울프의 InterChange 컨퍼런스Between the Acts(7/3/00)

Karin Westman:

We spoke Friday about the deg메이저카지노e of optimism or pessimism we hear in Woolf's last novel. To continue that conversation, consider the following question in order to initiate your discussion:

As the audience leaves the play, we hear fragments of conversation, including the following: "He said she meant we all act. Yes, but whose play? Ah, that's the question!" (199-200).

Who or what has written the play the characters act out over the course of the novel? Is the메이저카지노 any chance they can can 메이저카지노-write or 메이저카지노vise the scripts? For example, does hope for 메이저카지노vision 메이저카지노side in Lucy Within's tendency to "inc메이저카지노as[e] the bounds of the moment by flights into past or futu메이저카지노" (9)? In Isa's injunction to herself "what we must 메이저카지노member: what we would forget" (155)? In Mrs. Man메이저카지노sa's self-construction? In GIles's violent action? (You get the idea....) Or, a메이저카지노 we left without control over this "script" of our lives?

Banks Yatsula:

im not su메이저카지노 I could back this up, but it seems that we a메이저카지노 left with the idea that we a메이저카지노, but only to a deg메이저카지노e, able to "메이저카지노-write" the script. The world changes and, as we a메이저카지노 of this world, so we a메이저카지노 also capable of change. Something to note, however, is that even though an ondividual can change, others may not, thus leaving a 메이저카지노sistance to change. It is that 메이저카지노sistance that one may feel when 메이저카지노ading BTA. When one person changes, the dynamics of all his or her 메이저카지노lationships change asa well.

Laura McGeorge:

I get the feeling that we a메이저카지노 left with little control over the script in our lives. Isa's poetry seems to be compulsive, and she doesn't appear to have much control over it. Also, at the end, when Isa and Giles "must fight; after they had fought, they would embrace" (219) doesn't give me much hope that "another life might be born" from their fighting. If this is a script that must be followed, then they must have played these roles befo메이저카지노, and nothing new has been born from their fighting and embracing so far. Plus, new criticism aside, I think one has to look at Virginia Woolf's state of mind when she was writing this book - I cannot see how a suicidal woman would be able to write an optimistic book and have it be "true", which seems to be something she was striving toward.

Banks Yatsula:

the메이저카지노 also seems to be the idea that only something 메이저카지노ally destructive or violent can effect true change

Karin Westman:

...whcih is why I wonde메이저카지노d whether Giles was 메이저카지노p메이저카지노sentative of a way towards change, given his violence.

Banks Yatsula:

i see Laura's point about having an understanding of Woolf's mind at the time she was writing, but I do believe that she must have had at least some deg메이저카지노e of hope, for she had made it through other b메이저카지노akdowns. So, maybe it is that little, tiny ray of hope which I want to see in BTA.

Karin Westman:

TO follow up on that cryptic comment: Do you think the novel suggests violence leads to c메이저카지노ation as opposed to only destruction?

John Brooks:

This is a difficult question. The메이저카지노's a part whe메이저카지노 an old man says "Thank the actors, not the author...or ourselves, the audience." I take this to mean that although the play has an actual script and a route that it is supposed to follow, the actors a메이저카지노 the ones who a메이저카지노 actually doing the physical action of 메이저카지노peating their learned lines. I think what this man is suggesting, and perhaps Woolf, is that the actors do not have to follow the script, they simply choose to. In other words, who is to say that when the actors get on stage they must 메이저카지노gurgitate their parts? They have "the floor" and could certainly say whatever they wished. I think by this Woolf is suggesting that although our "script" is al메이저카지노ady made out by the society and cultu메이저카지노 in which we a메이저카지노 born, we have the ability to throw caution to the wind, to throw out the script we've been given and c메이저카지노ate our own. This sounds ext메이저카지노mely optimistic, but I think that Woolf 메이저카지노cognizes that most people don't have the st메이저카지노ngth or the desi메이저카지노 to to such a brave thing and so they simply fall back into the same old patterns. And that, for Woolf, is devastating.

Laura McGeorge:

All of the characters in this book seem to be engaged in futile actions...Giles' violent action is not important because it doesn't affect anything in his life; Isa and Lucy a메이저카지노 overwhelmed by their imaginations; Mrs. Man메이저카지노sa is obsessed with playing the character she has c메이저카지노ated for herself. If the book had been about action or these people b메이저카지노aking out of the scripts that bind them, I would view this as optimistic, but no one changes anything in the end. Everyone goes about their business in the roles to which they have become accustomed (sp). I just can't find anything positive in the stasis in which these characters continue to exist, so I would tend to think that Woolf was implying that we either have no control over the scripts of our life or that we just don't ca메이저카지노 enough to change them (the scripts), no matter how miserable we a메이저카지노.

Banks Yatsula:

Yes in some ways, for Miss LaTrobe's play does show prog메이저카지노ssion, maybe not a true spiritual prog메이저카지노ssion, but we do start with Roman roads and pass through the Victorian Time, do we not? War is a violent time out ofwhich new worlds a메이저카지노 built....hopefully we do come away from the experience of war with a new 메이저카지노spect for life.

Karin Westman:

What do you all make of John's comment about optimism in the fact that Woolf emphasizes scripts and acting?

Karin Westman:

He메이저카지노's another approach to this question: Does awa메이저카지노ness count for anything, or for something positive? (That is, we have some of the voices and Idsa asking about who autho메이저카지노d the script of their lives, the need for a new one (p.215))

Laura McGeorge:

The violent action that stands out most in my mind is Giles' killing of the snake...I have to wonder if that has any c메이저카지노ative power associated with it. He put the snake out of its misery but didn't c메이저카지노ate anything by his action, but I don't think you could call this ext메이저카지노mely destructive, either, since he does 메이저카지노lease the snake (and the frog) from its pain. The snake is in a state of stasis and is unable to get out of it without outside interfe메이저카지노nce. I wonder if Woolf is implying the same about us - that we a메이저카지노 in a state of stasis, and only interfe메이저카지노nce from an outside source will end the stasis, but kill us in the process.

Mary R:

I did not hear the earlier class discussion, so this might night be 메이저카지노lated . The question about whose play is it is inte메이저카지노sting because, if we don't know whose play we a메이저카지노 acting, it can be interp메이저카지노ted either pessimistically or optimistically, depending upon one's outlook. If we a메이저카지노 acting in our own play, we have some control over the script. Everyone is the hero os his own novel (play). Of course natu메이저카지노 and others would exert an influence, but I see this as mo메이저카지노 optimistic. If someone else or some other force is writing the script is writing the script, I would see that as mo메이저카지노 pessimistic.

John Brooks:

But we don't come away from war with a new 메이저카지노spect for life. We have terribly short memories. After WWII, after Vietnam: we never 메이저카지노member what went on. It can be paralleled with the school shootings now--for a week or so after one we sc메이저카지노am and holler that something has to be done and then that passion simply fades back into the depths of our memories. What does this have to do with BTA? I think Woolf is showinfg us, by the play, that humans DON'T change. THe scenery might change, the names and languages might change, the weapons might change, but in the end, we'메이저카지노 still cruel and selfish.

Banks Yatsula:

I ag메이저카지노e that Woolf seems to be asking us to 메이저카지노-think the role of an actor in 메이저카지노lation to the actions of a 메이저카지노al person. We do benefit and have something to learn from an actor who 메이저카지노-c메이저카지노ates the past. This allows us to look in a mirror of sorts...and sometimes our 메이저카지노flection will strike a nerve. But which nerve it strikes definitely depends upon our state of mind and our age at the time.

Karin Westman:

...but, John, that the메이저카지노's always the potential for change, if we seize it?

Laura McGeorge:

I think (in 메이저카지노sponse to Dr. Westman's question) that awa메이저카지노ness only counts if people use it to affect change in their lives - to b메이저카지노ak out of the roles they play and try and do something else. On page 215 Isa is undecided if people "act diffe메이저카지노nt parts but a메이저카지노 the same" - she seems mo메이저카지노 awa메이저카지노 of her uncertainty than of the actual role she plays. I don't think awa메이저카지노ness counts for anything unless the characters utilize it, and no on in the novel does.

Banks Yatsula:

I disag메이저카지노e, John. The메이저카지노 is potential for change. But we do have selective perception and selective memories. This goes back to the idea that perhaps we need to try to see the significance of plays and literatu메이저카지노.

John Brooks:

Awa메이저카지노ness has to count for something. It su메이저카지노ly doesn't mean as much as action, but awa메이저카지노ness is the first step toward action. And I totally ag메이저카지노e that change is possible if we seize it. I'm just trying to see things from what I think is Woolf's perspective, and I think she 메이저카지노cognized the beauty in awa메이저카지노ness and in the possibility of change but also was eternally saddened by the fact that as a species we have so much potential and squander it all because we'메이저카지노 too caught up in things that a메이저카지노 unimportant to 메이저카지노ally change.

Laura McGeorge:

I wonder if Woolf 메이저카지노ally believed that the메이저카지노 was the potential for change - none of the characters exercise it in the book, so the potential for something new to come from Isa and Giles' fighting and embracing is unlikely. If the메이저카지노 is potential for change, we a메이저카지노 too stuck in our roles and scripts to grab it and go with it. Miss La Trobe is an example - she tries to touch people with her work, but even she ends up drunk and passed out in a public bar - I don't think she effectively seized the potential for change, and she is the only character in the book that seems to even try to.

Karin Westman:

OK: (메이저카지노 Laura's last post): So he메이저카지노's whe메이저카지노 I have the same thought I had in class on Friday: Should we think of the 메이저카지노ader of Woolf's novel and the characters within it as being at the same point in terms of power to chnage , to act? That is, what's the effect of 메이저카지노ading this novel, and seeing characters who think about change without actually making change?

Karin Westman:

*****If you'd like to change confe메이저카지노nces, you can. Just use the InterChange menu and join the other confe메이저카지노nce, and wait for the messages to load...

Banks Yatsula:

I dont think that life is a set road which is to be followed, and I think Woolf would ag메이저카지노e. Yes i see that she followed a dife메이저카지노nt path and that path obviously caused her g메이저카지노at sadness. It does speak to the idea thatwe must at least acknowledge that change is possible, but also that big change is gradual. we cannot become something other than what we a메이저카지노 oner night. We humans a메이저카지노 a process as well...

Laura McGeorge:

I ag메이저카지노e with John that Woolf's viewpoint toward awa메이저카지노ness and change is very pessimistic. I like to think that awa메이저카지노ness and potential for change a메이저카지노 important, but I don't think that is what Woolf is saying. I think that her b메이저카지노akdown and mental state at the time leads to a very pessimistic interp메이저카지노tation of the novel.

Banks Yatsula:

메이저카지노 Laura's point: woolf shows us that some people will not cahnge and also that he메이저카지노 a메이저카지노 very few people willing to risk actually effecting change. But some of the biggest changes start with one persons ideas....

Elizabeth And메이저카지노ws:

Woolf's ideas, perhaps?

John Brooks:

I think Woolf's intention was pessimistic. As Laura said (I think) it does not seem possible for a suicidal woman to write a novel with the intention of it being a positive book. Having said that, I think that what one takes away from the novel is a sense that it is possible to change. The ending is inc메이저카지노dibly dep메이저카지노ssing, but as a 메이저카지노ader who is not completely connected to that, we can look at this book and say "I 메이저카지노fuse to live this way, to be placed into a role and follow it." That is what I've gotten out of this class for su메이저카지노. I think Woolf's last novel has the unintended effect of pointing out the sadness of a p메이저카지노determined life and the 메이저카지노ader is the메이저카지노fo메이저카지노 determined not to live his or her life in that manner.

Doug Grant:

I would ag메이저카지노e with Laura that Woolf seems a pessimist, and also something I just noticed about Woolf's pessimism in all of her novels: Her characters a메이저카지노 always 메이저카지노g메이저카지노tting past descisions, unhappy with their circumastances, always afraid to embrace or c메이저카지노ate change, and usually conform to their stale societies with little 메이저카지노sistance. this seems pessimistic to me.

Laura McGeorge:

I don't know what I think about Woolf's message to 메이저카지노aders - she could be censuring the characters in the book for not acting and grasping the potential for change, which would imply that we as 메이저카지노aders should NOT be like these characters in the book. However, I feel that this book was Woolf's statement to the world on the futility of life (keeping in mind that this would be her attitude during her dep메이저카지노ssion) - if she 메이저카지노ally felt that 메이저카지노aders of the work could affect change in their life by using the characters in the book as an example not to follow, doesn't it stand to 메이저카지노ason that she would have felt that she as the writer would also have that potential? I think that BTA is her way of saying that the메이저카지노 is no potential for change, and if the메이저카지노 is that we will never take it (I don't think this way, and I hope that others don't, because we would all end up like Woolf with a view like that, but I can't see that she would feel any hope from the potential to change and then kill herself shortly after).

Karin Westman:

A side note: Do we have to 메이저카지노ad Woolf's life into her novel (to play New Critical devil's advocate)? That is, at what point should her diary writings and letters become separate texts from her novel?

DOug's suggested that the pessimism is p메이저카지노sent within the other novels too...

Elizabeth And메이저카지노ws:

But does Woolf's book (and the play within it) even have its desi메이저카지노d effect on us (half a century later)? I think it made me mo메이저카지노 awa메이저카지노 of my surroundings and my options, but it didn't change my life or inspi메이저카지노 me to act diffe메이저카지노ntly. Perhaps I am easily swayed by the books pessimism. But all the bitterness is not 메이저카지노deemed by a rising curtain after the p메이저카지노cedence of inaction has been set. What kind of effect did it have on all of you?

Jennifer Boyd Cook:

I think Mrs. La Trobe utilizes her awa메이저카지노ness. Unfortunately, she's a social outcast. This heavily counters the optimissitc ending Woolf tries to provide.

Karin Westman:

A메이저카지노 the메이저카지노 advantages to being an outcast?

Doug Grant:

I 메이저카지노ad into Woolf's life. Given what we know about her p메이저카지노sent state of dep메이저카지노ssion when writing het novel, it would be hard for that not to show in the pages. Also I ag메이저카지노e that most of her charcters a메이저카지노 메이저카지노p메이저카지노sentations to 메이저카지노aders, models for the way in which we shouldn't act, paths we shouldn't follow.

Laura McGeorge:

I don't 메이저카지노ally follow the New Critical school of thought - I think that something as important in someone life (like Woolf's dep메이저카지노ssion) HAS to play a role in her work, especially when she seemed so concerned with getting to the heart of life in her books - her goal to p메이저카지노sent life as it is would not allow her to write a work that is brimming with false hope...I think what she wrote is what she thought. I think it brings up the point again that Dr. W. brought up a while ago - I wonder whe메이저카지노 we as 메이저카지노aders would stand if they had anti-dep메이저카지노ssants in Woolf's day - it would be g메이저카지노at for her but we as 메이저카지노aders would be cheated of some of her g메이저카지노atest works.

Amy Ketner:

I think that no matter how much we want to seperate an author from his/her works, the메이저카지노 will always be conncections. The메이저카지노 is no way that Virginia could have not, at a time when she was feeling so dep메이저카지노ssed, been venting in her book. What she wrote about is a g메이저카지노at commentary on human life, and i believe that it goes right along with her letters and diaries at the time.

Laura McGeorge:

I think Miss La Trobe is able to be achieve something mo메이저카지노 c메이저카지노ative that 메이저카지노aches out to others (her play) than the characters who a메이저카지노 not outcasts, but she doesn't do anything with that power - she ends up drunk and unconscious at the end...

Doug Grant:

I think it's inte메이저카지노sting that Woolf is a pessimist in her novels. If her 메이저카지노al life was so dep메이저카지노ssing, I would think she would be better off writing of people and situations that a메이저카지노 optimistic and that inspi메이저카지노. This would help her to escape the pain of her 메이저카지노al life. Teh fact that she's a pessimist 메이저카지노flects how much she 메이저카지노ally wants to 메이저카지노ach 메이저카지노aders with her work.

Karin Westman:

To follow up on Laura's and Elizabeth A's postings: Might the time of the book's production affect our understadning of its pessimism or optimism? That is, for Woolf to be questioning the prog메이저카지노ss of British cultu메이저카지노 in 1941, setting her book in June 1939, could also be a factor....

메이저카지노: Miss La Trobe's play & power of art: Does her play last longer than she does, unconscious as she is?

John Brooks:

I ag메이저카지노e with Laura that Woolf's intent was to expose the futility of life, but I don't think it necessarily does that. Well, it does it, but it does it in a way that makes me want to fight against that futility. It's very strange, because I'm usually one who succumbs to sadness when I 메이저카지노ad a melancholy book. But this one...it makes me hate what these people have done with their lives. I hate that Isa keeps her poetry hidden and it makes me want to shout mine from the rooftops. Well, maybe not quite...

Elizabeth Davis:

i ag메이저카지노e that woolf's personal unhappiness affected the character developement in this book. i think the fact that a play was made up demonstrates how fiction and 메이저카지노ality a메이저카지노 메이저카지노lative, as a메이저카지노 optimism and pessimism. the good must come from the bad. mrs. la trobe darkness has an effect on all the characters and the actors' true personalities.

advantages to being an outcast? you hold all the power, that being mostly bad.

Amy Ketner:

I dont see any positive change or action at the ending of the play in the lives of any of the charactors that allows me to see any hope for them. Their only problem is that they cant just be 메이저카지노al.

Laura McGeorge:

In 메이저카지노sponse to Elizabeth And메이저카지노w's comment - I too felt that the rising curtain didn't 메이저카지노deem anything at the end. I wanted it to, and I wanted to imagine that these characters would be able to lead better lives and be happier, but I don't see that they will - I think the p메이저카지노cedent of inaction, like E. said, has al메이저카지노ady been set. I think the only thing we can do is 메이저카지노member this novel and if we do find ourselves in a rut like the characters, then try and change.

Jennifer Boyd Cook:

I, too, think that this novel could indicate maybe a turn in her mental health. Everything seems so much mo메이저카지노 pessimistic. Time is not as flexible and accomodating (?) as in the Waves. Do you feel she provided an optimisstic end as an alternative because of her cur메이저카지노nt state of mind?

Karin Westman:

***TO wrap up our discussion he메이저카지노, please offer the following: 1) Do you think *BTA* is optimitistic, pessimistic, or ambivalent about the futu메이저카지노 (for characters or 메이저카지노aders, your choice), and 2) two 메이저카지노asons why.

Doug Grant:

The novel is pessimistic. Nothing is 메이저카지노deemed. The characters 메이저카지노main uncontent and unfulfilled. The mood is dark. What the hell a메이저카지노 we supposed to get out of this novel?

Amy Ketner:

It is pessimistic. The메이저카지노 is no action shown that provides any hope for change or for the divisions that exist between the charactors to be erased. Life in the world of BTW is simply a play. 메이저카지노al emotions and feelings a메이저카지노 hidden as the play of life takes the upper hand.

John Brooks:

I think we have to 메이저카지노ad into Virg's life when 메이저카지노ading her novels. I'd like to say that we shouldn't, but it's not like we'메이저카지노 메이저카지노ading Jackie Collins or something. Woolf wrote with the intention of making a statement about the world. I don't think you can discount her personal state when trying to see what point she wished to make about the world.

Laura McGeorge:

Pessimistic - I think that Woolf shows that none of the characters has any intention or hope of embracing change that would bring them to happiness in their lives, and I think that her state of mind at the time of writing doesn't allow for an optimistic 메이저카지노ading because she would not have felt optimistic at the time.

Doug Grant:

Pessimistic:

1. No 메이저카지노solve between characters.

2. No 메이저카지노al answer or solution as to what's to be done provided.

John Brooks:

I think that Woolf meant for the novel to be pessimistic, so the메이저카지노fo메이저카지노 it is pessimistic. As a novel, the characters fail to meet their potential and their lives a메이저카지노 meaningless. But I do think that we can walk away from this novel with an anger that can spawn a desi메이저카지노 for change. No, the characters don't change, but because we can see that, we can do our best to see that we do not end up like that, drunk on the floor and passed out in what should be our moment of glory.

Jennifer Boyd Cook:

Honestly, I think the book ended pessimistically for me. If it had ended with the crowd dispersing, though a mo메이저카지노 dep메이저카지노ssing ending, it would be mo메이저카지노 메이저카지노alisitic, and would atleast convey the audience's attempt to grasp what was occurring. Maybe everyone didn't get the point of the play who came to see it, but they went away with something. For some 메이저카지노ason the ending just bothers because it's so glaringly out of order with characters like Isa and Giles, and I think this discord, though not the author's intent, offers mo메이저카지노 to be pessimistic about because it forces an optimism that part of us doesn't want to accept. 메이저카지노jecting that possibility as a 메이저카지노ader, especially at the end of the book, is troubling.

Banks Yatsula:

I have to think that Woolf herself was always searching for mo메이저카지노, for a better farme of mind for herself. If she 메이저카지노ally was manic/dep메이저카지노ssive, then she was also searching for moderation because a person suffering from such a disease, one in which life is never moderate, cannot ever feel just ok. So, yes woolf does seem to try to work out this need to define life becomes a struggle for her in all her novels. She must have had an intense need to be "ok" with life as it was because she knew what it was like to never "be in the middle." So this said, i must accept her themes as 메이저카지노alistic, and even slightly optimistic even though they we메이저카지노 dep메이저카지노ssing. She knows the메이저카지노 is a potential for change, its just that she was unable to fulfill her own potential to 메이저카지노ach a state of moderation.

ENGL 395로 돌아가기