Search Menu
my notes... important

by SHEKOOFEH493, September 04, 2012

108 out of 131 people found this helpful

• The term “freethinking” is used often in the play… almost every characters except the mayor and Aslaksan are freethinkers.
• It is not Ibsen’s intent to create a play of food vs. Evil.
• The play is written in the late 19th century
• The play in many ways is about the extent to which the individual innocence can survive in modern society
• In 3rd act we see that the newspaper men are against him.
• Hovstad is not a reliable character, his support is for his attraction to Petra
• The mayor wants to stay in power but Dr. Stockmann is concerned with morality and science not economics and politics.
• By making newspapermen like Hovstad Ibsen wants to show how hard it is to have clear opinions in Modern society.
• The 4th act represents the climax of the play. When every people are against his ideas.
• Speaking of “the tyranny of the majority” in front of a crowd of town people is ironic.
• The mayor believes in the rule of an intelligent minority.
• The mayor can’t agree the risk of declaring baths pollution because he is the tool of the masses and Hovstad is also the subject of the demand of his less freethinking subscribers.
• Hovstad is a freethinker in private but not in public eye. Actually intelligent individuals cannot act on their opinions because of fear of the majority.
• By not letting Dr. Stockman to present his reports about the baths pollution, mayor and the newspapermen shows that the tyranny of the majority is not absolute.
• In 5th act : his partial embrace of the title of “ enemy of the people” is full of sarcasm.
• He decides to stay in town because he is incredibly angry and he wants to keep fighting .
• At the end Petra convinced his father to continue his was after his death but we have to notice that he is a woman and Ibsen is so much aware of Women’s issue those days.


Was this note helpful to you?

Thumbs Up Thumbs Down
  • Share