What do you think?
Rate this book
Four Great Plays: A Doll's House / Ghosts / An Enemy of the People / The Wild Duck
Here are four major plays by the 1st modern playwright, Henrick Ibsen. Ghosts--a portrayal of a family destroyed by disease & infidelity. The Wild Duck--a poignant drama of lost illusions. An Enemy of the People--a vigorous attack on public opinion. & A Doll's House--scandalizing the Victorian world with its unsparing views of love & marriage, featuring one of the most controversial heroines & one of the most famous exists in dramatic literature.
306 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1958
25 people are currently reading
573 people want to read
About the author
Henrik Ibsen
2,227 books2,100 followersHenrik Johan Ibsen was a major Norwegian playwright largely responsible for the rise of modern realistic drama. He is often referred to as the "father of modern drama." Ibsen is held to be the greatest of Norwegian authors and one of the most important playwrights of all time, celebrated as a national symbol by Norwegians.
His plays were considered scandalous to many of his era, when Victorian values of family life and propriety largely held sway in Europe and any challenge to them was considered immoral and outrageous. Ibsen's work examined the realities that lay behind many facades, possessing a revelatory nature that was disquieting to many contemporaries.
Ibsen largely founded the modern stage by introducing a critical eye and free inquiry into the conditions of life and issues of morality. Victorian-era plays were expected to be moral dramas with noble protagonists pitted against darker forces; every drama was expected to result in a morally appropriate conclusion, meaning that goodness was to bring happiness, and immorality pain. Ibsen challenged this notion and the beliefs of his times and shattered the illusions of his audiences.
His plays were considered scandalous to many of his era, when Victorian values of family life and propriety largely held sway in Europe and any challenge to them was considered immoral and outrageous. Ibsen's work examined the realities that lay behind many facades, possessing a revelatory nature that was disquieting to many contemporaries.
Ibsen largely founded the modern stage by introducing a critical eye and free inquiry into the conditions of life and issues of morality. Victorian-era plays were expected to be moral dramas with noble protagonists pitted against darker forces; every drama was expected to result in a morally appropriate conclusion, meaning that goodness was to bring happiness, and immorality pain. Ibsen challenged this notion and the beliefs of his times and shattered the illusions of his audiences.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews
August 14, 2015
HELMER. Hello, my sweet! My little squirrel, my little turtledove!
NORA. Will you cut it out?
HELMER. Cut it out? Why? What’s the matter?
NORA. This is hardly the time or the place.
HELMER. In the bosom of my own home, with my lovely darling wife?
NORA. You are mistaken. We are not at home.
HELMER (looks around). Oh my God, you're right! Nora, where are we?
NORA. We’re in a review.
HELMER. A review, but… does that mean…?
NORA. Yes; some second-rate hack on the internet is writing us now.
HELMER. Just my luck! Oh, why does this always happen to me? First I’m passed up for a promotion; and now this!
NORA. Stop whining; we have a job to do.
HELMER. What, pray?
NORA. To review the book, of course.
HELMER. You mean, the collection of Ibsen’s plays?
NORA. What else?
HELMER. But I don’t want to.
NORA. You don’t have a choice.
HELMER (irritated). Can’t a man choose for himself anymore?
NORA. Not when he’s fictional.
HELMER (stamping his feet). This is intolerable! I won’t stand it!
NORA. Oh, come, come. Real people don’t get to choose, either. They’re just as subject to outside forces as we are. So don’t be upset.
HELMER. Alright, I suppose you’re right. I’d just feel better if I could see the children. Do you happen to know where they are?
NORA. They don’t exist in this universe.
HELMER (almost falling down). What? Don’t exist?! What happened?
NORA. They never existed. We exist in a blank white room created by the reviewer. He has decided to omit our children, which is just as well, if you ask me.
HELMER. I need a drink. Did the reviewer include those?
NORA (pulling out a wine bottle). As a matter of fact…
HELMER. Thank God!
(They poor themselves a drink, clink their glasses, and swig it down.)
HELMER. That’s much better. So, er, you said we have a job to do?
NORA. That’s right. We have to discuss Ibsen’s plays.
HELMER. Well, how am I supposed to do that? Ibsen is my father, after all—and yours too, if you don’t mind my saying so.
NORA. Quite so; nonetheless, we must. I’ll go first. I think Ibsen’s plays…
HELMER. What’s this business with reviews, anyway? It seems to be such a ridiculous custom.
NORA. But isn’t it nice to have conversations about books?
HELMER. Very occasionally. But so often it’s just egotism and nonsense. Yes, that’s right, egotism and nonsense. Consider this review right here. Somebody sitting at a laptop is, at this very moment, writing a review of one of the greatest dramatists of all time. And who is he? A nobody! The arrogance!
NORA. But, criticism has such a long and noble tradition…
HELMER. Hmph! Long and noble tradition my tuckus! That's all nonsense. And wasn’t this Ibsen’s whole point? Wasn't his goal to question society’s assumptions and to critique its values and traditions?
NORA. I suppose…
HELMER. So if we are to be true to the spirit of Ibsen, I contest that we must flout the tradition of reviewing. Yes, that’s the only way. We must take part in a vicious critique in the culture of Goodreads. That’s what Ibsen would have done.
NORA. But how would we do that?
HELMER (smiling). Like this.
(He walks to the door, opens it, and walks outside.)
NORA. Helmer, you can’t!
HELMER. Ah, Nora, don’t you see? It has to be so!
(With a resounding thud, the door slams shut.)
NORA. Will you cut it out?
HELMER. Cut it out? Why? What’s the matter?
NORA. This is hardly the time or the place.
HELMER. In the bosom of my own home, with my lovely darling wife?
NORA. You are mistaken. We are not at home.
HELMER (looks around). Oh my God, you're right! Nora, where are we?
NORA. We’re in a review.
HELMER. A review, but… does that mean…?
NORA. Yes; some second-rate hack on the internet is writing us now.
HELMER. Just my luck! Oh, why does this always happen to me? First I’m passed up for a promotion; and now this!
NORA. Stop whining; we have a job to do.
HELMER. What, pray?
NORA. To review the book, of course.
HELMER. You mean, the collection of Ibsen’s plays?
NORA. What else?
HELMER. But I don’t want to.
NORA. You don’t have a choice.
HELMER (irritated). Can’t a man choose for himself anymore?
NORA. Not when he’s fictional.
HELMER (stamping his feet). This is intolerable! I won’t stand it!
NORA. Oh, come, come. Real people don’t get to choose, either. They’re just as subject to outside forces as we are. So don’t be upset.
HELMER. Alright, I suppose you’re right. I’d just feel better if I could see the children. Do you happen to know where they are?
NORA. They don’t exist in this universe.
HELMER (almost falling down). What? Don’t exist?! What happened?
NORA. They never existed. We exist in a blank white room created by the reviewer. He has decided to omit our children, which is just as well, if you ask me.
HELMER. I need a drink. Did the reviewer include those?
NORA (pulling out a wine bottle). As a matter of fact…
HELMER. Thank God!
(They poor themselves a drink, clink their glasses, and swig it down.)
HELMER. That’s much better. So, er, you said we have a job to do?
NORA. That’s right. We have to discuss Ibsen’s plays.
HELMER. Well, how am I supposed to do that? Ibsen is my father, after all—and yours too, if you don’t mind my saying so.
NORA. Quite so; nonetheless, we must. I’ll go first. I think Ibsen’s plays…
HELMER. What’s this business with reviews, anyway? It seems to be such a ridiculous custom.
NORA. But isn’t it nice to have conversations about books?
HELMER. Very occasionally. But so often it’s just egotism and nonsense. Yes, that’s right, egotism and nonsense. Consider this review right here. Somebody sitting at a laptop is, at this very moment, writing a review of one of the greatest dramatists of all time. And who is he? A nobody! The arrogance!
NORA. But, criticism has such a long and noble tradition…
HELMER. Hmph! Long and noble tradition my tuckus! That's all nonsense. And wasn’t this Ibsen’s whole point? Wasn't his goal to question society’s assumptions and to critique its values and traditions?
NORA. I suppose…
HELMER. So if we are to be true to the spirit of Ibsen, I contest that we must flout the tradition of reviewing. Yes, that’s the only way. We must take part in a vicious critique in the culture of Goodreads. That’s what Ibsen would have done.
NORA. But how would we do that?
HELMER (smiling). Like this.
(He walks to the door, opens it, and walks outside.)
NORA. Helmer, you can’t!
HELMER. Ah, Nora, don’t you see? It has to be so!
(With a resounding thud, the door slams shut.)
December 18, 2024
The rating is for the play "Ghosts" only (I had previously read the other three plays in this collection).
April 1, 2019
Ghosts- Lots of amazing lines, especially, "It is the very mark of the spirit of rebellion to crave for happiness in this life." But it leaves everything a depressing mess... just like real life I guess.
The Wild Duck- Oh boy, Ibsen is dark. This one was too dark for me- everyone is the worst.
An Enemy of the People- Unless I'm missing something deeper, it appears to just be about the ugliness of politics. The locals don't seem to understand the science of the local baths making people sick and they are so involved in their own power struggles that they don't care. We see this frequently in American politics. I still didn't connect to this play that well. Perhaps it was my particular translation that made the language or scenes seem somewhat awkward, but I didn't enjoy it.
A Doll's House- The actual plot in the story is a little overwrought, but I like the characters, their experiences, and Nora's moment of realization. I'm also impressed with such early feminist perspectives.
The Wild Duck- Oh boy, Ibsen is dark. This one was too dark for me- everyone is the worst.
An Enemy of the People- Unless I'm missing something deeper, it appears to just be about the ugliness of politics. The locals don't seem to understand the science of the local baths making people sick and they are so involved in their own power struggles that they don't care. We see this frequently in American politics. I still didn't connect to this play that well. Perhaps it was my particular translation that made the language or scenes seem somewhat awkward, but I didn't enjoy it.
A Doll's House- The actual plot in the story is a little overwrought, but I like the characters, their experiences, and Nora's moment of realization. I'm also impressed with such early feminist perspectives.
August 30, 2022
Well, that was interesting.
Ibsen dug deep with his themes in these four plays. Each one struck an uncomfortable nerve in me because these were all rather dark and serious in tone. The only one I can imagine playing out well on stage today is A Doll’s House because it’s a bit more relatable. The other 3 were interesting but honestly kind of strange and not stories that I would personally care to see acted out.
I’m on the fence about Ibsen. 3 stars.
Ibsen dug deep with his themes in these four plays. Each one struck an uncomfortable nerve in me because these were all rather dark and serious in tone. The only one I can imagine playing out well on stage today is A Doll’s House because it’s a bit more relatable. The other 3 were interesting but honestly kind of strange and not stories that I would personally care to see acted out.
I’m on the fence about Ibsen. 3 stars.
January 29, 2018
Four thoughtful plays. If you haven’t tried reading plays- I recommend it. Something different.
Ibsen was way ahead of his time. These were written in the late 1800s but seem much more modern. The book’s editor talks about ‘drama of ideas’ and Ibsen certainly spun some heads with his new ideas about society’s closed mindedness at that time. He startles the viewer at every turn. Brilliantly written although if I were the director-much dialogue would be deleted!
Ibsen was way ahead of his time. These were written in the late 1800s but seem much more modern. The book’s editor talks about ‘drama of ideas’ and Ibsen certainly spun some heads with his new ideas about society’s closed mindedness at that time. He startles the viewer at every turn. Brilliantly written although if I were the director-much dialogue would be deleted!
January 23, 2011
I had tried reading this collection of Ibsen plays years ago and found myself bored to near literal death. But I returned to it just recently with a, hopefully, more open mind. In a sense I’m glad, but in another it’s just a bit humbling and scarring. Ibsen depicts more or less normal people in his day and age destroyed by their societies values, and adherence to communal norms beyond logic, reason, and all but the most extreme tips of human compassion. And unlike many modern writers who seem to favor the oblique and obscure (wanting to say it all, plus nothing, plus everything else), Ibsen lays it bare with simple (at times too simple) dialogue and stories of real people involved in real small town actions. A warning, these plays are not uppers. I read them and was amazed at the ingenuity employed by Ibsen, but also more than a bit downcast afterwards from the too believable depictions of human ignorance and willingness to hide in the mass societal at the cost of compassion, dignity, and sometimes just common sense.
August 22, 2018
Incredibly beautiful, moving and inspiring works of art.
May 2, 2015
Ibsen is one of those names you cannot help hearing in school, but despite having taken more than my share of literature and drama courses (for someone not majoring in the field) I knew nothing specific about him. This book addresses that reasonably well, as it contains a fair synopsis of his place in the literary world plus four plays written consecutively at what seems to have been the peak of his career. Of course, because it is four plays it is a collection, and that makes it more difficult to assess fairly, as all collections are uneven.
I find myself wondering whether the format of introducing each play before the text was beneficial or detrimental. It is of course difficult to follow a discussion of a play with which you are not yet familiar, and impossible to present such a discussion without spoilers. I am inclined to think it would have been better to have a briefer introduction, perhaps providing the date of the play and any information relevant to the time of its release, and then having a postscript after it examining the aspects of the story that are worth noting.
Ibsen is apparently considered the first "modern" playwright, having shifted the genre to stories about ordinary people living in ordinary situations, and examining character and morality in a more relativistic way. None of his characters are exactly good and none are exactly bad, the situations are at least awkward and certainly morally challenging. The resolutions are bound to be dissatisfying on some level, simply because the problems are complex--too complex for simple solutions.
The first, A Doll's House, focuses on a woman, a housewife, who some time before the opening of the play had found herself in the difficult situation that her husband was sick and the doctor told her that he needed a rest, such as a Mediterranean vacation. To finance this, she forges a note from her dying father as a guarantor of a loan to her, and is now in the final stages of paying off that loan. She talks about how it was the right thing to do even though it was illegal, because she did it for the love of her husband. However, circumstances change such that someone at the bank blackmails her and when she cannot do what he demands he informs her husband, and suddenly the housewife finds that the man she loves is not at all sympathetic. To him, her illegal conduct makes her entirely untrustworthy; but then as circumstances change again he also changes his mind. She is left with the conclusion that her marriage is based on a lie. In this story, I felt that I was watching some melodramatic movie on a women's channel. Everyone in it is wrong in some way, but the woman herself proves the least forgiving. The end left me unhappy--but I think it was probably not possible to provide a better ending without significantly lengthening the story.
Ghosts similarly focuses on a woman, a recent widow building an orphanage to the memory of her recently deceased husband, and the vicar who had been a counselor to her for many years. We find that the husband was an immoral cheat, and that the legacy of the vicar's counsel that the wife stay with him is that her son, whom she has kept far from the family at distant schools so he would not be around the father, is suffering the symptoms of a venereal disease contracted at birth, and wants to marry the maid he does not know is his half sister. In the end everything crashes, and we have the impression that it is all bad primarily because of the vicar's emphasis on the wife staying with her husband. It ultimately is conveying the message that traditional morality, as encouraged in that time, is a road to disaster.
In An Enemy of the People, the protagonist is a man, a doctor who is a younger brother in an upper class family. He had encouraged the town to build public baths, but now has determined that because they took shortcuts on the water supply the baths are contaminated and spreading disease. He wants the town to make the necessary repairs, but his brother the mayor does not want to finance these. Gradually the hero gets caught in the wheels of politics, as he first gains and then loses the support of various factions until his insistence that something has to be done about the effluent in the water supply is silenced and he and his family are attacked. The message seems to be that anyone who stands for an inconvenient truth will be ostracized and will fail to achieve anything.
Finally, The Wild Duck is a more complicated story in which there are several lines, but they focus on a half dozen people. The story is very complicated, but focuses on one person who believes that everyone is happier if he knows the whole truth about his situation, and further believes that the daughter of his best friend is actually the daughter of his own father, who arranged and encouraged the marriage of this friend to a pregnant mistress and then poured money into getting them into their own business. The tension is such that the daughter perceives that she is going to lose her father, and does not understand why, and the meddler gives her dubious advice for fixing it. A peripheral character makes the story's point: most people are better off believing the illusions and lies of their lives rather than knowing the truth.
Let's face it, people are fallen and broken. Most of us ignore our own flaws and faults while harping on those of others around us. Ibsen's view is pessimistic and tragic, suggesting that because we are imperfect we should not strive for ideals but should settle for falsehoods and illusions.
The stories were well done, but I did not much enjoy them.
I find myself wondering whether the format of introducing each play before the text was beneficial or detrimental. It is of course difficult to follow a discussion of a play with which you are not yet familiar, and impossible to present such a discussion without spoilers. I am inclined to think it would have been better to have a briefer introduction, perhaps providing the date of the play and any information relevant to the time of its release, and then having a postscript after it examining the aspects of the story that are worth noting.
Ibsen is apparently considered the first "modern" playwright, having shifted the genre to stories about ordinary people living in ordinary situations, and examining character and morality in a more relativistic way. None of his characters are exactly good and none are exactly bad, the situations are at least awkward and certainly morally challenging. The resolutions are bound to be dissatisfying on some level, simply because the problems are complex--too complex for simple solutions.
The first, A Doll's House, focuses on a woman, a housewife, who some time before the opening of the play had found herself in the difficult situation that her husband was sick and the doctor told her that he needed a rest, such as a Mediterranean vacation. To finance this, she forges a note from her dying father as a guarantor of a loan to her, and is now in the final stages of paying off that loan. She talks about how it was the right thing to do even though it was illegal, because she did it for the love of her husband. However, circumstances change such that someone at the bank blackmails her and when she cannot do what he demands he informs her husband, and suddenly the housewife finds that the man she loves is not at all sympathetic. To him, her illegal conduct makes her entirely untrustworthy; but then as circumstances change again he also changes his mind. She is left with the conclusion that her marriage is based on a lie. In this story, I felt that I was watching some melodramatic movie on a women's channel. Everyone in it is wrong in some way, but the woman herself proves the least forgiving. The end left me unhappy--but I think it was probably not possible to provide a better ending without significantly lengthening the story.
Ghosts similarly focuses on a woman, a recent widow building an orphanage to the memory of her recently deceased husband, and the vicar who had been a counselor to her for many years. We find that the husband was an immoral cheat, and that the legacy of the vicar's counsel that the wife stay with him is that her son, whom she has kept far from the family at distant schools so he would not be around the father, is suffering the symptoms of a venereal disease contracted at birth, and wants to marry the maid he does not know is his half sister. In the end everything crashes, and we have the impression that it is all bad primarily because of the vicar's emphasis on the wife staying with her husband. It ultimately is conveying the message that traditional morality, as encouraged in that time, is a road to disaster.
In An Enemy of the People, the protagonist is a man, a doctor who is a younger brother in an upper class family. He had encouraged the town to build public baths, but now has determined that because they took shortcuts on the water supply the baths are contaminated and spreading disease. He wants the town to make the necessary repairs, but his brother the mayor does not want to finance these. Gradually the hero gets caught in the wheels of politics, as he first gains and then loses the support of various factions until his insistence that something has to be done about the effluent in the water supply is silenced and he and his family are attacked. The message seems to be that anyone who stands for an inconvenient truth will be ostracized and will fail to achieve anything.
Finally, The Wild Duck is a more complicated story in which there are several lines, but they focus on a half dozen people. The story is very complicated, but focuses on one person who believes that everyone is happier if he knows the whole truth about his situation, and further believes that the daughter of his best friend is actually the daughter of his own father, who arranged and encouraged the marriage of this friend to a pregnant mistress and then poured money into getting them into their own business. The tension is such that the daughter perceives that she is going to lose her father, and does not understand why, and the meddler gives her dubious advice for fixing it. A peripheral character makes the story's point: most people are better off believing the illusions and lies of their lives rather than knowing the truth.
Let's face it, people are fallen and broken. Most of us ignore our own flaws and faults while harping on those of others around us. Ibsen's view is pessimistic and tragic, suggesting that because we are imperfect we should not strive for ideals but should settle for falsehoods and illusions.
The stories were well done, but I did not much enjoy them.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 6, 2024
Pretty dark plays. Lowkey wouldn’t recommend to a friend but I enjoyed reading for most of it. Really liked Enemy of the People and The Wild Duckling. Cool to see how the political themes that Ibsen highlights in Norwegian theatre in whatever year a long time ago is still so relevant to American politics. Reminds you that none of this stuff is new, it’s all kind of just human nature. I also loved the ideas of Relling in Wild Duckling; how the ideals in life are really just falsehoods that the average person clings to in order to have some sense of purpose and happiness in the world.
December 23, 2021
This was a heavy lift. I really only liked the "An Enemy of the People." Very weird. It was my 52nd book. I did it.
March 27, 2022
A Doll's House: https://youtu.be/fnWb0YVg3-g
Ghosts: https://youtu.be/0_oH0zTyIys
An Enemy of the People: https://youtu.be/6JaS8PZYavM
The Wild Duck: https://youtu.be/h7u7DWmo2GA
Original Review: I did not think I was going to like Ibsen. Before reading this collection I had seen A Doll's House and I found the ending really problematic, and that experience colored my expectations for Ibsen. But I was really pleased with Ghosts and An Enemy of the People, which I think are excellent plays.
I still have a problem with the end of A Doll's House, mostly because I feel like Nora critiques Torvald for things she has encouraged him to do throughout the play (e.g., she refers to herself using his animal rhetoric), so it seems to me like she has encouraged him to treat her a certain way and then suddenly is mad at him for having treated her that way. Now I understand that he was probably inclined to treat her like a child/pet before, but her behavior seems like it encouraged him. Reading the play I found her condemnation a bit more convincing because I read with the emphasis on his refusal to take the blame for her illegal actions, although this is also a somewhat problematic critique on her part, based more on romance novels than a real practical set of expectations.
But I really enjoyed Ghosts and An Enemy of the People. If I were going to teach one of these plays I would definitely choose Ghosts, which was my favorite. I feel Mrs. Alving is a more coherent and reliable lead character than Nora, and I find the social critique more devastating and less problematic.
Ghosts: https://youtu.be/0_oH0zTyIys
An Enemy of the People: https://youtu.be/6JaS8PZYavM
The Wild Duck: https://youtu.be/h7u7DWmo2GA
Original Review: I did not think I was going to like Ibsen. Before reading this collection I had seen A Doll's House and I found the ending really problematic, and that experience colored my expectations for Ibsen. But I was really pleased with Ghosts and An Enemy of the People, which I think are excellent plays.
I still have a problem with the end of A Doll's House, mostly because I feel like Nora critiques Torvald for things she has encouraged him to do throughout the play (e.g., she refers to herself using his animal rhetoric), so it seems to me like she has encouraged him to treat her a certain way and then suddenly is mad at him for having treated her that way. Now I understand that he was probably inclined to treat her like a child/pet before, but her behavior seems like it encouraged him. Reading the play I found her condemnation a bit more convincing because I read with the emphasis on his refusal to take the blame for her illegal actions, although this is also a somewhat problematic critique on her part, based more on romance novels than a real practical set of expectations.
But I really enjoyed Ghosts and An Enemy of the People. If I were going to teach one of these plays I would definitely choose Ghosts, which was my favorite. I feel Mrs. Alving is a more coherent and reliable lead character than Nora, and I find the social critique more devastating and less problematic.
November 8, 2015
I only read A Doll's House
September 4, 2021
This had been sitting on my pile of unread books the past few months, almost forgotten if not for a play my cousin had alluded to on Facebook. While I can't recall the context of her post, Manang Christine Godinez-Ortega's mention of Henrik Ibsen's The Wild Duck spurred me to pick this up sooner rather than later.
The first plays I read and reread, many times over, were Tennessee Williams's A Streetcar Named Desire and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. Both were almost as small as chapbooks, and bought at Cang's; this was 1987, and Dumaguete was bereft of bookstores. My fascination with the characters and a shortage of reading material made these two my rereading staples of choice, and by the time I finally got hold of laser disc copies of both movies in 1995, I practically had the dialogue down pat. Over the years I began to accumulate more of Williams's plays, and each has always been a treat. I eventually got hold of playwrights, and was hugely disappointed by Arthur Miller's thoroughly depressing Death of a Salesman, but enjoyed Eugene O'Neill's equally depressing but intriguing The Iceman Cometh. And the Greek plays felt too much like entertainment, which I couldn't take seriously. Ditto Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot. When it comes to books and movies, suspension of disbelief is usually second nature to me, but not when there's too much of that deus ex machina going on. Because of the early influence of Tennessee Williams's work, I prefer plays that are of the same mold--preferably with Southern drawls. A train wreck you anticipate from the get-go. Skeletons, galore--in the closet. Irony-laced accusations, scandalous revelations, and life-altering snap decisions. This is my first book by Henrik Ibsen, and all four plays almost fit my criteria, which I've listed in order of their misery quotient:
1) The Wild Duck - A rich, lecherous old man, his moral, philosophically misguided prodigal son, and a happy family of four (husband, wife, daughter, husband's father). Body count: 1.
2) Ghosts - A long-suffering, pragmatic mother, her prodigal artist son. Plus their maid and a meddling pastor. In most every lament lurks syphilis, it may as well count as a major character. Body count as I interpreted it: 1.
3) An Enemy of the People - Dirty small town politics refracted by my own Dumaguete. Again, we have a happy family of five. Whose lives are upended by a father's conviction for the truth (and a wee bit of sadomasochism). No body count, and redemption seems within reach.
4) A Doll's House - Another happy family of five, but with very young kids this time. The plot and setting have a very Edith Wharton feel to it. An early win for women empowerment.
In spite of the similar threads in these four plays, especially in the theme of family, I can't form a general opinion just yet. I'll have to read more of Ibsen's work.
The first plays I read and reread, many times over, were Tennessee Williams's A Streetcar Named Desire and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. Both were almost as small as chapbooks, and bought at Cang's; this was 1987, and Dumaguete was bereft of bookstores. My fascination with the characters and a shortage of reading material made these two my rereading staples of choice, and by the time I finally got hold of laser disc copies of both movies in 1995, I practically had the dialogue down pat. Over the years I began to accumulate more of Williams's plays, and each has always been a treat. I eventually got hold of playwrights, and was hugely disappointed by Arthur Miller's thoroughly depressing Death of a Salesman, but enjoyed Eugene O'Neill's equally depressing but intriguing The Iceman Cometh. And the Greek plays felt too much like entertainment, which I couldn't take seriously. Ditto Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot. When it comes to books and movies, suspension of disbelief is usually second nature to me, but not when there's too much of that deus ex machina going on. Because of the early influence of Tennessee Williams's work, I prefer plays that are of the same mold--preferably with Southern drawls. A train wreck you anticipate from the get-go. Skeletons, galore--in the closet. Irony-laced accusations, scandalous revelations, and life-altering snap decisions. This is my first book by Henrik Ibsen, and all four plays almost fit my criteria, which I've listed in order of their misery quotient:
1) The Wild Duck - A rich, lecherous old man, his moral, philosophically misguided prodigal son, and a happy family of four (husband, wife, daughter, husband's father). Body count: 1.
2) Ghosts - A long-suffering, pragmatic mother, her prodigal artist son. Plus their maid and a meddling pastor. In most every lament lurks syphilis, it may as well count as a major character. Body count as I interpreted it: 1.
3) An Enemy of the People - Dirty small town politics refracted by my own Dumaguete. Again, we have a happy family of five. Whose lives are upended by a father's conviction for the truth (and a wee bit of sadomasochism). No body count, and redemption seems within reach.
4) A Doll's House - Another happy family of five, but with very young kids this time. The plot and setting have a very Edith Wharton feel to it. An early win for women empowerment.
In spite of the similar threads in these four plays, especially in the theme of family, I can't form a general opinion just yet. I'll have to read more of Ibsen's work.
June 6, 2018
The only one of these I have ever been exposed to before was A Dolls House. I saw a very good version of it and quite enjoyed it here as well. Ibsen is a very talented writer, and I enjoy how he plays with the truth and perceptions, especially in An Enemy Of The People. I also enjoy how his plays are mostly character studies. Ghosts is ripe with irony and has a very strong anti established order feel, as does An Enemy of The People and A Dolls House. The Wild Duck is a very good study of a marriage and what lies can do, although I am not sure if Ibsen is saying there should be truth from the start of a marriage, or if there is a lie to keep it, or if regardless of lies the couple should stay together. It is a very layered play.
I do like how in A Dolls House and Ghosts he shows that personal happiness is a crucial part of any happy marriage by showing what happens when personal happiness is not there. I especially like the strength of the two main characters in these stories, who are both women. An Enemy of The People and The Wild Duck both feature male main characters who are also strongly shown but these show what happens when personal happiness is the only consideration. Any of these plays could be considered tragedies, depending on how you look at things, and all of them have some silver lining as well.
I do like how in A Dolls House and Ghosts he shows that personal happiness is a crucial part of any happy marriage by showing what happens when personal happiness is not there. I especially like the strength of the two main characters in these stories, who are both women. An Enemy of The People and The Wild Duck both feature male main characters who are also strongly shown but these show what happens when personal happiness is the only consideration. Any of these plays could be considered tragedies, depending on how you look at things, and all of them have some silver lining as well.
December 29, 2022
Individual rankings:
A Doll's House: 3/5 stars - a good for her story but I hate her too.
Ghost: 1/5 stars - wHaT iF aFfAiRs HaD cOnSeQuEnCeS ft. incest.
An Enemy of the People: 1/5 stars - Big Bad Government™ bad. Not Big Bad Government™ good.
The Wild Duck: 4/5 stars - I wanted so badly to like this one, but the end is awful and depressing. It could have been a great story asking the question if it is okay to ruin someone's happiness if their happiness is based on a lie - but this is Ibsen and all of the characters are vile people.
A Doll's House: 3/5 stars - a good for her story but I hate her too.
Ghost: 1/5 stars - wHaT iF aFfAiRs HaD cOnSeQuEnCeS ft. incest.
An Enemy of the People: 1/5 stars - Big Bad Government™ bad. Not Big Bad Government™ good.
The Wild Duck: 4/5 stars - I wanted so badly to like this one, but the end is awful and depressing. It could have been a great story asking the question if it is okay to ruin someone's happiness if their happiness is based on a lie - but this is Ibsen and all of the characters are vile people.
October 8, 2023
From this anthology I read A Doll’s House. Nora goes from being her husband’s doll to a woman who leaves her husband and children when she comes to the realization that she doesn’t love her husband any longer and that she must begin to understand her life from her own point of view.
The play does challenge the reader in having to accept that a rational mother would leave her 3 children. The husband, yes; the children, not sure.
Reminded me of the 1960s and 1970s when women were having their great awakening to independence and following their dreams.
The play does challenge the reader in having to accept that a rational mother would leave her 3 children. The husband, yes; the children, not sure.
Reminded me of the 1960s and 1970s when women were having their great awakening to independence and following their dreams.
Read
October 21, 2020Not sure how to give this a rating since it's four separate plays. I enjoyed a Doll's house the most, The Wild Duck the least, the other two I felt were good, but I also found them all to be quite similar in theme (not necessarily a bad thing, just an observation). I think I would have rather had a few different themes present, but he might only have written domestic dramas revolving around infidelity/the disintegration of the home. Much of them also ended similarly, which was interesting.
Read
January 28, 2022Ibsen's commitment to skepticism and forcing his audience to re-evaluate all truths they hold to be self evident is impressive, and I don't think I can ever fully understand how subversive some of these messages must have been in their time. The ending of A Doll's House even came as a shock to me, thus in its time it must have been completely unheard of.
August 8, 2019
Anyone can relate to "An Enemy of the People" which might also be called the Whistle-blower. Seemed almost perfect until the speechifying. Wish he just let the action explain it all. Wish we were fed more of Ibsen in H.S. instead of Shakespeare.
December 30, 2023
This book has four plays in it. I've only read one - The Wild Duck. This review is for that play only.
The Wild Duck
Overall Rating: ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ .5 (3.5/5) or 6.85/10 overall
Characters - 7
Atmosphere - 7
Writing - 8
Plot - 7
Intrigue - 7
Logic - 6
Enjoyment - 6
The Wild Duck
Overall Rating: ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ .5 (3.5/5) or 6.85/10 overall
Characters - 7
Atmosphere - 7
Writing - 8
Plot - 7
Intrigue - 7
Logic - 6
Enjoyment - 6
November 26, 2017
"The strongest man in the world is he who stands most alone." - Dr. Thomas Stockmann, AN ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE
"I am half inclined to think we are all ghosts, Mr. Manders." - Mrs. Alving, GHOSTS
"I am half inclined to think we are all ghosts, Mr. Manders." - Mrs. Alving, GHOSTS
August 10, 2018
Wonderful!
Read
May 17, 2021I do prefer the Meyer translations of Ghosts and A Doll’s House.
September 1, 2023
Una muy buena compilación, me encanta el teatro de Ibsen
October 20, 2023
The guy wasn’t even rich in the first place nora why did you marry him???
January 16, 2024
the dolls house- read for a level english, not my fav- felt rushed, and reminded me of an inspector calls, not awful just not my favourite , it was an easy read though and took me no time to read :)
June 28, 2024
Stopped reading after two plays. They're good, but they're major bummers. I can't bring myself to read another one.
Want to read
December 2, 2024Recommended by Ruby Granger
December 10, 2024
this is why I love Ibsen. The issues that he tackled in his plays are still relevant today.
and I have found my new favorite play while reading this: An Enemy of the People!
and I have found my new favorite play while reading this: An Enemy of the People!
February 23, 2025
Dolls house + Ghosts
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews