Customer Reviews

Ghosts (Dover Thrift Editions)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Although Henrik Ibsen is the first great modern dramatist, his play "Ghosts" ("Gengangere") bears a strong similarity to ancient Greek drama, where the "tragic flaw" of the protagonist lives on in his children. However, in this story the curse on the Alving family has a medical basis. Published in 1881 but not performed until the next year because of its controversial subject matter, "Ghosts" deals with the impact of congenital venereal disease on a family. "Ghosts" strongly reflects Ibsen's desire to attack hypocrisy and conventional morality and caused even more of a furor that his previous drama, "A Doll's House."

Helen Alving is building an orphanage as a memorial to her late husband and the night before the dedication she confesses to her old friend Parson Manders that her husband had been a "degenerate," and she is building the orphanage using her husband's "dirty" money so only her own money will pass on to her son, Oswald, who has just returned from living abroad. But then Oswald confesses he has a debilitating, incurable disease that the doctors believe was inherited. Even from beyond the grave, the "ghost" of Captain Alving ruins the life of his family. Mrs. Alving has to confess her husband's past to their son, destroying the young man's idealized view of his father. Knowing he is dying, Oswald wants to seduce the maid, Regina, so that when he enters the next stage of the disease she will give him poison. Oswald does not care that Regina is really his half-sister, and in the end it will be his mother's decision whether or not to give her son the poison when Oswald begins to have his attack.

The ending of the play constitutes a Rorschach test for the audience, with Ibsen refusing to let them off the hook. "Ghosts" is probably the Ibsen drama that relies most on symbolism, from the heavy use of light/dark imagery to the purifying aspects of fire, to the obvious symbolism of ghosts. Consequently, I think this makes "Ghosts" one of the easier plays by Ibsen for students to analyze. Final Argument: Reading Ibsen's plays in order has greater benefit than usual when reading the works of a single author. If you read "A Doll's House," "Ghosts," "An Enemy of the People," and "The Wild Duck," then you will see the playwright struggling to find a play that will reflect his deeply held beliefs and also find widespread critical and public acceptance. The relationship between each set of plays in the progression becomes insightful, as Ibsen either extends or reverses elements of the previous drama. For teachers of drama there might not be a better quartet of plays to study to show the growth of a major dramatist.

I read "Ghosts" by Henrik Ibsen as part of a college assignment. At first I thought it was really easy to understand - the language was really simple compared to Shakespeare etc. But once I got down to analysing it, I found it really difficult. The ending is ambiguous and the characters are all a little disturbed. "ghosts" is about the past and its effect on the present. it also incorporates such complex themes as euthenaisia, incest and family secrets. if you can understand the complexity of the text, and make some attempt at understanding the ending, "Ghosts" is a pretty good read and is actually quite interesting to analyse.

"Ghosts", while not as famous as Ibsen's "A Doll's House", is clearly an interesting piece of writing. Nobody denies that. It is an interesting book to analyze, it's a quick read, but very deep, and it leaves a very strong impression on you.

"Ghosts" is in a sense, like "A Doll's House", about something that while still frowned upon today, is much more acceptable. In "Ghosts" there is the theme of the "sins of fathers", and the father's sins are brought to light. Mrs. Alving has been keeping secrets for a very long time, and here is where, through her ghosts, she reveals them.

Well, perhaps it's not as simple as that. The plot is intriguing, the plot twists are surprising, and the ending is disturbingly good. Ibsen created a fascinating story and masterpiece when he wrote "Ghosts", and it's absolutely superb. I highly recommend reading this play to anyone, especially if you liked Ibsen's other works.

Note: I don't suggest buying this play alone in a book like this, though. You might as well buy a book with several of Ibsens plays for the same amount of money, and then you'll get "A Doll's House" too.

Though Ibsen is a little bit dated, more so than his successor, Knut Hamsen, he is still one of the greatest minds to come out of Norway and is arguably the father of the modern drama - and also to some extent, the father of the modern novel. He initiated the style which was later taken up by Franz Kafka, Henry Miller (Tropic of Cancer), Roman Payne (Crepuscule). Ghosts is a quick read. Dover Thrift Editions makes the price definitely worth it. A must-read once in your life. Highly recommended.

I chose this book to read and analyse a couple of years ago. It seemed to have simple meaning, but the more I tried to analyse, the more outstanding I found the book, and far from simple.
Helen Alving is a widow and is keeping a secret. One day she tells her friend Manders and he's quite shocked. It all has to do with some money from her dead husband that she doesn't want her son to have. Oswald, her son, comes home from abroad with very sad news. He is ill, and there isn't a cure for him. When Mrs. Alving is told that it was most likely inherited, she tells her son the secret too, and that changes his view on his father. As the book goes on, the intriques grow bigger...
Ibsen is probably more known for his play "A Doll House", but this one is just as great. He was very critical of the society and most, if not all, of his books often has a somewhat hidden story where he debates social matters and also morals. He use symbols and mostly contrasts to give the play a certain atmosphare and meaning. I believe this is one of Ibsen's greatest plays and strongly recommend it to anyone.

The Norwegian title of this famous and now highly extolled play could be translated "That which returns," suggesting that the consequences of an evil deed is another evil deed. Written in 1881, Ibsen's contemporaries considered it a terrible and offensive morality play that was indecent, scandalous, morbid, and filthy. It spoke of subjects - sex without marriage, adultery, syphilis, suicide, and marriage of siblings - that shouldn't be mentioned publically. One figure in the play is a minister who takes the Christian moral position of the time and makes statements and performs acts that reflect this belief, but they result in harm to others. He is certain, for example, that God protects good people and harms those who are evil; therefore it is irreligious to protect a building with insurance. He insists upon the sanctity of marriage and that husband and wife should stay together even if the husband mistreats his wife and has repeated adulterous relationships.
This story is about a widow who suffered from such an abusive husband. She needs to send her son from home so that he would not be affected by his father's deeds. The son has syphilis, which he acquired at birth because of his father's acts. The son wants to marry a girl who, unknown to him, is one of the illegitimate daughters of his father, his half sister. Thus on the tenth anniversary of her husband's death when her son comes home and reveals his disease and intention to marry, the wife is revisited with her husband's ghost.
Will she remain silent, ignore the dictates of her church, and allow her son, who is deathly ill, to have happiness? What effects did his father's improper behavior have upon her son other than the syphilis? Health aside, has his life been ruined? What about her husband's illegitimate daughter, how much of his character did she inherit? Did it ruin her life? Was there once a chance for both the wife and the minister to have a happy life together, which was destroyed because of the minister's misguided piety? Does the minister ever realize that his way is wrong and is demolishing the lives of many people? Ibsen addresses these and other issues brilliantly, with superb and suspenseful dialogue.

I chose this book to read and analyse a couple of years ago. It seemed to have simple meaning, but the more I tried to analyse, the more outstanding I found the book, and far from simple.
Helen Alving is a widow and is keeping a secret. One day she tells her friend Manders and he's quite shocked. It all has to do with some money from her dead husband that she doesn't want her son to have. Oswald, her son, comes home from abroad with very sad news. He is ill, and there isn't a cure for him. When Mrs. Alving is told that it was most likely inherited, she tells her son the secret too, and that changes his view on his father. As the book goes on, the intriques grow bigger...
Ibsen is probably more known for his play "A Doll House", but this one is just as great. He was very critical of the society and most, if not all, of his books often has a somewhat hidden story where he debates social matters and also morals. He use symbols and mostly contrasts to give the play a certain atmosphare and meaning. I believe this is one of Ibsen's greatest plays and strongly recommend it to anyone.

A play that is easy to follow and raises some controversial topics especially of its time. The ending was surprisingly much more emotional than I thought it would be.

...I found the play interesting, but Oswald's hysterics were melodramatic and bordered on comical. For a better play about a dysfunctional family, read Tennessee Williams