The Wild Duck- Journal #5

Comparison
Prompt: To what extent have you found it possible, in your consideration of literary works, to separate the individual from his or her public role?

In The Wild Duck, all of Ibsen's characters come with a distinct placement in their society and household. Due to this, it makes it extremely difficult to look beyond their given role in their society. The characters that make this most pronounced are Gregers and Relling. For Gregers, at first and throughout almost the entire book I like him. I like him because of his social class mainly, for everything he is portrayed to be. His wealth (which conotates other qualities such has manners and knowledge), his continued friendship with Hjalmer and so on. But by the end of the play, I think of Gregers has an idiot! The way he tries to interfere with Hjalmer and Gina, and the joy he finds in thinking that they will be closer than ever before is dead wrong. One of the last lines he says, in reference to Hedvig is, "Hedvig did not die in vain. Did you notice how grief freed the greatness in him" (Ibsen 216). Gregers is horrible, he is more than the surface level optimism, he sees the death has a good thing because it assists his friend's greatness! The other character something similar to this happens to is Relling. Relling's public life is portrayed poorly by Hjalmer, Relling is said to be a, "wild pair, those fellows[Relling and Molvik]. They go out on the town evenings," (Ibsen 154). Relling is described has a drunk party-goer. Throughout the majority of the play, I held a dislike for him because of the way Gina and Hjalmer describe and react to him. However, by the end of the play he is my favorite character, the one that is the most knowledgeable and respected. By doing this, Ibsen shows how a person's social standing in society defines the opinions others have of them.
Similarly, in Oedipus the King, Sophocles uses the townspeople's respect for Oedipus to briefly outshine his tragic flaws. "He [Oedipus] was the joy of Thebes! / Never will I convict my king, never in my heart" (Sophocles 187). The Oedipus the citizens of Thebes love and respect is not an accurate portrayal of who Oedipus is nor of his values and limitations. However, by the end of the play, the audience's opinion of the king changes from one of merit to almost anger. I found myself rather angry at Oedipus for appearing to be one thing while truly containing many many flaws that negatively affect all he is. Sophocles uses this to show how before making judgements on an individual, look at their actions currently, more than what people say or previous choices. Ibsen and Sophocles both show the opinion on the characters changing from public to private, but their warnings or main ideas are separate. Ibsen discusses the social level, while Sophocles deals more with pre-conceived notions. Sophocles is more critical while Ibsen remains speculative.