Develop a close reading of Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, Lucas Hnath’s A Doll’s House, Part 2, or August Strindberg’s Miss Julie in light of the theories of naturalism. To what extent is the text you’ve chosen to analyze an example of a naturalistic or “modern” play? (**Please relate to the introduction from the section on “Modern Theater” through the end, pp. 59-84 to the term of “modern” play; Relate to Emile Zola, “Preface to Thérèse Raquin” (1873) and “Naturalism in the Theater” (1881), 351-367, and George Bernard Shaw, “The Quintessence of Ibsenism” (1891), 146-154 for the definition of naturalism.) If you wish, you may identify elements of the script that you consider non-naturalistic – as long as you describe these elements clearly and explain how they diverge from the precepts of naturalism. To define your terms and strengthen your analysis, cite at least one of the secondary sources provided (i.e., Zola, Shaw, or Intro/Preface of Miss Julie) and the text of the play you choose to discuss.
Important reminders:
Your essay should have a clear thesis, ordinarily stated in the first or second paragraph.
Include parenthetical citations of all quotes and paraphrases, and works cited list at the end of the essay, prepared in MLA style.
The idea is not asking you to define whether or not the plays are naturalistic, since wether or not it is naturalistic isn’t important. The goal is to dive into the play and consider how it is related to “naturalitic theater” and “modern drama” to find sth meaningful about the play’s position in the development of modern drama.
Features of naturalism demonstrated by zola in the preface are:
1 accurate and delicate scenery
2 psychological rather than metaphysical/ ordinary people big and common problems
3 prose instead of verse
4 characters’Interior life that is more related to us
5 telling story of ordinary people…not telling stories about characters that audiences identify as gods or heroes
etc
script of Miss Julie:
https://stageagent.com/shows/play/5121/miss-julie/script
