Customer Reviews

The Wild Duck

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Many find Ibsen difficult to understand. I certainly did. However, by reading The Wild Duck, I was introduced to an entire new world of symbolism and creative writing. Like the master he was, Ibsen paints a portrait of a family, representing all of us, living on a lie. Cruelty in our midst, innocent victimes and pragmatists losing to the vindictive, it's all there. The touches of comedy and tragedy just increase the impression that it does concern us, that really, he's looked into our lives and seen our lies, although hopefully in a less extreme version. And don't we all know a Hedvig, a Gina, a Hjalmar and a Gregers? Maybe there's something of the all in all of us... The book sucks you in, creeps under your skin and stays there, along with the horror, the anger and the sympathy you feel while reading. In my opinion, one of the best examples of Ibsen's less romantic period of writing.

Ibsen's philosophical "message" in this play disturbs me. I don't think I agree with Dr. Relling that each of us needs his own brand of self-deception to cope with life. Certainly Hialmar Ekdal is content enough, and hilariously funny as an lazy fool who thinks he's a creative genius in photograhy, a breadwinner to his wife and daughter, and a martyr to his father's scandalous past. Alas, his friend Gregers Werl points the way to the truth, that Hialmar is deceived about everything in his life. It would all be comical but for the fact that Hialmar's daugher Hedvig, who is probably not his daugther at all, shoots herself as proof of her love for Hialmar. So, Ibsen seems to say, here the truth has cost a young girl's life, an unbearable tragedy but for the fact that she was going blind. Well, no doubt there is cost in knowing the truth about oneself and about others, no doubt there are things we prefer not to know, and no doubt there are people like Hialmar who are impervious to truth. But there are also people like Hialmar's wife Gina, and Dr. Relling himself, who know the truth and who hold up nobly and well. For at least these, I think Ibsen should recommend truth in large doses, and perhaps he does.

Werle is a successful merchant. His previous partner Ekdal was found guilty of a crime, although it becomes clear in Ibsen's play that Werle committed it. Ekdal served time in prison for Werle's crime and is now, after his release, a broken man. Werle eases his conscience by giving him some copying work to do, so that he has pocket money.

When Ekdal went to prison, Werle also gave Ekdal's son, Hialmar, money to start a photography business on a small scale, a business that Hialmar does not like very much. And he gave him his mistress as a wife without telling him of his relationship with her.

Hialmar's wife has a daughter with an eye disease. She is now fourteen years old. Hialmar has been married for under fifteen years. Ekdal lives with his son and his family and raises some animals in the garret, including a wild duck that Werle shot but did not kill because he has an eye disease. The duck was snatched and bitten by one of Werle's dogs and is slightly lame. It tried to hide in water and is hurt for being there too long. Werle told one of his men to kill the duck, but Ekdal rescued it.

Werle has a son, Gregers, who considers himself a friend of Hialmar. Gregers is bothered by his involvement in the nefarious deeds of his father. He believes in the ennobling value of truth, sincerity, and the ideal. He feels that he must reveal all the things that Hialmar does not know about his wife. He is misguidedly convinced that that the revelation of the truth will make Hialmar's marriage ideal.

The wounded wild duck is obviously a symbol. Gregers thinks that Ekdal and his son have "something of the wild duck" in them. Are they the only ones? Is everyone in the play a wounded wild duck? How can a wounded duck be cured?

After Gregers reveals Hialmar's wife's past to Hialmar and Hialmar is distraught, Hialmar's doctor tells Gregers that he will heal Hialmar by "cultivating the life-illusion in him." The Norwegian word literally means "the life-lie." The doctor says, "Rob the average man of his life-illusion, and you rob him of his happiness at the same stroke." The doctor is clearly saying that the average person needs "the life-lie" in order to live, and cannot survive happily with the truth or the ideal.

The Ekdals - Hjalmar, his wife Gina, and their daughter Hedvig live a decent life. It has it's frustrations but they get by and they care for each other. One day an old friend of Hjalmar's, Gregers Werle, shows up. He's learned some family history, and, being an idealist, as someone who thinks truth should reign at all costs, he turns the Ekdal's world upside-down. How this little family deals with this news is the crux of the play.

It's a provacative read. It may seem slow at first but it picks up considerably and moves along swiftly towards the end. The characters are well drawn, that is, they're recognizable. They have their personal idiosyncrasies, their faults and virtues and ideals. I was impressed by how much they reminded me of people in my own life.

There are many ideas to play with when reading this. Is it possible to live a life completely free of self-delusion? Do we all tell ourselves lies in order to live? I would call it a play of ideas but that might make it sound didactic or doctrinaire, which it isn't (to me anyway, I think some people disagree).

I've read a fair sample of Ibsens work and I think this is the best of the bunch.

Many find Ibsen difficult to understand. I certainly did. However, by reading The Wild Duck, I was introduced to an entire new world of symbolism and creative writing. Like the master he was, Ibsen paints a portrait of a family, representing all of us, living on a lie. Cruelty in our midst, innocent victims and pragmatists losing to the vindictive, it's all there. The touches of comedy and tragedy just increase the impression that it does concern us. And don't we all know a Hedvig, a Gina, a Hialmar and a Gregers? Maybe there's something of that in all of us. The book drew me in, it crept under my skin and stayed there, along with the horror, the anger and the sympathy I felt like I was in their world while reading.

This is a very complex play although it seems simplistic at first. There were a lot of changes going on in society when Ibsen wrote this play in 1884 And not everyone was adapting to these changes. Some still tried to cling to the old way of doing things, and others were trying to force changes within their own sphere. (Is that so different than now?) Anyway, Ibsen portrays these varying degrees of acceptance with his characters in this play. And he does a masterful job of it. How can so much be depicted about the heartache and pathos of the human psyche within the limits of a five-act play? That is Ibsen/s genius.

so hilarious, so poignant, so daring, and so dense - teeming with life - the characters speaking their characterization - and such beautiful characters - and so wacko