A -LEVEL: LITERATURE ANALYSIS BOOK "AN ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE" by Henrik Ibsen

 

About An Enemy of the People

An Enemy of the People is one of Henrik Ibsen's most popular and well-known plays among audiences and producers –but it is also one of Arthur Miller's best-known staged works. This situation results from the fact that Miller translated and modified Ibsen's work and went on to stage it several times; Miller's version is usually the one found in bookstores and is more commonly read and studied (in fact, it is what this ClassicNote uses as its source).
Ibsen wrote the play in 1882, setting the action in a small Norwegian coastal town. The plot was based on the real-life censure he experienced as a result of his controversial play, Ghosts (1881). It was initially five acts long. His plays were known for their realist style and, as Miller put it, a structure that utilized "models of a stringent economy of means to create immense symphonic images of tragic proportions."

Miller first studied Ibsen's works in seminars at the University of Michigan. His own works, such as All My Sons, were influenced by Ibsen, and he soon became attracted to the idea of creating his own version of Enemy. He believed the play was an important bulwark in the fight against fascism and red-baiting of the late 1940s and early 1950s. He commissioned a translation from Lars Nordenson, trimmed down the acts from five to three, and simplified the language. He also made Stockmann more heroic and one-dimensional, whereas the character in Ibsen's work evinces more problematic attitudes toward the common man.

Miller's version was first staged in New York City on December 28th, 1950. Unsurprisingly given the political and social climate at the time, it was relatively unsuccessful and closed after 36 shows. Some critics lauded Miller's version –the New York Times called it "a vast improvement on the original" –but, more often than not, reviews were mixed or negative. One critic ironically called it a work of "agitational propaganda."

Three films of Miller's version have been done to date:  one in 1966; one in 1976; and one in 1990. Critics were still divided regarding all three, some calling the play outdated with others waxing poetic about how relevant it was.
The play is not very popular amongst critics and scholars, but is popularly beloved.

An Enemy of the People Summary

The play is set in a small town in Norway, which has recently become famous for the Kirsten Springs. The Springs were built by the town and lure visitors with their promise of health and vitality. At the opening of the play, Catherine Stockmann entertains various guests in her home. Her brother-in-law, the town’s mayor and chairman of the board for the Springs, stops by and waxes poetic about how the Springs are revitalizing their town. Not long after he leaves, Stockmann himself comes home. His daughter, Petra, a young woman in her twenties who is a schoolteacher, hands him a letter that came in the mail.
Stockmann reads it in private and returns to his family, exultant. He explains that he had long found it suspicious that so many people were getting sick lately, and secretly ordered tests of the Springs’ water. The letter included the results of the tests, demonstrating that microscopic bacteria from the tannery above the Springs were polluting the water. His family is happy for him, and he is confident that, when he tells his brother about it, the town will move to renovate the Springs. Hovstad, the editor of the People’s Daily Messenger, who is there visiting the family, is ardently supportive and tells him he will run the article in his paper.
The next day, Catherine’s father, Morten Kiil, stops by. He tells Stockmann he heard about the report but thinks it is a hilarious joke Stockmann wants to play on his brother. Then Hovstad and Aslaksen, the newspaper’s publisher and Chairman of the Property Owners’ Association, arrive. Hovstad is on fire about routing the town’s entrenched authority, and Aslaksen cautions moderation but says the people are behind Stockmann.
After the newspapermen leave, Peter comes by to talk to his brother. He tells him sternly that he is angry that Stockmann went behind his back, and that the proposed plan will bankrupt the town. Stockman is aghast at his brother’s behavior and says that Peter is only upset because he does not want to be held responsible for it, as his administration approved the Springs. Peter replies that a government needs moral authority, and he forbids Stockmann to tell the public. Stockman says it is already getting out and he will use the press. Furious, Peter demands that he keep his convictions to himself and stop trying to ruin the town. Catherine and Petra enter as the brothers’ argument heats up. After Peter leaves, Catherine wonders about Stockmann’s duty to his family vs. his duty to uphold the truth.
The next day Hovstad, Aslaksen, and Billing, a journalist, meet in the newspaper’s office. They are excited to print Stockmann’s piece. Petra visits and tells Hovstad that she does not believe the newspaper has principles because it wants to print a translated novel about good people being rewarded and bad people being punished. She leaves after Hovstad tries to ingratiate himself with her but accidentally criticizes her father.
Peter visits the office and manages to sow doubt and persuade the men not to run the report, as it results in a high tax that will hurt the town. Peter hides when he hears Stockmann coming.
Stockmann enters the office and begins to wonder why the men are hesitant about the article. He sees Peter’s cane on a table and realizes what happened. Catherine and Petra enter the office and Catherine condemns Hovstad for doing her husband ill. Peter comes out of hiding and he and Stockmann argue once more. Stockman claims he will march through the street if he has to, now that the newspaper will not print his article.
In Act II, Stockmann meets with Captain Horster, a traveling sea captain, at the captain's house. Horster has agreed to hold a lecture by Stockmann. People begin to trickle in and take their seats. A drunk man behaves obnoxiously. The townspeople seem antipathetic towards Stockmann, especially when he takes the stage. It is suggested to have a moderator, and Aslaksen is selected.
Peter get to speaks first, criticizing his brother as wanting to destroy the town, and painting him as the enemy. He says that his right to free speech is curtailed in a time of danger. He also tells the story of the town before the Springs came, and how in the future everyone would be rich. Finally, he asks that Stockmann not be allowed to read his report.
Stockman is frustrated but stands and promises he will not talk about the Springs. The heckling ceases for a bit and he begins. He condemns the people’s ignorance and the tyranny of the majority. He begs people to think of the risk of getting of sick.
The crowd is furious and hostile, and cares for nothing Stockmann says. He is called an enemy of the people, and people shout him out of the room. Captain Horster says the family can go on his ship to America with him.
In Act III, the family experiences the animus of the town. Rocks are thrown into their windows, they are evicted from their home, and Petra is fired. They plan to go to America but Catherine is nervous that things will not change.
Peter comes over and tries to get Stockmann to agree to a statement that he was wrong, but Stockmann holds fast. Peter accuses his brother of a plot, as it seems Morten Kiil is buying up stock in the Springs. Stockmann has no idea what is going on, but Peter assumes he does.
Later Kiil arrives and confirms this, because he was responsible for the tannery that polluted the Springs in the first place. He wants Stockmann to clear his name. Stockmann is irate and refuses, and the men part with ill words.
Horster visits the house and tells them he cannot take them on his ship because the owner got rid of him as captain due to his affiliation with Stockmann.
The Stockmann boys come home and Morten explains he was beaten up because another boy called his father a traitor and he fought back. This enrages Stockmann. He decides the family will not retreat –they will stay and fight for what is right. They will educate the children at home and Stockmann will embrace his role as enemy of the people. They have truth on their side and will be strong and victorious.

An Enemy of the People Character List

Dr. Thomas Stockmann

The protagonist of the play, Stockmann is a doctor and family man. He is occasionally naive and carried away by his passions, but he is fiercely dedicated to the preservation of the truth regarding the Springs. He holds on to his view regardless of how much he and his family are attacked.

Peter Stockmann

Stockmann's brother, mayor, and chairman of the board for the Springs, Peter is derisive of his brother and completely opposed to his finding. He believes in the power of the government, in limiting free speech, and in toeing the line.

Hovstad

The newspaper editor and avowed radical who is initially excited by the opportunity to support Stockmann, but who then is swayed by Peter. He disavows all affiliation with Stockmann.

Petra Stockmann

Bright, pretty, and politically radical, Petra is initially a schoolteacher until her father's scandal causes her to lose her job. She supports him and his cause wholeheartedly, demonstrating modern attitudes, keenness of intellect and wit, and a burning desire for the truth.

Billing

A journalist for the newspaper who starts out as supportive of Stockmann but switches his affiliation to Peter.

Aslaksen

The newspaper’s publisher and Chairman of the Property Owners’ Association, he promises Stockmann the majority of the town but then switches allegiance to Peter. His rallying cry is "moderation."

Morten Kiil

Catherine's father, he initially seems harmless but once he realizes his tannery is causing the pollution, he behaves disreputably by buying up stock in the Springs and ordering Stockmann to clear his name.

Catherine Stockmann

Stockmann's wife, Catherine is mild-mannered at the beginning of the play, and worries about what Stockmann's findings might mean for her family. However, as the play goes on she becomes more outspoken and stays by her husband's side.

Captain Horster

A sea captain, Horster is open-minded and tolerant. He supports Stockmann as much as he can, allowing him to use his house for the lecture and when Stockmann decides to remain in the town. He credits his tolerance for speech to his travels to many places that do not possess it at all.

Morten Stockmann

One of the Stockmann's young sons, Morten gets in a fight at school after he hears another student call his dad a traitor.

Ejlif Stockmann

One of the Stockmanns' young sons.

Drunk

A belligerent and amusing man who shows up at the lecture and heckles those talking. He is one of the few, though, that support Stockmann.

An Enemy of the People Glossary

agitation

the act of rousing people, getting them worked up

badgering

bothering, annoying, or pestering someone

befouled

dirtied, sullied

blundered

erred, made a mistake

cabal

a group of people who work together secretly

corroborated

supported with evidence to make convincing

defamed

had one's reputation ruined, or ruined someone's reputation

editorial

a piece of journalistic writing that expresses an opinion

electioneer

to work for an election or campaign

expose

a news report that delivers information, usually scandalous, to the public

guise

the way something is seen

hamlet

a small village

heathen

uncivilized, coarse person

hypodermic

something that goes under the skin (like a needle)

imperiously

acting like a king

memorandum

a statement or message on a subject

peddling

telling people something

prevailed

to be persuaded, convinced

spitefully

done in a way to bring harm or defeat to someone

unvarnished

plain, unadorned

  

An Enemy of the People Themes

The tyranny of the majority

Most of the time in conflicts over power and free expression, the majority is opposed to a minority of powerful men who control government/society. The majority clamor for their rights and occasionally rebel or revolt. However, as Ibsen trenchantly points out, the majority can also be a swelling mass of ignorant, easily moldable, and irrational people who will eagerly embrace anything that makes their lives easy and comfortable. In this play Stockmann’s report threatens their material comfort, and they are easily swayed by Peter’s persuasive appeal to their baser instincts. There is no room in the town for an iconoclast or a rebel; conformity is required and promoted. The masses are depicted in the play as dangerous and ridiculous, and the individual is the persecuted hero.

Pride

It is unambiguous that Stockmann is the hero of the play –he sticks to the truth no matter what, upholds the values of free speech and public health and safety, and loses almost everything he cherishes in the process. However, Stockmann is still very, very prideful, as is his brother Peter. An early indicator of this is the brothers’ subtle battle over who created the Springs (when they were unknown to carry pathogens). When he finds out about the bacteria, Stockmann is pleased with his discovery and not-so-secretly hopes for a bit of fame. He is incensed that Peter and everyone else deny the validity of his work. He also makes no effort to understand where Peter and the others are coming from, although, to be fair, Stockmann is in the right. Like his brother, Peter is extremely prideful. He fears damage to his reputation and authority, and does not yield at all. He denies his brother any ability to make people aware of his findings. Through Peter especially, Ibsen demonstrates that pride is dangerous and shortsighted –that summer when the Springs make people sicker, he will rue his hubris.

Power and authority

Peter is the best representation in the play of how entrenched power and authority are influential but very dangerous. Through the power of his office and his own savviness, Peter manages to, in one conversation, cast doubt in the minds of the newspapermen and turn them to his side. He is imposing enough to mold others in his opinion, as well as use his connections to make Stockmann’s life a mess. Ibsen depicts men of authority as dangerous because they want to hold on to their position and its rewards, and not have to bear any criticism, debate, or changes to their agenda. Peter expresses outright how he does not want his reputation to suffer, and altering the Springs would cast doubt on his authority. The reader/audience is meant to assume that most of his subsequent decisions stem from his fear that he will lose his standing.

Duty

There are multiple understandings of what one’s duty is in this play, with characters often finding it difficult to negotiate this terrain. Stockmann is the best example of a man who has multiple duties pulling at him –his duty to the truth and to science, his duty to his family, and his duty to his town. He ultimately chooses to adhere to the first choice, but Ibsen does not seem to censure him for that; his standing up for the truth is seen as the noble thing to do. Catherine wavers between her duty to her family and her duty to Stockmann, who is supporting his claims, and although she is concerned about her family’s safety and material comfort, she sticks by Stockmann at the end of the play. As for Peter, he almost gives no thought to his duty as a brother, and seem to ignore his duty to the townspeople in regards to their future health. His allegiance is paid to authority and to government, and he never wavers. Ironically, he feels the least ambiguity about where his duty lies, but he also seems to be the most off the mark.

Gender

Catherine and Petra are the only females in the play, and offer interesting contrasts. Catherine is a traditional wife and mother, concerned with her family’s safety and material comfort. She is hesitant about Stockmann’s conflict with authority and evinces more timidity. However, once she sees her husband scorned, she is unafraid of confronting men and making her concerns known. This makes her similar to Petra, who is, as female characters in the late 19th century go, quite modern. She is an unmarried teacher who is passionate, intellectual, and hotheaded. She takes on a public persona and campaigns vociferously for the truth, which are not things women would ordinarily do during this time. Both of these women, Petra more so than Catherine, are rather atypical for women of their era and thus fit in comfortably with the other iconoclastic women of Ibsen’s oeuvre.

Freedom of expression

This is one of the major ideas of the text -that freedom of expression should be cherished and upheld. The audience has the benefit of knowing Stockmann is in the right, but even if he were not, his right to express himself should be honored by the town. He should get to print his report, speak at the lecture, and talk to whomever he wants about his findings. He should not be evicted, fired, harassed, or censured. Instead, the town, led by Peter, suppresses everything he wants to say. This is dangerous both in terms of precedent of a deprivation of civil liberties (what will happen when someone else has an unpopular idea?) as well as dangerous because the town has little knowledge of what could happen to them because of the Springs. Arthur Miller saw just how resonant Ibsen's text was during his own time of anti-communist hysteria of the 1950s.

Hysteria

Ibsen seeks to demonstrate how easy it is for people to become hysterical about things which they know very little of. The people barely heard anything of what Stockmann had to say, and turned against him en masse. They switched their political allegiance as soon as things became slightly complicated. Hysteria also escalates extremely quickly; the people move from yelling at Stockmann to throwing rocks at his home and trying to destroy all aspects of his life. Ibsen suggests that reason and rationality must be used in confusing situations, or it is all too easy to run amok. A democracy must be based on reasoned discussion and freedom of expression, or it will descend into chaos.

An Enemy of the People Quotes and Analysis

As a matter of fact, I happen to admire the spirit of tolerance in our town -it's magnificent. Just don't forget that we have it because we all believe in the same thing; it brings us together.

Peter, 8

This quote encapsulates Peter's viewpoint and why Stockmann has no hope of prevailing. Peter, as an authority figure, knows that the world works best when there is no dissension. Conflict and iconoclasm and novelty are dangerous because they are destabilizing and exhausting. Peter does not have a problem, though, with paying lip service to certain ideals because he knows that it sounds better. He is quick to praise tolerance and openmindedness and freedom of expression, but only when they do not cause him problems. He is essentially a hypocrite when he speaks like this, but a keen understanding of Peter's character yields the sense that he is not so much a hypocrite as one who simply does not believe people should speak up if there is an issue.

 

Society, captain, is like a ship -every man should do something to help navigate the ship.

Billing, 14

This quote comes from Billing, Hovstad, and Horster's discussion about voting and civic participation. At the time of this quote, Billing's words seem very appealing. He suggests that democracy relies on participation by the people, who all have an important role to play. His suggestion that the captain needs to vote is evidence of that fact. However, Billing's words take on a more ominous note when looked at retrospectively -that is, after he and everyone but Horster turn against Stockmann and join with the rabid masses in their antipathy toward the proposal of changing the Springs. Now Billing's words smack of men joining together in a formless majority who blindly obey their "captain" (not Horster; this is figurative) and sail in whatever direction he asks them to. Stockmann in essence is leading an unpopular mutiny while the others blindly sail away.

Oh, there was nothing to it. Every detective gets a lucky break once in his life.

Stockmann, 19.

Stockmann's glee and satisfaction upon the discovery that his suppositions about the Springs are correct are in sad contrast to the rage and frustration he will feel when Peter, and eventually the rest of the town, disavow his findings. In these words, though, are also indications of some of Stockmann's own flaws. He is cocky and a little naive, clearly secretly hoping that the rest of the town will elevate him to hero status. He does not take the time to consider what his findings might entail in terms of rectifying the Springs' problems. Even though he is right, and is doing a service to the town by trying to keep them healthy, his lack of humility and naivete make him a difficult figure to deal with. 

By God, this is the best thing I ever heard in my life!

Morten Kiil, 22.

Morten Kiil seems like a rather harmless character at the beginning of the play, but he quickly becomes rather noxious. This quote is one of his amused statements in reaction to the first news of the scandal. He cannot believe that it is true; rather, he thinks it is a hilarious joke and that Stockmann is inordinately clever for trying to carry it out against Peter. This reaction not only provides some insight into the slippery Kiil (does he really think it is a joke, or is he already trying to protect himself?), but also offers a disconcerting foreshadowing of what Stockmann will face in the future -disbelief and not being taking seriously.

They're all rich -all with old reputable names and they've got everything in the palm of their hands.

 Hovstad, 24.

This statement could come from any person in history who has ever opposed the entrenched elite and tried to fight back. Hovstad at this point places himself in a long line of individuals with radical opinions who think those in power are abusing that power and should not be guaranteed it based on their wealth and lineage. Hovstad's views seem to be in line with Stockmann's at first, or at least they are close enough to form a mutually beneficial relationship. However, Hovstad's passionate utterances about the corrupt rich bureaucrats of the town are not long held. In fact, he turns against Stockmann the most vociferously once Peter gets to him. Hovstad is revealed as a fraud and a hypocrite, and his character conjures up questions regarding how easily one can hold to unpopular beliefs before being manipulated into relinquishing them.

Isn't it time we pumped some guts into these well-intentioned men of good-will? Under all their liberal talk, they still idolize authority and that's got to be rooted out of this town.

Hovstad, 27.

Another quote from Hovstad pays lip service to that prevalent theme of the novel -regular, moderate men are often complacent and easily swayed by those in power. Of course, it is rather ironic that it is Hovstad uttering these sentiments, as he turns out to be one of those men, but it is still an important utterance because Ibsen is explaining just what is so problematic about most people: they find it easy to talk and pretend they have liberal ideas, but they are still privy to "idolozing" authority and going with authority when prompted. Stockmann is a rare figure because he cannot be cowed or bullied; he is the only character who decides to stay true to his beliefs even when it costs him almost everything. Clerly Stockmann's situation is not enviable, but he still demonstrates tenacity and rectitude.

You love your town when you blindly, spitefully, stubbornly go ahead trying to cut off our most important industry?

Peter, 33.

Peter uses this notion of Stockmann destroying the town multiple times throughout the text. His refrain is intended to get to Stockmann, the latter who has always professed to love the town and have a duty to it. Peter suggests that Stockmann will be doing more harm than good if he goes forward with his report on the Springs. Peter has somewhat of a point because the town will experience financial hardship and a drop in reputation, but he misses the point that Stockmann thinks that he I[is] doing what is best for the town. Duty is a complicated notion in this text, with different characters' interpretation of duty butting up against each other. Peter and Stockmann both think they have a duty to the town, but cannot reconcile their two versions of it.

Yes, but I have the truth on mine.

Stockmann, 34.

This quote is important for two different reasons. First, it is part of an exchange between Catherine and Stockmann in which she cautions him to be wary of Peter's power. He responds that he has truth and it is more powerful. This reveals a conflict between husband and wife, for she is more cautious and later tells him to remember his duty to his family, whereas he is bolder and brasher and does not seem to waver in his duty to the truth above duty to family. The statement is also important because it sets up Stockmann's central concern and the fount from which he draws his strength when nearly everyone is against him. He knows he is in the right, much like Galileo centuries before, and can only adhere to that because to neuter his own protests would be to compromise his principles. Stockmann does not get to be a hero in the way he originally intended -parade, dinners, universal love and acclaim -but he is one nonetheless.

Now God knows, in ordinary times I'd agree a hundred percent with anybody's right to say anything. But these are not ordinary times.

Peter, 54.

Peter continues to pretend that he values freedom of expression but in reality he prefers everyone to fall in line and defer to their leaders. His paying lip service to these tenets of democracy is generally successful when it comes to manipulating the masses, but obviously ring hollow to contemporary audiences and readers. His perspectives are not altogether unbelievable though, as many democracies suspend civil liberties during times of crisis. Peter tries to use that argument, saying these are not "ordinary times", but even that seems a bit off. It is not war, or a recession, or anything of that magnitude. Even though Stockmann has the reputation of being the off-kilter one, Peter is the character whose ideas are truly ridiculous.

If the only way I can be a friend of the people is to take charge of that corruption, then I am an enemy!

Stockmann, 75.

Here Stockmann finally embraces his role as the outcast, as the prophet, as the menace to society. He disavows his old life and prepares to live life on the fringes with only his immediate family, some scrappy kids, and one friend. What is interesting about this is that he is right -his findings on the water will eventually be borne out when people become sick. His services may be in need as he is a doctor, and if the town authorities want to combat the issue then they might need his original plan. Furthermore, the townspeople will all know that he was right the whole time, as his new status as an enemy of the people no doubt means putting his ideas out there into the world so people are forced to listen to them. Stockmann's future is unknown, of course, but he will either be vindicated or destroyed. There is no middle ground for people like him. He has made a courageous and perhaps foolhardy choice, and he stands as a testament to perseverance in the face of tremendous obstacles.

An Enemy of the People Summary and Analysis of Act I

Scene I  
It is Mr. Stockman's living room. Kiil is eating and gets up to leave. He tells Billing to let his daughter know, but Catherine comes in and tells him not to go, and he ought to wait for Tom. Kiil says he has a lot to do, but Catherine urges him to stay and asks if he might want to move in with them.
The door sounds and Peter comes in. Kiil says rather facetiously, "Your Honor," and leaves. Catherine welcomes her brother-in-law inside and tells him Tom went out for a walk with the boys and should be back soon. The door sounds again and it is Hovstad, the newspaper editor of The People's Daily Messenger.  
Peter is cheerily dismissive of the paper, but says that he admires the spirit of toleration in the town. After all, when everyone believes in the same thing, it brings people together. That thing is the Kirsten Springs, which is becoming an attraction for miles around. Peter tells everyone about all the new reservations, and is pleased to hear when Hovstad says Tom, the doctor, had written a piece about it awhile ago that will now be published.
There is a slight bit of awkwardness when Catherine says Tom created the Springs, and Peter feels as if he was the one that promoted them. Catherine wonders why they cannot share the honor.
Stockmann (how Tom is referred to in the play) enters with his two sons, Morten and Ejlif. Peter stiffly says he ought to go now, but is prevailed upon to take a seat. Stockmann is expansive, talking about young people and the clarity he received when he spent five years up north away from everything. He calls out that one must have things to work and fight for, and that his motto is to live to the hilt.
Hovstad joins them brings up the article, but Stockmann says he does not want it published. He hints at abnormal conditions but says he will say no more right now even though Peter questions him. Peter reminds him that he is the mayor and chairman of the board for the Springs, and warns his brother that the individual must subordinate himself to society.
The mood is acrimonious and Peter excuses himself. When Catherine comes back in the room, she is surprised Peter is gone, and Stockmann says he does not have to account for himself to his brother. To Hovstad he says his brother has a bad stomach and is used to his solitary existence.
Stockmann now focuses on Captain Horster and Billing, and Catherine serves them drinks. They smoke and talk. It seems the Captain will be sailing soon and not home for the election, and talk turns to voting and citizens' duties.
Petra, the daughter of Stockmann and Catherine, enters. She embraces her parents, says hello to the others, and tells her father she picked up the mail and has a letter for him. He seems quite anxious and excited, and goes to his study to read it. Catherine says she noticed that he has been asking for the mailman quite often lately.   Hovstad chats with Petra about how busy she is; she is a teacher and loves it. The boys come in and chatter childishly, and Catherine sends them away.
Stockmann comes back in, glowing. He says he has made a fantastic discovery , and chortles about all the "baboons" in the town who will be proven wrong. He asks his family and friends if they think the Springs are healthy. They say yes, and then he announces that they are a pesthole. Everyone is aghast, and he explains that the filth at Windmill Valley, where the tannery is, runs down into the Springs.

Stockmann explains that he had a suspicion based on the disease counts last year, and started to investigate the water. He found that it had "infectious organic matter" (18) in it and now the whole water system has to be changed, even though it was very expensive to put in.

His family remembers that he warned them, and Stockmann says he did, but that politicians do not like to be told things by scientists. Now, though, they will have to listen. They are all thrilled, and Stockmann looks forward to telling Peter and knows he will be grateful to him. They lift their glasses and cheer, all pleased with Stockmann's tremendous news.

Scene II  
The next morning Stockmann waits for his brother, who has read and the report and wants to come over and talk to him. He is certain his brother will try to take credit for the discovery , but says he does not mind as long as everybody is happy.
Kiil enters and asks about the story and if it is true. It seems he heard about it from Petra, who stopped by that morning. Catherine says it is lucky for the town and Kiil begins to laugh. He starts talking about the "bacteria" as if it is a joke and Stockmann is trying to pull his brother's leg. Catherine tries to reason with her father but he cannot be swayed. Laughing, he prepares to depart, telling Stockmann he hopes Peter and his cronies will accept this bait, and if they do, he will donate money to charity.

Kiil leaves and Hovstad comes in. He wants to talk to Stockmann about how he sees that the Springs story ties into many other things. For him, the truly poisonous spring is all the bureaucrats who run the town –the rich, reputable men who have the town in their hands. He starts talking about this "scandal", and Stockmann tries to calm him down a bit.
Hovstad starts talking abut his own lowly background and how he likes rooting for the underdog, and he doesn't care if some circles call it "agitation." As they are talking, Aslaksen enters and asks to speak to the doctor.

He asks Stockmann if he intends to campaign for a better water system. Stockmann says yes, but it is not a campaign. He thinks it is a straightforward matter, but Aslaksen interrupts him and says that, as Chairman of the Property Owners' Association, he cares about businessmen and is active for prohibition and thus knows many people and could arrange a demonstration.
Stockmann is a bit confused, but Aslaksen says it would be a demonstration to compliment the Doctor for bringing the matter to light. It would be peaceable and not radical.
Stockmann is pleased with this news and shakes the man's hand and offers him a drink, but as he is for prohibition, Aslaksen cannot take one.

After he leaves, Hovstad says these men are essentially still in awe of authority and need to be amped up a bit more. He wants to print Stockmann's report, but the latter says not until he talks to his brother. He promises the newspaper man it will happen, and Hovstad leaves.
Stockmann marvels to Catherine how he has the majority behind him and that he feels at home in the town again, something he hasn't felt since he was a boy.
Peter enters the room and the family cheerily greets him. Peter is quiet and says he read the report. Catherine takes Petra to another room.

Peter asks his brother why he felt he had to go behind his back. Shocked, Stockmann says he wanted to be sure. Peter asks if he intends to present the report and Stockmann says yes. Peter then says he walked around the site with the City Engineer and asked about the cost of a new site, and the Engineer said it would be expensive –three hundred thousand crowns. It would take two years as well, but the main thing that Peter points out is that there would be no visitors at all left. Stockmann, then, is ruining the town.

Stockmann is frustrated and says that the report is actually underestimated because once warmer weather comes, it will be worse. Peter says maybe if he is correct, the Directors of the Institute could look into ways to reasonably and "without financial sacrifices" (29) try and improve things.
Stockmann calls this a fraud and treason against the town. He thinks Peter and his administration simply don't want to admit their blunder since they were the ones that insisted the water supply be built there.

Peter says it does not matter even if that is true, for "without moral authority there can be no government" (30). He warns his brother that not a word should meet the ears of the public.
Stockmann replies that people already know and the free press will disseminate the story. Angry, Peter tells Stockmann he is irresponsible and that there will be consequences. He had hoped that improving his finances he would be better, which angers Stockmann because he sees how that was self-interested. Peter criticizes his brother as a man who gets an idea into his head and just runs with it –the public doesn't need any of his new ideas, and they're better off than the old ideas. In fact, he orders Stockmann to deny all rumors publicly. As an official, Peter knows that one has to keep one's convictions to oneself.

Stockmann claims that as a scientist he has a right to speak out, but Peter warns him that he might even find himself dismissed from the Institute.
Petra comes in and yells that she cannot believe her uncle would do this. Catherine asks her to be quiet. Peter continues, saying that Stockmann can't love his town if he is cutting off its most important industry and that he is a traitor for his insinuations.

Peter finally leaves and the family is left alone. Catherine is worried, noting that Peter has all the power on his side. Stockmann replies that he has the truth. This is not comforting to Catherine, as she thinks about his duty to their family. Petra tells her mother not to worry about the family but Catherine can't help it; she does not want to be without money again, as it was horrible.
The boys come in, and Stockmann tells them he will teach them how to be men. Catherine cries.

Analysis  

Upon reading Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People, it is good to note first whether or not you are reading Ibsen’s original, five-act work, or Arthur Miller’s more famous three-act adaptation. This ClassicNote works off of Miller’s version, as it is the most commonly available in bookstores and performed on the stage.   Act I, the longest of the three, establishes the main characters and central conflict of the play. Dr. Thomas Stockmann, a physician in a small Norwegian town, discovers that the town’s famed Springs are being polluted by a local tannery and urges his brother Peter, the mayor and chairman of the board for the Springs, to consider redoing them. Stockmann’s initial jubilation quickly fades when his brother evinces a disdain for the plan owing not just to its immense cost but to the impact such a revelation would have upon his reputation, as he gave the okay for the Springs and constantly touts their health benefits.
The brothers’ personalities are clearly contrasted in this first act: Stockmann is overly enthusiastic and a tad naïve. He does not consider at all the possible ramifications of his report, demonstrating little nuance in considering the way entrenched power works, even in a small town. He possesses the truth and is, as Ibsen makes entirely clear, in the right, but still behaves in an almost rashly idealistic fashion. He claims his motto is, “Live to the hilt!” (11), but, as his wife Catherine gently scolds him, he has a family and responsibilities and “living to the hilt” may very well –and indeed it does –endanger them. The play also alludes to the vicissitudes in the family fortune, which Stockmann seems to look upon fondly as a sort of adventure but Catherine remembers as less than ideal, imploring her husband, “If you go this way, God help us, we’ll have no money again. Is it so long since the North that you have forgotten what it was like to live like we lived?” (24).
Peter plays on Stockmann’s character traits (obviously knowing him so well) by claiming that Stockmann is “blindly, spitefully, stubbornly” (33) trying to destroy the town. While he may be hitting some of Stockmann’s characteristics, what makes this different, of course, is that Stockmann is right, is not trying to ruin the town but to save it, and that Peter himself is privy to several negative characteristics. He certainly is more austere and sterner than his brother is, but he is also inordinately conservative and hostile to change. He says without batting an eye that “without moral authority there can be no government” (30) and that as “an official, you keep your convictions to yourself!” (31). He deems Peter a “traitor to society” (33) and promises to secure his downfall. Ibsen depicts him clearly as a man who relishes power and authority, and cannot broker any resistance or threat to institutions.
Interestingly, Peter’s victory is secured by the majority, not by an entrenched elite. There are two ways to perceive the majority: one, as composed of common people who are wary of the elite making decisions for them and nobly and idealistically clamor for democracy and participation; and two, as an ill-educated and easily-misled mass who blindly follow the currents of the day as established by the elite. In this play, Ibsen utilizes the latter interpretation, depicting the majority of the town as malleable and ignorant.
These malleable and ignorant men are represented by Aslaksen and Hovstad, who are initially supportive of Stockmann. This is no doubt because supporting Stockmann before Peter intervenes is not difficult; it’s easy to stick to one’s principles when they are not threatened. Aslaksen and Hovstad seem like men of convictions, but in Act II they are revealed as weak and enthralled by the systems of power they claim to want to combat. Aslaksen is slightly less hypocritical, as he from the beginning calls for moderation, but his move to Peter is still a betrayal.
Finally, Catherine bears some analysis. Her character evolves throughout the short timeframe represented by the play. As evinced by her earlier quote, she offers a counterpart to Stockmann’s rigid adherence to his obligation to the town. She feels that his first obligation is to his family, and that everyone must put up with injustices in their lives and cannot fight every battle. Terrance McConnell writes, “as [she] has already argued, Thomas is not going to prevail against Peter. So, in terms of making a positive impact on the world, Thomas should give up his fight and devote himself to causes that are more feasible. If he agrees to this, that will enable him and [Catherine] to do what is best for their children.” The later acts show how she changes this perspective (see the other analyses).
Both Catherine and Peter prevail upon Stockmann to understand his role and its obligations. While Catherine wants Stockmann to embody his role and responsibilities as a father, Peter wants Stockmann to embody his role and responsibilities as a citizen. He argues that Stockmann has a duty to the town, and that a tax would ruin it. Of course, Stockmann does believe he is doing his duty by the town in ensuring that its residents as well as tourists do not become sick; he may be stubborn and idealistic, but he wants to help the town. He knows that when summer comes it will only get worse, and it violates his code as a physician to allow such illness to proceed.  

An Enemy of the People Summary and Analysis of Act II

Scene I  
The curtain opens on the Editorial Office. Billing and Hovstad  are there, talking about printing the doctor’s report. Billing criticizes Aslaksen, the publisher, for being too cowardly. Both men are thrilled at the possibilities of bringing a liberal administration in after the winds of change sweep away the people in charge.
Stockmann enters and tells them to print the report right away, as the mayor has declared war. Aslaksen enters and tells him to be careful and to be moderate. Stockmann smiles and says of course, and asks Aslaksen to make sure everything is printed perfectly. He is excited to finally see the truth printed in the paper.
After he leaves, Aslaksen says he feels a bit nervous and he hopes the Doctor sticks to the Springs. Billing asks why he is scared, and Aslaksen says he has to live there, and is worried that attacking a town’s administration might mean a complete collapse. This might be bad for small property owners. Billing scoffs at this, and in response Aslaksen queries Billing if it is true he has applied for a job as a secretary in the Magistrate’s office.
Embarrassed, Billing says yes, and Hovstad criticizes him. Billing defends himself and says he can do a lot of good from there. Aslaksen is skeptical, and touts the fact that at least he has never gone back on his principles. He leaves.
The men discuss whether or not Stockmann’s father-in-law has money and could maybe back the paper, but are interrupted by Petra. She enters carrying an English novel that the newspaper wanted translated for the paper, and says she was upset by the novel’s message that supernatural forces reward “good” people and punish “bad” people. She thinks the newspaper has no principles if they want this printed.
Hovstad protests and says he did not even read it, and that he highly admires Petra and “women like you” (41). She is still indignant, which causes Hovstad to protest at her extreme views, which are like her father’s. This gives her pause, and she says that he must not have any use for her father.
Aslaksen enters and Petra, frightened and upset by Hovstad’s words and ingratiating but hostile manner, leaves.   Aslaksen announces that the Mayor is here. Peter comes in and remarks that the office is clean and he assumed it would be dirty. After this backhanded compliment he asks about the paper’s goal to print the report. He asks to see it, and asks if Aslaksen will really do it. Aslaksen responds that it is a signed article by the author so he has no problem printing it.
Peter wryly notes how the lower sorts are always apt to call for a sacrifice, especially on the part of the wealthy. However, he plans on taxing the people to pay for the modifications to the Springs. Aghast, Hovstad replies that it was a private corporation that built it. Peter says that the corporation built it but has no funds left and if the people want a change then they can pay for it.
He criticizes his brother’s “mad dream of a man who is trying to blow up our way of life” (44). Hovstad finally gets nervous and comments that he would never want to hurt the town like that, and he never thought there would be a tax.
Peter brings out his own statement, which he calls an assertion of the basic facts. Over time some small improvements could be made without a tax.
Suddenly Stockmann is observed coming their way, and Peter gets up and says he does not want to meet him here. Hurriedly he leaves, and the newspapermen try to cover up Stockmann’s manuscript.
Cheerily Stockmann asks about the printing but the men defer nervously. They are interrupted by Catherine and Petra who burst in. Catherine is full of ire towards Hovstad, accusing him of dragging people into disaster and that he is not her husband’s friend.
Stockmann is confused until he sees his brother’s cane lying on the table. He starts to realize Hovstad might have been talked out of printing the report.   Peter reveals himself and Stockmann lashes out at him, “Poisoning the water wasn’t enough, you’re working on the press?” (46). Peter asks for his hat and cane but Stockmann taunts him by putting the hat on.
Stockmann asks Hovstad to run the piece but the editor refuses. Stockmann says he will call a meeting and if he cannot get the hall he will parade through the streets. Peter calls him mad and his brother replies that he hasn’t even seen him mad yet. Stockmann takes his family and departs.

Scene II  
It is a room in Captain Horster's house –a meeting has been called. People wander around outside and Billing asks Horster why he is putting this on. The captain responds that he has traveled to a lot of places where people are not allowed to say unpopular things.

Catherine and Petra enter. Hovstad peevishly tells them he is not as bad as they think, and that he did not print the report because people would not believe him. Catherine scoffs that he is a liar. Someone nearby blows a horn and Horster angrily shuts him down.

More people, including Peter, file in. he asks if Petra made a poster that was put up on the Town Hall. She boldly says yes, it was her work, and her uncle says he could have arrested her. She holds up her hands and says he could do it right now.

A drunken man starts badgering the group, yelling that he wants to vote. Horster pushes him out.
At this time Stockmann and others arrive. The drunk starts agitating again but walks out. Stockmann mounts the stage and prepares to speak, but Aslaksen calls out that a chairman should be elected. Stockmann says it is only a lecture and there does not need to be one. A man named Henrik says there must be some order. Other people heckle Stockmann.

Peter is proposed as chairman, but he suggests the neutral Aslaksen. The vote is seconded. After this, Stockmann starts his speech again, explaining that he called for this because he could not get the hall or get his report published.

Aslaksen comes to the stage and tells the crowd that moderation is expected. The drunk starts in again, yelling that Peter should not electioneer the results. Quiet is called for, and Peter comes to the stage. He claims that his brother wants to destroy Kirsten Springs because he is only happy when he is "badgering authority, ridiculing authority, destroying authority" (53). He concedes that freedom of speech is important but not during perilous times, and these are such times.
The Doctor stands up in protest and says Peter should not be standing on the stage criticizing him. There is a bit of a ruckus but things calm down again. Peter continues, and paints a picture of the town as it was before the Springs –poor, ignored. Now everyone knows it, and the town will become prosperous and admired. It makes sense that the people should be able to say that there is a line a man cannot cross, and that they will enforce that line if the town is in danger. He moves that Stockmann not be able to read his report.

There is a bit of a commotion and Stockmann protests for a bit, but then says that he will not speak of the Springs. He is tentatively allowed to proceed.
Stockmann begins by talking about how the people have no right to call themselves that just because they have the human shape. His words garner anger, but he persists. He talks about his noble vision he originally had for the Springs and how this situation proves the majority is not always right. When he asks if the majority of the people were right when they crucified Jesus, the crowd is stunned.
Hovstad stands and says he cuts himself off from Stockmann. Stockmann begs everyone to reconsider even though the cost is great.

The crowd is becoming violent and hostile. Peter tries to calm them. When asked to go home, Stockmann proclaims he will take his story to out-of-town newspapers if he has to. This leads him to be labeled a traitor, and, as Aslaksen yells out, an enemy of the people.
Aslaksen asks if anyone is against the motion to declare Stockmann an enemy of the people, and amid the din only Horster and the drunk man, who is still there, raise their hands.
Stockmann asks Horster if he has room for him and his family on his trip to America. Horster says yes.
Stockmann and his family leave the crowd, jeering and spitting.

Analysis  

Ibsen’s tale does not come out of the blue; in fact, there are precedents for this realistic drama in Europe. “Social problem” comedy-dramas, with their focus on one character and one or two main problems, use of satire and comedy, and straightforward structure, were fashionable during the day; writers included Ibsen, Dumas I[fils], Augier, and Bjornson. Ibsen already experimented with this genre in I[Ghosts], but I[An Enemy of the People] is the best example. Critic Thomas F. Van Laan writes that none of the works by the other authors can measure up to the standards set in the last two acts of the play, and “the sheer abundance of unfailingly brilliant inventions almost makes up for the lack of typical Ibsen density.”

Ibsen was not just adhering to conventions of the day, though; he also infused the characters, particularly Stockmann, with his own views. He wrote to his publisher, “Dr. Stockmann and I get along so splendidly with one another; we are so much in agreement on many things.” He conceded his protagonist might be “more muddleheaded than I am,” however, and also, upon seeing a performance of the play, commented that the character was a “hothead.”

This is amusingly evidenced in several places in Act II, when Stockmann enters the newspaper office and says the town is “liable to start making a saint out of me or something” (45) and that he “simply will not attend a dinner in my honor” (45). Later, in Scene II, Stockmann replaces his self-aggrandizing thoughts with condemnatory rhetoric in regards to the people of the town –“a mass of organisms with the human shape…[who] do not automatically become a People” (57). He is justifiably angry in the aftermath of Peter’s hijacking of his truth-telling lecture, but his words are obviously inflammatory. Arthur Miller chose to cut out some of the even more intense rhetoric, but there is enough left to be a bit weary with Stockmann’s strategy.

On the other hand, there seems little left to do. He has been foiled at every turn, and the abuse is only worsening. Only his immediate family, Captain Horster, and an amusing drunk are on his side. He is not allowed to read from the report. He knows that he is right and that things will worsen if the Springs are not revamped. He believes that his motivations are sound, that he worked on the Springs “so we might cure the sick, so that we might meet people from all over the world and learn from them, and become broader and more civilized –in other words, more like Men, more like A People” (57). Stockmann might be bombastic, but he seems to truly believe in his words. He does not possess the pragmatic, savvy, and manipulative mindset of his brother; he does indeed think he is engaged in noble pursuits. As Terrance McConnell writes, "If the Baths remain open, the patrons are being harmed; if the Baths are temporarily closed, the townspeople are being denied a benefit. The losses of the two parties are on a different moral plane. The obligation not to harm takes priority over the obligation to provide benefits."

The contrast between majority and minority is further heightened here. Although the reader might be skeptical about Stockmann's choice to lambast the people, the fact is, they seem to deserve it. At the lecture they are practically frothing at the mouth; they are hostile, combative, and, of course, ignorant. In Act III they even resort to violence. They do not want Stockmann to speak so they can listen to both sides and make a decision. They do not want to put in that effort –they want it to be done for them. Stockmann, then, is a model and an articulator of the idea that "the minority, the small handful who are in tune with the newest truths, that is always in the right and must be listened to," (as stated by Van Laan). Stockmann is a Galileo figure –one who would sacrifice himself for truth and science. It is no surprise Arthur Miller was attracted to this play in light of the blind obedience to anti-communist cant in the 1950s.

An Enemy of the People Summary and Analysis of Act III

Act III
Stockmann and his family are at home, cleaning up rocks people had thrown through their windows. It seems the glazier will not come to fix their windows, and, as Stockmann realizes when he reads a letter, their landlord evicted them. He tries to comfort Catherine that they will be happier in America but she is unconvinced.
Petra comes home and announces she lost her teaching job because her supervisor received anonymous letters, one stating that she had radical ideas.
Horster comes in. He is friendly, asking how the family is doing. His news, though, is not good –the ship will sail for America but he will not be on it because he was removed from his position. He says he will find another, but it seemed like the owner was a political ally of Peter.
Peter himself arrives at the house, and he and Stockmann converse. Peter gives his brother a letter that fires him from the Institute. Stockmann accuses his brother of wanting to ruin him, but Peter admits he thinks it has gone too far. However, he adds that he thinks this will all go away if Stockmann will sign a statement apologizing for going overboard.
Stockmann scoffs that his brother still does not understand that there are men one cannot buy. Peter retorts that he does not seem to be one of those men, and explains that Morten Kiil had gone about buying up cheap stock in the Springs last night after the meeting. Stockmann is perplexed and said he knew nothing about it, but Peter is hostile and does not believe him. He says he will draw up charges of conspiracy against Stockmann if he has to.
Incredulous and irate, Stockmann starts yelling about that a maid needs to clean the room of such pestilence. Peter leaves and Kiil enters afterward. Stockmann confronts him on this and Kiil explains. His tannery, the one passed down through his family, is above the Springs and is responsible for sullying them. He used the money that he was setting aside for Catherine and the family as an inheritance to buy up stock. His hope is that Stockmann will clear his name, but he still thinks his son-in-law's theories about poison are crazy.
Stockmann is aghast that his father-in-law would do this and tries to explain about the science behind the testing. Kiil nettles him, trying to get him to admit he could have even the slightest doubt about the tests' veracity. He insinuates that Stockmann was only doing this to get back at his brother.
Stockmann says this is ludicrous, and that he cannot believe Kiil gambled away his family's future. After more harsh words, Kiil leaves.
Hovstad and Aslaksen enter. Stockmann gruffly tells them he has a lot on his mind and they should get to the point of why they are there. In essence, they want the Doctor to help fund their paper and they will support him. However, when Stockmann mentions the tax they get annoyed and say that the paper and the town would be bankrupted. Stockmann does not budge, and mocks Hovstad for wanting to be a hero. Hovstad becomes incensed, and calls the Doctor a "madman" who is "insane with egoism" (74). He prepares to leave, and Aslaksen nervously leaves a proposed budget for the Doctor to look at.
At that moment Stockmann's sons come in. Morten was beaten up because other students called his father a traitor and he would not stand for it. Stockmann tries to comfort his son, and tells the newspapermen to leave.   He officially announces that he is an enemy of the people. He says, "If the only way I can be a friend of the people is to take charge of that corruption, then I am an enemy!" (75). Hovstad asks in amazement if he knows where this will end.
Stockmann rages on –he is not a hero, he is an enemy of the people and he will do everything in his power to tell the truth even if the people must bleed for it. The other men leave, in shock, and Stockmann gathers his family close. He tells them they are besieged but will not retreat. The boys will stay out of school and he will teach them. They should find about twelve street kids too.
Stockmann pauses, almost about to say that Kiil should be told, but realizes they are all alone. A rock crashes in the window. Catherine is frightened, but Stockmann says that they have the truth, which makes them strong, and they must get used to being lonely.

Analysis  

In this last act, Stockmann moves from desiring retreat to hunkering down for the long run, the townspeople demonstrate further the tyranny of the majority, and family itself is revealed a complicated construct.
The townspeople’s behavior in the aftermath of the lecture is reprehensible. They act almost ludicrously, given the fact that they never even bothered to listen to Stockmann’s report in the first place before they judged whether he was wrong. They resort to violence and threats, Petra is fired, and they are evicted. Even the neutral Captain Horster is affected; he cannot be captain of the ship anymore due to his association with the “enemy of the people.” Morten and Eljeh experience slurs and fighting at school. As mentioned in the previous analysis, it is no wonder Arthur Miller was attracted to this play. His own era of the 1950s featured a pervasive and hysterical fear of Communism, with backstabbing and rumormongering and “witch-hunting” common at all levels of society. Most Americans in this majority had allowed themselves to be misled and riled up, which is something Miller addresses in perhaps his most famous work, The Crucible.

Miller’s comments regarding what he saw as Ibsen’s message are particularly accurate: “[it is] the question of whether the democratic guarantees protecting political minorities ought to be set aside in time of crisis. More personally, it is a question of whether one’s vision of the truth ought to be a source of guilt at a time when the mass of men condemn it as a dangerous and devilish lie.” To some extent, the issue regarding the Springs in the play does not seem like a “crisis,” but, to be fair, the town would slip back into the ignominy and poverty it once experienced.   Scholar Susan C.W. Abbotson writes of the majority-minority conflict in her article on the play: “the bureaucrats who run the town [are depicted] as authoritarian and narrow-minded and fully prepared to sacrifice the individual for what they determine to be the good of the whole. Tolerance of other opinions only extends as far as the dissent remains unproblematic.” Peter says almost this very thing himself at the beginning of the play when he notes, “I happen to admire the spirit of tolerance in our town –it’s magnificent. Just don’t forget that we have it because we all believe the same thing; it brings us together” (8), and, later, “The individual really must subordinate himself to the overall –or more accurately to the authorities who are in charge of the general welfare” (12). These views are not altogether surprising coming from an authority figure, but it is indeed disturbing how quickly the majority falls in line to support them.

As for Stockmann, he has two choices by the end of the play: agree that his earlier assertions were misguided and subsequently fall in line, or stick to his views even when it means he will face extreme persecution of himself and his family. Stockmann chooses the latter, and he truly does face a staggering array of obstacles: he has no job, no home, his children are threatened, his reputation is destroyed, his friends are gone, and he is viewed as a dangerous threat to society when all he desired was to help the town. His position demonstrates how being in the right can often translate to being hated, to being an outsider, to living a difficult, straitened life. He claims at the end of the play that because he has truth he is alone, and because he is alone he is strong. There are almost religious resonances in this last statement, and, coupled with Stockmann’s request for twelve kids to start, he ends the play as a martyr figure, sacrificing himself on the altar of truth.
Finally, a small note on family: while Catherine and Petra and the boys prepare to wait out the tension in the town with Stockmann, two other family members prove that blood is not thicker than power or reputation. Peter and Morten Kiil both desire to preserve their reputations at all costs, and even though they might know deep down that Stockmann is right, they cannot bring themselves to lose power, money, and prestige. Despite the fact that Peter is Stockmann's brother and Morten Kiil is Catherine's father, blood proves of little weight when these issues are at stake. It is a lamentable reality, but Ibsen clearly wants to depict the allure of power and prestige.

 

An Enemy of the People Symbols, Allegory and Motifs

The Springs

The poisoned and toxic Springs represent a body politic that is infected by intolerance and a lack of freedom of expression.

Stockmann's report

The report represents truth and science; its suppression is an indicator of the town's unwillingness to accept either. The continual allusions to the report and its continual blocking reinforce the way truth is treated in the town.

Allegory -Anti-communism

Arthur Miller interpreted and staged the play as an allegory of the anti-communist hysteria sweeping through America. It thus resembles his own work, The Crucible, in its application of current concerns to a different time and place.

Motif- Words and Writing

The play is filled with newspaper articles, the report, proposed statements, and letters/notices. All of these are used in service of power; the written word is not able to be used in the service of the truth unless the powers that be allow it. Letters and notices come kicking the Stockmanns out of their house and firing Stockmann from his profession. The report is unpublished and thus lifeless. Peter wants Stockmann to write up a statement disavowing his earlier assertions. Clearly writing is not able to promote truth or knowledge.

An Enemy of the People Metaphors and Similes

n/a

n/a

An Enemy of the People Irony

Peter's Irony

Peter believes that freedom of expression should be suppressed in a time of crisis, but the crisis is one of his own making, if a crisis at all. It appears absurd that he paints Stockmann out as a villain and destroyer of the town when Stockmann wants to save it.

Stockmann and the truth

The audience knows Stockmann is correct and that in the future more and more people will become sick, so irony is seen in the townspeople's reactions to him. They appear ridiculous and ignorant, spending time and effort fighting against something that is not actually valid.

Hovstad

Hovstad purports to be one of the most radical men of the town but is one of the fastest to turn over to Peter's perspective. His words about rich and reputable men controlling everything rings true, because they can even get to Hovstad, the self-proclaimed radical.

 

An Enemy of the People Imagery

n/a

n/a

An Enemy of the People Henrik Ibsen's Plays

Ibsen’s plays have a few things in common: they tend to realistically depict the psychological complexities and contradictions of the individual; they focus more on character rather than plot; they feature character whose drive to attain spiritual and moral purity conflicts with the society in which they live; and they were unconventional by the standards of the day. They explored the concept of the “life-lie,” in which people dealt with the miseries of life by masking it with idealism and creating a new, false life. Self-deception was oftentimes necessary but dangerous. Many of the plays ended on ambiguous notes –they were not tidily wrapped up or comforting to audiences. Oftentimes his lyricism was not as apparent as the force of his ideas. Arthur Miller believed Ibsen valuable for his striving to “make understandable what is complex without distorting and oversimplifying what cannot be explained.” He also admired how the subject matter was often worked out on a symbolic level while his characters seemed wholly realistic. Writer C.D. Merriman notes, “societal breakdown, stereotypes, class struggle and issues of morality dominate his characters,” while scholar Martha Fletcher Bellinger writes, “The principles of Ibsen's teaching, his moral ethic, was that honesty in facing facts is the first requisite of a decent life. Human nature has dark recesses which must be explored and illuminated; life has pitfalls which must be recognized to be avoided; and society has humbugs, hypocrisies, and obscure diseases which must be revealed before they can be cured.”
Brand (1866) is a poem, later turned into a play, featuring man giving up everything in his life –wife, child, friends –in adherence to his personal philosophy of “all or nothing.”

Peer Gynt (1867) is the story of a young man who spends his days indulging in immoral behavior. His journey through the world is fantastical and varied; he is, at times, a slaveholder, a prophet, and a lonely wanderer. He repents of his immoral behavior and is saved by the love of a woman named Salvig, whom he had abandoned earlier.

A Doll’s House (1879), one of Ibsen’s most well-known and oft-performed works, concerns a woman who is treated like a doll by her husband and realizes she is profoundly dissatisfied with her life and must leave. Unsurprisingly, this work was very controversial during its day.
In Ghosts (1881) Ibsen dealt with themes of self-sacrifice in the face of adherence to social norms, drunkenness, and venereal disease. A mother trapped in an unhappy marriage witnesses her son beginning to act like his dissolute father, and must decide whether or not to administer poison to him to save him from a painful life suffering from syphilis.
An Enemy of the People (1882) shows how one man’s concern with exposing and upholding the truth about his town’s revered Springs leads him into bitter conflict with bureaucrats and weak-willed men. The individual against the tyranny of the ignorant majority is the main theme of the work.
Hedda Gabler (1890) features the titular character seeking spiritual fulfillment in her life of bourgeois convention. This work was also controversial, as many critics could not stomach Ibsen’s depiction of his female character and her flouting of gender roles.

An Enemy of the People Literary Elements

Genre

Drama

Language

English

Setting and Context

19th century Norwegian town

Narrator and Point of View

Third person.

Tone and Mood

Tone: ironic, somewhat cynical, mostly objective

Protagonist and Antagonist

Stockmann; Peter, the townspeople, the majority

Major Conflict

The minority vs. the majority; the upholding of truth when it is unpopular; freedom of speech in a time of crisis.

Climax

Stockmann's failure at the lecture hall to convince the people of the truth, and his subsequent label as an enemy of the people.

Foreshadowing

n/a

Understatement

n/a

Allusions

Jesus -Stockmann invokes Jesus, who was crucified on the cross because the mass of people thought he was dangerous.

Imagery

n/a

Paradox

n/a

Parallelism

n/a

Personification

n/a

Use of Dramatic Devices

There are numerous stage directions for the play in regards to characters' movements and actions onstage as they deliver dialogue.

 

An Enemy of the People Essay Questions

1. 1

What are the structure and tone of the play?

The structure of the play is very straightforward. The issue –that of the Springs being toxic and Stockmann's possession of that knowledge –is established right away. Only a few "events" happen afterwards; the play is mostly conversations. The plot is flimsy. Ibsen's tone, established through the characters, is polemical and ironic, with a touch of satire.  

2. 2

What role does Petra play?

Petra is an interesting character because she is perhaps the only character who is as radical as Stockmann and thus supports his perspectives and views, but she also has a lot less at stake and is thus not exactly the best example of self-sacrifice. Even Peter notes that she is young and radicalism is the provenance of the young; he seems apt to dismiss her views and not become offended by them in the same way that Stockmann’s views offend him. She does not have a family to support and will not feel the pressure of her other duties bearing down on her. Her commitment to the town is not as deeply engrained as her father’s. This is not to say we should not admire her efforts and her vociferous support of her father, but Stockmann is still the main hero of the text, as he loses so much to stand up to the town’s ignorance and hysteria. Finally, Petra also is part of the Ibsen tradition of strong female characters who deviate from norms regarding behavior and expectations.

3. 3

What is Ibsen's message in this play?

Ibsen wants to impart to his readers that standing up for truth and justice can be very difficult and one may even lose most of the things they treasure. He reveals how little glory there is in remaining true to one’s principles, and that one will face an array of obstacles. Those obstacles may even include family, friends, and former connections. Ibsen favors Stockmann and suggests he is right, but does so almost grudgingly, as a keen reading of his text reveals that heroes are not blameless (Stockmann has character traits that limit his likeability), and the issue of where duty lies is more complex than usually assumed (Stockman very well could decide to focus on his family, and would not be wholly off base for doing that). Finally, his message includes the reality that the majority is more dangerous than the minority when they are ignorant and propelled by self-interest.  

4. 4

What did Arthur Miller's changes to the play entail?

Arthur Miller was attracted to the play because he felt that it resonated with his own time; it spoke to the same tyranny of the majority that America faced in the 1950s when hysterical anti-communism ruled the day. Thus, he adapted the play and staged it, but with a few crucial change. He modernized the language a bit through the help of his translator, he condensed five acts to three, and he rid of some of Stockmann's more controversial language in which he has more critical things to say about the masses. He wanted the play to stay true to the idea that Stockmann was an obvious hero/martyr, and did not want to complicate his character for his readers.

5. 5

What is Ibsen's message about family?

On the one hand, family is celebrated for remaining true to each other and supporting each other during hard times; Catherine and Petra both stick by Stockmann regardless of how bad it gets for them. On the other hand, family does not always translate to loyalty. Kiil and Peter are both happy to throw their son-in-law and brother, respectively, under the bus. They do not care that they are related by blood or marriage; their own reputations are far more important to them. Ibsen keenly notes that family is no guarantee of camaraderie, especially in light of reputation and power. 

6. 6

What are the problems with democracy found in the play?

It is not correct to claim that Ibsen does not like democracy, but it would be fair to note the shortcomings democracy may possess. In this play the people are given the power, but they are people who are ignorant and quick to hysteria and condemnation. They are easily manipulated by authority figures who capitalize on that ignorance and sway the people to support something they perhaps wouldn't naturally support. Thus, everything that happens to Stockmann happens in an above-board manner because the people are making the decisions, but it is clear that this democracy is very, very flawed.

7. 7

Is Stockmann a hero or a fool?

The answer to this question can vary, of course, depending on one's interpretation. There are some who would claim he is a fool, as he stubbornly adheres to his truth, refuses to compromise, and loses almost everything he cherishes as a result. His family will suffer, as will others around him. However, Stockmann could also be perceived as a hero because he is strong and courageous enough to stick to what he knows is right even amidst this adversity. He gives up worldly trappings to uphold truth. He may not be living an ideal life right now, but it is implied that one day he will be vindicated for his actions. Thus, there are elements of both the hero and the fool in Stockmann.

8. 8

What are the conflicting duties of the characters?

It is not always clear what the characters should do, and their various duties often contradict each other. Stockmann is the best exemplar of a character whose various duties are in conflict with one another. He feels the strongest sense of duty to telling and upholding the truth, especially as it relates to his progression as a doctor. However, he also has his family, and Catherine notes that he has a duty to keep them from falling back into poverty. Finally, as Peter informs him, he also has a duty to his town; he should consider the financial straits that the people would experience. Stockmann adheres to the first duty and largely ignores the second two, but clearly the character's situation is far from ideal.

9. 9

What is the significance of Stockmann's speech at the lecture?

Stockmann's speech at the lecture is the closest he comes to speaking the truth about how he feels about the people and what is happening to him. He certainly does not shy away from being honest and angry with Peter and the newspapermen, but his tone becomes derisive and hostile with the people. He criticizes them, in some words, for being ignorant and useless and failing to live up to the promise of the species. He is not content to let them off the hook for their behavior. Part of his speech, especially the tone, is indicative of his frustration, but his actual words are not too far off from the truth.

10. 10

What do the allusions to Stockmann's past mean for the contemporary events of the story?

There is very little actually known about Stockmann's past, but it appears he was in the North for a time and experienced poverty. Catherine alludes to the difficulty of those years, and Peter talks about how he helped Stockmann out. Stockmann, though, refers to this time with pleasure and nostalgia, touting it as a time of purity and resolve. His interpretation of events is a manifestation of his innate tendency to only see things from a certain light -usually a more positive light -and ignore some of the actual duress of the situation. It is telling that Stockmann thinks of the time fondly and Catherine does not, for the contemporary events are quite similiar.