INTRODUCTION
First
of all, it is necessary for us to know the condition of realism dramas before
trying to comment or criticize them. Basically, realism dramas are not
different in many ways compared to dramas today. We can even say that realism
dramas are the pioneer of modern drama.
By
the mid-nineteenth century, the Romantic outlook had been modified
considerably, for the belief in man’s idealistic nature had received many
setbacks. For example, after the downfall of Napoleon around 1815, most
European countries had reinstated political conditions more oppressive than
those of the eighteenth century. The deals of liberty, equality, and fraternity
now seemed doomed. Furthermore, the general misery of a large part of humanity
was being emphasized by the industrial Revolution, as a result of which workers
were pouring into urban centers where living conditions were daily more
inadequate. Crime and poverty were prevalent (Brockett, 19- : 287).
In
the face of such political and economic conditions the Romanticist’s emphasis
upon the ideal seemed both too vague and too impractical. Many came to argue
that dreams must be abandoned for a systematic inquiry into actual condition
and for solutions based upon discoverable facts. Observation, prediction, and
control of society became the new goals (Brockett, 19- : 287).
Among
the major influences on the new though was Auguste Comte (1798-1857), whose
philosophy came to be called positivism. Comte argued that sociology is the
highest form of science and that all knowledge should ultimately be used for
the improvement of society. He states that the key to knowledge lies in precise
observation and experimentation, since all events must be understood in terms
of natural cause and effect (Brockett, 19- : 287).
Positivism
attracted a large following and was soon reenforced by Charles Darwin’s The
Origin of Species (1859). Darwin’s doctrines may be divided into two main
theses: (1) all forms of life have developed gradually from a common ancestry;
and (2) the evolution of species is explained by the “survival of the fittest”
(Brockett, 19- : 288).
Darwin’s
theories have several significant implications. First, heredity and environment
are made the determinants of existence. Second, heredity and environment become
explanations for all character traits and actions. Furthermore, since behavior
is determined by factors beyond the individual’s control, he cannot be blamed
for it. Third, Darwin’s theses cast considerable doubt upon the existence of
God as traditionally conceived. Fourth, Darwin’s theories strengthened the idea
of progress. Fifth, man is reduced to the status of a natural object (Brockett,
19- : 288).
Ibsen
is supposed to be much influenced by Darwin’s theories. The first and second
impacts as mentioned above, implicitly, drawn in his works during the second
period of his career. These impacts are represented in many ways. The
characters of Ghosts, which was first performed in 1881, is a good example of
how characters who create a social reality at the age of Ibsen, put in
practice.
THE SUMMARY OF GHOSTS
Ghosts
tells a story about a young man named Osvald Alving. He was a son of The
Alvings. He just came from his long life abroad, in France. His father, Mr.
Alving, was just died. He wanted to follow the ceremony was taken place by his
mother, Mrs. Helena Alving, in order to give the least honor for his husband.
In his coming, Osvald decided not to live abroad in France for longer. He
wanted to stay with his mother and their servant.
Osvald’s
willing scorned Mrs. Alving. She was the only one who encouraged Osvald to go
abroad. Her reason was unique. She trusted that it was not good for young
Osvald kept staying at his own home. This is due to her husband, Mr. Alving who
was a heartbreaker, was suffered from syphilis. She didn’t want young Osvald
inherited her husband’s illness. So that she encouraged young Osvald to go
abroad and lived in France. Young Osvald didn’t know his mother’s really reason
in encouraging him to go abroad since he was about seven years old. He just
followed what her wanted him to do.
Osvald
even had not been so long staying at home when finally he felt in love with
their servant, Regine Engstrad. Mrs. Alving was shocked knowing this. Both
Osvald and Regine didn’t know a secret. Indeed, Regine was Osvald’s stepsister.
Mr. Alving had an affair with Regine’s mother who was their servant as well.
Mrs. Alving worried the same thing occurred to his husband would be repeated to
her son. Like father like son.
Mrs.
Alving’s worry was increased at the time she knew that Osvald, who wasn’t a
heartbreaker as his father was, suffered from syphilis as well. It was supposed
to be inherited-sin. Firstly, Osvald blamed himself, he was angry to himself,
and thought that it was all due to his carelessness. But finally, he made up
his mind that it was an inherited-sin as well.
Osvald
finally found that he didn’t have any hope to live for longer. Knowing Regine,
who was supposed to be his joy of life, indeed, was his stepsister, and despair
of syphilis, Osvald wanted to end his own life. He asked his mother to injure
him Morphine tablets in over-doses. It wasn’t clear his mother realized his
willing to suicide or not. That’s the end.
ANALYSIS
From
the summary above, it is now become clear that Ibsen was much influenced by
Darwin’s theories. He was strongly agreed that heredity and environment are
made the determinants of existence. Heredity and environment, then, become
explanations for all character traits and actions. Furthermore, since behavior
is determined by factors beyond the individual’s control, he cannot be blamed
for it.
This,
then, become the concept of modern drama that is however a man survive against
the heredity and environment, it doesn’t change anything. Everything is determined
by social reality. This is completely different from the concept of previous
works, of course. As it has told above that characterization of Ghosts
obviously described the society at the age of Ibsen. The question then may
arise: what kind of characters who create such social reality at the age of
Ibsen so he came to that concept? To analyze it, let’s see each of the
character.
1. Osvald Alving
It
is not necessary to explain, twice, that Ibsen is a playwright who often shows
that free will, at the end story, finally must have defeated by the social
reality. Or, according to Taine, Ibsen is a playwright who put his character in
inferior position against the milieu. Osvald is such the character. Osvald is
described as a brave, dynamic youth. This is shown when Osvald saw his mother
was talking with Pastor Meanders. Osvald didn’t like Pastor Meanders. Osvald
didn’t agree at all with Pastor Meanders’ view. Moreover, he bravely against
him. His particular reason in against the man in such manner is his stereotype
to him. That he lived in France, Osvald truly knew the man didn’t like it at
all. Given this, the man called him ‘a prodigal son’
Osvald
adored beauty, loved glory, and particularly freedom. He stayed in France for
so long and became a part of France artists’ enlightenment. This is shown by
his choice of work which he fond of in France: painting.
Osvald
is typically a youth who is brought up by modernity. He is a rational man.
Simply this is drawn when he was sick, he went to the doctor. Osvald even
couldn’t understand why a doctor who is known as a rational creature suspected
that his illness, syphilis, was an inherit-sin.
At
that time, Osvald’s belief in rationalism was tested. Osvald’s, who was first
didn’t know –even it could be- didn’t care about his father’s past, at the time
he knew it, he questioned himself about the truth of inherit-sin. He almost
assured himself that it’s true: his illness was an inherit sin.
Unfortunately,
at the end of the story, Osvald finally was defeated by the social reality.
What a rational he was, he couldn’t avoid the fate that he was suffered from
syphilis.
Thus,
according to Ibsen, Osvald spirit to keep alive was killed, murdered by a fact
that he must have been defeated by his fate. By syphilis which he inherited of
his father.
2. Mrs. Helene Alving
Mrs.
Alving is completely different from Osvald. Mrs. Alving didn’t live in spirit
of beauty and freedom. On the contrary, Mrs. Alving was totally conscious what
a putrid environment around her and her family.
But
among the putrid environment, she chose to avoid it rather than against it. Owe
to Freud’s words, she has a good self-defense-mechanism. She married, according
to Pastor Manders indirect satire, a ‘loose man’, but she didn’t give up. She
kept survive and she had never said anything to show it off. Her purpose was
only to bring Osvald up without any bad influences of his father and not let
Osvald touch a penny of his father’s wealth.
Unluckily,
behind her consciousness of the environment, basically, Mrs. Alving is a
defeated woman. Although she didn’t fond of her husband behavior, she even
could do nothing when at last Regine, her stepdaughter, must stay with her. She
even protected her from Pastor Manders when she though that a danger was
threatening Regene.
The
other evidence of Mrs. Alving’s defeat can also be seen at the end of the
story. She had tried to separate Osvald from his father’s bad influences. But
finally she failed. Osvald was suffered from syphilis, even he wanted to
suicide. She even could take a decision when her son was dealing with the
agony.
Thus,
this is the irony. Although Mrs. Alving didn’t live in a “freedom of illusion”
as the way Osvald did, she could do nothing. That she knew what a putrid the
social reality around her is, it didn’t help her to win. She was defeated –and
she must have been the most tragic character in this Ibsen’s Ghosts, it wasn’t
Osvald.
3. Pastor Manders
As
the way Ibsen used to do with his religious character, he located him as
hypocrite man. In one side, Pastor Manders is described as a pastor who kept
the orthodoxy and moral values. Almost each of his words described what a
moralist that he is. He talked about the papers of deeds, his Sunday activity
that was denied by Osvald impolitely, the behavior should be done, etc.
But,
on the contrary, he loved Regine and tried to blur the fact that Regine is
Osvald’s stepsister. This fact is never shown in the plays. But it is not
difficult to be concluded since it is known that Pastor Manders is Jacob
Engstrad’s ally.
Being
Jacob Engstrad’s Ally, Pastor Manders was also involved in settling Regine in
The Alving’s house. In this case, his purpose is quite different from
Engstrad’s. He, indeed, loved Regine. This is only illustrated implicitly when
he supported Jabob to get Regine home.
Pastor
Manders is a materialistic man, as well. This fact is only shown implicitly. He
strongly encouraged Mrs. Alving to have insurance for The Orphanage. It can’t
be denied that he was disappointed when fire decayed The Orphanage. As much as
possible he argued when Engstrad attacked him for his despair not getting
insurance from the blamed Orphanage.
Given
this, simply it can be said that Manders is a hypocrite. He is one part of
putrid society, who finally defeated people like Osvald and his mother.
4. Jacob Engstrad
Jacob
Engstrad is Manders’ ally. It means that he is the other man who created a
putrid society who around Osvald. Engstrad was described as a poor carpenter, a
wretch, who finally saw a probability of having money. He asked Regine to be
adopted as the exchange for Mr. Alving’s debt to him.
Settling
Regine in The Osvalds’ home, he also got money from Regine’s salary. It can be
concluded that Engstrad is a character who is fond of profit from other people
misery, nonetheless, he still loved her stepdaughter.
5. Regine Engstrad
Regine
Engstrad is a “neutral” character. She is described as an innocent girl and
doesn’t know anything about so many mysteries around her. She lived in her own
world, separated, without she knew that there were many people organized her
life.
In
the other words, she is a victim, like Osvald and his mother were. The
distinction is that, Regine is neither a girl like Osvald, who is very
enthusiastic in running her life, nor his mother, who is very conscious of her
environment. She is an ordinary, innocent girl and damn right to be a reality
victim.
CONCLUSION
From
the discussion above, we can see such characters who create the social reality
at the age of Ibsen. A man’s struggle against his environment is supposed to be
nothing. For whatever reason, he must have defeated. The owner of the authority
that deserves to determine the result of a man’s struggle is social reality. So
Ibsen came to the concept that however a man survives against the heredity and
environment, it doesn’t change anything. Everything is determined by social
reality.
Ibsen
has also made his character complex personalities by showing both good and bad
aspects of each. None is perfect, but none is villainous. This complexity makes
each role challenging to actors, and requires subtlety in playing (Brockett,
19- : 294).
Furthermore,
the supporters of realism suggested, if audiences did not like the pictures of
contemporary life being shown on the stage, they should strive to change the
society which had fur-fearless in his treatment of what he saw around him
(Brockett, 19- : 289).
For
the realist, then, change was the watchdog. Realism sought to strip away the
façade of sentimental escapism pervading the theatre and to objectively examine
and present man as he is. Understanding replaced moralizing; science replacing
metaphysics. These were plays of ideas, not action; of criticizing tradition
instead of perpetuating it. Realism propounded “art for truth’s sake,” not “art
for the art’s sake” (Small, Norman M., 19- : 333).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brockett,
Oscar G.,The Theatre: An Introduction, 2nd edition ( )
Small,
Norman M., The Making of Drama, (Boston: Holbrook Press, 19- )
No comments:
Post a Comment