz piederību – uzskatu sevi par piederīgu Nacionālajam teātrim, jo tur esmu nostrādājis 46 gadus, pat vairāk. Četri gadi bija Valmierā, bet Nacionālajā teātrī tiešām pagājusi mana dzīve. Kā tai Raiņa dzejolī - "Tur putekļi, tur lampas kūp, tur lēni mana dzīve drūp". Lai gan mana dzīve nedrupa, nē. Radošā darbā dzīve paiet ļoti ātri un ļoti interesanti. Lai arī ne vienmēr tik ideāli un skaisti, kā šķiet no malas – bijuši arī sāpīgi un dramatiski brīži. Bet neskatoties uz to, sevi uzskatu par piederīgu Nacionālajam teātrim. Domāju, ka Kultūras akadēmija noteikti uzskata tevi par piederīgu viņiem, un arī Mūzikas akadēmija – tu esi apbrīnojami veiksmīgi un labi strādājis par pedagogu. Saki, kas tevi pedagoga darbā aizrauj? Šķiet, ka sāku pagājušā gadsimta 1977. vai 1978. gadā – biju tikai dažus gadus vecāks par saviem studentiem, jo mani pirmie studenti ir Aigars Vilims, Indra Burkovska, Ineses Ramute... Biju jauns un mani interesēja viss, ko dzīve piedāvā, un būtībā šo darbu man piedāvāja Imants Adermanis, toreizējais Teātra katedras vadītājs Konservatorijā. Viņam esmu pateicīgs par to. Viņš teica – klausies, tu negribi pamēģināt padarboties pedagoģijā? Ja nepatiks vai nesanāks, tu jau vari atteikties! Studentiem jau patīk jauni pedagogi! Jā, bet pēc gadiem bija otrādi. Man bija ļoti patīkami būt jaunu cilvēku vidē, jo tā iedod citu enerģiju. Tikai jautājums – cik tu spēj kā pedagogs noturēt kontaktu ar saviem studentiem, cik viņi tevi pieņem un kurā brīdī viņi tevi sāk vērtēt tā: nujā, viņš jau ir labs onkulis, bet nu labi, labi... Man gan tik traki nebija. Uztaisīju pēdējo diplomdarbu, Vampilova "Vecāko dēlu". Man liekas, ka labi sapratāmies ar audzēkņiem, bet tad izlēmu, ka tomēr labāk teikšu "stop!" un tālāk vairs neturpināšu. Bet tie bija ļoti ilgi gadi – gan Konservatorijā, gan arī Kultūras akadēmijā. Profesionālās zināšanas – tas ir viens. Bet kā ir ar kompleksajām zināšanām jaunajiem aktieriem, jo visādi zili brīnumi dzirdēti par kolokvijiem… Tā ir ļoti dīvaina lieta. No vienas puses, šodien jauniešiem pieejama tāda informācija, par kādu mēs, savulaik būdami studenti, varējām tikai sapņot. Internets, informācija nāk un nāk, burtiski gāžas pār tevi. Līdz ar to varbūt tieši tāpēc zināšanas brīžam ir pārāk virspusējas. Reizēm tiešām nosāp sirds, kad vienam jaunam aktierim vai studentam jautā, kurš latviešu rakstnieks un dramaturgs mira Somijas sanatorijā, un viņš atbildi nezina. [Te domāts Rūdolfs Blaumanis – red.] Liekas – nu, kā to var nezināt, tas ir tik šausmīgi! Un ir vēl kādi gadījumi. Bet tas ir tieši no tā, ka informācijas ir ārkārtīgi daudz. Ja tās ir mazāk, cilvēks tajās pamatīgāk iekožas. Savos pusaudža gados izlasīju ļoti daudz par latviešu teātra vēsturi, savos piecpadsmit gados ļoti labi zināju, kas ir Biruta Skujeniece, kas ir pirmais Jaunais Rīgas latviešu teātris – toreiz ar Mierlauka iestudēto Raiņa lugu "Uguns un nakts". Bet man šķiet, ka nevajag vispārināt – ka visa jaunatne neko nezina. Ir ļoti dažādi – kas nu kuru interesē. Domāju, ka tā nelaime ir tieši informācijas pārbagātībā. [Daudzas lietas] paslīd garām. Tu tver visu Latvijas teātru lauku, un man gribas vaicāt – kas tev šobrīd šķiet interesants Latvijas teātrī? Varbūt ir kādas tendences, kuras tu gribētu izcelt, vai ir kāds spožs veikums? Pandēmijas dēļ pēdējās sezonas teātrus tā ļoti pamatīgi neesmu apmeklējis un man ir grūti spriest – teātra raža ir milzīga, pirmizrādes nāk un nāk, līdz ar to nav tik viegli atbildēt ar konkrētiem piemēriem. Bet pārdomu līmenī man vienkārši šķiet tā: kas ir tā pozitīvā lieta – ka nāk jaunas aktieru paaudzes un tās tiek ļoti labi vērtētas. Trīsreiz jānospļaujas un jāpieklapē pie koka, lai nenotiktu tā, ka ātri sakāpj galvā: ka ļoti ātri, pēc pirmajām lomām, saslavē un saka – ak, kas tie par aktieriem, tik brīnišķīgi, brīnišķīgi! Un tad vienā brīdī interese par viņiem var sākt zust, jo parādās atkal jaunas sejas. Tas ir bīstami. Bet process, cik jaušu, ir ļoti pozitīvs: jaunas asinis ir gan Valmierā, gan Jaunajā Rīgas teātrī. Vai ir kāds, ko tu gribētu tā īpaši izcelt? Jaunajā Rīgas teātrī skatījos "Kalpa zēna vasaru". Es to uzskatītu par tādu kā ieskaiti skatuves runā. (..) Pensionārs būdams, vakarus pavadu pie televizora (smejas). Ļoti cienu režisoru Armandu Zvirbuli, kurš uzņēmis gan "Sarkano mežu", gan "Krimināllietu iesācējam", kur ļoti labi startējis jaunais aktieris Ritvars Toms Logins. Var just, ka cilvēks visu dara ar apjēgu. Par dramaturģiju runājot: vienu laiku bija ļoti populāra tendence, ka izrādes materiālu veidoja paši aktieri. Jaunajā Rīgas teātrī tas bija ļoti aktuāli. Bet ir tāda sajūta, ka šis posms ieilgst un reizēm gribas patiešām lielu, rakstītu lugu. Jā, jā... Te mūsu domas pilnīgi sakrīt... Es arī par to esmu domājis un mani arī tas dara bažīgu, ka parādās tādi sacerējumi, ludziņas, tādas viendienītes par aktuālu tēmu. Lai gan brīžam tiek reklamēts, ka "šī luga vēl pēc piecdesmit gadiem būs akuāla", man ir aizdomas, ka diezin vai. Teātris un aktieri attīstās tikai uz labas dramaturģijas pamata. Jo laba, bagātīga loma – Šekspīrā, Čehovā, Ibsenā – dod milzīgas izaugsmes iespējas, jo tev ir līdz tai jātiek, tev sevi jāattīsta, lai tu pasniegtos līdz tam Čehovam. Bet brīžam notiek tāds process, ka mēs to Čehovu gribam noraut pie sevis. Redzēju, piemēram, vienu izrādi, kur pēc Čehova galvenais varonis izdara pašnāvību, bet iestudējumā pārrakstīts, ka viņu nošauj. Es domāju – vai tiešām jūs domājat, ka esat gudrāki un lielāki mākslinieki par Čehovu? Viņš kaut ko ar to bija domājis, veidodams šo sižetu par pašnāvību. Būtībā jau nav slikti, jo mēs savulaik izbaudījām to otru pusi – ka bijām iežogoti savā radošajā darbā: mums vajadzēja rēķināties ar daudzām lietām – vai izrādi pieņems vai nepieņems. Radošais lidojums ir laba lieta, bet domāju, ka aktieri ir laimīgi, ja pie dēļa ierauga, ka saņēmuši lomu kārtīgā klasiskā darbā – teiksim "Romeo un Džuljetā". Saruna pilnā apjomā lasāma portālā lsm.lv!
Do you have the address of Henry Gibson?Kelly and Dermot welcome special guest Paul Ringo to Blooms & Barnacles. Topics include Joyce's love of Henrik Ibsen, Paul's love of Finnegans Wake via the stage, Joyce's study of Norwegian, realism as seen in the works of Joyce and Ibsen, the artist as a conduit for the world's filth, Joyce's dream to Europeanize Ireland, the search for Henry Gibson, Joyce's attempt to introduce Ibsen to Ireland, Joyce's letter to Ibsen on his birthday, Joyce's review of When We Dead Awaken, Hedda Gabler's influence onUlysses, gender roles in the works of Joyce and Ibsen, Ibsen's self-imposed exile, A Doll's House's influence on “The Dead”, the influence of Peer Gynt on Ulysses, Stanislaus Joyce and My Brother's Keeper, A Brilliant Career, Lou Reed, Laugh In, and who Paul would like to play in Hedda Gabler.Sweny's Patreon helps keep this marvelous Dublin landmark alive. Please subscribe!Paul Ringo:https://paulringo.blogspot.com/Social Media:Facebook | TwitterSubscribe to Blooms & Barnacles:Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher
Based on a true story, The Exorcism of Emily Rose opens on a desolate landscape, a weathered farmhouse the only dwelling in sight. One thing we learn right away: Emily Rose, a girl of 19, is dead, and her condition shakes the medical examiner who comes to visit. Emily, we discover, has died as the result of demonic possession… or six demonic possessions… or maybe none. Erin Bruner, a top-notch defense attorney, is assigned to defend the priest who exorcised Emily, Father Richard Moore, who stands accused of having cut off the girl from medical treatments she was undergoing. Father Moore is offered a plea deal, but rejects it, as he feels Emily's story must be told. Hoping to make partner at her law firm, Erin is determined to follow her instincts, but between Father Moore's compelling testimony and some very strange happenings in her own life, Erin starts to wonder if perhaps, against all odds, possession is real, and can be proven in a court of law. Intro, Math Class, and Debate Society (spoiler-free) 0:00-15:20 Honor Roll and Detention (spoiler-heavy) 15:21-41:47 Superlatives (so. many. spoilers.) 41:48-1:01:58 David Grimm is a Brooklyn-based award-winning playwright and screenwriter. His plays include Ibsen in Chicago (Seattle Rep.); a new adaptation of Cyrano de Bergerac (Perseverance Theatre); Tales From Red Vienna (Manhattan Theatre Club); Measure for Pleasure (Public Theater; Bug 'n Bub Award; GLAAD Media Award nominee, Outstanding New York Theater, Broadway and Off-Broadway); The Miracle at Naples (Huntington; Best New Play IRNE Award); Steve & Idi (Rattlestick); Chick (Hartford Stage); The Learned Ladies of Park Avenue (Hartford Stage); Kit Marlowe (Public Theater; GLAAD Media Award nominee, Outstanding New York Theater, Broadway and Off-Broadway); Sheridan, Or Schooled In Scandal (La Jolla); Enough Rope (Williamstown Theatre Festival, starring Elaine Stritch), and Susanna Centlivre's The Gaming Table (for which he wrote additional material; Folger Library Theatre). Grimm's film work includes the dialogue for Matthew Barney's River of Fundament. His work for television includes “The Exorcist” (FOX Television, Seasons 1 and 2) and “NOS4A2” (AMC, Season 2). David is the recipient of an NEA/TCG Residency Grant and has received commissions from The Public Theater, Roundabout Theatre Company, Seattle Rep., Huntington Theatre Company, Hartford Stage, and Pittsburgh's City Theatre Company. He has developed work at the Sundance Theatre Lab, Old Vic New Voices, and New York Stage & Film. David holds an MFA from NYU, a BA from Sarah Lawrence College, and has lectured in Playwriting and Screenwriting at the Yale School of Drama, Brown University, Columbia University, and NYU. Our theme music is by Sir Cubworth, with embellishments by Edward Elgar. Music from “The Exorcism Of Emily Rose” by Christopher Young. For more information on this film, the pod, essays from your hosts, and other assorted bric-a-brac, visit our website, scareupod.com. Please subscribe to this podcast via Apple or Google Podcasts, Stitcher, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave us a 5-star rating. Join our Facebook group. Follow us on Instagram. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app
I denne episode taler Annelis Kuhlmann om naturalismen og svenskeren August Strindberg, der fortsætter, hvor Ibsen slipper, og skaber så provokerende teater, at det ikke kan spille på det kongelige teater. Vært og tilrettelægger: Liv Thomsen. Lyd': Per Buhl Ács. Musik: Upright Music Produceret for Dansk teater 300 år. Med støtte fra Augustinus Fonden, Konsul George Jorck og Hustru Emma Jorck's Fond, A.P. Møller Fonden, Gangstedfonden I næste episode handler det om det teater, der vokser ud af ruinerne efter 1. verdenskrig, og om avantgarde og eksperimenter på bl.a. Riddersalen.
I denne episode har jeg besøg af Ulla Kallenbach, der fortæller om et helt nyt og moderne slags teater, der opstår i sidste halvdel af 1800-tallet, det realistiske, og om Henrik Ibsens 'Et dukkehjem', der får det bedre borgerskab til at hoppe i sæderne på det nybyggede kongelige teater. Vært og tilrettelægger: Liv Thomsen. Lyd': Per Buhl Ács. Musik: Upright Music Produceret for Dansk teater 300 år. Med støtte fra Augustinus Fonden, Konsul George Jorck og Hustru Emma Jorck's Fond, A.P. Møller Fonden, Gangstedfonden I næste episode taler Annelis Kuhlmann om naturalismen og svenskeren August Strindberg, der fortsætter, hvor Ibsen slipper, og som skaber så provokerende teater, at det, i modsætning til Ibsens værker, ikke kan spilles på Det Kongelige Teater.
Under hösten har hela tre Ibsenpjäser satts upp i Stockholm, Göteborg och Malmö. Teaterkritiker Kristina Lindquist och Maria Edström besöker studion för att reda ut varför den norske dramatikern är evigt aktuell. KOMMUNPOETEN I TRANEMO SÅ GICK DETHan har hånats, kallats för hovnarr och parasit. För ett år sedan rasade debatten om att Tranemo fått en kommunpoet. Projektet blev utskällt innan det ens börjat. Men hur gick året med kommunpoet? Och vad fick uppmärksamheten för konsekvenser? Vår reporter Mina Benaissa har besökt Tranemo och pratat med invånare, kommunledningen och Sveriges första kommunpoet själv, Jimmy Alm, för att ta reda på hur Sveriges mest utskällda kulturprojekt landade.BARNRADIONS BOKPRIS: JURYSAMTALDen här veckan är det höstlov i Sverige och det är också det som kallas för läslov, vilket är ett brett läsfrämjande samarbete mellan många olika organisationer, kulturinstitutioner och förlag. Läslov blir det också här i P1 Kultur den här veckan då vi möter juryn i Barnradions bokpris som har i uppgift att utse årets bästa bok för 9-12 åringar. Juryn består av femteklassare från Bagarmossens skola i Stockholm och det har blivit dags för deras andra sammankomst. I dag får vi ta del av deras samtal om boken Ingen kommer levande härifrån av Gustav Boman.ESSÄ: ZOMBIENS KULTURHISTORIADagens OBS-essä är den första delen av fyra i en långessä, skriven av författaren Torbjörn Elensky. Ämnet är synnerligen passande för dessa Halloween-tider, nämligen zombiens kulturhistoria från slaveri till klimatkollaps och folkfest. Häng med från början där du får höra om hur historien om vår tids monster en gång började, och ta del av den sorgliga berättelsen från Haiti om en kvinna som återuppstod från de döda.Programledare: Saman Bakhtiari Producent: Felicia Frithiof
Students in the theatre program at Grenfell Campus, Memorial University, are performing Henrik Ibsen's "Hedda Gabler" this week. CBC's David Newell spoke to the show's director, Grenfell associate professor Michael Waller, about the production.
Episode 20: Got your coupons?! We have a TWO FOR ONE Script Tease episode, as Ty and Kiera break down two of Henrik Ibsen's most iconic pieces of work. Are you itchin' for Ibsen? We'll talk about the craziness of these two shows, the comparisons between the two protagonists and just how much of a feminist Henrik was... was he the original girlboss? Every Thespians dream: a podcast from two lifelong theatre kids talking all things theatre! Join Ty Eatherton and Kiera Sweeney each episode as they discuss their own theatre fantasies and knowledge! Theme Music: George Benson -- On Broadway (Master Chic Mix) Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
5 point for 12 kampe og 10 point op til overlevelse er de kolde fakta for De Kongeblås hidtidige forløb i Superligaens grundspil. Hvad har været skidt, og hvor finder cheftræneren lys i mørket? Derudover tager vi også et kig på blandt andet Kikkenborg vs. Ibsen, Kasper Jørgensens udvikling, Rezans comeback i startopstillingen og en evaluering af nogle af nyerhvervelsernes aftryk på holdet. Sidst i udsendelsen kommer vi omkring Freyrs syn på trupsammensætningen, spillerudvikling kontra resultater samt en opdatering på de skadede spillere. Vært er Pelle Lindegaard Bügel
Inden for det meste arbejde med personligt salg, er relationen, man opbygger til en kunde afgørende. Det hele starter med at gribe knoglen og få booket nogle møder i kalenderen, hvilket jo burde være meget lige til. Alligevel er det netop at få ringet ud, der volder rigtig mange hovedbrud og giver anledning til en hel pallette af overspringshandlinger.Men hvorfor er det egentlig så vanskeligt for mange at ringe ud? Og hvordan bevarer man motivationen, hvis man får et rungende nej på 9 ud af 10 opkald? Det kan du alt sammen blive klogere på her i episoden, hvor Management Consultant hos TACK, Kenneth Ibsen dykker ned i den svære men givende disciplin: Mødebooking. Mange af os kender barrieren ved at ringe til folk, vi ikke kender, for hvad nu, hvis de bliver sure og vi får et afslag… Hør Kenneths råd til, hvordan du gør de naturlige afslag til din pipeline, og hvorfor det godt kan betale sig at booke dine egne kundemøder, frem for at udlicitere opgaven – også selvom du måske er steget i graderne med årene! Kenneth kommer også omkring relevansen af mødebooking i dag, hvor der findes mange andre tekniske hjælpemidler til kontakt, og hvordan disciplinen virkelig kan rykke ved salget, hvis du lærer at mestre den. Du får også Kenneths tips til, hvordan du bedst forbereder dig, inden du taster nummeret på dit første kundeemne.
Hvordan behandler Strindberg og Ibsen parforholdene sine? Hvordan står det til med familieverdier i stykkene deres – får alltid barnet offerrollen? Og hvilke ideer i samfunnet var med på å prege kunstnerskapene deres?I høst spilles både John Gabriel Borkman av Henrik Ibsen og Dødsdansen av August Strindberg på Nationaltheatret. Denne salongsamtalen tar utgangspunkt i disse stykkene, som har flere møtepunkter, og som er skrevet av to samtidige dramatikere som faktisk aldri møttes.Du møter:Sissel Gran, psykolog.Marit Moum Aune, regissør av Dødsdansen på Torshovteatret.Giuliano D'Amico, førsteamanuensis, Senter for Ibsenstudier, Universitetet i Oslo.Kaja Schjerven Mollerin, litteraturviter og salongens ordstyrer. Idé: Gunhild Aarebrot KildeLydtekniker: Olav Erik JohansenProdusent: Oda TømteMusikk: Gaute Tønder og Olav Waastad Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In her latest novel, The Unfolding, the prize-winning AM Homes has created a compelling central character: a larger than life American patriot and family man. Undone by Obama's victory in the 2008 presidential election, he collects together a band of like-minded men to spread their version of the American dream, and to reclaim it by force if necessary. AM Homes tells Tom Sutcliffe her Big Guy's fight to retain his influence is confounded by his failure to keep his own family from fracturing. Power, reputation and family dynamics are also central to Ibsen's play John Gabriel Borkman, now playing at the Bridge Theatre, directed by Nick Hytner, in a new version by Lucinda Coxon. Borkman was once a great man, who put wealth and influence ahead of his family and personal life. But now, disgraced and destitute after a financial scandal, he sits alone in an upstairs room obsessively planning his comeback. Families and dynastic power is at the heart of Simon Sebag Montefiore's history of The World: A Family History Of Humanity. The grand themes of war, migration, plague, religion and technology are told through the stories of the world's great dynasties as they battle to stay relevant and retain power through the ages. Producer: Katy Hickman Image credit: Photograph - Front l-r Simon Russell Beale (John Gabriel Borkman) and Sebastian De Souza (Erhart Borkman), photo by Manuel Harlan
Alain Perroux, der Generalintendanten der Opéra national du Rhin, steht hinter der für Sprecher und Sänger eingerichteten kongenialen Konzertfassung von Edvard Griegs Peer Gynt. Mit Tilman Böttcher Tilmann sprach er über Norwegen, Trolle, einen seltsamen Antihelden-Helden und ein musikalisches Meisterwerk, Tilmann Böttcher unterhielt sich mit AP über Norwegen, Trolle, einen Antihelden-Helden und ein musikalisches Meisterwerk.
This is part 2 of our NarxCare podcast series. We play portions of the radio show 1A of NPR that Maia Szalavitz and Bev Schechtman were on. They covered the article Maia wrote in Wired about NarxCare called "The Pain Was Unbearable. So Why Did Doctors Turn Her Away?" Here is the full recording of the radio show 1A Watch Dr. Ibsen do a running commentary on the radio show as it happened Here is the link to NarxCare information on our website. Contact us at: email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Disclaimer: This information that has been provided to you in this podcast is not to be considered medical advice --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/the-doctor-patient-forum/message
The individual versus the masses is at the heart of Enemy of the People. A bank manager speculating with his customers' money is the story told in John Gabriel Borkman. Lucinda Coxon and Steve Waters have written new versions of these Ibsen plays. They join Norwegian actor and director Kåre Conradi, theatre critic and writer Mark Lawson and presenter Anne McElvoy to explore the ways in which Ibsen's characters and dramas resonate now. John Gabriel Borkman starring Simon Russell Beale, Lia Williams and Clare Higgins runs at the Bridge Theatre, London September 24th to November 26th. Drama on 3 scripted by Steve Waters will be on air early in 2023. Kåre Conradi has established The Norwegian Ibsen Company which has brought productions to the Print Room at the Coronet Theatre in London. Conradi is an actor and a lifetime employee at The National Theatre of Norway. Mark Lawson is theatre critic for The Tablet and has written many radio dramas for BBC Radio 4. Producer: Ruth Watts On BBC Sounds and the Free Thinking programme website you can find previous discussions about Adapting Molière https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00138km John McGrath's Scottish drama https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017tzt Shakespeare https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06406hm Lorraine Hansbery https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06tpdh3 and other key thinkers and writers on morality like Hannah Arendt/ Iris Murdoch/ Thomas Mann in our landmarks collection https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01jwn44
Ibsens Klassiker „Ein Volksfeind“ steht für tiefsinnige Gesellschaftskritik. Regisseurin Lily Sykes bringt eine neue Leichtigkeit in den Stoff – mit herrlich absurden Einfällen, Jugendsprache und veränderter Handlung. Eine Botschaft gibt es auch.Natascha Pflaumbaum um Gespräch mit Britta Bürgerwww.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, FazitDirekter Link zur Audiodatei
Beim australischen Back to Back Theatre stehen ausschließlich Menschen mit Behinderung auf der Bühne. In Oslo hat die Kompanie nun den renommierten Ibsen-Preis erhalten und führte dort „Ganesh Versus the Third Reich“ auf, eines ihrer ältesten Stücke.Elisabeth Luft im Gespräch mit Sigrid Brinkmannwww.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, FazitDirekter Link zur Audiodatei
Dronning Elisabeth er død til Storbritanniens store sorg. Herhjemme er Prins Nikolai og Felix ved at blive kørt helt ud på et sidespor, og der spekuleres i, om de to internationale prinser skal ikke skinne mere end Christian. Og så er Bubber blevet gift med Signe - barnepigen, han gjorde gravid bag Ibsens ryg. Panelet gav Ibsen et par gode råd, og ikke mindst Bubbers tre børn, der ikke kom til begravelsen. I studiet sad chefredaktør på Illustreret Videnskab, Jonas Kuld Rathje, teaterredaktør, Jakob Steen Olsen og Frihedsbrevetes chefredaktør, Kristoffer Eriksen.Sarah Bech producerede.Ditte Okman var vært.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Emily Perkins is acclaimed as a novelist and short story writer, but her career started as an actor graduating from Toi Whakaari New Zealand Drama School in 1989. In her playwriting debut In 2015 Perkins created a contemporary interpretation of Ibsen's A Doll's House with Auckland Theatre Company, who have now commissioned a new work from her.
Where did Lord Byron and Percy Shelley come to scribble down their verses? Where did Bizet and Berlioz go to discuss their work? Where could Casanova be found trying to pick up girls? Caffè Greco, where else? Having opened in 1760, Antico Caffè Greco is the oldest café in Rome and the second-oldest in all of Italy! And you can still go there and sit where Hawthorne, Ibsen, Gogol, Goethe, Canova, and many many other literary, art, and musical greats rubbed elbows and drank coffee. On this episode, we visit the famous café, grab some espresso ourselves, and discuss what it feels like to drink coffee in the same place so many brilliant thinkers over the generations did the same. ------------------------------------- ADVERTISE WITH US: Reach expats, future expats, and travelers all over the world. Send us an email to get the conversation started. BECOME A PATRON: Pledge your monthly support of The Bittersweet Life and receive awesome prizes in return for your generosity! Visit our Patreon site to find out more. TIP YOUR PODCASTER: Say thanks with a one-time donation to the podcast hosts you know and love. Click here to send financial support via PayPal. (You can also find a Donate button on the desktop version of our website.) The show needs your support to continue. START PODCASTING: If you are planning to start your own podcast, consider Libsyn for your hosting service! Use this affliliate link to get two months free, or use our promo code SWEET when you sign up. SUBSCRIBE: Subscribe to the podcast to make sure you never miss an episode. Click here to find us on a variety of podcast apps. WRITE A REVIEW: Leave us a rating and a written review on iTunes so more listeners can find us. JOIN THE CONVERSATION: If you have a question or a topic you want us to address, send us an email here. You can also connect to us through Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. Tag #thebittersweetlife with your expat story for a chance to be featured! NEW TO THE SHOW? Don't be afraid to start with Episode 1: OUTSET BOOK: Want to read Tiffany's book, Midnight in the Piazza? Learn more here or order on Amazon. TOUR ROME: If you're traveling to Rome, don't miss the chance to tour the city with Tiffany as your guide!
"Life is meant to be a learning process" | Overcoming Imposter Syndrome & Insecurity in Business & Academics with Kaelyn Grace Apple & Katie Ibsen _____________________________________________________ In this episode, we discuss the challenges of imposter syndrome, how insecurities show up for us as academics and entrepreneurs, and what we do to overcome those feelings. _____________________________________________________ ✨ LINKS ↳Kaelyn's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheRedHeadAcademic ↳Katie' YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheVintageAcademic ↳Accepted Consulting: https://acceptedconsulting.com/ ↳Accepted Society: https://accepted.community _____________________________________________________ ✨ How to Contact Us ❤ Kaelyn's Email: email@example.com ❤ Katie's Email: firstname.lastname@example.org --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/kaelyn-apple--katie-ibsen/support
Danny Burstein is a seven- time Tony Award nominee for The Drowsy Chaperone, South Pacific, Follies, Golden Boy, Cabaret, and Fiddler on the Roof, who won a Best Supporting Actor in a Musical Tony in 2021 for his performance as Harold Zidler in the stage adaptation of Moulin Rouge! He has also won two Drama Desk Awards, four Outer Critics Circle Awards, and received three Grammy Award nominations. His other Broadway credits include The Seagull, Saint Joan, and Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown. On television, Burstein appeared as different characters in six episodes of the original NBC drama series Law & Order and recurred as Lolly Steinman on the HBO series Boardwalk Empire. Other TV appearances include: Fosse/Verdon, The Good Fight, Evil, and Winning Time: The Rise of the Lakers Dynasty. Film roles include: Transamerica, Deception, The Family Fang, Nor'Easter, Blackhat, and Indignation. (Revised bio courtesy of BroadwayWorld.com)
"I needed to establish where the line is" | What it's like to work with your friends, creating boundaries, and being a good boss with Kaelyn Grace Apple & Katie Ibsen _____________________________________________________ In this episode, we discuss the challenges and the benefits that come from working with friends and learning how to create and maintain boundaries between work life and friend life. _____________________________________________________ ✨ LINKS ↳Kaelyn's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheRedHeadAcademic ↳Katie' YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheVintageAcademic ↳Accepted Consulting: https://acceptedconsulting.com/ ↳Accepted Society: https://accepted.community _____________________________________________________ ✨ How to Contact Us ❤ Kaelyn's Email: email@example.com ❤ Katie's Email: firstname.lastname@example.org --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/kaelyn-apple--katie-ibsen/support
Erik Ibsen, the Toledo Mud Hens Executive Vice President and General Manager joins the show to dive into his successful career spanning over 25 years. Ibsen touches on many topics that have contributed to both his and the Mud Hens success in downtown Toledo. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/jacob-hornstein/message
"Who was I as a partner as well as an academic?" | How Personal Relationships Impact Your Academic Work - Dating & Relationships in Academia with Kaelyn Apple & Katie Ibsen _____________________________________________________ In this episode, we discuss what dating and long term relationships look like as academics and entrepreneurs - the pros, cons, and the nuanced impact that personal relationships can have on your academic work _____________________________________________________ ✨ LINKS ↳Kaelyn's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheRedHeadAcademic ↳Katie' YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheVintageAcademic ↳Accepted Consulting: https://acceptedconsulting.com/ ↳Accepted Society: https://accepted.community _____________________________________________________ ✨ How to Contact Us ❤ Kaelyn's Email: email@example.com ❤ Katie's Email: firstname.lastname@example.org --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/kaelyn-apple--katie-ibsen/support
Lobo and Trash almost meet in person but then Covid nixes their plan. Over coffee, they talk about adaptations of short stories, novels, and plays, and why they work (and why not). From Murakami to Ibsen and from Cortazar to Wilson, they dive into their favorite film versions. Fences (Film) -- https://g.co/kgs/63CwZ6 Play by August Wilson -- https://g.co/kgs/PcJjGC Ensayo de un crimen, by Rodolfo Usigli (out of print) -- https://www.amazon.com/Ensayo-crimen-Spanish-Rodolfo-Usigli/dp/9708105511/ref=sr_1_19?crid=2KP0WVRTS39TL&keywords=rodolfo+usigli&qid=1655421159&s=books&sprefix=rodolfo+usigli%2Cstripbooks%2C219&sr=1-19 The criminal life of Archibaldo de la Cruz, directed by Luis Buñuel -- https://g.co/kgs/n6MAS5 The unbearable lightness of being, by Milan Kundera -- https://www.amazon.com/Unbearable-Lightness-Being-Perennial-Classics/dp/0061148520 Film adaptation by Philip Kauffman -- https://g.co/kgs/45PCba Burning (Film) -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_(2018_film) Barn Burning (Haruki Murakami) -- https://www.mrflamm.com/uploads/2/2/0/0/2200902/barnburningbyharukimurakami.pdf Blow-Up (Antonioni) -- https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060176/ Blow-Up (Cortazar) -- https://www.amazon.com/Blow-Up-Other-Stories-Julio-Cortazar/dp/0394728815 Blue Water, White Death (Movie) Blue Meridian (Peter Mathiessen)
"If you were not ready, the opportunity simply would not be there" | Seizing Opportunities and Taking Risks with Kaelyn Apple & Katie Ibsen _____________________________________________________ In this episode, we discuss a little bit about opportunities, when to seize them, the anxieties that come with stepping outside of your comfort zone, and creating new comfort zones. _____________________________________________________ ✨ LINKS ↳Kaelyn's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheRedHeadAcademic ↳Katie' YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheVintageAcademic ↳Accepted Consulting: https://acceptedconsulting.com/ ↳Accepted Society: https://accepted.community _____________________________________________________ ✨ How to Contact Us ❤ Kaelyn's Email: email@example.com ❤ Katie's Email: firstname.lastname@example.org --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/kaelyn-apple--katie-ibsen/support
Laura Loge, Nordic operatic soprano. Edvard Grieg, Norway's greatest composer. Henrik Ibsen, Norway's greatest playwright. A trio that comes together through Ibsen's play, Peer Gynt, and Grieg's incidental music for that play. Laura sings the role of Gynt's long and abiding love, Solveig. Join us as we learn how Laura first sang Solveig's song at the age of 14, and how this music followed her as she studied Norwegian, Italian, and classical music to become a talented, accomplished classical singer, sharing her love of Greig through concertizing and school outreach. In this podcast Laura gives a brief summary of Ibsen's Peer Gynt, originally a hero from Norwegian folklore, who became the basis of Ibsen's anti-hero in his legendary Norwegian play. We also learn more about Grieg's music in general and the magic and images it creates of the Norwegian landscape, nature, and folklore. We finish the podcast with Laura's performance of Solveig's song (from Grieg's Peer Gynt Suite #2) in 2017. Check out the episode website for links to more of Laura's recordings, websites, photos etc. at nordicontap.com/laura-loge-grieg-ibsen-and-solveigs-song .
Failing Forward | From Community College + Journey to Self-Discovery with Kaelyn Apple & Katie Ibsen _____________________________________________________ ✨ LINKS ↳Kaelyn's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheRedHeadAcademic ↳Katie' YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheVintageAcademic ↳Accepted Consulting: https://acceptedconsulting.com/ ↳Accepted Society: https://accepted.community _____________________________________________________ ✨ How to Contact Us ❤ Kaelyn's Email: email@example.com ❤ Katie's Email: firstname.lastname@example.org --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/kaelyn-apple--katie-ibsen/support
Guy de Maupassant - The Necklace - The Master Of The Short Story At His Best! Hi, I'm Christy Shriver and we're here to discuss books that have changed the world and have changed us. I'm Garry Shriver and this is the How to Love Lit Podcast. Today we are going to journey to France and meet one of the greatest short story writers in the world- he influenced O Henry, Chekov, Kate Chopin and many others- this would be Guy de Maupassant. And the story we will be reading and discussing is his most famous story, “The Necklace”. Guy de Maupaussant didn't live very long. He died right before turning 43, but fortunately during his life he got to enjoy financial success and even fame. He wrote over 300 stories, six novels, three travel books and a bunch of poetry. So, let's date him exactly. He was born in 1850 and died in 1893. If we put that in historical context in the America's, we were living through the American Civil War. Europe in general was experiencing the good and bad of the height of the Industrial Revolution(we talked about that briefly when we talked about Charles Dickens but also William Blake-some of the excesses were pretty terrible and were felt all over Europe), but France in particular under the leadership of Emperor Napoleon 3rd, made great strides to modernization. France led the world in many ways. Unfortunately this all came crashing down to some degree with Emperor Napoleon III, reluctantly really, led France into the Franco-Prussian war. As with every other war, it was an atrocity, although we don't talk about it much today. Among other things, it changed the landscape of Europe and the. European balance of power from then on. Yeah, I guess I've heard of the Franco-Prussian war, but I can't say I understand it very well. This war was between France and what is now primarily what we call Germany. However, this isn't exactly accurate because our maps have changed so much since those days. The German confederation led by the Kingdom of Prussia defeated Napoleon III and France's Second Empire. Napoleon the 3rd, would be the last emperor of France. Guy de Maupassant volunteered in that war and pulled from his experiences in the war for a lot of his stories. I'm sure MauPaussant's war experiences were one big influence and subject of his writing, but certainly not the only one. De Maupassant observed all levels of French society starting with prostitutes to soldiers and upward on the social scale. He was very interested in social struggle and in some ways a little cynical about the whole thing. A lot of his stories convey a sense of hopelessness really- trying to fight fate. Which in some ways is interesting in light of the fact that he did financially and professionally well for himself in spite of some very difficult obstables not the least of which is his parents fairly traumatic divorce. He grew up in Normandy which is in the North of France. His mother filed for and got divorced from his dad for his being a womanizer- a woman being granted a divorce was unusual for that time. Well, it was, and Guy was raised by his mom. He went to Catholic school which apparently wasn't a positive experience, and he orchestrated his own expulsion. Eventually, he moved to Paris, and his mother introduced him to a man who would be the single greatest influence in his life, outside of his mother, Gustave Flaubert. Flaubert was famous and he was a writer. His most famous book- Madame Bovary-maybe one of the most infuriating books I've ever read- of course that's intentional. is beautifully written and admired as a powerful work concerned with human frailty . Well, Flaubert introduced de Maupassant to other famous writers and off his career started. He was prolific and well-received. After a few years, he was able to quit his day job and live off his writing and in a high style. Yes, amd he apparently inherited his father's taste in women, for he too has been labeled by history as “a womanizer.” He was single, had many relationships: these included relationships prostitutes all the way to many other women of high rank including countesses. He even had three children with one lover. Unfortunatetly, his lifestyle ultimately resulted in his contracting syphilis. As his syphilis progressed his writing got more and more shocking because he himself was losing his sense of reality. Eventually he became convinced that flies were devouring his brain. He tried to shoot himself, then he rammed a paper knife into his throat. This got him taken to an asylym where he stayed until he died just a few months later. Wow. That ending is somewhat shocking. Well, it truly is and perhaps ironic that a writer so respected for his ability to see real life for what it really was, ended his life without a real notion of reality. Well, Tolstoy, the Russian writer found him worthy enough of a writer to write a very long and complimentary piece titled “The Works of Guy de Maupassant”. He claimed that de MauPaussant could see with his own eyes things as they were, see their meaning, see the contradictions of life, which are hidden from others and vividly present them. Yes, and that in a nutshell is basically what what he's famous for. At that time, many writers in France, and this includes Flaubert, de MauPassant's mentor, but also others most notably Emile Zola, were moving away from a romanticized way of writing about the world towards a move gritty realistic way. The trend was to portray life as it really was- we call this realism. Of course, we saw this with Ibsen and the theater. In Ibsen's plays he also portrayed real life, but Ibsen was working in the theater. We saw this with Chopin. But the French were doing this first and most notably in the plastic arts, like painting. One notable and famous early example was a politically controversial artist by the name of Gustave Coubert. He would paint peasants, which wasn't that big of a deal, but in his work, tney weren't out in some field happily picking wheat. They were miserable. He was showing that life was hard—people didn't like that in their paintings. They wanted the romantized versions showing how beautiful life was., Guy de Maupasasnt was in this vein. He didn't want to make people or life look like they were better than they really were. However, de Maupassant wasn't just a realist in the sense that he wanted to portray real life, he extended this idea further into a branch which we call naturalism. Now, I know I'm throwing out a lot of -isms and that can get boring, but if you understand what these guys were doing it actually makes reading the stories more interesting. De Maupassant was of the mindset that nature held a very large sway on your agency in the world. In other words, it's not really possible to pull yourself up by your bootstraps- the powers of this world are going to win. He saw this in evolutionary terms- This is survival of the fittest type thinking. The strongest survive, the weakest die and there's not a whole lot you can do about it. God is not coming to your rescue; there is no prince charming that will swoop down. Nobody is coming to save you. John Steinbeck thought like this too and we see that in Of Mice and Men. That kind of writing is pretty dark. Well, it certainly can be. But our story today isn't as dark as Of Mice and Men; no one dies, but we do see that people are what they are, and they are not always good. They are selfish and often stupid. Also, they will be products of their environment. It's not likely that you will rewrite your story to overcome your circumstances- not really- most people will succumb to their environments. De Maupassant said this about what he wanted to do, He wanted to “write the history of the heart, soul and mind in their normal state.” His goal was not “telling a story or entertaining us or touching our hearts but at forcing us to think and understand the deeper, hidden meaning of events.” So, let's do it….this story, “The Necklace” is set in Paris sometime during the 1800s. She was one of those pretty and charming girls born, as though fate had blundered over her, into a family of artisans. She had no marriage portion, no expectations, no means of getting known, understood, loved, and wedded by a man of wealth and distinction; and she let herself be married off to a little clerk in the Ministry of Education. Her tastes were simple because she had never been able to afford any other, but she was as unhappy as though she had married beneath her; for women have no caste or class, their beauty, grace, and charm serving them for birth or family. their natural delicacy, their instinctive elegance, their nimbleness of wit, are their only mark of rank, and put the slum girl on a level with the highest lady in the land. De MauPaussant immediately situates our protagonist in the social system of her day. During this period of European history, classes were very stratified. There was the highest class, there were the peasants, but because of the Industrial Revolution, there was a growing middle class- but even the middle class was stratified. The woman in this story, is from a family of artisans. That's one class up from peasants but not prestigious or powerful by any definition. Artisans work with their hands. Bottom line, our protagonist is born poor; however, because she is so gorgeous she is able to have a little upward mobility. Her beauty, according to our story “puts the slum girl on a level with the higest lady of the land.” Her husband, on the other hand, is a bureaucrat- that's better than a bricklayer of other working class people, but certainly not high ranking. I do notice a little editorializing on the narrator's part in that he comments that women live outside of the class system since they cannot work. They have only their physical attributes, their elegance and their social smarts as a way to improve their lives, NOT their ability to work for a living. Indeed, and what makes this girl upset is that she thinks she is better looking and basically better than her husband because she's beautiful. Her beauty, in her mind, means she DESERVES something in this life. She deserves luxury, and since he can't provide that, she suffers. She's tormented use deMaupassant's words. Let's read how she thought of her life. She suffered endlessly, feeling herself born for every delicacy and luxury. She suffered from the poorness of her house, from its mean walls, worn chairs, and ugly curtains. All these things, of which other women of her class would not even have been aware, tormented and insulted her. The sight of the little Breton girl who came to do the work in her little house aroused heart-broken regrets and hopeless dreams in her mind. She imagined silent antechambers, heavy with Oriental tapestries, lit by torches in lofty bronze sockets, with two tall footmen in knee-breeches sleeping in large arm-chairs, overcome by the heavy warmth of the stove. She imagined vast saloons hung with antique silks, exquisite pieces of furniture supporting priceless ornaments, and small, charming, perfumed rooms, created just for little parties of intimate friends, men who were famous and sought after, whose homage roused every other woman's envious longings. When she sat down for dinner at the round table covered with a three-days-old cloth, opposite her husband, who took the cover off the soup-tureen, exclaiming delightedly: "Aha! Scotch broth! What could be better?" she imagined delicate meals, gleaming silver, tapestries peopling the walls with folk of a past age and strange birds in faery forests; she imagined delicate food served in marvellous dishes, murmured gallantries, listened to with an inscrutable smile as one trifled with the rosy flesh of trout or wings of asparagus chicken. She had no clothes, no jewels, nothing. And these were the only things she loved; she felt that she was made for them. She had longed so eagerly to charm, to be desired, to be wildly attractive and sought after. She had a rich friend, an old school friend whom she refused to visit, because she suffered so keenly when she returned home. She would weep whole days, with grief, regret, despair, and misery. It's a very long description describing her “misery.” It's also a long description of the things she imagines she deserves. And again, we see our narrator communicating through the subtext that maybe, this woman's perspective does not align with her reality. She describes how bad her house is..but notice she has a MAID!!! So, obviously, she is better than some people. Also, she complains that she doesn't have elegant food over her dinner, so obviously she's not starving. If you listen to how she behaves it's pitifully over-dramatic. Listen to the language- it is as if she were in a war zone, but the reality is, she's not as well off as her friend friend from her old school days. The text states the ONLY thing she loves is clothes and jewels. She weeps for whole days with grief, regret, despair and misery, but what is she weeping over? We are set up to question this woman's priorities and perspectives. One evening her husband came home with an exultant air, holding a large envelope in his hand. " Here's something for you," he said. Swiftly she tore the paper and drew out a printed card on which were these words: "The Minister of Education and Madame Ramponneau request the pleasure of the company of Monsieur and Madame Loisel at the Ministry on the evening of Monday, January the 18th." Instead of being delighted, as her-husband hoped, she flung the invitation petulantly across the table, murmuring: "What do you want me to do with this?" "Why, darling, I thought you'd be pleased. You never go out, and this is a great occasion. I had tremendous trouble to get it. Every one wants one; it's very select, and very few go to the clerks. You'll see all the really big people there." She looked at him out of furious eyes, and said impatiently: "And what do you suppose I am to wear at such an affair?" He had not thought about it; he stammered: "Why, the dress you go to the theatre in. It looks very nice, to me...." He stopped, stupefied and utterly at a loss when he saw that his wife was beginning to cry. Two large tears ran slowly down from the corners of her eyes towards the corners of her mouth. "What's the matter with you? What's the matter with you?" he faltered. But with a violent effort she overcame her grief and replied in a calm voice, wiping her wet cheeks: "Nothing. Only I haven't a dress and so I can't go to this party. Give your invitation to some friend of yours whose wife will be turned out better than I shall." He was heart-broken. "Look here, Mathilde," he persisted. :What would be the cost of a suitable dress, which you could use on other occasions as well, something very simple?" She thought for several seconds, reckoning up prices and also wondering for how large a sum she could ask without bringing upon herself an immediate refusal and an exclamation of horror from the careful-minded clerk. At last she replied with some hesitation: "I don't know exactly, but I think I could do it on four hundred francs." He grew slightly pale, for this was exactly the amount he had been saving for a gun, intending to get a little shooting next summer on the plain of Nanterre with some friends who went lark-shooting there on Sundays. Nevertheless he said: "Very well. I'll give you four hundred francs. But try and get a really nice dress with the money." Again, the focus of our story is Madame Mathilde Loisel. Her husband, so proud of himself, has scored for his miserable and despairing wife a very impressive and selective invitation to go to a ball, an event for elite people. She weeps for days because she doesn't have a certain life, and he's finally found something he thinks his wife will appreciate. What follows is a dialogue between the two where we see Mathilde very obviously condescend to and degrade her husband. She also manipulates him to get something she wants. She says this, Only I haven't a dress and so I can't go to this party. Give your invitation to some friend of yours whose wife will be turned out better than I shall." He was heart-broken. In other words, give this invitation that you think I'll like to a better man than you. Find a bigger man who can take care of his wife better than you can take care of yours. This is passive aggressive and accusasatory and it has the desired effect. She breaks his heart. He wants to know how much it would cost to satisfy her, and we notice that she takes her time before responding. She asks for exactly the amount he has set aside for a hunting trip- we aren't told this is a coincidence, but we have been led to believe this is a self-centered manipulative woman. He gives her the whole thing. The day of the party drew near, and Madame Loisel seemed sad, uneasy and anxious. Her dress was ready, however. One evening her husband said to her: "What's the matter with you? You've been very odd for the last three days." "I'm utterly miserable at not having any jewels, not a single stone, to wear," she replied. "I shall look absolutely no one. I would almost rather not go to the party." Again- the hyperbolic language demonstrates her total contempt and ingratitude for her husband. She's miserable because she doesn't have jewels. Remember- clothes and jewels are the only things she loves. She's humiliated, and she looks to her husband to problem-solve for her. He's going to recommend she go see her rich friend- which she does. "Wear flowers," he said. "They're very smart at this time of the year. For ten francs you could get two or three gorgeous roses." She was not convinced. "No . . . there's nothing so humiliating as looking poor in the middle of a lot of rich women." "How stupid you are!" exclaimed her husband. "Go and see Madame Forestier and ask her to lend you some jewels. You know her quite well enough for that." She uttered a cry of delight. "That's true. I never thought of it." Next day she went to see her friend and told her her trouble. Madame Forestier went to her dressing-table, took up a large box, brought it to Madame Loisel, opened it, and said: "Choose, my dear." First she saw some bracelets, then a pearl necklace, then a Venetian cross in gold and gems, of exquisite workmanship. She tried the effect of the jewels before the mirror, hesitating, unable to make up her mind to leave them, to give them up. She kept on asking: "Haven't you anything else?" "Yes. Look for yourself. I don't know what you would like best." Suddenly she discovered, in a black satin case, a superb diamond necklace; her heart began to beat covetousIy. Her hands trembled as she lifted it. She fastened it round her neck, upon her high dress, and remained in ecstasy at sight of herself. Then, with hesitation, she asked in anguish: "Could you lend me this, just this alone?" "Yes, of course." She flung herself on her friend's breast, embraced her frenziedly, and went away with her treasure. Again notice the words, her heart beats “covetously”. Her hands tremble. She's in ecstacy. She embraces her friend in a frenzy. The day of the party arrived. Madame Loisel was a success. She was the prettiest woman present, elegant, graceful, smiling, and quite above herself with happiness. All the men stared at her, inquired her name, and asked to be introduced to her. All the Under-Secretaries of State were eager to waltz with her. The Minister noticed her. She danced madly, ecstatically, drunk with pleasure, with no thought for anything, in the triumph of her beauty, in the pride of her success, in a cloud of happiness made up of this universal homage and admiration, of the desires she had aroused, of the completeness of a victory so dear to her feminine heart. What is interesting about this account of the party is that it's so short. Her delusions of gradeur at the beginning were described in more words. She's a hit. She's the most beautiful woman there and by far. All the men want to dance with her. The Minister himself notices her. She is “drunk with pleasure”. All she thinks about is her triumph, her success the “universal homage and admiration”. Her presence at the ball is a complete victory. In other words, she gets everything she wanted. Except, it only lasts two short paragraphs. She left about four o'clock in the morning. Since midnight her husband had been dozing in a deserted little room, in company with three other men whose wives were having a good time. He threw over her shoulders the garments he had brought for them to go home in, modest everyday clothes, whose poverty clashed with the beauty of the ball-dress. She was conscious of this and was anxious to hurry away, so that she should not be noticed by the other women putting on their costly furs. Loisel restrained her. "Wait a little. You'll catch cold in the open. I'm going to fetch a cab." But she did not listen to him and rapidly descended-the staircase. When they were out in the street they could not find a cab; they began to look for one, shouting at the drivers whom they saw passing in the distance. They walked down towards the Seine, desperate and shivering. At last they found on the quay one of those old nightprowling carriages which are only to be seen in Paris after dark, as though they were ashamed of their shabbiness in the daylight. Notice how much attention is paid to the fact that she's ashamed. This paragraph is just as long as the entire party. She races out the door because she's ashamed of her coat. Her husband literally tries to restrain her, but she's in a rush. She shouts, she walks, she's out pacing in the streets ashamed of her “shabbiness.” It brought them to their door in the Rue des Martyrs, and sadly they walked up to their own apartment. It was the end, for her. As for him, he was thinking that he must be at the office at ten. She took off the garments in which she had wrapped her shoulders, so as to see herself in all her glory before the mirror. But suddenly she uttered a cry. The necklace was no longer round her neck! "What's the matter with you?" asked her husband, already half undressed. She turned towards him in the utmost distress. "I . . . I . . . I've no longer got Madame Forestier's necklace. . . ." He started with astonishment. "What! . . . Impossible!" They searched in the folds of her dress, in the folds of the coat, in the pockets, everywhere. They could not find it. "Are you sure that you still had it on when you came away from the ball?" he asked. "Yes, I touched it in the hall at the Ministry." "But if you had lost it in the street, we should have heard it fall." "Yes. Probably we should. Did you take the number of the cab?" "No. You didn't notice it, did you?" "No." They stared at one another, dumbfounded. At last Loisel put on his clothes again. "I'll go over all the ground we walked," he said, "and see if I can't find it." And he went out. She remained in her evening clothes, lacking strength to get into bed, huddled on a chair, without volition or power of thought. Her husband returned about seven. He had found nothing. He went to the police station, to the newspapers, to offer a reward, to the cab companies, everywhere that a ray of hope impelled him. Notice the juxtaposition here- after the necklace is lost, the husband takes the initiative to look for it. He looks for it until 7am. Matilde lays in bed. He walks, he goes to the police, he goes to the newspapers, he offers a reward. She does nothing. She waited all day long, in the same state of bewilderment at this fearful catastrophe. Loisel came home at night, his face lined and pale; he had discovered nothing. "You must write to your friend," he said, "and tell her that you've broken the clasp of her necklace and are getting it mended. That will give us time to look about us." She wrote at his dictation. By the end of a week they had lost all hope. Loisel, who had aged five years, declared: "We must see about replacing the diamonds." Next day they took the box which had held the necklace and went to the jewellers whose name was inside. He consulted his books. "It was not I who sold this necklace, Madame; I must have merely supplied the clasp." Then they went from jeweller to jeweller, searching for another necklace like the first, consulting their memories, both ill with remorse and anguish of mind. In a shop at the Palais-Royal they found a string of diamonds which seemed to them exactly like the one they were looking for. It was worth forty thousand francs. They were allowed to have it for thirty-six thousand. They begged the jeweller not to sell it for three days. And they arranged matters on the understanding that it would be taken back for thirty-four thousand francs, if the first one were found before the end of February. Loisel possessed eighteen thousand francs left to him by his father. He intended to borrow the rest. He did borrow it, getting a thousand from one man, five hundred from another, five louis here, three louis there. He gave notes of hand, entered into ruinous agreements, did business with usurers and the whole tribe of money-lenders. He mortgaged the whole remaining years of his existence, risked his signature without even knowing it he could honour it, and, appalled at the agonising face of the future, at the black misery about to fall upon him, at the prospect of every possible physical privation and moral torture, he went to get the new necklace and put down upon the jeweller's counter thirty-six thousand francs. By this point in the story, no one should have any respect for Matilde. She has done nothing for herself. We even find out that he has a pretty good inheritance from his father, and he spends the entirety of it to partially pay for this necklace his wife lost. Listen to the language, he is appalled at the agonizing face of the future, at the lack misery about to fall upon him, at the prospect of every possible physical privation and moral torture….it's very inflated language- in fact, the sentence structure and contrasts very obviously with the language used to describe Matilde in all of her glory. The inflated misery will be as inflated as her momentary glory- except it will last into the infinite future. This stands out! His misery is undeserved. Her short-lived fabricated glory is undeserved. He is grounded in his own reality; she does nothing to fix her problem; it is his to solve. When Madame Loisel took back the necklace to Madame Forestier, the latter said to her in a chilly voice: "You ought to have brought it back sooner; I might have needed it." She did not, as her friend had feared, open the case. If she had noticed the substitution, what would she have thought? What would she have said? Would she not have taken her for a thief? *** Madame Loisel came to know the ghastly life of abject poverty. From the very first she played her part heroically. This fearful debt must be paid off. She would pay it. The servant was dismissed. They changed their flat; they took a garret under the roof. She came to know the heavy work of the house, the hateful duties of the kitchen. She washed the plates, wearing out her pink nails on the coarse pottery and the bottoms of pans. She washed the dirty linen, the shirts and dish-cloths, and hung them out to dry on a string; every morning she took the dustbin down into the street and carried up the water, stopping on each landing to get her breath. And, clad like a poor woman, she went to the fruiterer, to the grocer, to the butcher, a basket on her arm, haggling, insulted, fighting for every wretched halfpenny of her money. Every month notes had to be paid off, others renewed, time gained. Her husband worked in the evenings at putting straight a merchant's accounts, and often at night he did copying at twopence-halfpenny a page. And this life lasted ten years. At the beginning of the story, we see that she thought she was poor. Now, she has come to know what real poverty looks like. Now she is “glad like a poor woman.” At the end of ten years everything was paid off, everything, the usurer's charges and the accumulation of superimposed interest. Madame Loisel looked old now. She had become like all the other strong, hard, coarse women of poor households. Her hair was badly done, her skirts were awry, her hands were red. She spoke in a shrill voice, and the water slopped all over the floor when she scrubbed it. But sometimes, when her husband was at the office, she sat down by the window and thought of that evening long ago, of the ball at which she had been so beautiful and so much admired. If you remember, this is how she started. She was pretty but she was poor. Now she's poor and ugly, like everyone else who she thought she was better than. Even her dillusions have stopped. All she has is the memory of her one moment of glory. What would have happened if she had never lost those jewels. Who knows? Who knows? How strange life is, how fickle! How little is needed to ruin or to save! One Sunday, as she had gone for a walk along the Champs-Elysees to freshen herself after the labours of the week, she caught sight suddenly of a woman who was taking a child out for a walk. It was Madame Forestier, still young, still beautiful, still attractive. Madame Loisel was conscious of some emotion. Should she speak to her? Yes, certainly. And now that she had paid, she would tell her all. Why not? She went up to her. "Good morning, Jeanne." The other did not recognise her, and was surprised at being thus familiarly addressed by a poor woman. "But . . . Madame . . ." she stammered. "I don't know . . . you must be making a mistake." "No . . . I am Mathilde Loisel." Her friend uttered a cry. "Oh! . . . my poor Mathilde, how you have changed! . . ." "Yes, I've had some hard times since I saw you last; and many sorrows . . . and all on your account." "On my account! . . . How was that?" "You remember the diamond necklace you lent me for the ball at the Ministry?" "Yes. Well?" "Well, I lost it." "How could you? Why, you brought it back." "I brought you another one just like it. And for the last ten years we have been paying for it. You realise it wasn't easy for us; we had no money. . . . Well, it's paid for at last, and I'm glad indeed." Madame Forestier had halted. "You say you bought a diamond necklace to replace mine?" "Yes. You hadn't noticed it? They were very much alike." And she smiled in proud and innocent happiness. Madame Forestier, deeply moved, took her two hands. "Oh, my poor Mathilde! But mine was imitation. It was worth at the very most five hundred francs! . . . And of course the irony. If you remember, irony is when things are opposite. Here we have situational irony. The situation is the opposite of what we should have expected. And the story ends with an ellipsis…what happens next has no consequence. The self-delusion, the self-serving nature, the lack of agency, all of it…was it her destiny, was it her personality, was it her society, de Maupassant ends with an ellipsis, but he has led us to his conclusion. If we go back to the essay Tolstoy wrote about Guy de Maupassant, this is what he had to say, There has hardly been another such an author, who thought so sincerely that all the good, the whole meaning of life was in woman, in love, and who with such force of passion described woman and the love of her from all sides, and there has hardly been another author, who with such clearness and precision has pointed out all the terrible sides of the same phenomenon, which to him seemed to be the highest, and one that gives the greatest good to men. The more he comprehended this phenomenon, the more did it become unveiled; the shrouds fell off, and all there was left was its terrible consequences and its still more terrible reality.- Tolstoy Oh, I feel like for me to comment here would be swimming in dangerous waters. HA! Yes, it seems that Guy de Maupassant loved women passionately in every way until the day he died, but he was a realist; he was a naturalist. Humanity is what it is- both men and women are equally human, and he felt no need to romanticize our essence. It's kind of refreshing, really. Well, we hope you enjoyed this very famous short story by one of our world's greatest writers of short stories. Thank you for being with us today. If you enjoy our work, please like us on social media. Give us a review on your podcast app, but most importantly share our podcast with a friend. That's how we grow. Peace out!
This week, host Jason Jefferies is joined by Jarred McGinnis, author of The Coward, which is published by our friends at Canongate Books. Topics of discussion include Artificial Intelligence, wheelchairs, the distance between fiction and memoir, advice, dealing with problematic family members, dreams, Zola, Ibsen, Tolstoy and the Lived Novel, James Frey, World War III, and much more. Copies of The Coward can be purchased here with FREE SHIPPING.
Kate Chopin - The Awakening - Episode 3 - Edna Pontellier Battles The Forces Without Only To Meet The Forces Within! Hi, I'm Christy Shriver and we're here to discuss books that have changed the world and have changed us. I'm Garry Shriver and this is the How to Love Lit Podcast. This is our third episode discussing Kate Chopin's controversial novella, The Awakening. Week 1 we introduced Chopin, her life and the book itself. We talked about what a stir it made during her lifetime ultimately resulting in it being forgotten and then rediscovered midway through the 20th century. Last week, we spent all of our time on the vacation resort island of Grand Isle. We met Mr. ad Mrs. Pontellier, as well as the two women who represent got Edna, our protagonist, two alternating lifestyles. Edna Pontellier, we were quick to learn, is not a happily married woman. Her husband is outwardly kind to her, but readers are told outright that love and mutual respect was never part of the arrangement between these two. Edna is indulged by Mr. Pontellier, for sure. He gives her anything she wants in terms of money or material, but in exchange, she is his ornament, an expensive hobby, a pet even- something to be prized- or as Ibsen would describe it- a beautiful doll for his doll house. The story starts in the summer at the vacation resort town of Grand Isle, Louisiana. While vacationing on the island, Edna Pontellier experiences what Chopin terms “the awakening”. She awakens to the understanding that she is not a pet or a doll in the doll house, and just like Nora in the The Doll's House, she decides she really doesn't want to be one anymore. No, I guess if that were the only thing to this story, we'd have to say, Sorry Kate, Ibsen beat you by about 20 years. In Ibsen's story, Nora awakens when her husband, Torvald, turns on her over money. That's a good point, what awakens Edna in this book is not a marital crisis over money. It is a crisis that awakens her, and it totally informs how she views her marriage, but it is a crisis concerning her husband at all that is the catalyst. She is awakened to her own humanity by discovering her own sensuality. I want to highlight that this awakening isn't overtly sexually provoked. No man comes in and seduces Edna; she does not go off with a wild vacation crew. She is left vulnerable, if you want to think about it that way, because of loveless marriage, but she is sensually and emotionally provoked through three very different relationships- all of which affect her physically as well as emotionally. The first is with a Creole woman, Adele Ratigntole, one with a younger Creole man, Robert LeBrun, and the third with the provocative music of Madame Reisz. Experiences with these three awaken something in Edna that encourages maybe even forces her to rebel- rebel against her husband, against the culture, against the person she has always been, against the roles she has played, against everything that she has ever known. The problem is- rebellion only takes you so far. You may know what you DON'T want, but does that help you understand what you DO? And this is Edna's problem. Where do we go from here? And so, in chapter 17, we return with the Pontellier's to their home in New Orleans. And, as we have suggested before, New Orleans is not like any other city in America, and it is in these cultural distinctives of Creole life at the turn of the century that Chopin situates our protagonist. But before we can understand some of the universal and psychological struggles Chopin so carefully sketches for us, we need to understand a little of the culture of this time period and this unusual place. Garry, tell us a little about this world. What is so special about Esplanade Street? Well, one need only Google tourism New Orleans and a description of Esplanade street will be in the first lists of articles you run into. Let me read the opening sentence from the travel website Neworleans.com One of the quietest, most scenic and historic streets in New Orleans, Esplanade Avenue is a hidden treasure running through the heart of the city. From its beginning at the foot of the Mississippi River levee to its terminus at the entrance of City Park, Esplanade is a slow pace thoroughfare with quiet ambiance and local charm. According to this same website, Esplanade Street, during the days of Chopin, functioned as “millionaire row”- which, of course is why the Pontelliers live there. It actually forms the border between the French Quarter and the less exclusive Faubourg Marigny. At the turn of the last century it was grand and it was populated by wealthy creoles who were building enormous mansions meant to compete with the mansions of the “Americans” on St. Charles Avenue. “The Americans”? Yes, that was the term for the non-Creole white people. The ones that descended from the British or came into New Orleans from other parts of the US. Esplanade Street was life at its most grand- there is no suffering like you might find in other parts of New Orleans. The Pontelliers were wealthy; they were glamorous; these two were living competitively. The first paragraph of chapter 17 calls the Pontellier mansion dazzling white. And the inside is just as dazzling as the outside. Mrs. Pontellier's silver and crystal were the envy of many women of less generous husbands. Mr. Pontellier was very proud of this and according to our sassy narrator loved to walk around his house to examine everything. He “greatly valued his possessions. They were his and I quote “household gods.” The Pontelliers had been married for six years, and Edna over this time had adjusted to the culture and obligations of being a woman of the competitive high society of Creole New Orleans. One such obligation apparently centered around the very serious etiquette of calling cards and house calls. This is something we're familiar with, btw, since we watch Bridgerton. It was something we saw in Emma, too. Garry, talk to us about the very serious social business of calling cards. Well, this is first and foremost a European custom during this time period. It started with simple cards designed to announce a person's arrival, but as in all things human, it grew and grew into something much larger and subtextual- and of course, with rules. During the Victorian era, the designs on the cards as well as the etiquette surrounding were elaborate. A person would leave one's calling card at a friend's house, and by friend meaning a person in your community- you may or may not actually be friends. Dropping off a card was a way to express appreciation, offer condolences or just say hello. If someone moved into the neighborhood, you were expected to reach out with a card, and a new arrival was expected to do the same to everyone else. The process would involve putting the card on an elaborate silver tray in the entrance hall. A tray full of calling cards was like social media for Victorians- you were demonstrating your popularity. For example, if we were doing this today, we would have a place in the entrance of our home, and we'd make sure the cards of the richest or most popular people we knew were on to. We would want people who dropped off cards to be impressed by how many other callers we had AND how impressive our friends were. The entire process was dictated by complicated social rules, and as Leonce explains to Edna, to go against these rules could mean social suicide. It could also mean financial suicide because business always has a human component. The function of an upper class woman would be to fulfil a very specific social obligation and this involved delivering and accepting these calling cards. Every woman would have a specific day where she would make it known she was receiving cards, and the other ladies would go around town to pay house calls. In some cases, a woman might remain in her carriage while her groom would take the card to the door. During the Regency era like in Jane Austen's day, there was a system of bending down the corner of the card if you were there in person, and not if you were sending it, but by Chopin's day, I'm not sure if that was still a thing. The main thing was that the card would be dropped off on this special silver tray. If it were a first call, the caller might only leave a card. But, if you were calling on the prescribed day, the groom would further inquire if the lady of the house were home. A visit would consist of about twenty minutes of polite conversation. It was important that if someone called on you, you must reciprocate and call on then on their visiting day. Well, the Tuesday they get back, Edna leaves the house on her reception day and does not receive any callers- a social no-no. In fact, as we go through the rest of the book, she never receives callers again. This is an affront to the entire society, and an embarrassment to her husband; it's also just bad for business, as Mr. Pontellier tries to explain to his wayward wife, let's read this exchange. “Why, my dear, I should think you'd understand by this time that people don't do such things; we've got to observe “les convenances” if we ever expect to get on and keep up with the procession. If you felt that you had to leave this afternoon, you should have left some suitable explanation for your absences. One thing I find interesting. Mr. Pontellier assumes that Mrs. Pontellier is on the same page on wanting the same things as he wants, and what he wants is to keep up with the procession. They'd been doing this for the last six years, and doing it well. Another thing I notice is that he doesn't rail at her for skipping out. Mr. Pontellier, unlike her father, even as we progress through the rest of the book, is not hard on her at all. In fact, he's indulgent. The problem in the entire book is not that he's been overtly abusive or cruel. Read the part where he tries to kind of help her fix what he considers to be a serious social blunder. Page 60 Well, if taken in isolation, this exchange doesn't seem offensive, and I might even have taken sides with Mr. Pontellier if it weren't back to back with this horrid scene of him complaining about his dinner then walking out to spend the rest of the evening at the club where he clearly spends the majority of his time. You have to wonder what is going on at that club, but beyond that. Edna is again left in sadness. “She went and stood at an open window and looked out upon the deep tangle of tea garden below”. (On an aside, if you've read Chopin's story, the story of an hour, you should recognize the language here and the image of this open window). Anyway,, Here again we have another image of a caged bird, or a person who is looking out in the world but not feeling a part of it. “She was seeing herself and finding herself in just sweet half-darkness which met her moods. But the voices were not soothing that came to her from the darkness and the sky above and the stars. They jeered and sounded mournful notes without promise, devoid even of home. She turned back into the room and began to walk to and from down its whole length, without stopping, without resting. She carried in her hands a thin handkerchief, which she tore into ribbons, rolled into a ball, and flung from her. Once she stopped, and taking off her wedding ring, flung it upon the carpet. When she saw it there, she stamped her heel upon it, striving to crush it. But her small boot heel did not make an indenture, not a mark upon the little glittering circlet. In a sweeping passion she seized a glass vase from the table and flung it upon the tiles of the hearth. She wanted to destroy something. The crash and the clatter were what she wanted to hear.” She's clearly angry…and not just because Mr. Pontellier complained about the food and walked out of the house. She's angry about everything. Never mind the fact that we are never told what goes on at this club, but there are several indications in different parts of the book that Mr. Pontellier may be doing other things besides smoking cigars in crowded rooms. Adele even tells Edna that she disapproves of Mr. Pontellier's club. She goes on to say, “It's a pity Mr. Pontellier doesn't stay home more in the evenings. I think you would be more- well, if you don't me my saying it- more united.” Although I will add, Edna quickly replies, “'Oh dear no!' What should I do if he stayed home? We wouldn't have anything to say to each other.” - the fact remains that MR. Pontelier does not see any need to nurture any sort of human or intimate relationship with Edna- theirs comes across as a cordial business arrangement, at best, with Edna in the position of employee. True, and although I don't know if this is the right place to point this out, but in terms of the sexual indiscretions that may or may not be going on when Mr. Pontellier is at the club, there is likely a lot in the culture at large going on under the surface that a person from the outside wouldn't immediately be aware of. Edna is naïve at first to all that goes on in her Victorian-Creole world. There just is no such thing as “lofty chastity” amongst the Creole people, or any people I might add, although Edna initially seems to believe that in spite of all the sexual innuendo in the language, nothing sexual was ever going on. There are just too many indications otherwise in the story that that is not the case. The reader can see it, even though Edna cannot. True, and if you didn't catch it on Grand Isle, in the city, it is more obvious, and the farther along we go in the story, it gets more obvious as well. Mrs. James Highcamp is one example. She has married an “American” but uses her daughter as a pretext for cultivating relationships with younger men. This is so well-known that Mr. Pontellier tells Edna, after seeing her calling card, that the less you have to do with Mrs. Highcamp the better. But she's not the only example. Victor basically details an encounter with Edna of being with a prostitute he calls “a beauty” when she comes to visit his mother..ending with the phrase that she wouldn't comprehend such things. And of course, most obviously there is the character Arobin with whom Edna eventually does get sexually involved, but his reputation has clearly preceded him. Well, Edna's awakening to all of this would explain part of her anger, but there is more to Edna's awakening then just Leonce, or the new culture she's a part of, or really any outside factor. Yes, and it is in the universality of whatever is going on inside of Edna that we find ourselves. That's what's so great about great literature- the setting can be 120 years ago, but our humanity is still our humanity. I agree and love that, but let's get back to her setting for a moment. I think it's worth mentioning that the 19th century culture of the Creole people in New Orleans is messy and complicated in its own unique way. It's fascinating, but for those who are not of the privileged class, life was often a harsh reality. The world, especially in the South, was problematic for people of mixed race heritage. So, and this is more true the closer we get to the Civil War and the Jim Crow era, but those who called themselves “white creoles” had a problem because of the large existence of the free people of mixed race ancestry in New Orleans. There was a strong outside pressure to maintain this illusion of racial purity, but the evidence suggests this simply wasn't reality. Let me throw out a few numbers to tell you what I'm talking about. From 1782-1791, the St. Louis Catholic Church in New Orleans recorded 2688 births of mixed race children. Now that doesn't seem like a large number, but let me throw this number out- that same congregation at that time same only records 40 marriages of black or mixed race people. Now, I know Catholics are known for having large families, but I'm not sure 20 women can account for 2688 births. No, something feels a little wrong. That number suggests another explanation may be in order. Exactly, and by 1840 that number grows from 2688 to over 20,000 with mixed raced Creoles representing 18% of the total population of residents of New Orleans. And if that doesn't convince you, here's another indicator, during this same period many many free women of color were acquiring prime real estate in New Orleans under their own names. These women had houses built and passed estates on to their children, but notice this detail, the children of these mixed-raced women had different last names then their mothers. We're not talking about small amounts of property here. By 1860 $15 million dollars worth of property was in the name of children with last names that were not the same as that of their mothers, oh and by the way, a lot of that property was in the neighborhood where Edna rents her pidgeon house just around the corner from Esplanade street- in other words around the corner and walking distance from millionaire row. Well, that's really interesting, and I guess, does add a new dimension to the subtext in the language for sure. Well, it does, and it is likely something readers of the day would have certainly understood, more than we do 100 years later when the stakes of identifying as being of mixed raced heritage are not the difference between freedom and slavery. But beyond just that, it's an example of cultures clashing. Edna represents an outwardly prudish Puritan culture coming into a society that is French, Spanish and Caribbean- very different thinking. This is a de-facto multi-cultural world; it's Catholic; it's French-speaking; it's international. She doesn't understand what she's seeing. And in that regard, her own situational reality is something she's realizing she is only beginning to understand, and she comes into it all very gradually. She is not, in Adele's words, “One of them.” In fact, there may have been irony in the narrator in Grand Isle suggesting that Robert LeBrun's relationships every summer were platonic. His relationship with the girl in Mexico we will see most certainly is not, but nor was his relationship with Mariequeita on Grand Isle, the girl they meet on the day they spent together. Indeed. You may be right- perhaps there is a real sense that Edna has been blind, and perhaps not just to her husband but by an entire society that presents itself one way but in reality is something entirely different altogether. When she visits Adele and her husband at their home, everything seems perfect- of course. Adele is the perfect woman with this perfect life. Adele is beautiful. Her husband adores her. The Ratignolle's marriage is blissful, in fact to use the narrator's words, “The Ratignolles' understood each other perfectly. If ever the fusion of two human beings into one has been accomplished on this sphere it was surely in their union.” Do you think it's sarcasm again? Was it truly perfect, or just presenting itself to be perfect? It's really hard to tell. Maybe they have worked out a great life together. I think there is a lot in this passage to suggest they are truly happy together. Edna even expresses that their home is much happier than hers. She quotes that famous Chinese proverb “Better a dinner of herbs”. The entire quote is “Better a dinner of herbs than a stalled ox where hate is.”- meaning her house has better food but she thinks of it as a hateful place- whereas this place is the opposite. Poor thing- she sees her reality for what it is. I still see a little sarcasm in the narrator's language, but even if Adele is every bit as perfect as she seems, and even if her home is every bit as perfect as it seems, and even if her husband is every bit as perfect as he seems, in the most real of ways, that could all be true and it wouldn't matter. E Precisely, The Ratignole's life can be every bit as perfect as it appears. and it wouldn't make Edna want it any more. Edna leaves Adele's happy home, realizing that even if she could have it it's not the life she wants. She wouldn't want that world even if Leonce loved her. It's just not for her. The problem is, that's as far as she's gotten with her problem solving. All she knows is what she DOESN'T want. Her new world is a world of negation. She wants to quit, and so she does. She absolutely disregards all her duties to the point that it finally angers Leonce enough to confront her. “It seems to me the utmost folly for a woman at the head of a household, and the mother of children, to spend in an atelier days which would be better employed contriving for the comfort of her family.” An atelier is an artist studio. It' seems Edna has left all the responsibilities she had as a housewife as well as a mother. And let me add, Edna was never dusting, cooking, or bathing her children. She has several house keepers and nannies. But now, she's not even overseeing what others are doing. Instead, she's devoting herself entirely to painting. And surprisingly, Leonce doesn't even have a problem with that in and of itself. Edna tells her husband, “I feel like painting.” To which he responds, “Then in God's name paint! But don't let the family go to the devil. There's Madame Ratignolle, because she keeps up her music, she doesn't let everything else go to chaos. And she's more of a musician than you are a painter.” Yikes, that may be honest, but it does come across as a little harsh. I know. I think it's kind of a funny line. To which, Edna has an interesting comeback- it's like she knows it's not about the painting. She says, “It isn't on account of the painting that I let things go.” He asks her then why she's let everything go, but she has no answer. She says she just doesn't know. Garry, do you want to take a stab at what's going on with Edna? Well, I do want to tread carefully. What is fascinating about this book is not so much that Chopin is arguing for any specific course of action, or warning against any specific set of behaviors. She doesn't condemn Edna for anything, not even the affair she will have with Arobin. Instead of judging, Chopin, to me, seems to be raising questions. And it is the questions that she raises that are so interesting. Edna is desperately trying to rewrite the narrative of her life. There is no question about that. But that is an artistic endeavor, in some ways like painting or singing. I guess we can say Chopin is blending her metaphors here. Edna doesn't want to be a parrot and copy, but she's living her life exactly the way she is painting- it's uncontrolled; it's undisciplined; it's impulsive. I'd also say, it's rather unoriginal. There is no doubt that the social roles offered to her are restrictive. There's no doubt her marriage is a problem, but as we get farther into the story, it's hard to believe that even if all of these problems could be rectified that Edna would be able define a life for herself. We, as humans, are always more than a reaction to the social and cultural forces in our world- I hate to get back to the word we used last week, but I can't get away from it. Even under strict social norms, which I might add, Edna is NOT under for her time period- she is after all one of the most privileged humans on planet Earth at that particular time in human history, but even if she were under severe restrictions, she, as a human, still has agency- we all do. Yes- and to use Chopin's words from chapter 6, Mrs Pontellier was beginning to realize her position as an individual as a human being, and to recognize her relations as an individual to the world WITHIN and about her. I think that Edna is like the rest of us in that it's easier to understand and manage the world about us as opposed to the world within. At least I can SEE the world about me- how can I see within? How can I understand myself? And so Edna goes to the world of Madame Reisz having discarded the world of Adele Ratignolle- the world of art, the world of the artist- which is where Edna goes in chapter 21. I would argue that she sees it as the polar opposite of Adele's reality. There is the Adele version of being a woman- a totally objectified, sexualized but mothering type of woman= versus this version of womanhood who is basically asexually. Perhaps Madame Reisz isn't a woman at all- she's an artist. Except that world, the world of the artist, comes with its own share of difficulties nevermind that it is simply more uncomfortable. Reisz' house is described as “dingy”. There's a good deal of smoke and soot. It's a small apartment. There's a magnificent piano, but no elegant food or servants or silver trays for calling cards. She cooks her meals on a gasoline stove herself. Let me quote here, “it was there also that she ate, keeping her belongings in a rare old buffet, dingy and battered from a hundred years use.” True, but there is also the music and when the music filled the room it floated out upon the night, over the housetops, the crescent of the river, losing itself in the silence of the air and made Edna sob. The art is otherworldly, and there is something to that. Something attractive maybe even metaphysical. I want to talk about Kate Chopin's choice of music. I don't think we noted this in episode one, but Chopin was an accomplished pianist. She played by ear and read music. She held parties, almost identical to the ones she described Madame Ratignole throwing in the book with dancing and card playing. Music was a very big deal to Kate Chopin, so when she includes specific music in her writing, she's not just dropping in commonly used songs, she uses artists she likes for specific reasons, and in this novel, the pianist Frederic Chopin is selected intentionally- and not because he has the same last name, although I did check that out- they are not related. Garry, as a musician yourself, what can you tell us about Frederic Chopin, the Polish composer and pianist? Well, let me make this comparison, Frederic Chopin's music in his day was the pelvis gyrating Elvis' Rock in Roll of his day. It was provocative. 19th century attitudes towards this type of harmony driven romantic music would seem hysterical to us. They were seen as sensual and a destructive force, especially for women. This may even be Chopin's sassy narrator playing with us again- Frederic Chopin's music is definitely driving sensuality in Edna. To say Kate Chopin is using it ironically is likely taking it too far, but I don't know, maybe not. This narrator has been ironic before. The main undeniable connection is that Madame Reisz plays Impromptus. Impromptus are improvisational music. Frederic Chopin wrote only four of them in his career. The one Kate selects here is called Fantasie-Impromptu in C minor- it's the only one in a minor key that he ever wrote. You can pull it up on Spotify and hear it for yourself. It is full of rhythmical difficulties. It's very difficult to play. It's quick and full of emotion. There is banging on low notes at times, thrills and rolling notes going faster and slower at others points. Frederic Chopin, by the way, was a very temperamental person and in some ways shares a lot of the personality quirks of Madame Reisz. But he did have an interesting philosophy about music that I really like and does connect to our book. He is recorded to have said this, “words were born of sounds; sounds existed before words…Sounds are used to make music just as words are used to form language. Thought is expressed through sounds. And undefined human utterance is mere sound; the art of manipulating sounds is music.” Interesting, music is thoughts as sounds. I like the expression “undefined human utterance” especially in regard to Edna because she absolutely cannot get her thoughts out nor is she willing to share then with anyone. She expresses more than once that her inner world was hers and hers alone. She can't get her thoughts out when she talks to Adele; she can't get them out when she talks to her husband, and she can't get them out even with Madame Reisz which would have been a very safe space for her to express herself. At the end of chapter 21, she's sobbing at the music and holding in her hands a letter from Robert LeBrun crumpled and damp with tears. It would have helped her to have found someone to talk to, maybe the Dr. Mandelet that Leonce goes to in chapter 22 for advice about how to help his wife. What we find out from Leonce's conversation is that Edna has withdrawn from every single person in her world. She won't even go to her sister's wedding. What the doctor sees when he goes to dinner at their house is a very outwardly engaging woman but an inwardly withdrawn one. The Doctor wonders if she's having an affair, but she isn't. She is, to use the title of the book, One Solitary Soul. As a human being, there are only so many types of relationships we find meaning in: we have our parents and birth family, we have our intimate relationship, we have our children (if we have any), we have our professional relationships, and we have our social friends- at least one of these has to be working for us. Edna finds no satisfaction in any of them. She doesn't have a trusting relationship anywhere. Yes, every single relationship in her life is basically a burden. Edna is trying to relieve herself of every single responsibility in the world hoping that getting out of relationships will help her expand her identity. The problem is getting RID of responsibilities is not really the answer. To find meaning in this world you must DO something worth doing. Something that takes strength and energy. Something you can be proud of. Of course as a classroom teacher, that is what we do everyday. It's not helpful to give students high grades or marks for nothing. It weakens them. When you give them a difficult task and then they are able to do that task, they grow, they get strong, they learn they are capable of even great responsibilities. If you want to get strong, you have to take ON responsibilities- you have to practice strength training, Edna goes the opposite way here. Edna does look for models, and if she wanted a career path, or a professional life like we think of in our era, Chopin threw in a character that could have served that function. It's what I see going on in the chapters about the races. Edna is actually really good at horse gambling. She knows horses. She knows the horse-racing business and knows it well. The text actually says that she knows more about horse-racing than anyone in New Orleans. In fact, it's her knowledge about horses that puts her on the radar of the man she eventually has the sexual relationship with, Alcee Arobin. Let's read the section where we see this relationship, if we want to call it that, take shape. Arobin had first seen her perform well at the tracks and to use the narrator's words, he admired Edna extravagantly after meeting her at the races with her father. Mrs. Highcamp is also a completely different version of a feminine ideal, although neither Edna nor the narrator seem to think enough of to give her a first name. This confused me some when I read this because in my mind, Mrs. James Highcamp would have been this type of a liberated woman that Chopin might want to have Edna admire. She's clearly sexualy liberated, but beyond that she's worldly, intelligent, slim, tall. Her daughter is educated, participates in political societies, book clubs, that sort of thing. But nothing about Mrs. James Highcamp is alluring to Edna at all. She suffers Mrs. James Highcamp because of her interest in Arobin. Let's read about these encounters between Arobin and Edna. Here's the first one Page 86 So, Arobin becomes fascinated with Edna, in part because she is so smart and different from other women. At the end of that evening, they dined with the Highcamps. And afterwards Arobin takes Edna home. The text says this “She wanted something to happen- something, anything, she did not know what. She regretted that she had not made Arobin stay a half hour to talk over the horses. She counted the money she had won. There was nothing else to do, so she went to bed, and tossed there for hours in a sort of monotonous agitation. And so the relationship with Arobin is born out of boredom. Yes, the dominant movement in Edna's life is always drifting towards boredom. Edna wants to rewrite her social script, but she can't seem to define what she wants. She has trouble speaking, so she has no words to write her own story. She doesn't want to be a mother; she doesn't want to work except in sunny weather; she has an opportunity with Mrs. Highcamp to get involved with political or literary women; but that doesn't spark her interest. She could make a name for herself at the races, but the money doesn't motivate her- she's always had it and in some ways doesn't seem to know a world without money. So, she's going to default into this relationship with Arobin. I'm going to suggest that she is again playing the part of the parrot. Messing around with Arobin is just the kind of thing she sees men doing. It's what Victor does; it may be what her husband does; it is likely what Robert is doing down in Mexico, so she's going to try to mimic male behavior since she hasn't really found a female model she's interested in emulating, and Arobin is an opportunitiy for this. And yet, she's self-aware enough to not be seduced by Arobin. The first time he really tries to make a move on her by kissing her hand, this is what she says which I find insightful, “When she was alone she looked mechanically at the back of her hand which he had kissed so warmly. Then she leaned her head down on the mantlepiece. She felt something like a woman who in a moment of passion is betrayed into an act of infidelity, and realizes the significance of the act without being wholly awakened from its glamour. The thought was passing vaguely through her mind, “what would he think?” She did not mean her husband; she was thinking of Robert LeBrun. Her husband seemed to her now like a person whom she had married without love as an excuse. She lit a candle and went up to her room. Alcee Arobin was absolutely nothing to her. Yet his presence, his manners, the warmth of his glances, and above all the touch of his lips upon her hand had acted like a narcotic upon her. She slept a languorous sleep, interwoven with vanishing dreams.” Garry, is there a connection between Edna's boredom with her new life and her desire to pursue this relationship with Arobin. Well, again, Dr. Kate Chopin is playing the psychologist. Science has absolutely confirmed there is a relationship with boredom and risk-taking behaviors. In other words, the more bored you find yourself, the more likely you are to do something risky. It's one reason teenagers are so prone to dangerous behaviors like drugs. They don't know yet how to cope with personal down time. They can't manage their own boredom. Bored people don't know what they want to do. They also score low on scares that measure self-awareness. Bored people can't monitor their own moods or understand what they truly want. And here's another characteristic that should sound familiar in the life of Mrs. Edna Pontellier, notice that last line “vanishing dreams”, Edna is not dreaming. She's not working at writing a script for her life..structuring a story for herself. Her dreams and not building anything, they are vanishing. That's not good. And it's not that doesn't have illusions, she does, but a dream is not an illusion. Dreams are what inspire us to do something different. Both a dream and an illusion are unreal, but an illusion will always be an illusion- it has no chance of becoming real; out of dreams new realities are born. We are not seeing Edna dream. Her dreams are vanishing. Which brings us to the place where I want to end with this episode- chapter 26 and Edna's decision to move out of her husband's house. I mentioned that this book is constructed with the archetypal 3 in mind at every point. Edna has been living on Esplanade street- the wealthy gilded cage life, and she doesn't want that. She has visited Madame Reisz's apartment, but she doesn't seem to want that- it's, and I quote, “cheerless and dingy to Edna”. So what does she do? She moves two steps away from Esplanade Street, to a house Ellen calls, “the pigeon house.” Pigeons are the oldest domesticated bird in the world. They never fly far from home- homing pigeons is actually a term. She's building an illusion. Edna is going out of her husband's house to a place around the corner, but is she really building a new life of any kind? What is this about? Edna describes it to Madame Reisz, this way, “I know I shall like it, like the feeling of freedom and independence.” But is the feeling of freedom and independence the same as actually having freedom and independence? Well, obviously not. They are worlds apart. But Edna lives in feelings. She works when she feels like it. She plays with her children when she feels like it, and now she admits to Madame Reisz that she's in love with Robert LeBrun, who by the way is coming back. And when she finds that out she feels, and I quote “glad and happy to be alive.” And what does she do after that, she stops at a candy store, buys a box to send to her children who are with their grandparents in the country and she writes a charming letter to her husband. Her letter was brilliant and brimming with cheerfulness. I'm sorry, but Edna frustrates the feminist in me. Well, Edna is struggling for sure. She can't connect with people. She can't identify a dream worth pursuing. She can't write her own story. There is no doubt that a lot of this has to so with cultural and social forces at work in her world. These are powerful forces. However, it is not the outside forces of her world that will do her in. Edna is smart. She's beautiful. She's charming. She actually has a lot going for her, especially for a woman during this time period. If Chopin had wanted to write a story where a woman breaks free and soars, she has a protagonist who is positioned to do that very thing. But she's in a mess. And maybe that's why she's so relatable. Many of us have made messes of our lives. We have an incredible ability to screw up, but humans are also incredibly resilient. Look at Chopin's own life as an example. In some ways, she's both Adele Ragntingole and Madame Reiz, at different points in her life she'd been both. She may even have been Mrs. James Highcamp to a lesser degree. Why is Edna struggling here? Well, humans are incredibly resilient, but you know what else we are- we are social beings. Let's revisit that original book title, “One Solitary Soul”- it's my experience that no one gets out alone- not even the rich, the beautiful or the smart. No one gets out alone. Ah, Edna is strong enough to confront the forces without, but who will help her confront the forces within? And so next episode, we will see her confront those internal forces. There are no more female characters to meet; no more male characters either for that matter. We will see Edna confront Edna alone, and we will see what happens. Thank you for listening. If you enjoy our podcast, please share it with a friend, a relative, your classmates, your students. We only grow when you share. Also, come visit with us via our social media how to love lit podcast- on Instagram, facebook and our website. Feel free to ask questions, give us your thoughts, recommend books. These are all things we love. Thanks for being with us today. Peace out.
There's so much stigma around cannabis, but there's even more stigma around mom's who use cannabis, usually for fear that they suddenly become a bad parent. This episode with Katy Ibsen, founder & publisher of Sweet Jane Magazine. We talk about the threat of women (unknowingly) getting drug tested in the hospital and Child Protective Services taking away their baby. We discuss the studies happening right now that are trying to find out if consuming cannabis during pregnancy is safe. We get real and RAW! This episode is sponsored by Weedmaps ~ https://wmaps.app.link/mccartergetshigh (download their free app today) to look for deals, local dispensaries and order online for convenient pickup!
This #StudentStory features Katherine Ibsen, a current UC Berkeley undergraduate student and alumna of Sacramento City College. A NISTS 2022 Transfer Student Ambassador, Katie sits down with Dr. Heather Adams to share the motivations behind her love of anthropology and fashion, to touch upon her experience with impactful mentorship as a CC student, and to make the case for implementing better support systems for students at pivotal moments of their educational journey. About Our GuestKatie Ibsen is an undergraduate transfer student currently studying Anthropology at the University of California, Berkeley. While in high school, Katie suffered from undiagnosed ADHD and struggled academically in her courses. During her senior year, she was overwhelmed with school and did not submit any college applications. At the time, she did not realize that she had alternative options to a four-year degree, and so she ultimately took a gap year to work and consider her own goals. This is when Katie learned about the benefits of pursuing a community college education. During her time at community college, Katie found a community of “vloggers” on YouTube whose main content centered on community college. She began to watch videos focused on study skills and tips for submitting applications. Through these videos, Katie was able to regain stability and motivation. She enrolled at the community college full-time and decided that it was her turn to promote the community college pathway by developing her own vlogs about her educational journey.Today, Katie actively works to spread the word to others about the benefits of a community college education. Using her YouTube channel, the Vintage Academic, as a platform, Katie connects with hundreds of students to provide them with valuable information and vlogs that detail her transfer pathway.Learn more about Katie's story HERE!Follow Katie's journey online!The Vintage Academic: YouTube & InstagramAccepted Consulting: Website & InstagramFind the 2022 Transfer Ambassador winners announcement HERE! #TransferLeadership #TransferStudents #NISTS #TransferPride #TransferSuccess #TransferChampion #TransferAdvocacy #TransferVoiceAtTheTable #TNTalks #TransferNationKeep talking with Transfer NationIG: @WeAreTransferNationTikTok: @TransferNationTwitter: @TransferPrideFB Group: Transfer NationEmail: WeAreTransferNation@gmail.comTalk soon!Show CreditsHost | Dr. Heather AdamsGuest | Katherine IbsenProducers | Sam Kaplan, Brandon RodríguezSound Editing | Abraham Urias
Welcome Katie Ibsen! This week I talk with UC Berkeley undergraduate (and soon to be alumni!) Katie Ibsen @thevintageacademic on Instagram. Katie is a transfer student and is passionate about de-stigmatizing community college education and works to help other's transfer through her social media and through her job at Accepted Consulting. Katie discusses her fieldwork experiences, future plans, and favorite spots on the UCB campus. Follow @thatanthropodcast on Instagram, and @ThatAnthroPod on Twitter for more behind the scenes content. Brought to you in collaboration with the American Anthropological Association check out their podcast library here https://www.americananthro.org/StayInformed/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=1629 Merch: https://www.redbubble.com/i/sticker/That-Anthro-Podcast-Sticker-by-thatanthropod/89065514.JCQM3
For Video Edition, Please Click and Subscribe Here: https://youtu.be/R6aM_1yf2hc Dorothy Lyman is a two-time Emmy© Award-winning actress for her work as Opal Gardner on “All My Children” and is widely known for her co-starring role on “Mama's Family,” alongside Vicki Lawrence and Carol Burnett. In addition to her numerous film and television appearances, Ms. Lyman also directed 75 episodes of the Fran Drescher sitcom “The Nanny.” Her other plays are Enemy (an adaptation of Ibsen's An Enemy of the People), A Rage in Tenure and Soft Landing (directed by John Tillinger) all developed and produced by Players Workshop in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico. In The Bleak Midwinter was produced in New York City and Westchester in 2019. Ms. Lyman's directing career began in 1980 when she produced and directed the original off-Broadway production of A Coupla White Chicks Sitting Around Talking starring Susan Sarandon and Eileen Brennan, and the subsequent national tour starring Elizabeth Ashley and Susan Anton. Her feature films, The Northern Kingdom and Split Ends, are available on Netflix. She lives in Washington Depot, Connecticut and New York City.
In this episode Michael talks to Anders Ibsen. Anders started his real estate career in 2018 and by 2021 had closed 61 transactions in one year. His success was well earned by his dedication to using a process and showing up every day. He is very deliberate in his approach. Anders talks about the need for using a process and understanding your strengths and weaknesses. He will be very honest and say when he started, he had to work hard and spend money to make money. Today he has a team and a niche that has be very well thought out and has allowed him to live the life he wants to have. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/coachingmin/support