The first part of the article that I tend to agree with is the fact that people say that Ibsen was writing Hedda as an "international" play, and to an extent, an "international"woman. I believe that Ibsen wrote Hedda as a modern day Norwegian heroine, and that it is only because of the way that the world was changing. It enabled people to make parallels between Hedda and their own societies, but I don't believe this was Ibsen's intention. I agree with the article, in that it is obvious that Ibsen wanted the play to be Norway-centric, due to the fjord references, the very Scandinavian appearance of Thea, and other factors. Hedda can appear to be an international woman, but I don't believe that was the intent of Ibsen, when he wrote the book.
What interests me more is the fact that the author constantly refers to Hedda as the "modern woman". I don't know how much I agree with this. Hedda seems to have some modern day thoughts, that the majority of women have now-a-days, but I disagree that this makes her a unique character. Throughout literature, we see women using their power to manipulate, and to better themselves. Hedda is simply another example of this. In As You Like It, we see Rosalind using her beauty and her power of Orlando to get what she wants, and we also see her expressing herself how she wants, although she does need to dress up as a man to do this.
Another example of a woman that uses her sensuality, and her mind, to manipulate men is Lady Brett Ashley from The Sun Also Rises. Brett manipulates Cohn, manipulates Mike, and manipulates Jake, simply because she can. She doesn't seem to get any feeling of success or accomplishment after doing this, she just does it. This is almost exactly like Hedda, who simply does things for the sake of it. When Hedda destroyed the manuscript, she did it simply to mess with Mr. Elvsted. Not to gain some self-satisfaction from it.
The author of this article, William Arthur, states that Ibsen has no heroines. I disagree 100% with this. Ibsen shows Hedda in a spotlight, and seems to make it as if she is a shining symbol of the woman. He doesn't make her a simple woman, but glorifies her, and idolizes her. All of the other characters do this, which makes it hard to ignore. It is as if Ibsen is TELLING us to worship Hedda.
In Gautam's blog, he agrees with this fact, but says that he feels as if Ibsen is portraying Hedda in a bad light. He says that he tries to make her seem as bad as he can, and says that he uses her to show the class struggle going on in Norway at the time. I disagree with that, and say that he glorifies her, and uses that as a way to show the fact that all fantastic people have a dark side.
I don't really like this article, because it seems that he doesn't support any of his arguments, and it kinda seems as if he is pandering to defend Hedda, without any basis for his arguments.
What interests me more is the fact that the author constantly refers to Hedda as the "modern woman". I don't know how much I agree with this. Hedda seems to have some modern day thoughts, that the majority of women have now-a-days, but I disagree that this makes her a unique character. Throughout literature, we see women using their power to manipulate, and to better themselves. Hedda is simply another example of this. In As You Like It, we see Rosalind using her beauty and her power of Orlando to get what she wants, and we also see her expressing herself how she wants, although she does need to dress up as a man to do this.
Another example of a woman that uses her sensuality, and her mind, to manipulate men is Lady Brett Ashley from The Sun Also Rises. Brett manipulates Cohn, manipulates Mike, and manipulates Jake, simply because she can. She doesn't seem to get any feeling of success or accomplishment after doing this, she just does it. This is almost exactly like Hedda, who simply does things for the sake of it. When Hedda destroyed the manuscript, she did it simply to mess with Mr. Elvsted. Not to gain some self-satisfaction from it.
The author of this article, William Arthur, states that Ibsen has no heroines. I disagree 100% with this. Ibsen shows Hedda in a spotlight, and seems to make it as if she is a shining symbol of the woman. He doesn't make her a simple woman, but glorifies her, and idolizes her. All of the other characters do this, which makes it hard to ignore. It is as if Ibsen is TELLING us to worship Hedda.
In Gautam's blog, he agrees with this fact, but says that he feels as if Ibsen is portraying Hedda in a bad light. He says that he tries to make her seem as bad as he can, and says that he uses her to show the class struggle going on in Norway at the time. I disagree with that, and say that he glorifies her, and uses that as a way to show the fact that all fantastic people have a dark side.
I don't really like this article, because it seems that he doesn't support any of his arguments, and it kinda seems as if he is pandering to defend Hedda, without any basis for his arguments.
I always thought of Hedda as the modern woman as well but she seems to be ahead of her time in this play. You compared her to Ashley who was an independent woman in her time.
ReplyDeleteAshley was independent because she lived around the time women started to strive for independence and be different. This was during the 1920's.
Hedda on the other hand lived in the 1890′s when women had no rights, and they weren’t fighting for them either. She was the one to realize how bad it is for women and she tried to control her own life and keep power. Ultimately she ended her life to keep that power.