A Closer Look at The Merchant of Venice

This is my attempt of a close reading eassay. The text I had the pleasure of working with was The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare, written in 1596/ 97. It is amazing to see how much information you can get out of such a small piece of text. Exercises like this make you fall in love with Shakespeare even more, or at least I do. If anything should be unclear, please feel free to leave a comment. Enjoy!

– Dea ♔

A Closer Look at The Merchant in Venice

Love is a central part of William Shakespeare's comedies. I am going to have a closer look at Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice, act 3, scene 2, line 1-185. This is a passage where we very clearly see the important role love plays. Here Bassanio determines which casket he wants to open, and after choosing the right one, he receives a ring from Portia. The scene is the moment which eventually brings the two plots of the play together, and it is a key moment for understanding the rest of the play.

In the opening of act 3, scene 2 we meet Portia, Bassanio and their trains. It is time for the casket ceremony. The two princes who have undertaken this task before Bassanio chose two different caskets and both of them were unsuccessful. The reader is therefore quite certain of which casket Bassanio needs to pick to win Portia's love. We might also have an expectation that the leaden casket is going to be his choice because it is the only casket that has not yet been opened. Another fact we might put into consideration is that the Merchant of Venice is a comedy, and that Bassanio and the other Christians are the ones we root for. A happy ending is therefore very likely, especially since there is love and marriage involved. Still, there is always a chance of failure. This choice may be the always included 'obstacle' the lover has to overcome, or it may lead to it. To begin with, we might think that Bassanio knows nothing more than the princes before him. Then again, when having a closer look, it might be that he actually does. The performance comment in The Norton Shakespeare informs us that some directors decide to present it as if Bassanio has been in Belmont for some time. This is, however, an interpretation. We do also find evidence of hints given by just looking at the text, both explicit and implicit. Portia plays with the idea of helping Bassanio decide on the right casket but arrives at the conclusion that she can not. However, the song that is sung right before Bassanio is to make his choice, tells us that love enters through the eye, and also says that 'With gazing fed: and fancy dies'. This might implicate that the caskets that are the prettiest to look at are not the right choices. If you only love with your eyes, love will die. If we transfer this meaning to Portia, Bassanio should want her and her love not because she is fair and rich, but for her inner qualities. In addition to this clue, the ending syllables, in 'bred', 'head' and 'nourishèd', at the beginning of the song, rhymes with lead. Harry Berger Jr's reflects in his article on 'The Casket Scene' on the fact that we do not know whether Portia is responsible for the hints given or not, or even if she knows about them. Neither do we know if Bassanio picks up on them. However, he claims that the important part is that 'the script encourages us to wonder about, and even to debate, the possibility'. If it is Portia who is behind the leak of information she has acted against her father's will, and also in a way managed to choose her own husband.

We understand from the very beginning that Portia wants Bassanio to choose the right casket. She has mentioned him before by name, in act 1, where Nerissa also says of him that he 'was the best deserving a fair lady'. In the opening sentence of act 3, scene 2 Portia expresses her worry that Bassanio might choose wrongly like the others. She says 'I pray you, tarry: stay a day or two/ Before you hazard, for in choosing wrong I lose your company'. Bassanio is an attractive suitor because he speaks Portia's language and has a more similar cultural background to her than the previous suitors. She has seen him before and has positive thoughts of him. Unlike the other suitors who were princes, lords and counts, Bassanio is described as 'a scholar and a soldier'. This might make him seem a bit more humble than the rest. It could also be that Portia wants a man that originally has less authority than herself. Portia stresses the fact that she can not choose her own husband, nor turn any of the suitors down. Bassanio seems to be the best candidate so far, and if he chooses wrong she could end up with someone she does not approve of. It is therefore important not just to Bassanio that he chooses right, but also to Portia.

Men from all over the world come to take part in the 'lottery' for Portia's hand. As mentioned earlier in the play, suitors who end up choosing the wrong casket are never allowed to marry at all. In other words, by taking part in this 'competition' much is at stake. Yet, maybe the fact that it is so similar to a game, where you might win or you might lose, is what makes Bassanio and the other men so interested? When we think about it, this 'lottery' has some parallels to the bond between Antonio and Shylock. There is a chance that Antonio will not be able to pay Shylock back in time, yet he agrees to the uneasy bond. Antonio is confident, and so is Bassanio in his choice of casket. The two situations are also connected in the way that Portia's money is a way to resolve Bassanio's economic issues. Marrying her is an investment. The 'lottery' is, of course, less of a gamble if Bassanio picks up on the hints.

Bassanio's motive for wanting to marry Portia is questioned quite early in the act. Portia says to him 'Then confess/ What treason there is mingled with your love', and the song includes the lines 'Tell me where is fancy bred:/ Or in the heart or in the head'. The reader also questions his motives because of the way Bassanio introduced Portia to Antonio in act 1. His main focus seems to be on her wealth, and his first sentence about her is 'In Belmont is a lady richly left'. Bassanio needs money, and marrying Portia would be an easy and quick way of gaining wealth. Furthermore, Portia compares herself to the virgin being sacrificed to a sea monster, in Greek mythology. She thereby suggests that Bassanio only wants her for the reward he is given if he 'saves her'. 

Nevertheless, Bassanio ends up choosing the leaden casket containing a picture of Portia. Portia at once places herself below her husband to be. She calls him 'her lord, her governor, her king', and says that 'Myself and what is mine to you and yours/ Is now converted'. All that she rules over and possesses is now his. As a man, he is a natural authority, though Portia is initially the more powerful and the one with the title. Portia is objectified as a 'thing' Bassanio gets along with the castle and wealth, as a reward for choosing right. This is a bit of a contrast to the symbol of the leaden casket, where Bassanio was to appreciate the inner qualities of Portia rather than just pay attention to her beauty and wealth.

In addition to the wealth, property and herself, Portia gives Bassanio one of the greatest symbols of the play, a ring. This is to symbolise her love and their unity. She says it is a ring 'Which when you part from, lose, or give away,/ Let it presage the ruin of your love'. Bassanio answers 'But when this ring/ Parts from this finger, then parts life from hence'. At this moment the ring becomes more than just an object. It is a vow. Bassanio claims that the ring will not come off his finger until he is dead. This is especially important to keep in mind when Portia and Nerissa later in the play dress up as men and ask for the ring back. When Bassanio agrees to give away his ring he does not just give away an object, but he also breaks his vow. At the same time, he becomes in a sort of debt to Portia. Portia has given him all she possibly can. She even helps save Antonio, and might have given him hints on which casket to chose. Bassanio on the other hand, after giving the ring away, has done nothing but take and receive. Bassanio's debt to Portia gives her a form of power in their marriage, similar to the power Shylock has over Antonio because of the bond. 

Apart from the action of the play, it is worth noticing the language used. In this act, as well as  in the rest of the play, the language is characterised by its frequent use of words referencing to economy and business. Bassanio says amongst other things that the caskets are 'purchased by the weight', and he uses phrases such as 'the very sum of' and 'underprizing it'. Portia's language, on the other hand, is marked by love, poetry and mythology. This affect how we see them. We think of Bassanio as a man of business, even in his marriage, while Portia seems to be a dutiful Lady. From line 1-185, with exception of the song, only Portia and Bassanio speak. This might emphasise the emotions of the two characters, and increase the tension and excitement in the room.

As we can see at lot of action crucial to the rest of the play is taking place in act 3, scene 2, from line 1-185. Bassanio has come to Belmont with the same hope as the other suitors, to marry Portia. His motives are questioned, with reason, but Portia likes him better than the other suitors. She might have had a role in indicating which casket to choose through the song, but we do not know this. Neither do we know if Bassanio chooses right because of this. He anyways become Portia's soon to be husband, and she gift him the symbolic ring, which he swears will not come off his finger until he is dead. When he later breaks his vow he also builds up his debt to Portia, something that gives her power in their marriage. The language used reflects on the personalities. Bassanio's choice of words linked to economy portrait him as a businessman both in context to his job and in personal life.

Bibliography:
Dr Elizabeth Elliott, Gender, performance and desire in The Merchant of Venice, lecture, University of Aberdeen, 09.10.18.
Dr Syrithe Pugh, The Merchant of Venice, tutorial, University of Aberdeen, 16.10.18.
Harry Berger, Marriage and Mercifixion in The Merchant of Venice: The Casket Scene Revisited, in Shakespeare Quarterly, volume 32, 1981. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2870008.pdf> [accessed 23 October 2018] (para. 8 of 20)
William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, in The Norton Shakespeare: International Student Edition ed. by Stephen Greenblatt et al. (New York and London: Norton: 2008)

New eyes on Shakespeare

This is an essay on William Shakespeare's The Tempest (published about 1610) and Margaret Atwood's modern version of the play, Hag-Seed (published in 2016). You should read them both. They are brilliant and might teach us a thing or two! I hope you enjoy my thoughts on the works.

– Dea ♔

New eyes on Shakespeare

William Shakespeare's works are often seen as the utmost of British and world literature. His plays are translated into numerous languages, and are preformed and read by professionals as well as amateurs across the globe. When one starts studying drama or literature, works by Shakespeare are rarely the starting point. His works are considered being advanced and there is, when analysing his plays, usually a large amount of interpretation and literary and dramatic terms and tools involved. Even professionals struggle to understand and agree on all the aspects in the various plays. However, after reading Margaret Atwood's novel Hag-Seed¹, my impression is that we do not really need as much as we often think to enjoy and understand Shakespeare. My thesis statement in this essay will therefore be that: 'The Tempest² by William Shakespeare is relevant and reliable to most people'. Atwood's book helps us read Shakespeare's The Tempest in a different way. I will be using her book as my main argument. 

Atwood has very neatly recreated The Tempest in a modern setting. The almost same story is presented twice. This helps us sort out what is important to pay attention to, not only in the novel, but also in the play. Felix is a modern Prospero. He loses his work and passion as a director, and decides to seek revenge on those who betrayed him. There are two Mirandas. Both Anne-Marie who plays her and Felix's daughter Miranda, who is 'present' even though she died many years ago. Felix's daughter also gives strong associations with the air spirit, Ariel, of whom there are two. 8Handz plays Ariel in the production. Tony is a clear parallel to Antonio. He stole Felix's 'kingdom' and encourages Serbert to act the same way. Lonnie is a parallel to Gonzalo, Sal to Alonso, Serbert to Sebastian, and Freddie to Ferdinand. Caliban is played by Leggs. Quite a few of the inmates may feel like Caliban, rejected and on their own, an outcast. In a way the entire prison may be filled with Calibans. As in the play, the theme is revenge, used as a driving force, eventually turning into mercy and freedom. 

Atwood feeds us information through systematic schemes and analyses. By presenting the same personalities and actions several times one can not miss the story and plot of Shakespeare's The Tempest.Hag-Seed presents both the 1610 version of the play and a modernised version, making the reader notice parallels between the two. The likenesses in how the characters act and feel, though there are hundreds of years between them, are striking. Shakespeare is for everyone precisely because of this. His plays presents the most fundamental human nature. Everyone will eventually face these feelings, in them selves or in others. We not only recognise these sides of being human, but also see how these actions are present in our contemporary modern society. Simultaneously it shows us how Shakespeare's works continue to be relevant and provoke our feelings. Some will argue that the 400 year old play is, despite its age and distinct language, can not be outdated. 

Most plays include three essential elements, namely setting, time and place. These units are traditionally quite concentrated, or limited³, and this is also the case in The Tempest. It is, however, important to keep in mind that The Tempest is a play made to be preformed on stage, while Hag-Seedis a novel that is only to be read. However, Hag-Seed, which is not a play, also to some extent follows this way of presenting a story. As mentioned above, there are in a way two of each unit in Atwood's novel. The settings, what the main conflict consists of and how the main characters are connected to it, are quite similar in the two stories. Someone steals the main character's 'kingdom' and 'title'. The story of both the play and the novel stretches over, somewhat, the same amount of time. In the play it seems that a minute 'on stage' is a minute in real time⁴. The backstory is summed up by Prospero in act 1, scene 2. In Hag-Seed the backstory is more thoroughly presented. The main part, in present time, still takes place when the main character presents his play and finishes his revenge, however, the planning of the revenge is also included. In The Tempest Prospero and Miranda spend twelve years on the island. This is the same amount of time Felix uses to plan and carry out his revenge in Hag-Seed. The place, where we are, is set to the island in The Tempest, and mostly to the Fletcher Correctional in Hag-Seed. Though in different ways, they are both prisons. The three units gives us the very framework of the play, and in this case, also the novel. 

In Atwood's Hag-Seed the story and plot of The Tempest is broken into small pieces. Felix helps the inmates, and the reader, put these pieces back together, one by one. The reader may almost feel like he is part of a children's theatre where he is 'fed' the basic parts of the play. The play is presented in a way that is enjoyable and understandable to all kinds of people. To many, a play dating back to the 1600s may seem a bit heavy, but Atwood's book argues that it does not necessarily have to be. This is much due to the way Shakespeare presents primal human emotions and actions, as mentioned above. Atwood makes sure the reader is a part of the characters feelings in the parallel stories. 

To understand the play we need to have a somewhat understanding of the characters in it. The question is, how are we to understand the characters, and how much of them do we need to understand? In Hag-Seed Ariel is initially an issue for the inmates, because no one wants to play 'a fairy'. Felix solves this by listing up Ariels qualities. What we know about Ariel is that 'he can be invisible', 'he can fly', 'he has superpowers', 'he's musical' and 'he's not human'⁵. Felix presents this information as something we are free to interpret the way we want. We may do the same with all of the characters. What exactly do we know about them? Is Prospero a madman, a caring father or maybe both? Is Miranda naive and defenceless or smart and independent? Ariel is something different, and hard to define. The inmates understand him to be an alien. The description in the play presents him as an airy spirit. Miranda in Hag-Seed seems to be something in between a ghost and a memory. Hag-Seed lets, the inmates, and the reader, read the characters with what we think is our personal understanding. Yet really, as the director, Prospero, Felix, or even Atwood, pushes the readers and inmates in their preferable direction. 

The characters are to a great extent characterised by their actions. To understand these actions we need to know some of the characters backstory, and their relationship towards the others. In Hag-Seedre-shaping of scenes helps the inmates understand the play, and even more the characters in it. For instance act 1, scene 2, is transformed from Prospero's long explanation of his and Miranda's situation and past, to a flashback-rap by his brother Antonio. It is a short and concise way of describing why Prospero and Miranda are on the island, and why Prospero seeks vengeance. Caliban is also introduced by a rap. This information is presented on the inmate's terms, in a way that is reliable and a bit closer to their world. Yet the original feelings and actions remain the same. The play is given their own distinctive character, which again may lead to a deeper understanding and relevance.

As in any play some aspects of The Tempest are more important to understand than others. Felix gives three assignments in Hag-Seed. Thesemake sure the inmates, and the reader, understand the most important parts of the play. The assignment considering curse words helps them get an overview of the play. This assignment also shows us that Shakespeare was not as 'posh' as he is often made out to be today. Atwood's way of presenting The Tempest could be seen as a way of giving Shakespeare back to the common people⁴. The second assignment, where the inmates were to find who is imprisoned by who and where, makes it clearer what situation the different characters are in, and their feelings towards the others. This is a key to understand the play and is presented in a scheme in Hag-Seed. The different groups the characters are divided into also helps the the reader of the play understand these feelings even deeper. The characters in The Tempest are not put in random groups, but are carefully placed there by Ariel on command from Prospero. Their feelings towards each other are, both through speech and action, in a way emphasised inside these groups. The last assignment in Hag-Seed, where the inmates are to imagine what happens to the characters after the play, may also teachus something. To imagine their future we must understand their present selves. The assignments in Hag-Seedare a very systematic way of gaining this significant knowledge about the play.

However, The Tempest includes some tricky elements which are hard to explain and understand. One of them is magic. It is impossible to attack the play with logic, reason and personal experiences alone. Imagination is a central part of our minimum understanding. We need imagination to understand Ariel, Prospero and the tempest itself. Another thing is how much of The Tempest that is happening within Prospero's own mind⁶. Hag-Seedmay help us in particular with this aspect. Having the long gone Miranda as Felix's moral compass, a constant presence and a feedback gives us not only a deeper understanding of Felix's own thoughts, but might also add an extra layer to Prospero. The Tempest is famous for being a play within a play. Hag-Seed explains this aspect by presenting The Tempest as a play within a play within a novel. Both The Tempest and Hag-Seed have symbolic and deeper meaning that may make the stories fell like a lot to take on. Nevertheless, reading Hag-Seedone is almost guided through the famous comedy, and will have solid foundation for further reading.

Atwood's Hag-Seed makes the reader rethink all he knows about Shakespeare's The Tempest. The play may be read and interpreted in many different ways. Some choose to read Prospero as the hero, others Caliban. Some choose a colonist or historical reading, while others see it as a fictional play about family, revenge and forgiveness, or romance. The recognisable feelings are there all the same.

Shakespeare's plays are played of all from amateur children's theatres to the professional Royal Shakespeare Company. These two groups, and all in between, will have a different understanding of the play. The play might be richer if we understand the symbol of chess, how The Tempest is a play within a play, or how it may be understood in a colonial setting. Still, it can definitely be discussed whether this information is necessary to enjoy and understand the story and plot. The inmates' interpretation of Ariel or solution to act 1, scene 2, shows us that our personal interpretation may be as justified as any critic's. However, it is to some extent controlled or restricted. To conclude, one might argue that The Tempest is relevant and reliable to most people because of the focus on basic human emotions.Atwood's novelshows us, in a very straightforward way, that the feelings and the actions of the characters in The Tempest are as common now as they were in 1610. Shakespeare does not have a date of expiry. There are some universal truths about what it is to be human that have not changed in the last 400 years, and probably will not change in the next 400. To recognise these feelings or actions is a helpful tool, and is often what plays aim to do. Hag-Seedhelps us see, or maybe just reminds us, that Shakespeare does not only belong to the high culture, Shakespeare belongs to all!

Bibliography:

Atwood, Margaret. Hag-Seed. (London). Vintage. 2017.

Pellicer, Juan [The Tempest and Hag-Seed, second lecture] University of Oslo. 06.03.18

Shakespeare, William. The Tempest. (Great Britain) Penguin. 2015.

Steinman, Kevin. [The Tempest and Hag-Seed] University of Oslo. 20.01.18

Vestøl, Magne. Dramatisk diktning.Accessed 13.02.18.

https://folk.uio.no/jonv/norsksider/noves3.htm

The Yellow Wall-paper

Author: Charlotte Perkins Gilman

Published: 1892

Genre: short story

If you have not yet read The Yellow Wall-paper, please do so before reading this analysis. It is a brilliant short story, really worth reading! If you have read it, please keep in mind that this analysis is my try of writing an essay, and is filled with subjective thoughts about the short story. Enjoy!

Understanding the Yellow Wall-Paper

The Yellow Wall-Paper was first published in 1892 and is a short story written by Charlotte Perkins Gilman. The short story enlightens mental illness among women in the Victorian Era through a story about a mentally ill woman and her husband. It is especially known for its many strong symbols. These symbols are crucial for our understanding of the story. In this essay my thesis statement will therefore be: “What effect do the symbols have on the readers understanding of the text?”. Because there are so many symbols in this short story I will be focusing on the wallpaper, the bed, the house and John.

Symbols are used on many occasions. The things and persons we call symbols have two functions. They function as what they actually are, but they also have a deeper meaning. They often function as an alternative way to comment on a phenomenon. One way of defining literary symbolism is that it is A word, phrase, or image that signifies an object or event which in turn signifies something, or has some sort of reference, beyond itself (Scherr. 2017).

The narrator of The Yellow Wall-Paper is a nameless woman, who is also the main character of the story. She tells the story from her point of view, in present time. The narrator might possibly be a writer, considering her wish of writing more, and her husband's prohibition against it. The Yellow Wall-Paper is a reaction and comment on how “hysteria” among women was treated and understood by the many male psychiatrists in the Victorian Era (Scherr. 2017). The point of view and the present time may be devices to enlighten this. Gilman struggled with mental illness and “hysteria” herself, and was on an occasion a patient of Silias Weir Mitchell, an actual specialist at the time mentioned in the text. The use of actual persons and institutions from the 19^th century makes the story more credible, though it is a fictional text. Gilman is also known for writing feministic literature, a factor that might somewhat characterise our interpretation of the text.

The wallpaper seems to be the strongest symbol of the story. The short story has its name after this symbol, and the narrator of the story keeps mentioning “that horrid paper” (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p. 488) in different ways. The narrator spends most of her time in the nursery where this paper is. She describes the wallpaper in a negative way from the very beginning. The colour is described as repellent, almost revolting; a smouldering unclean yellow. Yellow is a colour that many today associate with life, happiness, hope and joy. However, the narrator claims it makes her think of old foul, bad yellow things (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p. 493). The pattern is described as One of those sprawling flamboyant patterns committing every artistic sin (The Norton Anthology of American Literature. 2013. p. 487). The pattern is hard to decide and is quite early in the story starting to give us reasons for associating it with jail or imprisonment. At times it almost seems alive, as if it knew what a vicious influence it had! (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p. 488). Every time the room is mentioned the reader feels a hint of what the narrator might be feeling as if we are trapped in the ugly, yellow nursery with her. The narrator wants to figure out the pattern and where it ends and gets more and more obsessed with this task throughout the story. A wallpaper in a square room, however, has no end, nor a start. The narrator develops ownership to the wallpaper and says I am determined that nobody shall find out but myself!, as if there were some sort of competition about finding out first (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p. 493). This task also gives her something to be excited about and to look forward to.

The narrator also talks about how the wallpaper keeps changing. The moonlight's effect on the wallpaper especially seems to catch her attention, and she is often awake examining it at nighttime. Behind the wallpaper she insists there is a woman trapped. This is where the narrator seems to really start losing her sanity and it gets harder for the reader to follow her thoughts. The woman behind the wallpaper is a symbol within a symbol. She definitely helps to strengthen the feeling of total lack of control in own life. The narrator is also trapped, just in a different way. She does what John decides when he decides it. She is hiding her writing because John does not like it, and he refuses her to visit Cousin Henry and Julia. In the end the narrator peels off the wallpaper. The woman behind the wallpaper and the narrator are suddenly much harder to tell apart. The narrator says I wonder if they all came out of that wall-paper as I did? (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p. 496). In this sense, it seems like the wallpaper might be a symbol of the narrator's condition, that keeps getting worse (Camp.2017). It was already ripped, ugly and unclean when she first entered the room, but gets worse as a parallel to the narrator's condition. In the end she seems delusional, even schizophrenic and she creeps around on the floor. The ripped wallpaper may in another way represent freedom. Especially if we focus on the woman trapped behind it. The narrator has broken the never-ending, prison-like, pattern and creeps freely around by the wall. The task of figuring out the wallpaper may be seen as the narrator trying to figure out herself and trying to take control over her own life and treatment. The reader feels the tension rising as the narrator gets more obsessed with the wallpaper. One is almost obsessed with the paper oneself, analysing every piece of information we get about it.

There is more than just the wallpaper that gives us the feeling of being controlled and trapped. The bed is nailed to the floor in the former nursery. The narrator spends much time in this bed due to her rest cure, though she is not sleeping much. This could be another way of describing how trapped and controlled he narrator feels. She can not even move her own bed. It might even be that the narrator, or someone who lived there before, was strapped to the bed. This we do not know, but when she describes her struggle to tear off the wallpaper we get the impression that it is not impossible (Camp. 2017). She also tells how the paper is stripped in great patches all around the head of my bed, as far as I can reach (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p.487). Through the story the relationship between John and his wife is not once described as intimate or sexual. Even though the couple sleep beside each other in the bed at night they never seem to touch each other or lie close. The bed may therefore be a symbol of the couple's poorly functioning relationship. Having said that, a marriage in the Victorian age is not the same as a marriage or relationship today. The relationship could be a way of describing the relationship between mentally ill women in the Victorian Era and many of the male psychiatrists. The bed may also be yet another symbol of the lack of freedom the narrator is experiencing. It is certain that the bed makes the room even less welcoming. Together with the wallpaper it gives the reader an uncomfortable feeling about the room the narrator is to spend three months in.

The nursery is the room we get to know the best, but the house is also described. The narrator says in the very beginning of the story that the house lies in the most beautiful place. Though she wonders how they got to stay there so cheaply, and thinks that there is something queer about it, she appreciates John's thought behind it. The house has many rooms, little houses for the gardeners, a “delicious garden” and seems to be the perfect place to relax and get healthy (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p. 486). One seems to have to be privileged to afford to live in a summerhouse like this. Still, all the narrator wants is to leave. Throughout in the story the house seems to become more and more creepy. It lies quite alone, standing well back from the road and has been untenanted for quite some time. The windows are barred and the narrator mentions that there is a weird smell in the nursery as well as great patches stripped of wallpaper. One can easily imagine that the house might have been used to something more than a family house and a gymnasium. After we get to know about the bed, the barred windows, the ripped wallpaper and the cheap price of the house the reader to start feeling that there is something queer about the place. When the narrator with her “hysteria” moves into the house it almost turns into a mental asylum. The house might have a sort of mirror effect towards the mentally ill narrator. It is pretty on the outside, but the more we get to know it the more uncomfortable we get with it. In the same way, the narrators head is almost like a haunted house that keeps getting worse. She can not escape from the house, nor can she escape from her mind. Once again the feeling of being trapped occurs. The feeling increases the more about the house we get to know. All creepy details we get described about the house, in addition to the deserted location, makes one's thoughts fly far away from a lovely and relaxing vacation in the countryside. The house is introduced in the very beginning of the story and gives the reader an increasing feeling that something odd is going to happen. If we choose to understand the house as a sort of mirror it also helps the reader understand the main character of the story.

Just like the house, the way the reader sees John, and eventually also the narrator, changes when we get to know him. At first, he seems to be a loving and caring husband. He takes care of his mentally ill wife and does what he thinks is best for her. They spend three months in the summerhouse so that the narrator may rest without disturbance. Her baby is also taken away. She has no responsibilities. John represents men and husbands, but being a physician he also represents the male physicians in the late 1800s. John is in charge of everything in his wife's life. The narrator several times expresses her wish to visit Cousin Henry and Julia, but her husband refuses her to leave claiming she is too ill. Other than John, John's sister is the only one the narrator sees in the three months they are living in the summerhouse. She is also the one taking care of the narrator's baby. John comes and goes as he pleases, but the narrator never leaves the house, she barely leaves her room. It is an odd and interesting choice of John to place his wife in a nursery with barred windows. It definitely makes it seem like he thinks of his wife like a child more than an equal partner. It could be that John is a bit embarrassed by his ill wife. At times we certainly get the impression of it. Towards the end of the story, the narrator may remind the reader of “the madwoman in the attic” (Camp.2017). She is obsessed with the wallpaper, especially the never-ending pattern, and believes there is someone behind it, which is impossible. At the end, she also tares it apart and creeps around on the floor. Hearing about hysteria one understand that mental illness was tabu and misinterpreted. It was very likely something that one would be ashamed of and something that was to be hidden. Being a physician married to a mentally ill woman one could also imagine that John must be feeling a lot of pressure to cure his wife and to appear professionally without her. When they first arrive at the summerhouse she appears to be somewhat easy to deal with. Whatever John does she excuses him, and she seems to believe everything her husband says in a naive and childlike way. However, the narrator's relationship with John changes throughout the story. She gradually seems to understand how he treats her and how much power he has over her life. At one point she says The fact is I am getting a little afraid of John (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p. 493). She also keeps secrets from John, for example how she feels about the wallpaper and that she is writing. As mentioned earlier John and his wife do not seem to have an intimate and close relationship, but rather a hieratic one. The narrator eventually gives the impression of understanding that John has no right treating her like a child. In the end of the short story John faints when he finds his wife creeping around on the floor. Many have discussed whether this ending is a victory or a loss for the narrator (Camp. 2017). In one way the narrator has finally taken control in her own life. She has defied John's rules and destroyed the wallpaper that bothered her and made her feel trapped. However, the narrator's condition seems to be worse than ever, and not even her husband is able to help her anymore. Through John, the reader gets a look at not only this fictional relationship, but also the Victorian Era society. We can to a certain degree understand why John behaves the way he does because he is characterised by the society, and the profession, he is a part of. This idea is also backed up when the narrator tells about her physician brother who “says the same thing” as John (Baym. N. Levine. R.S. 2013. p. 486).

The Yellow Wall-Paper is full of symbols. The symbols characterise how we understand and read the text. Without them, we would have to do with an interlay different story. It would be harder to understand the message, if there would even be one. The symbols are not given information, we have to work to understand them, but when we do the story is suddenly much richer. The whole story builds on how the reader understands the wallpaper. It almost gives the reader a little inside information about how it feels to be mentally ill. The wallpaper can be seen as a symbol of the narrator's worsening condition. When she, in the end, tares the wallpaper apart the prison-like pattern is broken and so is John's control over her. The reader is in a way told two stories. One about a married couple renting a summerhouse and one about what society was like for mentally ill women in the Victorian Era. Our feelings, imagination and empathy are connected both to the narrator in the fictional story and the mentally ill women who lived in the Victorian Era. Symbols such as John helps to get through a message in a way that is easier to understand. By telling a simple story about John and his ill wife the author may indirectly criticise the way society treated woman struggling with mental illness. However, since this is a fictional short story no one can accuse Gilman of doing exactly this. Readers of the short story in the late 1800s will, of course, have read it differently than readers do today. Though this situation is now in the past, readers today may learn something about the history of society's view on mental illness and women, and how much it has changed in the last hundred years.

Sources:

Camp. A. (18.10.17) [The Yellow Wall-Paper] University of Oslo.

Scherr. R. (13.09.17) [Hawthorne and Melville] University of Oslo.

Scherr. R. (27.09.17) [Jacobs and Gilman] University of Oslo.

Baym. N. Levine. R.S. (2013) The Norton Anthology, American Literature. Volume 2, 1865 to the present. Shorter eighth edition. p. 485-497.

Picture: http://www.sffaudio.com/librivox-the-yellow-wallpaper-by-charlotte-perkins-gilman/

Fuglane

Forfatter: Tarjei Vesaas
Sjanger: Roman
Utgitt: 1957

Fuglane er et av Vesaas' mest kjente verk. Romanen handler om 37 år gamle Mattis som bor hos sin tre år eldre søster, Hege. Deres forhold er svært spesielt og nært, men endres mot slutten av romanen når en tredje person kommer inn i forholdet. Det er mange aspekter ved denne romanen som er interessante å fokusere på. Likevel er Mattis som person, og i kontrast med andre, kanskje spesielt interessant. I denne analysen vil jeg derfor se nærmere på hvordan karakterene i romanen blir skildret, samt hvordan fortellerteknikken er med på å forme dem.

Fortellingen starter i landlige omgivelser. Vi får verken vite hvor eller når handlingen finner sted, men flere av naturskildringene kan minne om Telemark, der Vesaas selv holdt til. Her møter vi Mattis og Hege, som vi tidlig skjønner har et spesielt forhold. Når vi etter hvert får vite alderen deres skjønner vi at det er noe avvikende med forholdt. Det kan minne litt om et forhold mellom mor og sønn. Mattis, som er en 37 år gammel mann, er helt avhengig av Hege. Han er yngre mentalt enn enn han er fysisk, har ingen form for inntekt og lever i sin egen symbolverden. Hovedkonflikten i romanen er kollisjonen mellom Mattis sine to verdener, den ytre og den indre verden. Dette forteller oss også mye om Mattis. Den ytre verden beskrives som monoton og rutinepreget, og er en verden Mattis ikke har noe større ønske om å være en del av. Likevel prøver han for Heges skyld. Han er klar over at han er en byrde for søsteren sin, og ønsker ikke Hege annet enn godt. Mattis får seg en jobb ute på en turnipåker, men holder ikke på denne særlig lenge. Den rutinepregede verden blir for mye for han. Mattis kjeder seg, og kanskje er han også litt lat. Han viser likevel en viss interesse ovenfor et kjærestepar som også jobbe ute på åkeren, og undrer seg over hvordan de kan jobbe i så mange timer i strekk uten å kjede seg. Senere i romanen starter han også sin egen ferjevirksomhet, uten særlig hell.

Mattis sin symbolverden er en svært sentral del av fortellingen. Dette ser vi også i tittelen på boka som har fått navn etter et av romanens mest sentrale symboler. For Mattis har alt symbolsk mening. Han utvikler et spesielt forhold til rugdetrekket over huset, og til en fugl som han mener kommuniserer med han på et unikt språk. Deres "evige vennskap" brytes når rugda blir skutt. Mattis, som har fortalt en jeger om rugda, føler sterk skyld for fuglens død. Han ser også på rugdas død som et tegn på Heges død. Når lynet etter dette slår ned i et av de to ospetrærne som har navn etter søskenparet blir Mattis desperat etter å finne ut hvilket av de to trærne som har blitt truffet. Er begge disse hendelsene et tegn på at Hege dø? Både rugda og ospetreet viser seg derimot å være prolepser mot Mattis sin død, og ikke Heges.

Som nevnt tidligere er Mattis mye yngre mentalt enn fysisk. Han er en enkel, tilbakestående mann. Dette undertrekes, utenom han totale avhengighet av Hege, spesielt av to ting. Mattis er livredd for tordenvær. Han gjemmer seg hver gang tordenværet kommer, og blir også veldig engstelig når han er ute og været blir tyngre og mørkere. Utenom tordenværet peker hans hyppige kjøp av drops mot en lav mental alder. Kjøpmannen vet hva han skal ha før han har sagt det, og gir han også drops uten at han betaler for seg. Han oppfører seg, og handler som et barn i flere situasjoner. Dette ser vi også eksempel på når han slår seg vrang og på trass spiser en fluesopp forran Jørgen, eller når han sutrer og skriker når Hege er mer sammen med Jørgen enn med han.

Mattis sin motpart er Hege. Hun er en sterk og stødig kvinne, som vet hvordan hun skal håndtere Mattis. Hun har, antageligvis, levd sammen med Mattis hele sitt liv, og deler ikke den samme entusiasmen over de små tingene i livet som Mattis har. Hun hører til i den rutinepregede hverdagen som Mattis ikke orker. De sterke symbolene har heller ingen effekt på henne, verken den døde rugda eller ospetreet. Hege jobber hardt for dem begge, og hun er Mattis sin klippe. Hege er den første, og også den eneste, Mattis forteller noe til. Hun lytter, nikker og roer han ned. Det er viktig for Mattis å dele sin verden med Hege, og det er også derfor det skjærer seg da Jørgen kommer inn i bidet. Jørgen, som kommer inn i forholdet på grunn av Mattis, blir en stor glede for Hege. Etter mange år med bare Mattis har hun endelig funnet en som kan sette pris på henne på en ny måte. Jørgen endrer også Heges måte å være på ovenfor Mattis. Der hun før var mer eller mindre likgyldig, insisterer hun nå på hvordan Mattis skal oppføre seg, og på hva han skal gjøre. Mattis føler at han mister Hege til Jørgen og bygger opp et slags hat mot tømmerhoggeren. Jørgen og Mattis kommer først ganske godt overens. Jørgen er en hyggelig og snill mann, som behandler Mattis med respekt. Han setter likevel Mattis på plass etter som de blir bedre kjent, noe Mattis takler dårlig. Blant annet tråkker Jørgen over en grense når han drar Mattis ut av skjulestedet sitt mens det tordner. Hege, som før har respektert Mattis sin frykt, gjør ingenting.

Når Mattis forstår at forholdet med Hege ikke vil bli som før setter han livet sitt i naturens hender, ettersom han fortsatt er overbevist om at alt har en mening. Mattis, som ikke kan svømme, må her være ganske desperat etter å bli sett og ønsket. Han venter også ganske lenge før han gjennomfører planen sin, og venter nesten på at Hege skal gjennomskue den og stoppe han. Den psykologiske siden ved Mattis blir derfor en viktig og interessant del av boka. Denne siden forsterkes av måten fortellingen blir fortalt på.

Romanen blir fortalt i tredjeperson, og har intern fokalisering. Fortelleren er altså autoral, ekstern og allvitende i forhold til Mattis. Vi ser verden gjennom Mattis sine øyne, og vi vet hva han tenker. Vi får følelsen av å kjenne Mattis veldig godt, nesten være en del av han. Vi føler sympati med Mattis, men klarer likevel å se hvordan de andre karakterene har det i forhold til hovedpersonen. Romanen er stort sett scenisk fortalt, og leser får vite alt som skjer i de sommermånedene vi følger søskenparret. Det er likevel noen ellipser som er med på å korte ned romanen ved å utelate uviktige hendelser. Romanen har singulativ frekvens, og forteller det som skjer kun en gang. Språket er svært minimalistisk, og passer godt til Mattis' måte å være på. Dette blir en måte å understreke Mattis sin enkelhet på. Det at språket er så enkelt gjør det kanskje også lettere å forstå alle de tunge symbolene romanen inneholder.

Alle de ulike sidene ved romanen gjør at den litteraturhistorisk kan plasseres flere steder. Språket i romanen gjør at vi kunne plassert den under nyenkelheten. Likevel kjennetegnes nyenkelheten av sin mangel på tunge symbol, noe som i Fuglane er svært sentalt. Uten om språket kan vi legge merke til at romanen har flere modernistiske trekk. Følelsen av å være fremmed, annerledes og alene vokser mot slutten av romanen. Den interne fokaliseringen gjør også at subjektet, altså Mattis, står i sentrum av fortellingen og preger hvordan leseren oppfatter verden. Vi får også skildret "det ubevisste sjeleliv" gjennom Mattis. Temaet i teksten peker derimot mer mot mer mot nyrealismen, både på grunn av den psykologiske skildringen av Mattis og fokuset på etiske og moralske spørsmål. Som flere av Vesaas sine romaner inneholder Fuglane en evnesvak karakter (såkalt Tuste-motiv), her Mattis, noe som blant annet trekker fram spørsmål rundt menneskeverd.

Fuglane er en roman som preges av symbolbruk, minimalistisk språk og intern fokalisering. Kontrasten mellom Mattis' indre og ytre verden, og kontrasten mellom Mattis og Hege er viktige aspekter for å forstå romanen. Kollisjonen mellom de to verdenene, og Jørgens inntrengelse i Mattis og Heges spesielle forhold, gjør at Mattis sin verden smuldrer opp. Symbolverdenen følger Mattis helt til siste slutt. Det minimalistiske språket og Mattis' enkelhet utfyller hverandre, og den interne fokaliseringen gjør at vi blir en del av Mattis sin verden. Vi forstår hvorfor han tar valgene han tar og føler med han når han tror og føler at han er alene i verden. Leser klarer likevel å tenke hvordan de andre karakterene har det, og hva de for eksempel vil tenke om at Mattis tar sitt eget liv.

– Dea ♔

En liten begrepsoversikt...

Når man skal analysere litterære tekster er det en del begreper det kan være greit å ha kontroll på. Her har jeg laget en liten oversikt over noen av dem.

Motiv eller tema?

Motivet er et verks konkrete forestilling, altså det verket handler om på et konkret nivå.

Temaet er et verks "egentlige" mening, altså hva det handler om i en mer abstrakt forstand.

Fortelling eller historie?

En fortelling er fortellingen slik den blir fortalt (gjerne kalt discourse).

Historien er det det fortelles om (gjerne kalt story).

Fortellerstemmen

En autoral forteller står utenfor handlingen og er refererende.

En personal forteller er en del av handlingen og formidler det som skjer slik jeg-personen selv opplever det. 

En allvitende forteller er ekstern, har ingen begrensning på informasjon og det brukes nullfokalisering.

En tredjepersonsfortelling (han/hun) har en ekstern forteller og intern fokalisering.

En jeg-fortelling har en intern forteller og intern fokalisering.

Fokalisering

Handler om hvem som ser og føler i teksten kontra hvem som snakker, altså hvor synsvinkelen ligger. Vi har tre typer fokalisering:

Intern fokalisering - sansene ligger hos en som er del av fortellingen. Man ser verden gjennom karakterens øyne.

Ekstern fokalisering - sansene fokuseres på et bestemt sted utenfor karakterene i fortellingen. Fortelleren har ikke tilgang til karakterenes tanker og følelser.

Nullfokalisering - fortelleren har tilgang til alt alle føler og tenker, men har ikke noe bestemt ståsted i fortellingen.

Trope eller figur?

En trope er en talefigur som innebærer spill med ordets betydning (dette kan f.eks. være besjeling, synekdoke eller metonymi).

En figur er et billedlig uttrykk på setningsnivå som former det språklige uttrykket, men som ikke utvider ordets betydning (dette kan f.eks være allegori, anafor eller ironi).

Tidsmessig utstrekning

Scene - alt som skjer fortelles.

Referat - det viktigste av det som skjedde fortelles.

Ellipse - mindre viktige hendelser blir ikke nevnt.

Forlengelse - en scene strekkes ut slik at fortellingen tar lenger tid enn selve hendelsen.

Pause - hendelsesforløpet står stille mens fortellingen fortsetter.

Rekkefølge

Kronologisk - fra start til slutt.

Prolepse (frampek) - noe fra starten peker på noe som vil skje mot slutten.

Analepse (tilbakeblikk) - fortellingen viser til noe som har skjedd.

Frekvens

Singulativ frekvens - noe skjer en gang og fortelles en gang.

Repetativ frekvens - noe skjer en gang og fortelles flere ganger.

Iterativ frekvens - noe skjer flere ganger og fortelles en gang.

Jeg håper oversikten kan være til hjelp!

– Dea ♔

Hovedkilden min er Litterær analyse. En innføring (2012) skrevet av P.T Andersen, G. Mose, T. Norheim m.fl.

Pigen paa Anatomikammeret – kontrastar og kritikk

Diktanalyser er noe jeg lenge har prøvd å unngå, rett og slett fordi det er ganske vanskelig. Det finnes så mange sider ved diktet man kan fokusere på, og de er også ofte vanskelige å tolke og forstå. Nå har jeg endelig skrevet en diktanalyse jeg ble fornøyd med (innleveringsoppgave i faget NOR1300 på UiO), og når jeg var ferdig var det faktisk ganske gøy likevel. Analysen har forbedringspotensiale (jeg burde f.eks. utdjupa enkelte områder bedre), men den er i alle fall et eksempel på hvordan en analyse kan se ut. Også er den jo på nynorsk da ❤  God lesing! – Dea ♔

---

«Pigen paa Anatomikammeret» er eit dikt skrive av Henrik Wergeland i 1836, fyrste gong trykt i tidsskriftet Bien 1. januar i 1837. I Wergelands dikt møter vi ein legestudent som er i ferd med å utføre ein obduksjon. Legestudenten ser brått at han veit kven den døde kvinna som ligg på obduksjonsbordet er. Dei har vore naboar i barndommen. Dette får han til å tenkje på uretten i samfunnet. Diket kan sjåast på som eit angrep på klassesamfunnet og utnyttinga av dei fattige. Dette gjer at diktet skil seg ut frå typiske romantiske dikt og 1800-talet sine normer. Likevel har diktet klare romantiske trekk. I romantikken glorifiserte ein gjerne det verkelege livet. Sjølv tragiske hendingar vart måla vakre. Henrik Wergeland har i diktet «Pigen paa Anatomikammeret» skapt ein sjeldan balanse mellom romantisk dikting og sosial kritikk. Dette er eit av fleire dikt, der lesaren kanskje kan føle litt på samvitet til Wergeland, som i heile sitt korte liv engasjerte seg politisk (lokus.no. 2008.).

Det vesle som finst av handling går i fyrste omgang føre seg på eit anatomikammer. Når eg-et i diket, altså legestudenten, forstår kven kvinna er, oppstår det ei parallell verd i form av legestudenten sine tankar og refleksjonar. Slik kan eg-et i diktet fortelje to historier samstundes. Det finst altså ei konkret historie, men òg ei meir svevande tankerekke som handlar om dei sosiale problema i samfunnet. Fordi det er to parallelle handlingar i diktet vert det teke i bruk to verbalformer, presens og preteritum. Dette gjer det lettare for lesaren å skilje mellom eg-et sine tankar, og hendinga som går føre seg no. Wergeland studerte sjølv medisin i om lag to år, og vi kan difor gå ut frå at han hadde noko erfaring med obduksjonar. Det er heller ikkje umogleg at kan ha opplevd det han fortel om i diktet sjølv (Holck, 2008).

Det er spesielt to moment som eg meiner peikar seg ut i diktet, og som eg difor vel å fokusere ekstra på. Det fyrste er måten romantikk og makaber kritikk av samfunnet er blanda saman på. Det andre er dei ofselege kontrastane som pregar teksten, og som er avgjerande for å forstå diktet. Eg vil kome innom verkemiddel som er brukt for å oppnå dette, samt kva for effekt det har.

Med tanke på at diktet er skrive i romantikken, står tematikken fram som ganske rå, brutal og ansleis i forhold til det som var norma (det finst andre typar romantikk der dette ikkje er like oppsiktsvekkande). Diktet er likevel gjennomgåande romantisk. Dette legg vi kanskje særskilt merke til dersom vi ser på orda som vert nytta. Det diktet i fyrste omgang handlar om, eit lik, vert ikkje nemnd med ord. I verselinjene «i denne Armes Hjerte!», som vi finn i fyrste strofe, og «at Blod saa fagert og saa skjært», som står i fjerde strofe, vert anatomiske omgrep teke i bruk, men desse har eit svært romantisk preg over seg. Samstundes er ordet «Hjerte» her brukt i konkret form, ikkje i symbolsk, noko som tek oss tilbake til det makabre (Per Thomas Andersen, 16.01.17. Henrik Arnold Wergeland).

Eg-et i diktet skapar ei parallell tankerekke rundt dei sosiale problema i samfunnet. Desse vert det sett lys på ved hjelp av sterke kontrastar og metaforar. Hovudkontrasten vert bygd opp rundt «Fornemme Folk» og «Fattigfolk». Det vert difor òg ein sterk kontrast mellom «eg» og «ho», som representerer dei to gruppene i samfunnet. Eg-et held heile vegen ei viss avstand til situasjonen. Dette kan vere fordi han som legestudent må opptre profesjonelt, eller kanskje det oppfattast slik fordi eg-et formulerer seg så romantisk og dermed litt overflatisk til situasjonen. Legestudenten høyrer altså til «Fornemme Folk», og er overlegen på to måtar. I tillegg til at han tilhøyrer overklassa og har moglegheita til å vere legestudent, er han òg den overlegne parten der han står med kniv og lampe og ser ned på den døde kvinna på operasjonsbordet. Kvinna tilhøyrer «Fattigfolk», har truleg vore prostituert, og er no død. Ho har alltid vorte sett ned på av dei øvre laga i samfunnet, og no som ho er død, er ho meir forsvarslaus enn nokon gong. Det at den døde kroppen hennar endar opp som noko legestudentar kan øve seg på, fortel oss òg at dei lågare gruppene i samfunnet ikkje blei sett på som mykje verd. Anatomikammeret der handlinga skjer og samfunnet i tankane til legestudenten vert òg parallellar, og speilar kvarandre. Anatomikammeret opptrer altså allegorisk i diktet (Wergeland, 2011).

På det personlege planet finn vi ein kontrast mellom barndom og vaksenliv. Det som før kanskje var lett, leikent og vakkert, er no alvorleg, vanskeleg og urettferdig. Livet har gått i heilt ulike retningar for dei to naboane, og det berre fordi dei vart fødd inn i ulike lag i samfunnet. Lesaren sit her med ei kjensle av urettferd og hjelpelause. Når diktet attpåtil er vakkert formulert, får det eit uttrykk som kanskje gjer det lettare å ta inn den kritiske bodskapen. Verkemidla som vert tatt i bruk forsterkar altså kontrasten, som igjen forsterkar kjenslene til lesaren.

Wergeland set i diktet adjektiv til meir eller mindre abstrakte substantiv. Dette gjer at orda får eigenskapar dei ikkje eigentleg kan ha. Adjektiva er med på å forsterke kontrasten mellom dei fattige og dei fornemme. Døme på dette ser vi i «døde Smerte» som skildrar den unge kvinna og dei fattige si smerte på eit makabert vis, og i «stolte Verden» som framstiller verda og samfunnet som stolte, og heva over dei fattige. «denne døde Smerte», samt «der er rædsom Vittighed» viser oss ironien over det heile, og peikar kanskje mot kvifor samfunnet er som det er. Det handlar her om dei «Fornemme Folk» sin mangel på forståing og evne til å setje seg inn i dei fattige sin situasjon. «Vittighed» rimar på «ned» som viser til korleis dei øvre klassane ser ned på klassane under seg, uten å vise forståing. «Hjerte» rimar på «Smerte» og visar kanskje til ei smerte hos den fattige kvinna som held fram sjølv etter døden hennar (Sejersted & Vassenden, 2011, s.73).

Dei sterke kontrastane gjer det mogeleg for lesaren å setje seg inn i begge situasjonar, og oppleve ulikskapane sjølv. Særskilt får vi her høyre dei svake og fattige si historie gjennom eg-et. I eit samfunn der fattige vart sett på som mindreverdige menneske, og der kvinna stod under mannen var det nok vågalt å vise så mykje forståing og medkjensle med underklassa. Det er samstundes viktig å hugse på at Wergeland som diktar står heilt utanfor diktet, og at det her er eg-et som formidlar bodskapen. Eg-et verkar heller ikkje heilt sikker på kvar han står i saka, og jobbar heile vegen for å overtyde seg sjølv. Diket vert òg lest og tolka ansleis no enn for om lag 180 år sidan, ettersom samfunnet har gått gjennom ei radikal endring og diktet har vorte tolka tallause gonger.

«Pigen på Anathomikammeret» har fleire gode metaforar som gjev diktet eit uhyggeleg preg. Bøddelmetaforane om lampa som «stirrer ned» på liket, som dei øvre klassane i samfunnet stirrar ned på dei lågare klassane, og metaforen «Frække Øine skar» som kniven no gjer i kvinna sin døde kropp, er døme på dette. Det at lampa vert besjela, og at auga får kniven sin funksjon gjer at den pågåande hendinga og eg-et sine refleksjonar vert sydd saman. Høgdemetaforane er med på å understreke kor stor kontrasten mellom «Fornemme Folk» og «Fattigfolk» faktisk er (Per Thomas Andersen. 16.01.17. Henrik Arnold Wergeland).

Det er ikkje berre uhyggelege metaforar som vert teke i bruk. Den unge kvinna vert fleire gonger omtala som ein blome. «Som Blomst i Isen frossen ind» «Stedmorsblommen» og «Maanedsrosens» beskriv kanskje ulike sider ved henne, kanskje òg trekk som kan gjelde fleire fattige kvinner. Den frosne blomen kan sjåast på som ein representasjon for den døde, stive kvinnekroppen. Kanskje fortel det oss óg at kvinna er lik seg sjølv som barn, og at trekka hennar er godt bevart. Stemors-blomen kan peike på kjensla kvinna sat med ovanfor andre menneske, som heile livet hennar behandla ho som om ho var mindre verd. Ein kan tenkje seg at eit slikt menneske sit med mange vonde kjensler som frykt, smerte, og det å vere framand og ha verda mot seg. Eg-et i diktet erkjenner at den fattige, unge kvinna er vakker, fleire stader i diktet. Han seier blant anna at «Fornemme Folk» ikkje kunne fatte at eit så vakkert barn «af Fattigfolk var kommen». Månedsrosa representerer denne skjønnheita, samt kvinna sin tidlige død. Ho var vakker mens ho levde, men ho får samstundes berre ei kort stund i denne verda. Venleik kan ikkje verne henne mot «Skjebnens Haand» (lokus.no. 2008.). Bruken av blomar der det eigentleg handlar om kropp, kan òg sjåast på som metonymi. Det at naturen og mennesket vert brukt om kvarandre på denne måten, var svært vanleg i romantikken.

Noko som derimot ikkje var vanleg i romantikken, er måten Wergeland framstiller kvinna på i diktet sitt. Ei kvinne var yndig, uskuldig og eit symbol på kjærleik. I diktet vert derimot kvinna presentert i form av ein død, urein kropp. Kvinna har levd eit syndig liv som fattig og truleg prostituert ettersom det står at «Syndens Spor dem overjog». Diktet endar med å samanlikne synda kvinna truleg har sett seg skuldig i, med «Sneglens Sliim paa Løvet». Her oppstår det ein kontrast mellom forventninga av korleis kvinna skal framstillast, og korleis ho faktisk vert framstilt. Dette verset gjer at lesaren sit att med eit vemmeleg og ubehageleg bilete, som står i sterk motsetning til det vakre og poetiske språket diktet har.

Kvar strofe består av seks vers, og heile diktet fylgjer same mønster frå start til slutt. Diktet består av sekvensrim, altså aaBccB, der dei små bokstavane er einstavelsesrim, og dei store er tosavelsesrim. Verselinje ein og to rimar, nummer tre og seks rimar, og nummer fire og fem rimar. Set vi «Pigen paa Anathomikammeret» inn i eit metrisk skjema, vil vi sjå at diktet er firfota jambisk. Dette vil seie at diktet startar på ein trykklett staving og er annankvar gong trykklett og trykksterk. Kvart vers har fire slike par, ei trykklett og ei trykktung staving, og vert difor kalla firfota (Norheim & Svare. 2012. s. 64-66.). Forma gjer det truleg lettare å ta til seg kritikken i diktet.

Diktet «Pigen på Anatomikammeret» er særeige for si tid. Det vert retta sterk kritikk mot samfunnet i form av romantiske vers og strofer. Diktet visar medkjensle med dei fattige og svake i samfunnet, og visar tydeleg gjennom heile diktet den store kontrasten mellom «Fattigfolk» og «Fornemme Folk». Den døde kvinna vert som ein liten modell på korleis det store samfunnet fungerer gjennom desse kontrastane. Kontrastar er mykje tatt i bruk, og er utan tvil eit svært viktig verkemiddel i diktet. Andre verkemiddel som metaforar, samanlikningar, besjeling og bruk av adjektiv, er med på å forsterke kontrasten mellom dei to polane i samfunnet.

Diktet hadde heller ikkje hatt same effekt dersom det ikkje hadde bestått av den unike blandinga av sosial kritikk, makaber tematikk og romantisk dikting. Ja, det er faktisk òg ein kontrast mellom det romantiske språket Wergeland brukar og det dystre temaet, samt den krasse kritikken. Det hadde nok vore vanskelegare å ta innover seg bodskapen for ein 1800-talsborgar, dersom ordet lik til dømes hadde vore brukt i staden for dei romantiske metaforane. Vi kan tenkje oss at det romantiske språket var heilt nødvendig for å kunne kritisere samfunnet på denne måten, og verte teke alvorleg. Kvinna og dei fattige får her medkjensle, og kanskje ei viss form for støtte frå ein som høyrer til det øvre laget i samfunnet. Dette bryt nok ei gong med 1800-talet sine normer. Diktet provoserer, men er samstundes vakkert å lese og høyre på. Kanskje er det akkurat denne balansen som har gjort «Pigen paa Anatomikammeret» til eit av Wergeland sine mest kjende dikt.

Kjeldeliste (referansestil APA 6th):

Andersen. P.T. Mose. G. Norheim. T. (2012). Litterær analyse. En innføring. Oslo: Pax Forlag.

Holck. P. (2008.26.06) Wergeland som medisiner. Tidsskriftet Den norske legeforening. Henta frå http://tidsskriftet.no/2008/06/medisin-og-kunst/wergeland-som-medisiner , 21.02.17.

lokus.no. (2008). STØV – undervisningsopplegg til Ivo de Figueiredos bok om Henrik Wergeland. Henta frå http://www3.lokus.no/?marketplaceId=11403779&languageId=1&siteNodeId=11801531, 23.02.17.

Serjersted., J. & Vassenden, E. (2011). Lyrikk. En håndbok. Oslo: Spartakcus Forlag. S. 72-75.

Wergeland. H. (2011) Henrik Wergeland. Bokselskap. Henta frå http://www.bokselskap.no/forfattere/wergeland, 24.02.17.

Wergeland. H. (2011) Om Utvalgte dikt. 1833-45. Bokselskap. Henta frå http://www.bokselskap.no/boker/wergelanddikt/pigenpaaanatomikammeret-1836, 23.02.17.