What do you think?
Rate this book
Four Major Plays: A Doll's House / Ghosts / Hedda Gabler / The Master Builder
Taken from the highly acclaimed Oxford Ibsen, this collection of Ibsen's plays includesA Doll's House, Ghosts, Hedda Gabler, and The Master Builder.
384 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1879
112 people are currently reading
3320 people want to read
About the author
Henrik Ibsen
2,228 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 187 reviews
July 9, 2019
A Doll's House ★★★★
There's a reason why this is one of the most performed plays in the world. It's just wonderful. I mean, who doesn't love that ending? It's so subversive (especially for the time). This is the best play in this collection.
Ghosts ★★
I didn't really care for this one. It bored me. I understand its inclusion because of the slight parallels with A Doll's House but otherwise it isn't anything spectacular.
Hedda Gabler ★★★
I went into this book thinking that Hedda Gabler was going to be the one that blew me away because well... it's Hedda Gabler. However while I did enjoy it, it wasn't exactly amazing. It reminded me a lot of Chekhov's The Seagull (which I think is a better play) and that comparison may have affected my enjoyment of this work.
The Master Builder ★★★★
My favourite play from this collection. It's a lot more "talkie" than the others and I really enjoy that. While the ending is a bit... odd, it's still wonderfully tragic and stayed in my mind longer than the other three plays.
There's a reason why this is one of the most performed plays in the world. It's just wonderful. I mean, who doesn't love that ending? It's so subversive (especially for the time). This is the best play in this collection.
Ghosts ★★
I didn't really care for this one. It bored me. I understand its inclusion because of the slight parallels with A Doll's House but otherwise it isn't anything spectacular.
Hedda Gabler ★★★
I went into this book thinking that Hedda Gabler was going to be the one that blew me away because well... it's Hedda Gabler. However while I did enjoy it, it wasn't exactly amazing. It reminded me a lot of Chekhov's The Seagull (which I think is a better play) and that comparison may have affected my enjoyment of this work.
The Master Builder ★★★★
My favourite play from this collection. It's a lot more "talkie" than the others and I really enjoy that. While the ending is a bit... odd, it's still wonderfully tragic and stayed in my mind longer than the other three plays.
March 27, 2015
In the 1980s BBC production of Ibsen's Ghosts, Judi Dench plays Mrs. Alving—that stiff-upper-lipped endurer of endless misfortune—as a sniping, often sarcastic adversary to self-righteous, simple-minded Pastor Manders (Michael Gambon), who arrives at her home to conduct business but also to needle her about her moral failings. I read the play immediately before watching the film, and I have to confess that wasn't at all how I pictured Mrs. Alving. Either because of my faltering skills of inference or the many interpretive possibilities, I imagined Mrs. Alving combating Pastor Manders' authority with a sort of equanimity. There's no contesting the fact that Manders is (in the common parlance) a jerk and somewhat of an idiot (to the extent that he can't decipher Engstrand's motives), and there's nothing a jerk hates more than being unable to 'reach' a victim with his or her insults or judgments. (From this knowledge is derived the contemporary admonition not to feed internet trolls—because they 'win' only if they get a reaction.) To that end, I pictured Mrs. Alving responding to Pastor Manders' admonishments in a seemingly pleasant and even voice, with a pretense to acquiescence, while all the while she develops an implicit case against the religious and moral authority that the pastor represents.
I bring this up to highlight the uniqueness of reading plays. These are texts that are intended to be acted out and are often skeletal in design to allow directors, actors, set designers, and so on to add flesh to the story. (Admittedly, Henrik Ibsen attempts to control the set designers to an often ridiculous degree with detailed descriptions, but the dialogue in his plays is generally presented neutrally.)
When you read a play, you are compelled to direct it yourself (in your mind). You might argue that that's true of novels and short stories as well—and that's of course true, but to a lesser extent. There is usually a lot more exposition and description in a story to make the narrative more specific in the reader's mind (unless you're reading, say, Hemingway). In most plays, many literalized cues are absent, and this is a good thing—in that it accommodates the creativity of those who put on the play.
I think this is especially relevant to Ibsen because I have watched a filmed adaptation of each one of these plays since I finished them, and all of them—except Hedda Gabler (which I think is the weakest of the four included in this volume)—'felt' very different from what I imagined.
Symptomatic of their era, the four plays rely heavily on (sometimes pained) narrative contrivances. These are harder to 'reconcile' when you only read the naked lines on the page, but when an actor or actress effectively embodies the psychology that results from these contrivances, they're so much easier to swallow.
I have previously reviewed another edition of A Doll's House on this website. I referred to Nora as a 'twit' in that review. But that's of course because of how I was predisposed to direct her in my mind—which surely isn't to discount the fact that Nora is intended to seem flighty and childlike early on in the play. But when Nora is rendered 'human' in a production (in this case, by Claire Bloom in the 1970s version), her traits become less conceptual than an actual iteration of very real human idiosyncrasy.
I enjoyed reading all of these plays and forming ideas of them in my mind, but Hedda Gabler doesn't feel sufficiently nuanced to me. The text doesn't allow enough room for an actress to make the title character anything but one-note. I wish there were a little more evidence of vulnerability in her, but she comes across as mainly villainous because her predicament (her indolence, her desire to wield psychological power) isn't explored. In the 1960s version, Ingrid Bergman played the role pretty much exactly as I imagined—and as the dialogue seems to demand.
The most puzzling play in the group is The Master Builder, which is filled with ambiguities I haven't fully reckoned with yet. It will take another reading and (I hope) a few more productions of the play to wrap my mind around it. It seems to take place almost in a quasi-reality, embedded with symbolism I haven't really unraveled yet. The play's message, at first glance, seems contradictory, quarreling with itself... but this might be one of its strengths.
I bring this up to highlight the uniqueness of reading plays. These are texts that are intended to be acted out and are often skeletal in design to allow directors, actors, set designers, and so on to add flesh to the story. (Admittedly, Henrik Ibsen attempts to control the set designers to an often ridiculous degree with detailed descriptions, but the dialogue in his plays is generally presented neutrally.)
When you read a play, you are compelled to direct it yourself (in your mind). You might argue that that's true of novels and short stories as well—and that's of course true, but to a lesser extent. There is usually a lot more exposition and description in a story to make the narrative more specific in the reader's mind (unless you're reading, say, Hemingway). In most plays, many literalized cues are absent, and this is a good thing—in that it accommodates the creativity of those who put on the play.
I think this is especially relevant to Ibsen because I have watched a filmed adaptation of each one of these plays since I finished them, and all of them—except Hedda Gabler (which I think is the weakest of the four included in this volume)—'felt' very different from what I imagined.
Symptomatic of their era, the four plays rely heavily on (sometimes pained) narrative contrivances. These are harder to 'reconcile' when you only read the naked lines on the page, but when an actor or actress effectively embodies the psychology that results from these contrivances, they're so much easier to swallow.
I have previously reviewed another edition of A Doll's House on this website. I referred to Nora as a 'twit' in that review. But that's of course because of how I was predisposed to direct her in my mind—which surely isn't to discount the fact that Nora is intended to seem flighty and childlike early on in the play. But when Nora is rendered 'human' in a production (in this case, by Claire Bloom in the 1970s version), her traits become less conceptual than an actual iteration of very real human idiosyncrasy.
I enjoyed reading all of these plays and forming ideas of them in my mind, but Hedda Gabler doesn't feel sufficiently nuanced to me. The text doesn't allow enough room for an actress to make the title character anything but one-note. I wish there were a little more evidence of vulnerability in her, but she comes across as mainly villainous because her predicament (her indolence, her desire to wield psychological power) isn't explored. In the 1960s version, Ingrid Bergman played the role pretty much exactly as I imagined—and as the dialogue seems to demand.
The most puzzling play in the group is The Master Builder, which is filled with ambiguities I haven't fully reckoned with yet. It will take another reading and (I hope) a few more productions of the play to wrap my mind around it. It seems to take place almost in a quasi-reality, embedded with symbolism I haven't really unraveled yet. The play's message, at first glance, seems contradictory, quarreling with itself... but this might be one of its strengths.
December 29, 2017
There is no doubt that Ibsen is one of the greatest playwrights. Reading him for the first time was a wonderful experience, and it must be very exciting to see his plays on stage.
On Ghosts:
A widow, Mrs. Alving, has to face the fact that her son, Oswald, has inherited syphilis from his father, Captain Alving. Captain Alving is deceased and is mentioned throughout the play, and it follows that Mrs. Alving did not have the courage to leave her husband when she should have done so. Ibsen attacks nineteenth century attitudes regarding marriage, hypocrisy, religion, etc. Mrs. Alving has a very curious mind. While this is probably there bleakest Ibsen play I have read so far, I thought it was brilliant. They way Ibsen stages realism is wonderful. "I almost think we are all of us ghosts." This means we are haunted by our past, with ideas and beliefs. A society cannot go on believing in old ideas, and this is further discussed in Ibsen's play An Enemy of the People.
On The Master Builder:
This is a play in which an aging architect accidentally kills himself while trying to impress a young woman. All his fortune is built off of a family tragedy, and it is very ironic. It's lonely at the top.
On Hedda Gabler:
In my opinion, this is Ibsen's best work. It is a stirring, thought-provoking drama. It involves an unhappy marriage, which I found very similar to Madame Bovary, although Hedda Gabler is far better. Hedda is a manipulative character. She destroys and manipulates to get what she wants but she lives in a reality which she cannot accept.
"It's a liberation to know that an act of spontaneous courage is yet possible in this world. An act that has something of unconditional beauty."
-Henrik Ibsen, Hedda Gabler
On A Doll's House:
I read this play in a different addition. This one also offered the alternate ending, where Nora does not leave her husband and children. He was forced to change the ending when they were doing a production of the play in Germany, and the leading actress insisted that she would not play the role of Nora unless Ibsen changed the ending. He did so under much pressure, and very reluctantly too. Ibsen encourages women to find their own selves and to think for themselves. Nora is married to a narrow-minded man, Torvald, who cannot tolerate her independence or decision making. Ibsen exposes middle class hypocrisy and encourages society to see the reality and not the ideal. Nora finally confronts the reality of the life she has lived for eight years and famously slams the door when Torvald thinks about "the miracle of miracles." I liked the character development and the symbolism.
This is my first time reading Ibsen and I have to say the experience was wonderful. I would recommend him to anyone.
On Ghosts:
A widow, Mrs. Alving, has to face the fact that her son, Oswald, has inherited syphilis from his father, Captain Alving. Captain Alving is deceased and is mentioned throughout the play, and it follows that Mrs. Alving did not have the courage to leave her husband when she should have done so. Ibsen attacks nineteenth century attitudes regarding marriage, hypocrisy, religion, etc. Mrs. Alving has a very curious mind. While this is probably there bleakest Ibsen play I have read so far, I thought it was brilliant. They way Ibsen stages realism is wonderful. "I almost think we are all of us ghosts." This means we are haunted by our past, with ideas and beliefs. A society cannot go on believing in old ideas, and this is further discussed in Ibsen's play An Enemy of the People.
On The Master Builder:
This is a play in which an aging architect accidentally kills himself while trying to impress a young woman. All his fortune is built off of a family tragedy, and it is very ironic. It's lonely at the top.
On Hedda Gabler:
In my opinion, this is Ibsen's best work. It is a stirring, thought-provoking drama. It involves an unhappy marriage, which I found very similar to Madame Bovary, although Hedda Gabler is far better. Hedda is a manipulative character. She destroys and manipulates to get what she wants but she lives in a reality which she cannot accept.
"It's a liberation to know that an act of spontaneous courage is yet possible in this world. An act that has something of unconditional beauty."
-Henrik Ibsen, Hedda Gabler
On A Doll's House:
I read this play in a different addition. This one also offered the alternate ending, where Nora does not leave her husband and children. He was forced to change the ending when they were doing a production of the play in Germany, and the leading actress insisted that she would not play the role of Nora unless Ibsen changed the ending. He did so under much pressure, and very reluctantly too. Ibsen encourages women to find their own selves and to think for themselves. Nora is married to a narrow-minded man, Torvald, who cannot tolerate her independence or decision making. Ibsen exposes middle class hypocrisy and encourages society to see the reality and not the ideal. Nora finally confronts the reality of the life she has lived for eight years and famously slams the door when Torvald thinks about "the miracle of miracles." I liked the character development and the symbolism.
This is my first time reading Ibsen and I have to say the experience was wonderful. I would recommend him to anyone.
September 3, 2022
I may have some more things to say later, but for now:
The oppressed, the obsessed, the possessed, and the perennial return of the repressed = sheer brilliance in the hands of this analyst of the class and gender wars, this unveiler of social hypocrisy and personal mauvaise foi (and foie!) this "master builder" of "castles in the air"...
The oppressed, the obsessed, the possessed, and the perennial return of the repressed = sheer brilliance in the hands of this analyst of the class and gender wars, this unveiler of social hypocrisy and personal mauvaise foi (and foie!) this "master builder" of "castles in the air"...
July 18, 2016
A Doll's House
☆☆☆/☆☆
Κοινωνική κριτική με βάση της τη δυναμική των ζευγαριών, τα χρήματα και τη δύναμη που φέρνουν, τη θέση της γυναίκας, τα καθήκοντα και τις υποχρεώσεις της απέναντι στην κοινωνία, αλλά και απέναντι στο σύζυγό της.
Ghosts
☆☆☆☆☆
Με την παράλληλη ανάγνωση των Βρικολάκων και του Κουκλόσπιτου οι ομοιότητες ήταν περισσότερο πρόδηλες, τα μοτίβα συνεχίζονται· τόσο η αντιμετώπιση από την πλευρά της γυναίκας των ηθών της πατριαρχικής κοινωνίας όσο και η απεικόνιση των ρόλων που η ίδια η κοινωνία υποβάλλει στη γυναίκα.
Hedda Gabler
☆☆☆☆/☆
Από τα πιο δυνατά έργα που έχουν γραφτεί· πραγματεύεται τη δύναμη, τον έλεγχο και την επιρροή που επιθυμεί και που, κατ' επέκταση, ασκεί ο κάθε άνθρωπος στον άλλο, ενώ παράλληλα διερευνάται το αίσθημα και η σημασία της ελευθερίας, της υποταγής και της ανθρώπινης μείωσης.
The Master Builder
☆☆☆☆/☆
Η ιστορία του Πρωτομάστορα, έχοντας αρκετές ομοιότητες στη βάση της με το έργο Έντα Γκάμπλερ, αφορά την επιρροή εστιασμένη όμως στις προσωπικές αδυναμίες και ανασφάλειες, που λειτουργούν ως κίνητρο για τη χειραγώγηση.
☆☆☆/☆☆
Κοινωνική κριτική με βάση της τη δυναμική των ζευγαριών, τα χρήματα και τη δύναμη που φέρνουν, τη θέση της γυναίκας, τα καθήκοντα και τις υποχρεώσεις της απέναντι στην κοινωνία, αλλά και απέναντι στο σύζυγό της.
Ghosts
☆☆☆☆☆
Με την παράλληλη ανάγνωση των Βρικολάκων και του Κουκλόσπιτου οι ομοιότητες ήταν περισσότερο πρόδηλες, τα μοτίβα συνεχίζονται· τόσο η αντιμετώπιση από την πλευρά της γυναίκας των ηθών της πατριαρχικής κοινωνίας όσο και η απεικόνιση των ρόλων που η ίδια η κοινωνία υποβάλλει στη γυναίκα.
Hedda Gabler
☆☆☆☆/☆
Από τα πιο δυνατά έργα που έχουν γραφτεί· πραγματεύεται τη δύναμη, τον έλεγχο και την επιρροή που επιθυμεί και που, κατ' επέκταση, ασκεί ο κάθε άνθρωπος στον άλλο, ενώ παράλληλα διερευνάται το αίσθημα και η σημασία της ελευθερίας, της υποταγής και της ανθρώπινης μείωσης.
The Master Builder
☆☆☆☆/☆
Η ιστορία του Πρωτομάστορα, έχοντας αρκετές ομοιότητες στη βάση της με το έργο Έντα Γκάμπλερ, αφορά την επιρροή εστιασμένη όμως στις προσωπικές αδυναμίες και ανασφάλειες, που λειτουργούν ως κίνητρο για τη χειραγώγηση.
February 25, 2019
Truly amazing.
June 3, 2021
Ibsen is of course one of the greatest playwrights of them all, and his works still get performed regularly despite the fact that they are very much rooted in their times. He is credited with leading the way in bringing realism, moral ambiguity, and social criticism into the theatre, and doing so in a way that is dramatic and interesting for an audience. This was James McFarlane's translation from the 1960s; there may be something more interesting out there now.
"A Doll's House" is his classic proto-feminist drama, about a woman trapped in a stifling, traditional, bourgeois marriage, and ultimately going against society's norms. "Ghosts" presents another troubled family, this one struggling with issues stemming from lustful behavior. The main ghost hanging over the proceedings is that of the pater familias, who has behaved selfishly and left behind some serious problems for his remaining relatives to deal with - a son who is suffering from syphilis, and a headstrong young house maid who is eventually revealed to be the illegitimate daughter of the patriarch.
Things get more complicated still in "Hedda Gabler", in which a strong-willed and manipulative woman is married to a pleasant, but slightly naive scholar named Tesman. Tesman's rival, a brilliant but self-destructive writer named Eilert appears on the scene, and it turns out that he and Hedda were once lovers. She then sets out on a destructive course of action, turning on the lost copy of a manuscript, that involves some debauchery and ultimately suicide. Hedda, is ultimately an opaque figure, and the audience is left to wonder why at the end.
"The Master Builder" gives us a great character in Halvard Solness - a very talented but arrogant architect and builder who has come to dominate those in his little world. A few women are in love with him, and only one is his wife. His male employees are tired of being under his thumb, but they still need his help. This strikes me as a story about ego, and how a grand one can contain the tendencies that will lead to self-destruction.
"A Doll's House" is his classic proto-feminist drama, about a woman trapped in a stifling, traditional, bourgeois marriage, and ultimately going against society's norms. "Ghosts" presents another troubled family, this one struggling with issues stemming from lustful behavior. The main ghost hanging over the proceedings is that of the pater familias, who has behaved selfishly and left behind some serious problems for his remaining relatives to deal with - a son who is suffering from syphilis, and a headstrong young house maid who is eventually revealed to be the illegitimate daughter of the patriarch.
Things get more complicated still in "Hedda Gabler", in which a strong-willed and manipulative woman is married to a pleasant, but slightly naive scholar named Tesman. Tesman's rival, a brilliant but self-destructive writer named Eilert appears on the scene, and it turns out that he and Hedda were once lovers. She then sets out on a destructive course of action, turning on the lost copy of a manuscript, that involves some debauchery and ultimately suicide. Hedda, is ultimately an opaque figure, and the audience is left to wonder why at the end.
"The Master Builder" gives us a great character in Halvard Solness - a very talented but arrogant architect and builder who has come to dominate those in his little world. A few women are in love with him, and only one is his wife. His male employees are tired of being under his thumb, but they still need his help. This strikes me as a story about ego, and how a grand one can contain the tendencies that will lead to self-destruction.
May 12, 2019
I only really loved one of these plays, liked two, and disregarded another. Regardless, Ibsen's work is still solid and is definitely something to look into if you want to read some classic period plays. I would also enjoy seeing three of the four I liked performed.
“A Doll’s House”-3 out of 5 stars: The parallels to Hedda Gabler we’re so apparent, and there were some really nasty lines about China and women being in subordinate positions to men, but the financial struggle and the ascension to power both women (Nora and Mrs. Linde) experiences in this play were wonderful and really ahead of 1879.
“Ghosts”-1 out of 5 stars: I unfortunately felt very disconnected from this play. I get the idea of the title, that ghosts of dead family can linger after they’ve passed, but the drama flew right by my head. It seemed to be centered around this orphanage that was put up in memorial of this shady husband, but I wasn’t interested in that since it took until the end of the first act to get anywhere. It looks like the drama gets juicier later on, but this was meandering too much for my taste.
“Hedda Gabler"-3 out of 5 stars: Guess who had to actually read the full play because they had a scene assigned from this for class?
Still, my prior thoughts still stand on how juicy of a drama this is. There's a lot going on, which may leave some people lost, but this is still a fun play that has so many twists and turns. Brack and Hedda's relationship is something of key interest for me, as I'm not exactly sure how to decipher it.
Unfortunately I had to skim this for my class tomorrow because I was getting a little uninterested in the beginning details and found this very similar to Chekhov (plus I was running late LOL), but this exploded fairly quickly. There's a lot of juicy drama here, what with a woman fighting for independence in a time when she could be given none and cheating and guns and it's a lot. It could be quite a fun roller-coaster ride on stage, but it didn't come across as cleanly on paper as I was expecting. Still, there was something entertaining and fun about this piece.
"The Master Builder"-5 out of 5 stars: Wow. I was not expecting to like this play as much as I did, but I was hooked as soon as the first act started. Halvard Solness's wild frenzy in trying to get rid of his young competition, the tumultuous affairs he has with two women, and his ascension to a God-like state at the very end was impossible to put down. But the other characters also had their place in the story: Solness's wife, a woman so connected to her duties that she couldn't be anything but upset, Hilde, a woman from the past who reignites Halvard's fire, Ragnar, the young construction rival who is secretly hoping for an overhaul of Solness's regime, and Kaja, the first mistress who is no longer satisfying Halvard, are a few of the characters I found really strong in this. To see the dynamics between them ebb and flow and snap throughout this play was truly extraordinary, and it really inspired me in a directorial way that I think would make this quite the interesting play. There seems to be a lot of religious symbolism, and the toxicity of much of the cast reads as both dramatic and realistic. Ibsen has stripped away some of his convoluted tendencies in favor for a power fight so real that I could clearly imagine it. This, for me, is an instant classic.
“A Doll’s House”-3 out of 5 stars: The parallels to Hedda Gabler we’re so apparent, and there were some really nasty lines about China and women being in subordinate positions to men, but the financial struggle and the ascension to power both women (Nora and Mrs. Linde) experiences in this play were wonderful and really ahead of 1879.
“Ghosts”-1 out of 5 stars: I unfortunately felt very disconnected from this play. I get the idea of the title, that ghosts of dead family can linger after they’ve passed, but the drama flew right by my head. It seemed to be centered around this orphanage that was put up in memorial of this shady husband, but I wasn’t interested in that since it took until the end of the first act to get anywhere. It looks like the drama gets juicier later on, but this was meandering too much for my taste.
“Hedda Gabler"-3 out of 5 stars: Guess who had to actually read the full play because they had a scene assigned from this for class?
Still, my prior thoughts still stand on how juicy of a drama this is. There's a lot going on, which may leave some people lost, but this is still a fun play that has so many twists and turns. Brack and Hedda's relationship is something of key interest for me, as I'm not exactly sure how to decipher it.
Unfortunately I had to skim this for my class tomorrow because I was getting a little uninterested in the beginning details and found this very similar to Chekhov (plus I was running late LOL), but this exploded fairly quickly. There's a lot of juicy drama here, what with a woman fighting for independence in a time when she could be given none and cheating and guns and it's a lot. It could be quite a fun roller-coaster ride on stage, but it didn't come across as cleanly on paper as I was expecting. Still, there was something entertaining and fun about this piece.
"The Master Builder"-5 out of 5 stars: Wow. I was not expecting to like this play as much as I did, but I was hooked as soon as the first act started. Halvard Solness's wild frenzy in trying to get rid of his young competition, the tumultuous affairs he has with two women, and his ascension to a God-like state at the very end was impossible to put down. But the other characters also had their place in the story: Solness's wife, a woman so connected to her duties that she couldn't be anything but upset, Hilde, a woman from the past who reignites Halvard's fire, Ragnar, the young construction rival who is secretly hoping for an overhaul of Solness's regime, and Kaja, the first mistress who is no longer satisfying Halvard, are a few of the characters I found really strong in this. To see the dynamics between them ebb and flow and snap throughout this play was truly extraordinary, and it really inspired me in a directorial way that I think would make this quite the interesting play. There seems to be a lot of religious symbolism, and the toxicity of much of the cast reads as both dramatic and realistic. Ibsen has stripped away some of his convoluted tendencies in favor for a power fight so real that I could clearly imagine it. This, for me, is an instant classic.
January 2, 2015
Holy crap, Ibsen is good. I read Hedda Gabler and Doll's House from this collection. Both feature strong female protagonists who are dissatisfied with the lives they feel trapped in. Both women insist on making something remarkable happen in their mundane worlds; Ibsen wants to remind us that extraordinary things can happen even in the most ordinary of families, where that seems almost impossible. Thus the line, "But, good God, people don't do such things!", which shows up at least twice in each play.
Hedda Gabler is sometimes called the female Hamlet, which seems a bit unnecessary. I mean, I get it. Both characters are lost and depressed and searching for something they're not quite sure of. But to me she seems more like Dorothea, the heroine of Middlemarch. Both marry stuffy, oblivious academics, and both yearn for something more out of life. Hedda Gabler is an image of what might have happened to Dorothea, had she been less strong and principled.
I had the good fortune to be able to compare Jens Arup's Hedda Gabler translation, included here, with Michael Meyer's; Meyer's is worlds better than Arup's. It's not even close. McFarlane's translation of Doll's House is the only one I've read, and it came across well, but I would say that given the information I have right now, Meyer's my homeboy.
Hedda Gabler is sometimes called the female Hamlet, which seems a bit unnecessary. I mean, I get it. Both characters are lost and depressed and searching for something they're not quite sure of. But to me she seems more like Dorothea, the heroine of Middlemarch. Both marry stuffy, oblivious academics, and both yearn for something more out of life. Hedda Gabler is an image of what might have happened to Dorothea, had she been less strong and principled.
I had the good fortune to be able to compare Jens Arup's Hedda Gabler translation, included here, with Michael Meyer's; Meyer's is worlds better than Arup's. It's not even close. McFarlane's translation of Doll's House is the only one I've read, and it came across well, but I would say that given the information I have right now, Meyer's my homeboy.
April 25, 2025
I really have enjoyed reading Ibsen. He is a master of the dramatic form, and these four plays read like contemporary television. A Doll’s House, Ghosts, Hedda Gabler, The Master Builder all contain elements of great storytelling centered on marriage in a small town society. One of the cornerstones of these works are the conflicts between husband and wife as others come to interfere or contest a harmonious relationship. There are secrets, both of action but also motivation and intention.
A Doll’s House addresses marriage with a centeredness on finance and responsibility. There are foul agents who tempt and lead astray, but it is ultimately the protagonists who brings on their own demise, and in turn, the measure to evaluate the quality of their own lives within their marriage.
Ghosts is even better. It does a great job of polarizing characters: the father and son, mother and Regine, pastor and carpenter. This story is the most decadent, of the fall and dissolution of a family. Dark turns do follow some sense of justice in the end.
Hedda Gabler is the funniest of the bunch, and Hedda is a rival to Cathy in East of Eden. Her manipulation and moral framework leave little sympathy for her condition nor her fate. Was this the outcome of ‘courage’ on Hedda’s part? Of the commitment to a marriage ‘everlastingly’?
The Master Builder is in many ways connected with Norwegian/Viking mythology and legend. Ragnar, Hilde, and the master builder lend themselves to an end of world and building a city in the air. The Prose Edda contains some references to a master builder, a giant tasked with building a fortress. This must in some way connect with the castle for ‘princess’ Hilde. What a great figure of youth, a sympathetic Hedda figure.
A Doll’s House addresses marriage with a centeredness on finance and responsibility. There are foul agents who tempt and lead astray, but it is ultimately the protagonists who brings on their own demise, and in turn, the measure to evaluate the quality of their own lives within their marriage.
Ghosts is even better. It does a great job of polarizing characters: the father and son, mother and Regine, pastor and carpenter. This story is the most decadent, of the fall and dissolution of a family. Dark turns do follow some sense of justice in the end.
Hedda Gabler is the funniest of the bunch, and Hedda is a rival to Cathy in East of Eden. Her manipulation and moral framework leave little sympathy for her condition nor her fate. Was this the outcome of ‘courage’ on Hedda’s part? Of the commitment to a marriage ‘everlastingly’?
The Master Builder is in many ways connected with Norwegian/Viking mythology and legend. Ragnar, Hilde, and the master builder lend themselves to an end of world and building a city in the air. The Prose Edda contains some references to a master builder, a giant tasked with building a fortress. This must in some way connect with the castle for ‘princess’ Hilde. What a great figure of youth, a sympathetic Hedda figure.
April 2, 2021
I haven’t read a play in about two years, to my recollection, A Streetcar named Desire was my last, so these plays were a happy detour from the long form. The easy flow of narrative by way of conversations revealed perhaps my over-saturation that had set in perhaps due to reading long novels or rather, difficult works, one after another. These ‘Four Plays’ were also my introduction to Henrik Ibsen, who I’ve often heard mention of but didn’t know much about, including the fact that he is Norwegian. To my surprise and joy, I’m reading more Scandinavian literature, all by chance.
A Doll’s House and Hedda Gabler are two most exquisite plays in this collection, serving up strong, free-thinking women ready to hold the reigns of their destiny in their own hands. Both narratives follow one dramatic reveal after another and end most shockingly. Kudos to Ibsen for exploring the various shades of women in and outside of marriage, and valuing their emotional aptitude as much as their intellectual prowess. To have been written in the 1870s, these plays felt way ahead of their time. Ibsen worked his writing in a way to expose the hypocrisy of society, especially as it works within the marriage equation. These stories, set in middle-class households, seem so simple, so rooted in the quotidian, until all of a sudden, they are much more than what they seem to be.
To be fair, all these plays feature strong female characters, they are all high on drama, and each is flourished with a blazing finish. They were illuminating and insightful; they were amusing and thrilling. And to my glee, each a sagacious commentary on marriage. I’ll never tire of those. 4 stars!
A Doll’s House and Hedda Gabler are two most exquisite plays in this collection, serving up strong, free-thinking women ready to hold the reigns of their destiny in their own hands. Both narratives follow one dramatic reveal after another and end most shockingly. Kudos to Ibsen for exploring the various shades of women in and outside of marriage, and valuing their emotional aptitude as much as their intellectual prowess. To have been written in the 1870s, these plays felt way ahead of their time. Ibsen worked his writing in a way to expose the hypocrisy of society, especially as it works within the marriage equation. These stories, set in middle-class households, seem so simple, so rooted in the quotidian, until all of a sudden, they are much more than what they seem to be.
To be fair, all these plays feature strong female characters, they are all high on drama, and each is flourished with a blazing finish. They were illuminating and insightful; they were amusing and thrilling. And to my glee, each a sagacious commentary on marriage. I’ll never tire of those. 4 stars!
September 12, 2021
Fantastic, ghosts remains my favourite out of the four but hedda and nora are so special to me in their own plays <3
August 14, 2023
3.5. Hedda Gabler was quite a disappointment, the ending is just… ugh. Ghosts was pretty good and emotionally driven. A doll’s house takes the cake for me.
January 28, 2025
Read A Doll House, the first play I’ve read in a long time. Will update this as I read more plays in the volume.
February 5, 2023
A Doll’s House.
would like to read the others when I’m not crying over the current reading list
would like to read the others when I’m not crying over the current reading list
November 20, 2017
Henrik Ibsen, like his countrymen today, was ahead of his time. The four plays published in this book were written nearly 100 years ago. Nevertheless, they would be forward thinking in these times. This is definitely worth reading and re-reading.
January 1, 2019
Henrik Ibsen is a straight-up feminist AND I AM HERE FOR IT! A Doll's House and Hedda Gabler were my personal favorites. Both have such shocking endings - especially when you consider the time the plays were written!
July 9, 2015
Ibsen was a man ahead of his time. Any of these scenarios could happen in 2015. Amazing writing.
August 28, 2013
I can’t say that I enjoyed these plays too much. Ibsen and I diverge too much in our basic ideas of the world. What he calls bravery, I call cowardice, and vice versa. What he calls virtue, I call selfishness, and again vice versa. But I will try to assess them from a literary perspective, as well as a taste one, especially understanding that many of his morals are the morals of my own society.
Henrik Ibsen was a Norwegian man born in 1828, who, as Oxford World’s Classics puts it, was a playwright with “a period of sustained creative endeavor unparalleled in the history of modern theater and one which gave a whole new impetus and direction to the drama of the twentieth century.” Whew. His most famous play, “A Doll’s House,” was published in 1879, and began his career as a public menace, the object of outrage. His plays started the stage in Scandinavia, where they met with wide public debate, and in Germany the ending was (forced to be) re-wrote. It took until 1889 for the play to reach London, where its fame preceded it. Amid criticism and hostility were support and love, and Ibsen would continue as a public topic of polarized debate for his career. Ibsen knew his plays, their topics, and his “stark” treatment of them were inciting, but he sought truth at all cost, and dealt openly with subjects like commercial hypocrisy, religious intolerance, political expediency, conventional morality, and established authority (including man’s authority over woman). As time continued, he moved from the public sphere of conflict to a personal one, where his characters increasingly wrestled with temperamental and sexual incompatibility, magnetism, force, their unconscious mind, and dreams and visions. Overall, his writing was not only an impetus for social change, but also a game-changer in the arena of theater, where he excelled at using subtleties in language to an extent no one before had ever done before.
The “period of sustained creative endeavor unparalleled in the history of modern theater” began in 1877 and lasted until 1892. The four plays I read were pairs of plays at the beginning (almost) and end of this period. “A Doll’s House” was meant to culminate in “Ghosts,” and “Hedda Gabler” and “The Master Builder” were–as I have heard the phrase before–spiritual sisters.
I have been doing a lot of thinking about plays as literature, lately (which may be revisited when I review “Hamlet”). It is not quite adequete to read a play, exactly. I would think that in almost all circumstance, plays are truly realized when they are performed. However, as this is a book blog and plays are often included in lists of novels/great literature, I will review them as I would a novel. If I easily encounter performances of them, I will review those as well. Almost any decent play can become great in the hands of a masterful director, actors, and set artist, and likewise can fall flat without them.
As for Ibsen’s plays, I find his characters to be unbelievable, especially one of the shining stars of his fame and accomplishments, Nora Helmer. I guess what I find most obnoxious about these characters is the speed with which they do things, which could be blamed on the necessity of story and play-writing, or it could be that the characters do not show significant glimmers of what they are to suddenly and so surprisingly become. Nora, for example, is this flitting, domestic plaything (thus the title) for nine-tenths of the play, unable to see her own mistakes and the seriousness of the looming catastrophe ahead. Then, all of a sudden, she is a most advanced, thoughtful, determined individual, come to drastic acts with absolutely no passion and able to express her inmost feelings and will to her husband without missing a beat. I’ve been in arguments. They don’t go like that.
Ibsen has also said of his own work that his plays do not make statements, they just pose questions. It is unfortunate that authors can not know their own work or impact as well as they might like (me and everyone else included), but I don’t buy this assessment for a second. It is historically interesting that he considered his plays questions, but they are very clearly works of value statements and modes for societal change (which is exactly what they became.) With lines like “If I’m ever going to reach any understanding of myself and the things around me, I must learn to stand alone,” would you believe his plays are unbiased vignettes, wondering about human nature, and nothing more?
And finally, I have to come back to this matter of taste. Ibsen, as might have been necessary in someone pushing toward individualism and equality in the 1800s, makes selfishness the knight in shining armor of his plays. I can’t enjoy story lines where such individuality is honored above duty and community and a moral compass; it’s just not something I believe and so I find Ibsen’s heroes and heroines unpalatable. In some stories, that’s okay, but Ibsen’s plays are constructed around the ideal, a pleasurable inoculation of them, so it’s much harder than having, for example, a novel where one of the characters commits suicide (a favorite of his) and another runs away (another favorite), and the novel’s judgement remains unclear or backward from what the reader might have picked. Let’s face it; we expect the just desserts of characters to line up with our morals, or else we have this thing called dissatisfaction. Only a very talented author can make characters so complex that we are willing to stay judgement for love of the character or some other dearly held ideal: that’s when literature can bend our future ideas, not when we are presented with characters that shock us and then merrily get the opposite of what we think they deserve.
For all that, I enjoy the story lines of some of his plays, especially “A Doll’s House.” Others were much less dramatic and, I would go so far, boring (namely “Ghosts”). Again, it’s only historically interesting Ibsen thought “Ghosts” was the culmination of “A Doll’s House,” because “House” is clearly the masterpiece of the two, better in every way I can think of. It’s dramatic. It’s interesting. It has several different plots interweaving on one stage, in one set, in just a few virtual days.
“A Doll’s House”
Like I said, I really enjoy the story of this play, but I find the outcome less than satisfying. I was also astonished by how many lines and ideas have become part of our culture. To wit (just from Nora’s lines in the last scene): “I have never understood you, either–until tonight,” “I’ve been greatly wronged, Torvald,” “You two never loved me,” “It’s your fault that I’ve never made anything of my life,” “I thought I was [happy], but I wasn’t really,” “I must take steps to educate myself,” “That’s something I must do on my own,” “I must learn to stand alone,” “All I know is that this is necessary for me,” “I have another duty equally sacred … My duty to myself,” “I have to think things out for myself,” “I believe that first and foremost I am an individual,” I don’t really know what religion is,” and “But I can’t help it. I don’t love you anymore.” It’s probably difficult to remove ourselves enough from the twenty-first to the nineteenth century to see what kind of statements these were, back then, but it seems that I am still hearing the echoes of Ibsen every day, at all levels of our society. That is quite something.
“Miserable as I am, I’m quite ready to let things drag on as long as possible. All my patients are the dame. Even those with moral affliction are no different” (p18).
“Ah, Torvald, you are not the man to teach me to be a good wife to you” (p81).
“Ghosts”
Sorry, but I found this play to be a lot of talking with no purpose. Boring. I can barely remember what it wasn’t about.
“My dear lady, there are many occasions in life when one must rely on others. That’s the way of the world, and things are best that way. How else would society manage?” (p102).
“All of this demanding to by happy in life, it’s all part of this same wanton idea. What right have people to happiness? No, we have our duty to do, Mrs. Alving” (p113).
“Hedda Gabler”
Alright, back to interesting. Again, can’t agree with half of what Ibsen implies, but at least there is a vibrant plot(s) here. I imagine you could put on quite a show with this play.
“Because we men, you know, we’re not always so firm in our principles as we ought to be” (p237).
“I’d sooner die! / People say such things, but they never do them” (p262).
“One generally acquiesces in what is inevitable” (p262).
“The Master Builder”
A mildly interesting play with somewhat interesting characters. Funny that “The Master Builder” is considered the culmination of “Hedda Gabler,” when “Gabler” was far superior.
“It’s fantastic the number of devils there are in the world you never even see, Hilde!” (p323).
“Or if one had a really tough and vigorous conscience. So that one dared to do what one wanted” (p323).
In a way, reading Ibsen is like seeing ourselves in a cracked, Victorian mirror. If, indeed, these plays were just questions, then my questions are these: Is Nora the heroine? Or Kristine? And does “Hedda Gabler” have a hero at all?
*****
Despite plenty of online photos of productions of these plays, I found only one video I could get my hands on, which is the Anthony Hopkins version of A Doll’s House (1973). And actually, I really enjoyed it. I thought that what Hopkins did for Torvald was a sight to behold, making the viewer sympathetic to him. And Claire Bloom actually welds Nora’s flightiness and her final conclusions together. It’s really wonderful acting. My only disappointment was the age of Doctor Rank. The guy played it well, but he was much too old to create much sexual tension between him and Nora (although they managed it fairly well, anyhow). If you are interested in plays or Ibsen, I would recommend this one. (It doesn’t view like a modern movie, as much).
***REVIEW WRITTEN FOR THE STARVING ARTIST BLOG.
Henrik Ibsen was a Norwegian man born in 1828, who, as Oxford World’s Classics puts it, was a playwright with “a period of sustained creative endeavor unparalleled in the history of modern theater and one which gave a whole new impetus and direction to the drama of the twentieth century.” Whew. His most famous play, “A Doll’s House,” was published in 1879, and began his career as a public menace, the object of outrage. His plays started the stage in Scandinavia, where they met with wide public debate, and in Germany the ending was (forced to be) re-wrote. It took until 1889 for the play to reach London, where its fame preceded it. Amid criticism and hostility were support and love, and Ibsen would continue as a public topic of polarized debate for his career. Ibsen knew his plays, their topics, and his “stark” treatment of them were inciting, but he sought truth at all cost, and dealt openly with subjects like commercial hypocrisy, religious intolerance, political expediency, conventional morality, and established authority (including man’s authority over woman). As time continued, he moved from the public sphere of conflict to a personal one, where his characters increasingly wrestled with temperamental and sexual incompatibility, magnetism, force, their unconscious mind, and dreams and visions. Overall, his writing was not only an impetus for social change, but also a game-changer in the arena of theater, where he excelled at using subtleties in language to an extent no one before had ever done before.
The “period of sustained creative endeavor unparalleled in the history of modern theater” began in 1877 and lasted until 1892. The four plays I read were pairs of plays at the beginning (almost) and end of this period. “A Doll’s House” was meant to culminate in “Ghosts,” and “Hedda Gabler” and “The Master Builder” were–as I have heard the phrase before–spiritual sisters.
I have been doing a lot of thinking about plays as literature, lately (which may be revisited when I review “Hamlet”). It is not quite adequete to read a play, exactly. I would think that in almost all circumstance, plays are truly realized when they are performed. However, as this is a book blog and plays are often included in lists of novels/great literature, I will review them as I would a novel. If I easily encounter performances of them, I will review those as well. Almost any decent play can become great in the hands of a masterful director, actors, and set artist, and likewise can fall flat without them.
As for Ibsen’s plays, I find his characters to be unbelievable, especially one of the shining stars of his fame and accomplishments, Nora Helmer. I guess what I find most obnoxious about these characters is the speed with which they do things, which could be blamed on the necessity of story and play-writing, or it could be that the characters do not show significant glimmers of what they are to suddenly and so surprisingly become. Nora, for example, is this flitting, domestic plaything (thus the title) for nine-tenths of the play, unable to see her own mistakes and the seriousness of the looming catastrophe ahead. Then, all of a sudden, she is a most advanced, thoughtful, determined individual, come to drastic acts with absolutely no passion and able to express her inmost feelings and will to her husband without missing a beat. I’ve been in arguments. They don’t go like that.
Ibsen has also said of his own work that his plays do not make statements, they just pose questions. It is unfortunate that authors can not know their own work or impact as well as they might like (me and everyone else included), but I don’t buy this assessment for a second. It is historically interesting that he considered his plays questions, but they are very clearly works of value statements and modes for societal change (which is exactly what they became.) With lines like “If I’m ever going to reach any understanding of myself and the things around me, I must learn to stand alone,” would you believe his plays are unbiased vignettes, wondering about human nature, and nothing more?
And finally, I have to come back to this matter of taste. Ibsen, as might have been necessary in someone pushing toward individualism and equality in the 1800s, makes selfishness the knight in shining armor of his plays. I can’t enjoy story lines where such individuality is honored above duty and community and a moral compass; it’s just not something I believe and so I find Ibsen’s heroes and heroines unpalatable. In some stories, that’s okay, but Ibsen’s plays are constructed around the ideal, a pleasurable inoculation of them, so it’s much harder than having, for example, a novel where one of the characters commits suicide (a favorite of his) and another runs away (another favorite), and the novel’s judgement remains unclear or backward from what the reader might have picked. Let’s face it; we expect the just desserts of characters to line up with our morals, or else we have this thing called dissatisfaction. Only a very talented author can make characters so complex that we are willing to stay judgement for love of the character or some other dearly held ideal: that’s when literature can bend our future ideas, not when we are presented with characters that shock us and then merrily get the opposite of what we think they deserve.
For all that, I enjoy the story lines of some of his plays, especially “A Doll’s House.” Others were much less dramatic and, I would go so far, boring (namely “Ghosts”). Again, it’s only historically interesting Ibsen thought “Ghosts” was the culmination of “A Doll’s House,” because “House” is clearly the masterpiece of the two, better in every way I can think of. It’s dramatic. It’s interesting. It has several different plots interweaving on one stage, in one set, in just a few virtual days.
“A Doll’s House”
Like I said, I really enjoy the story of this play, but I find the outcome less than satisfying. I was also astonished by how many lines and ideas have become part of our culture. To wit (just from Nora’s lines in the last scene): “I have never understood you, either–until tonight,” “I’ve been greatly wronged, Torvald,” “You two never loved me,” “It’s your fault that I’ve never made anything of my life,” “I thought I was [happy], but I wasn’t really,” “I must take steps to educate myself,” “That’s something I must do on my own,” “I must learn to stand alone,” “All I know is that this is necessary for me,” “I have another duty equally sacred … My duty to myself,” “I have to think things out for myself,” “I believe that first and foremost I am an individual,” I don’t really know what religion is,” and “But I can’t help it. I don’t love you anymore.” It’s probably difficult to remove ourselves enough from the twenty-first to the nineteenth century to see what kind of statements these were, back then, but it seems that I am still hearing the echoes of Ibsen every day, at all levels of our society. That is quite something.
“Miserable as I am, I’m quite ready to let things drag on as long as possible. All my patients are the dame. Even those with moral affliction are no different” (p18).
“Ah, Torvald, you are not the man to teach me to be a good wife to you” (p81).
“Ghosts”
Sorry, but I found this play to be a lot of talking with no purpose. Boring. I can barely remember what it wasn’t about.
“My dear lady, there are many occasions in life when one must rely on others. That’s the way of the world, and things are best that way. How else would society manage?” (p102).
“All of this demanding to by happy in life, it’s all part of this same wanton idea. What right have people to happiness? No, we have our duty to do, Mrs. Alving” (p113).
“Hedda Gabler”
Alright, back to interesting. Again, can’t agree with half of what Ibsen implies, but at least there is a vibrant plot(s) here. I imagine you could put on quite a show with this play.
“Because we men, you know, we’re not always so firm in our principles as we ought to be” (p237).
“I’d sooner die! / People say such things, but they never do them” (p262).
“One generally acquiesces in what is inevitable” (p262).
“The Master Builder”
A mildly interesting play with somewhat interesting characters. Funny that “The Master Builder” is considered the culmination of “Hedda Gabler,” when “Gabler” was far superior.
“It’s fantastic the number of devils there are in the world you never even see, Hilde!” (p323).
“Or if one had a really tough and vigorous conscience. So that one dared to do what one wanted” (p323).
In a way, reading Ibsen is like seeing ourselves in a cracked, Victorian mirror. If, indeed, these plays were just questions, then my questions are these: Is Nora the heroine? Or Kristine? And does “Hedda Gabler” have a hero at all?
*****
Despite plenty of online photos of productions of these plays, I found only one video I could get my hands on, which is the Anthony Hopkins version of A Doll’s House (1973). And actually, I really enjoyed it. I thought that what Hopkins did for Torvald was a sight to behold, making the viewer sympathetic to him. And Claire Bloom actually welds Nora’s flightiness and her final conclusions together. It’s really wonderful acting. My only disappointment was the age of Doctor Rank. The guy played it well, but he was much too old to create much sexual tension between him and Nora (although they managed it fairly well, anyhow). If you are interested in plays or Ibsen, I would recommend this one. (It doesn’t view like a modern movie, as much).
***REVIEW WRITTEN FOR THE STARVING ARTIST BLOG.
December 22, 2015
Well written but also terrifying {note I just read Hedda Gabler for school}
August 25, 2021
This is easily my book of the year to date - so often plays when read can feel thin, without the physical and emotional power of the actors on stage bringing the drama to its full potential, I am often left cold and unsatisfied. This couldn’t be further from the truth with this collection of four plays from Ibsen. The power and urgency created with a few characters snd a short passage in their lives. It is as though everything is stripped back to what is essential for the dynamics of the story to come to life. I have obviously known of Ibsen for many years but never got around to reading his works and to be honest, they have totally transformed my view of late 19th century drama. To think we teach ‘An Inspector Calls’ to GCSE students and yet there are these powerhouse plays written half a century earlier - so suggestive in what they don’t say, as much as what they do.
I can’t really encapsulate or bring together my thoughts about these plays just yet - think I need time, to re-read or see on stage, but I was fascinated by the way in which ‘A Doll’s House’ forced me to reconsider what I thought I knew of gender and gender relations in this period, ‘Ghosts’ was an altogether darker story almost the inverse of family and marriage narratives written for the majority of the Victorian era - it was like all the darker aspects of the Brontes boiled down and intensified. Then in ‘Hedda Gabler’ and ‘The Master Builder’ we have these two fascinating, suggestive central protagonists. It’s like a web of motivation and power dynamics and as the audience we are there trying to pin down what drives them, to question their morality, to determine whether they are the master of their actions or whether unconscious forces or the external pressures of society shape their behaviour.
I love the idea of comparing Hedda to someone like Hamlet in terms of a psychoanalytic reading of those plays, and in the case of ‘The Master Builder’ is this about the fear of youth overcoming age - is it about those characters who desperately try to cling onto their youth by exerting their power over those that are less experienced.
Loved these plays!
I can’t really encapsulate or bring together my thoughts about these plays just yet - think I need time, to re-read or see on stage, but I was fascinated by the way in which ‘A Doll’s House’ forced me to reconsider what I thought I knew of gender and gender relations in this period, ‘Ghosts’ was an altogether darker story almost the inverse of family and marriage narratives written for the majority of the Victorian era - it was like all the darker aspects of the Brontes boiled down and intensified. Then in ‘Hedda Gabler’ and ‘The Master Builder’ we have these two fascinating, suggestive central protagonists. It’s like a web of motivation and power dynamics and as the audience we are there trying to pin down what drives them, to question their morality, to determine whether they are the master of their actions or whether unconscious forces or the external pressures of society shape their behaviour.
I love the idea of comparing Hedda to someone like Hamlet in terms of a psychoanalytic reading of those plays, and in the case of ‘The Master Builder’ is this about the fear of youth overcoming age - is it about those characters who desperately try to cling onto their youth by exerting their power over those that are less experienced.
Loved these plays!
August 14, 2022
another book for english literature a level! and i was pleasantly surprised when i seemed to be really engaged with these plays. you can definitely see why they caused an uproar with audiences when they made their debuts. my favourites were definitely the doll’s house and the master builder. the first was a story told so little, and completely unbeknownst to women in norwegian society in the 1870s. i found it interesting how torvald helmer referred to his wife, nora, as weak little animals, such as a bird, a squirrel, etc. they’re all rather fragile, and this could symbolise how he viewed her- as nothing more than domestic and submissive. the fact that she actually left him and their children rejects the expectations of women and their roles in society. overall i do look forward to delving into the more hidden details in my course!
November 26, 2023
A Doll’s house ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
September 26, 2024
“I hope the devils choose kindly for you, Hilde.”
May 27, 2025
a doll's house: ★★★★
ghosts: ★★★
hedda gabler: ★★★★★
the master builder: ★★ (wtf was this play even. i only enjoyed the ending)
ghosts: ★★★
hedda gabler: ★★★★★
the master builder: ★★ (wtf was this play even. i only enjoyed the ending)
June 20, 2019
I’m pretty sure I read “A Doll’s House” in high school but this very adult experience of reading now “A Doll’s House,” “Ghosts,” “Hedda Gabler,” and “The Master Builder” blew me away. Ahead of his time and brilliant.
January 9, 2021
A Doll's House ★★★★
Ghosts ★★★
Hedda Gabler ★★★
The Master Builder ★★
Ghosts ★★★
Hedda Gabler ★★★
The Master Builder ★★
March 20, 2017
A brilliant playwright, Ibsen, no wonder his works are still played today. A very powerful voice and a surprisingly modern one too.
January 11, 2025
FINALLY. I like A Doll’s House and Hedda Gabler but I think I prefer adaptations over the original setting lol. The other two plays didn’t leave a huge impression on me
January 3, 2025
The Master Builder is good; the other three are excellent.
And Hedda Gabler is a cut above. One of the truly great characters in drama.
Her viciousness, boredom, and femininity are an intoxicating mix.
And Hedda Gabler is a cut above. One of the truly great characters in drama.
Her viciousness, boredom, and femininity are an intoxicating mix.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 187 reviews