My Act of Resistance: Drunk Driving

For my act of resistance I chose to inform people on something that I feel very strongly about which is drunk driving. I informed my friends and family on thanksgiving by handing out sheets of paper that said the following:
Every single injury and death caused by drunk driving is totally preventable. Yet 65% of all traffic accidents are a result of drunk driving. After having only a few drinks even simple tasks such as writing become more difficult. Don’t take the risk, stay the night, call a cab, or have a designated driver. Be safe don’t make a life altering mistake that could have easily been prevented. You never know how much you’ll regret it or how many people will be hurt. Make sure you have a safe and happy thanksgiving and encourage those around you to do the same.
I chose drunk driving as my act of awareness not only because I knew a lot of the friends and family there would be drinking but also because I have had family members who have gotten in car accidents after drinking or been hit by someone who was drinking. I think that driving is dangerous enough without drunk drivers because you never know what is going on in the minds of people around you and you should always be 100% aware of your surroundings, which is impossible even after only one drink. I never think it is a good idea to get in the car with someone who has been drinking it is too dangerous and I think it is done too often and not thought about enough. I know many people that have multiple DUI’s and still drink and drive and I think they don’t think about the possible consequences as much as they should. So by doing this I hoped that not only would it effect my friends and families decisions on Thanksgiving but also in the future.
The reactions to my handout were great. Everyone really paid attention and asked me what made me decide to do it so I told them about our project and why I chose drunk driving. We all talked about it later and I felt that I really got the point across and a lot of my family told me that they were proud of me for standing up for what I believed in. There were a few designated drivers on Thanksgiving. And my parents and some of my aunts and uncles really took what I was doing seriously and didn’t drink. Drinking isn’t as big of a deal by my mother’s family as it is by my dads anyway but I still feel that I made a difference.
In the future I would like to inform an even larger group of people who I may not be as closely related to. There were about 50 people all together at my Thanksgiving dinner. I think 50 is a good start but it would be great in the future if I could figure out a way to inform more people, maybe even three times that and see the difference in their prospective as well. Because I think when people really see that something is important enough to you to take the time out and inform them that is when they really listen.
I think that my act still helped the problem even though it wasn’t a very large group of people because my friends and family really did pay attention and rearrange their plans to support me. In the future I hope they will think of me when they go places and make plans to have a safe way home if they are drinking. I feel really good about informing my friends and family and helping them make the best decisions possible so they don’t hurt themselves or others. And in the future maybe I will inform them on something else or arrange some way to inform a larger group of people on drunk driving. It definitely feels good to know that I made even a small change in my families plans because you never know what could of happened if I didn’t. I would love to do that again in the future. It makes me feel like I can really make a difference.

Overall!

I really enjoyed this play! In contrast to the other plays it really showed the power of women, and how they are not completely dependent on men. I liked the new twist where the men were the desperate ones instead of the women :). The play really shows how unity and coming together to reach a common goal really works. It is shown through the women achieving what they wanted as well as in the end where the men realize they are all the same and going through the same thing and can look past their differences to get what they want. Im not sure if the men truly did it because they love their wives or because they really love sex but its clear that they do have love for their wives either way so I guess it doesn't matter what the motive for piece really was as long as it was accomplished.
This was a really good book to me it was funny and entertaining. And I think it has a really good moral that you can relate to any current event. I shows that people can come together and solve a problem. And it shows that you should never underestimate the power of a woman! Good story.

Would This Work Today?

I wonder if this would work today to solve a modern issue. It doesn't really seem like it would. In the book there a strong unity between men and women. And like I said earlier the men just seem really loyal to their wives. Whereas today this would probably not be the case. It would be very hard to get all the women to take the idea seriously and really participate. And if even one or two women did not stick to the plan they could ruin it for everyone because the men would have a way to get what they wanted without giving into the women. It just doesn't seem likely that all the women would actually participate and that the men would actually not cheat. However I still think that women do have the power to do something like this individually, and that women have the power to get what they want through other means. Just maybe not this way. I dont know. Maybe someone else would argue differently but thats what I think.

Stage Directions

Stage directions are a very important part of this play. They are important in a lot of plays but in this play because it is so simple and doesn't have sub plots to help characterize certain characters the stage directions really help the reader in characterizing certain characters and showing how they react to certain things, etc. If we didn't have stage directions in this play it would be very hard to understand some of the characters and how they say certain things because there are no other sub plots or settings to help express ideas.

PEACE

One of the puns in the end of the play is peace. Peace is what the women want the men to want and peace is a YOUNG beautiful woman as well. This pun was very clever to me. I don't know what I really think about it to be honest. I know that the fact that they are refering to different places they want as body parts could be considered somewhat degrating but Im not sure if thats what the author was going for. Maybe it was just supposed to show how closely the women are related to peace? or to remind you how the play reached this end...through the women. I don't know what I originally thought was that it was just about showing what the men were really after which was just the woman and to show that maybe in the end they still really hadn't even reached the point of comprehension of WHY their should be peace besides the fact that without it they would not be able to have what they desired most.

"War" of the Sexes

This seems to be one of the main themes of the play right? Well I was just thinking to myself how ironic this really is. I mean the play is to end a war and the way that this goal is reached is by creating two seperates "forces" or "armys" of men and women. So in order to end the "war" with their wives the men have to end the other actual war that they are fighting. I don't know it just seemed funny to me that the theme had the word war in it because if you look at it that way it just becomes kind of ironic. There is a war created to end another war. Even though obviously the war the women create is not about using actual weapons or killing or anything. They use their own weapon to hurt the men emotionally until they give in. Just an interesting thought I had on how ironic that can be if you look at it that way LOL.

Myrrine and Kinesias

One of my favorite parts of the play was the exchange between Myrrine and Kinesias. It says a lot about how the "War of the Sexes" is going and whos going to win, and without it I don't think it would really be clear how much power the women really did have over the men. The way Myrrine is able to get so close to Kinesias without doing anything really shows that she is in the fight for as long as it takes. She is able to lead him on so much and she never falters. Even though she obviously has a clear opportunity to have sex with him she doesn't! And he really thinks that she is going to thats the funny thing. And she is even controlling his actions because he is so desperate, making him lay down and get back up repeatedly. She just makes him want her more and more its so funny to me. She just has so much power over his actions and emotions. And she's still on the womans side showing how strong the womans "Army" really is, as a whole at least, considering it is clear not everyone on the womens side would have been so strong if given the same opportunity.

Choruses

The choruses of the old women and the old men are interesting to me. They add an interesting point to the play because it really shows you that not only are the young men and women a part of this so are the old men and women. They each help their own and help get the point of the wholes across. I think this adds a lot to the theme of the "War of the Sexes" it shows how all the women can come together and really prove a point and get what they want. And how unity is important in accomplishing a task like this. Without the choruses this play would be even simpler and I think it would make the overall actions of the play less signifigant. Because it would seem to be affecting a smaller group and would take away from the overall idea.

Punny!

The puns in this book were very interesting to me. They added a lot to the book and some even created a deeper meaning for example the "peace" pun in the end. Whereas others really just added to the humor of the book as a whole, such as "Who penetrates our positions" (79). Its just so funny when your reading and you see a simple pun like this. I think its really cool that the play has a comedic element to it. Because it could have easily been written without puns. But the puns really do add a lot to the book overall. And to be able to laugh to yourself while you are reading a play is always fun. Its better than having it be completely serious. Because like I said it could definetely have been written without but it just shows you how witty women are, even maybe unintentionally. Overall I just think it adds a lot to the characters, plot, and meaning of the play. I never knew puns could become such as important element of a play!

Love, Not Merely Sex?

In the introduction it was mentioned that this book is about "Love, Not Merely Sex" (9). After reading the play in some ways I do agree with this. Granted it all takes place in 24 hours to maybe after a longer period of time this would not be true, but based on what happened in this 24 hours it seems as though the men would have remained loyal to their wives and would not have cheated on them even though they practicing abstinence. You know what I mean? Like the men never showed interest in any one other than their own wife. So maybe that says something about love? Because today that might not have been the case. Maybe the men just didn't have any opportunities to cheat in the book because it was something being practiced by majority of the women. Or maybe they did and they just really loved their wives. Anyway I suppose that is a good example of how much the husbands loved their wives, because I mean they were really desperate but their eyes didn't seem to wonder over the course of the play. The women were somewhat worried about the young girl being around their husbands though so maybe if the play would have been over a long period of time things would have went differently. And maybe it would have become less about love and more about sex because of the mens desperation.

My Expectations

After reading the introduction to Lysistrata I was very interested in seeing how the play would go. I liked the idea that the book was about "Love, not merely sex" (9) and "the bond between husband and wife" (9). The introduction gave me a great insight as to what was to come in the book.
Even though it did give you these main idea, i still had a lot of things to wonder about. Even though I knew the play involved sex and love and of course married couples and I knew the plot I was wondering how they would talk and how the abstinence for peace would come about and how simple or complex the language would be. But I definetely felt more prepared to read it because I knew the basic ideas.
Over all I think the introduction helped a lot in developing an idea about the play and looking back now I can understand more of what its talking about than I could before I read the play.

Hedda (It's Over)

Overall I liked the book. It had a lot of twists and turns, some unexpected. Everything turned out to be so much different than I would have predicted in the beginning. I usually like books that I can relate to in one way or the other but I ended up enjoying this book more than I thought I would. I think that the theme of Appearance vs. Reality did a lot for this book and that if everyone would have been exactly how they appeared to be this book would not have been half as good. I guess that's one way I can relate to the book, because it's true that you can't judge a book by its cover. And people are a lot different than they appear to be most of the time.

Hedda Vs. Bernarda

Hedda and Bernarda are the two leading ladies of the books we read. Bernarda is a dictator in her house. She controls the lives of her children and everyone else around her. She is a lot different than Hedda because during the book she appears to be somewhat out of control and in the end we see how she maintains her control and the author alludes to the fact that she will continue to have that control after the book was over. Hedda on the other hand. Appears to be in control in the beginning and at the end we see she never really was. And at the end of the book she ends her own life. Another major difference is Bernarda is a mom, and that is something Hedda (although she may of been in the near future) never became.

Hedda was Pregnant Right?

I don't really get the point of Hedda being pregnant in the book. I mean Ibsen kind of alludes to the fact that she is in the beginning and then? She committed suicide and no one says anything about the fact that she had taken two lives...so what was the point? Was it just to show her character because he could of just had her state that she didn't want to have children or something? I guess it does add a little something to the book, but not much. Really its just another unanswered question at the end of the book.

Hedda's Childhood

Everyone looks at Hedda as such a horrible person, right? But I'm just wondering if her childhood could be somewhat of a justification for her behavior. She was raised by a general, someone with power and control of people, including her. She looked up to her father the general and she probably thought of him asvery successful and hoped she could be like him one day. Therefore the way she is might correlate a lot with how she was raised. And her tendencies may not be completely be her fault. Just a Thought.

Thea

Thea is one of those characters who is someone you don't expect. Her appearance makes her seem fragile and insignificant. Someone who could easily be looked over. She has blonde hair, blue eyes. Who would expect that such a light feminine character to be defying the roles of women the way Thea is? She left her marriage, she has control of her life, and she may have even written the whole manuscript on her own, who really knows? But we know she has the control of her own life that Hedda is dying for. And she doesn't have to pretend to have it. She really does. Hedda acts like she ahs this control, and Thea doesn't but she has it. The theme of appearance vs. reality makes this book so much fun. It wouldn't be as fun if you could just look at a character and know what they were all about its more fun to make assumptions and then be wrong. It keeps you guessing about what will happen next.

Pistols

Ibsen is so clever. The way he uses pistols to show the struggle for power and inter conflicts of Hedda. Hedda has General Gabler (her fathers) pistol. She uses it as a tool to scare others for example in Act Two when she tells Judge, "And now Judge I'm going to shoot you" or something like that. She just wants to control others and she uses the pistols to do this. Tesman reacts negatively to them and he is scared. She is taking control of other peoples emotions because thats what she wants, control. This is interesting because at the end of the play, when she takes her own life using her pistol, she is doing this again. Does that mean she took control?

Its all About Power Baby! :)

I think power is very important in this book. Everyone is so power hungry. And when you think they have clear intensions they probably do not. Everyone is out to help themselves. It is so interesting to me because it is very realistic. People don't care how they reach the top they are just worried about getting there. The only completely sincere character in the book who doesn't seem to only be looking out for herself is Aunt Julie.

My First Impressions (Hedda and George)

After reading the first act I felt like I had a good idea of the characters. I think Hedda is snobby but lovable. I thought this due to the enconter between her and Aunt Julie, and her and Thea as well. Hedda seems to be a bit controlling and definetely seems sly like she's working to keep people in places where she can play off of them. She definetely seems to be the kind of character with alterior motives. George on the other hand seems more laid back and easier to read. He throws all his cards on the table so you can see exactly whats going on in his mind. He seems very simple and you know exactly what he is into. You don't have to work hard to figure it out. I think it is a little weird they are a couple considering they don't seem to have much in common, but after analysising Hedda I'm sure theres some reason. Its just not obvious yet. Which is probably how Hedda wants it.

Judge Brack

Judge Brack is such an interesting character to me. Ibsens choice of words in the description of Brack on page 242 really says a lot about him and for me it was quite forshadowing in some aspects. Brack is described as "a man of forty five...his face is roundish with a distinguished profile...carefully groomed...neatly clipped ends...a bit TOO youthful for his age" (242). Wow. So when I read this I knew he would be a very interesting character. The distinguished profile 's suggests he is well known, he's not just your average person walking down the street he's recognizable. After analysising this I knew he would be important to how the book played out. Next he is careful groomed with neatly clipped ends. He cares a lot about his appearance, and this can suggest a lot about himself in general. I don't know if you would catch this without reading on more but maybe this could also be forshadowing to how in the end it was really all about him and getting things to go the way he wanted (self-centered). And last but not least he is youthful for his age, a bit TOO youthful. This could suggest a lot about what happens for one the triangle that he wants between himself and the Tesman's. This is not something you would expect from someone in his time, and especially someone his age. Because most people his age would probably be more traditional and in the past, while his is in the present. This can also say something about how motivated he is to get what he wants, he's not ready to embrace his age yet and still is looking for fun. He would also at his age be expected to settle down which he doesn't want to do either. Brack is definetely interesting, and his description says a lot about him.

Appearance Vs. Reality (Hedda)

I think appearance vs. reality is the most interesting theme in this book. I mean really nothing is as it seems with this characters. For example Hedda always wants to appear in control, she wants to control the people around her, she wants to be able to do and get what she wants when she wants. She tries so hard to fight the idea of males in control. But she can't and that's when we see her FINALLY take control by ending her own life. She didn't know what else to do and since she didn't see any other way other and she couldn't bear look into change or the future for the answer she "quit" while she could. So while Hedda may seem to be a strong character she really is not, and in the end she may be considered the weakest character in the book, because everyone else has at least a little control. The whole time she works so hard to appear in control until reality catches up with her.