Ibsen Studies

ISSN: 1502-1866 (Print) 1741-8720 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/sibs20

IBSEN'S MEN IN TROUBLE: MASCULINITY AND

NORWEGIAN MODERNITY
Chengzhou He
To cite this article: Chengzhou He (2008) IBSEN'S MEN IN TROUBLE: MASCULINITY AND
NORWEGIAN MODERNITY, Ibsen Studies, 8:2, 134-149, DOI: 10.1080/15021860802538918
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15021860802538918

Published online: 05 Dec 2008.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 374

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=sibs20
Download by: [University of Ghana]

Date: 10 October 2016, At: 08:26

IBSENS MEN IN TROUBLE: MASCULINITY

AND NORWEGIAN MODERNITY
Chengzhou He
Ibsen is often praised for his creation of female characters. In 1900
when he is full of fervent admiration for the Norwegian playwright,
James Joyce makes this popular comment: Ibsens knowledge of
humanity is nowhere more obvious than in his portrayal of
women. He amazes one by his painful introspection; he seems to
know them better than they know themselves.1 Ibsens women
are mostly housewives, some of whom are however not satisfied
with being excluded from public life. Confined within the limited
domestic sphere, they are eager to participate in public activities. As
they themselves are often deprived of that opportunity, they try to
achieve their purposes through men, notably their husbands.
However, they are more often than not disappointed or even
humiliated. Under the influence of her motherless, fatherdominated upbringing, Hedda Gabler for example has obvious
masculine ambitions, all of which are nevertheless thwarted in the
patriarchal society. Another interesting example is Mrs. Borkman,
who once lived a public life that Hedda dreams of when Borkman
was president of the bank. But that kind of life did not last long and
soon Borkman was put into prison for squandering a large sum of
public money. After the husband becomes her disgrace, she pins
her hopes on her son: Mrs. Borkman. Yes, Erhart my own good
son. Hell find the way to restore the family, the house, our name.
Everything that can be restored. And maybe something more
(p. 948).2 Her son, however, turns out to be unwilling to shoulder
any responsibility. Like Osvald in Ghosts, he wants fun and joy,
which must be very different from the prevalent idea of maleness in
Ibsens time.
Ibsens men are of many different types, engaged in various
major professions at that time: politician (mayor), manager, doctor,
photographer, priest, editor, professor, writer, architect, financier,
artist, etc. Through a series of representative portraits of men in
# 2008 TAYLOR & FRANCIS

[ 134 ]

DOI 10.1080/15021860802538918

Ibsens Men in Trouble

different professions, Ibsen probes the dynamism of masculinity in
late 19th century Norway and Europe. Ibsen does not simply present
those images, he dramatizes them and their lives, especially with a
double gaze, which means that Ibsen on the one hand idealizes or
romanticizes his male protagonists, endowing them with courage
and knowledge, and on the other remains critical of them, exposing
their weaknesses and the impact of their self-centrism on the people
around them, particularly the women. As a great dramatist, he is a
keen observer not only of the important social changes and
problems at his time but also of the inner tensions of his characters,
including mens desire for self-esteem, their sense of social identity
and so on, all of which are shaped by the bourgeois ideology of
gender and ideals of masculinity.
In contrast to the attention that women in Ibsens plays have
attracted, the male characters have been less frequently dealt with
in Ibsen scholarship. Recently, Atle Kitang in his book on Ibsens
heroism carried out a thorough and inspiring analysis of Ibsens
permanent, yet ambiguous fascination with power and strength.3
Informed by recent studies of masculinity in relation to modernity,
this essay will be mainly focused on the masculinity crisis in some
of Ibsens major prose plays. My basic argument is that Ibsens men
both take advantage of the power rendered them by the patriarchal
system, and are at the same time restricted by the prevalent
concept of the manly ideal and therefore have difficulty with their
self-recognition. Since it is impossible to include all men in Ibsens
plays within this narrow area of research, only a small number of
male protagonists are chosen for analysis, namely Helmer, Solness
and Borkman. This essay aims at discussing the following
questions: What is the concept of manly ideal that those male
characters are concerned with in Ibsens plays? How do they fall
prey to their strong desire for masculine power? In what ways are
they affected during the process of their identification with the
masculine ideal? In other words, how is their tragic fate related to
their understanding of bourgeois masculinity?
The Bourgeois Culture of Masculinity and its Conflicts
In 19 century Europe, the concept of masculinity is closely related
to the condition of modernity. In the era of booming capitalism,
th

[ 135 ]

chengzhou he
men are drawn into a network of social relations that encourage
sets of behaviours we would recognize as typically masculine.
George Mosse argues, The manly ideal corresponded to modern
societys felt need for order and progress and for a counterpart that
would serve to increase its self-confidence as it emerged into the
modern age.4 Success in work becomes a predominant ideal
among the bourgeois men, who are at the same time deeply
concerned about any uncertainty that might affect their power and
social status. The tension between desire for success in work and
family life and fear of failure informs the crisis of masculinity
among men. On the one hand, the crisis of masculinity may refer to
the position of men, often perceived as being undermined in
relation to institutions such as work and family. On the other, the
crisis of masculinity refers more precisely to mens experience of
these shifts in position. The two are interconnected. In Ibsens
plays, men strive hard for success, and failure in a career is
considered a threat to their male self-esteem.
The ideal man in the urban, capitalist society is first of all
someone who can earn a good salary and support his family. In the
19th century, it becomes possible and often necessary for one
member of the family to support the family by working long hours
outside the home, while the woman stays at home with the
children. The breadwinner ethic used to be essential to the family
structure and relationships between husband and wife, father and
children. For men, work not only provides income and security; it
is also a key dimension of their identity and masculinity. Being a
real man means being able to support his wife and family without
her having to earn a penny. So even if she wants to work, for him it
becomes a matter of honour that she doesnt.5 In A Dolls House,
Helmer cannot even bear seeing Nora knitting at home, which he
thinks can never be anything but ugly (181). He would rather see
her embroider because embroidery is nothing but a pastime for
leisured ladies. Knitting is ugly because it is useful.
The polarization between masculine and feminine gender roles
and identities becomes even sharper in the late 19th century due to
increasing industrialization. The feminine plays an important role
in the definition of bourgeois masculinity, which is in most cases
understood as the not-feminine. The separation of work and
[ 136 ]

Ibsens Men in Trouble

home brings about a sharper distinction between the spheres of
masculine and feminine activity: the mans domain of influence and
importance is his workplace, or the world of public affairs. The
domestic sphere, on the other hand, is presumed to belong to the
woman of the house. The successful achievement of a bourgeois
manhood becomes increasingly defined in terms of success within
the male sphere of industry and commerce.6 Women are effectively
excluded from influence, or participation, in public life. But for
men, the doctrine of separate spheres leads to a classic double-bind,
since successful bourgeois masculinity is defined not only in terms
of success in the world of affairs, but also in relation to the domestic
sphere. Success in the domestic feminine sphere is the expected
corollary of success in the masculine sphere of work. Men labour in
the outside world in order to maintain the idealized home, which is
in theory the womans domain, but of which he is overlord. Ibsens
men of success, for example, all seek to present a harmonious and
beautiful picture of their family life. Mr. Bernick of The Pillars of
Society invites his citizens to come to his garden and witness a
harmonious, prosperous and peaceful family life from the outside.
Helmer is not only concerned with his authority at the bank, he
also plays the role of law-giver at home, treating Nora as a
plaything.
What constitutes the core values of masculine ideals in specific
social and cultural contexts has been a much-discussed issue in
contemporary gender and masculinity studies. In his monumental
book Masculinities, R.W. Connell invents the phrase hegemonic
masculinity,7 which has ever since inspired a lot of discussions on
it and masculinities in general. Hegemonic masculinity, which is
distinguished from other subordinated masculinities, is thought to
embody the most honored way of being a man. It is normative and
authoritative, requiring all men to position themselves in relation
to it. Only a minority of men might be able to enact hegemonic
masculinity; while a considerable number of others play only a
supportive role of conspiracy due to the fact that they in one way
or another benefit from the application of that concept. The vast
majority of men are, however, disadvantaged by it and suffer from
self-doubt and diffidence. In Ibsens plays, the bourgeois masculine
stereotype or hegemonic masculinity usually has success in ones
[ 137 ]

chengzhou he
career at its core. Ibsens men generally conform to that stereotype
and make great efforts to achieve their purposes. The stories of
their struggle to success may be different, but all share something in
common, that is, they can make use of every means and endure
every sacrifice for the sake of success in their career.
Throughout history, men have managed to advance their own
interests through the successful manipulation of the masculine
ideal. So far as the bourgeois ideal of manhood is concerned, the
capitalist men create an image of ideal manliness favorable to their
domination and control, which, however, turn out to be restrictive
on themselves as well. In an article entitled La sainte virilite,
Gise`le Fournier and Emmanuel Reynaud say, It has rarely
occurred to men to criticize masculinity. It is their territory, they
identify themselves by it. In its name they undergo all kinds of
suffering and commit all kinds of atrocities, but they do not
question it. They see masculinity as a law of nature. It makes them
feel at ease; it is the proof of their power. They do not imagine that
it could be their prison.8
In Ibsens modern plays, men aspire to become successful by
every means they can make use of. They are afraid of being
unrecognized by modern society. It is clear that they are haunted
by feelings of failure, powerlessness and rage. While manhood
offers them power, satisfaction and confidence, it can also bring
with it emotional autism, emptiness and despair. Most of Ibsens
men fall into this masculine dilemma, which constitutes an
important part of the dramatic tension, social as well as
psychological, under Ibsens pen.
The Male Ambitions in Jeopardy
In Ibsens plays male characters are obsessed with the idea of
achieving success in work, for which they are willing to give up
everything including their health. In A Dolls House, Helmer has
driven himself very hard for several years and even fallen critically
ill once before he finally gets his chance of promotion. Although
the appointment of bank manager will not be formally announced
before Christmas, he is already fully engaged in preparing for his
new position. He plans to kick Krogstad out of the bank, because he
[ 138 ]

Ibsens Men in Trouble

sometimes jokes with him in the office, which he finds irritating
and harmful to his authority. Helmer wants to establish absolute
dominance and power at the bank and he does more or less the same at
home. He does not even allow Nora to enter his study, which he
regards as his own separate space forbidden to other family members,
including his wife. The promotion is indeed crucial to his masculine
pride and identity so that he would not tolerate anything that would
affect his new position. That Helmer flies into a rage at Noras cheating
does appear to be utterly selfish, but it also seems to be understandable
judging by the fact that the loss of position and power is the last thing
he would be able to endure.
The importance of work to masculine pride is also reflected in
the seemingly unconcerned Krogstad. For him, work is crucial not
only in the economic sense he has children to support. Work is
his final chance to keep up his pride as a man and father. The
danger of unemployment and the sense of uncertainty about his
future prove to be a big threat to his male pride. No doubt, he
would repeatedly request Nora to dissuade Helmer from dismissing
him by threatening to let out her secret of forgery.
While the male characters are solely preoccupied with their own
power and social status, the women are wholeheartedly devoted to
their family, giving little thoughts to themselves. When Helmer
was critically ill and had no money to take some holidays in the
warm south, it was Nora who borrowed money behind his back so
that they could make the trip. After Helmers recovery, she alone
shoulders the responsibility of repaying the loan. Apart from
secretly undertaking some part-time jobs, Nora saves as much as
she can from the everyday expenses and the pocket money that
Helmer gives her. Difficult as her life has since become, she has to
and is always ready to put on a happy mood and look like a nave
and carefree doll-wife before Helmer. Like other women of her
time, she willingly plays her role as an obedient housewife, trying
to forget herself as an individual being. In his notes for A Dolls
House, Ibsen writes: A woman cannot be herself in contemporary
society, it is an exclusively male society with laws drafted by men,
and with counsel and judges who judge feminine conduct from the
male point of view.9 Interestingly, it is exactly this gender
hierarchy that Nora is rebelling against at the end of the play.
[ 139 ]

chengzhou he
Noras revolt is foreshadowed in the subversive image of Mrs.
Linde. With her mother and a younger brother dependent on her,
Mrs. Linde has been working hard to support her family. Even her
choice of marriage is made for the sake of her family. As she
explains to Krogstad, she could not help turning down his marriage
proposal because she has a family to take care of. Now that she is
offered a job to replace Krogstad in the bank, she intends to form a
new family with him and to take care of his children.
In many different cultures in which Ibsen has been received,
people are eager to ask: What happens to Nora after she leaves
home? So far the critical concern has always been centered around
Nora and her future. If we have our attention slightly shifted to
Helmer, we would ask a different but equally interesting question:
What happens to Helmer after Nora leaves home? When Nora
leaves behind her three children, she gives the task of bringing
them up to her husband. Traditionally, father earned the income
and mother had to take care of the children. Parenting was what
women did. Men worried about the financial security of their
families, but rarely did they think of themselves as parents Being
a father had little to do with interacting with children.10 Now that
Nora has left, the father has to take the full responsibility for the
children. The idea of fatherhood as well as masculinity is challenged
by Noras gesture of leaving home. It proves in a different way that
Helmers story of success is actually dependent on Noras sacrifices.
The success of Solness in The Master Builder is equally attributable
to the sacrifices of women. He was not a very capable architect in
the beginning, without sufficient training in the profession. For a
long time in his career, he remained a nobody. His success was
largely based on the burning down of the old house of his wifes
family, for which he thought he was responsible. Long ago before
the fire broke out, he had discovered a crack in a chimney of the old
house. But he did not tell anyone about it. Although the fire
actually started elsewhere, in a clothes closet, he felt guilty about
secretly wishing for it to happen. When the old house was burned
down, Solness divided the garden into many small lots and built
homes for ordinary people. He says, homes for human beings.
Snug, cozy, sunlit homes, where a father and mother and a whole
drove of their children could live safe and happy, feeling what a
[ 140 ]

Ibsens Men in Trouble

sweet thing it is to be alive in this world (p. 825). Solnesss building
project becomes a huge success and brings him fame and honor in
his career. But at the same time it causes great tragedy in his family
life. On the night of the fire, his wife Aline contracted a fever in the
cold, which affected her milk and caused the death of their twin
boys. Aline has been totally crushed by losing both her children and
the nine beautiful dolls that were dear to her. Her life has
become tomblike ever since, and she has been more dead than
alive.
Kaja is another woman whom he sacrifices for the prosperity of
his business. As a bookkeeper, she records the debits and credits of
his thriving business. By exercising his hypnotic influence over her,
Solness successfully turns her into his admirer. Although she is
Ragnars fiancee, Kaja falls passionately in love with the master
builder. By making use of her infatuation for him, Solness wants to
keep Ragnar and his father from leaving him, on both of whom he
is dependent in his business. His hypocrisy and cold-heartedness are
vividly revealed in his playing with an innocent girl.
Borkman is no different from Solness in his selfish pursuit of
bourgeois status. In order to have a chance of success, he gives up
his lover and chooses the one who would be useful for his career.
He savours power and domination, for which he would give up
everything, including the woman he loves most.
Borkman. But you have to remember that Im a man. As a woman, to
me you were the dearest in the world. But in the last analysis, any
woman can be replaced by another.
Ella. Was that your experience when you took Gunhild to marry?
Borkman. No. My lifes work helped me to bear that, too. All the
sources of power in this country I wanted at my command. The earth,
the mountains, the forests, the sea I want to subjugate all the riches
they held, and carve out a kingdom for myself, and use it to further
the well-being of so many thousands of others. (p. 986)

For Borkman, love for and by a woman is dear, but not essential to
his self-esteem. The necessity of power is the excuse he uses for
betraying Ella.
[ 141 ]

chengzhou he
Ella. And still you traded me away. Bargained your rightful love to
another man. Sold my love for a for a bank presidency.
Borkman (somberly, bowed down). The necessity was overwhelming,
Ella. (P. 985)

To get power he depends on one man called Hinkel, who also loves
Ella. Hinkel is able and willing to ensure his control of the bank, if
in return he gives up the woman he loves because Hinkel wants to
marry her. Borkman comes to terms with that man. He admits:
Yes, Ella, I did! Because the rage for power was so relentless in me,
do you think? I came to terms. I had to. And he helped me halfway
up toward the enticing heights I longed for (p. 987). He sold the
living human heart (Ella) for the kingdom, power and glory he
desired.
To hold on to ones masculine pride, men desire success at work.
There is nothing wrong in that. That concept of masculinity is
useful as well as constructive for the development of society and
the well-being of the people. Borkman, for example, loves power
and wealth, but at the same time he claims that he would be
delighted to have the power to create human happiness for vast
multitude around him. Borkman. They [the steamers] come and
they go. They make this whole round earth into one community.
They spread light and warmth into human hearts in countless
thousands of homes. Thats the thing I dreamed of doing (p. 1020).
But the problem is that they are overburdened by the bourgeois
concept of masculinity. Their ambitions are jeopardized when they
have made people around them, particularly their lovers and wives,
endure great pain and sacrifices, for which there will be retaliation.
Masculinity in Crisis
Ibsen treats the images of bourgeois masculinity with his usual
double perspectives. On the one hand, he shows how the idea of
being a successful man is the force driving men to anxiously fight
for success. On the other hand, he shows us how the insistence on
success and male power distorts their character and leads them to
their tragic ending. They are both inspired and harmed by the
bourgeois idea of manhood. Atle Kittang in his book also suggests
that Ibsen is both fascinated with the idea of heroism and remains
[ 142 ]

Ibsens Men in Trouble

skeptical of it. This double exposure informs most of the
representations of Ibsens men.
Helmer thinks of himself as extremely manly, and heroic. He
keeps talking about how he would protect his wife as much as he
can. You know what, Nora, often I wish that some imminent
danger threatened you, so that I could risk life and blood,
everything, everything for your sake (186). Nora genuinely
believes in Helmers empty talk. She used to imagine that
Helmer would be heroic and offer her help when she was in
trouble. This is what she means by her repeated phrase the
miracle.11 But in her spirit of self-sacrifice, she says that she will not
accept his generous offer.
Despite Helmers self-aggrandization as a man, the truth is that
he was once saved by his wife. The idea of masculinity that Helmer
lives by is nothing but an illusion. In her book Henrik Ibsen and the
Birth of Modernism, Toril Moi says, the masculine authority in
which he believes is one which he never possessed in the first
place.12 Nora has a secret to tell to her friend Mrs. Linde: She is
very proud of what she has done for the family and her husband.
She says she feels like a man from time to time. And this certainly
gives her joy. Her departure from home is more natural than it
appears. Her borrowing the money, her negotiation with Krogstad
and her making money to repay the debt are all useful preparations.
She has been living a double life, constantly transgressing the
border between the private and public spheres.
In most of the play, Helmer and Nora are indulged in their
idealist fantasies about each other, which are unreal and vulnerable.
Once the truth is disclosed, the dramatic turn becomes irreversible.
When Helmer accuses her of cheating and thus destroying his
future after reading the letter from Krogstad, Nora finally realizes
that the miracle will not happen. She has come to understand
that her acceptance of the masculine doctrine of separation keeps
her ignorant of the world. In her determination to leave and to see
the world, Helmer begins to see the real Nora, who turns out to be
more masculine than feminine. The performances of masculinity
and femininity are rendered unstable and not associated with ones
biological gender.
[ 143 ]

chengzhou he
In contrast to the fact that Helmer is completely ignorant of
what Nora has been doing and thinking, Nora is perfectly aware of
his character: Torvald with his masculine pride how painful and
humiliating for him if he ever found out that he was in debt to me
(136). So Nora has been play-acting her role in the family. Helmers
sense of masculinity, writes Moi, depends on Noras performances of helpless, childlike femininity.13 At the end of the play,
Torvald is rendered helpless when he pleads, I still have it in me to
change. She mentions that she might return if real changes have
taken place in him, which she does not believe. The prevalent
ideology of masculinity is finally subverted.
In The Master Builder, Solness suffers a similar crisis of diffidence
and despair years after his first success, which he regards as a
miracle or my famous luck (825). In his business, he is largely
dependent on the Broviks and calls them a clever pair, those two.
Therefore, he has been worried over the likelihood of Ragnars
starting the work on his own. In order to keep him and his father,
Solness takes advantage of the innocent girl Kaja and her
infatuation with him to postpone her marriage with Ragnar.
Feeling guiltily indebted to them, he lives in fear of their
retribution, which is further embodied in the threat of the whole
young generation.
His fear is coupled with his sense of guilt towards his wife. For
the sake of this success, he pays the price of giving up any home of
his own a real home with children. He destroys the joy of his
wife. Mrs. Solness: You can build as much as you want, Halvard
but for me you can never build up a real home again (816). The
deep feeling of guilt in him is draining out his courage as well as his
hope for the future. Solness: And now shes dead thanks to me.
And Im alive, chained to the dead. (In anguish) I I, who cant go
on living without joy in life (845).
At the moment of his crisis comes Hilda Wangel, whom he met
ten years ago when he completed a church at Lysanger. His hope
for the future is aroused by her arrival. As Aline is the source of the
morbid guilt that ties Solness to the past, Hilda is the source of his
hopes for a future.14 Through fulfilling his promise to do the
impossible to climb as high as he builds, Solness attempts to
overcome his fear of retribution and rebuild a robust conscience,
[ 144 ]

Ibsens Men in Trouble

which is essential to his masculinity. His fall from the top of the
tower proves that he fails to achieve what he wishes for. His wish
cannot suppress his sense of guilt or his foreboding that retribution
is inevitable.
Borkmans concept of masculinity is also rendered problematic.
By converting Ella the woman he loves into capital for career
advancement, and by contracting a loveless marriage with her sister
Gunhild, Borkman sacrifices two women for his work, which he
regards as more important than anything else. In court, Borkman
blames his wife for his ruin because his wife needs too much
money, which is not true.
Mrs. Borkman. How could I know it wasnt his the money he gave me
to squander? And that he squandered, too ten times beyond what I
spent! Yes. I always heard that we had to set the style. So he set the
style all right to a fault! Drove a four-in-hand as if he were a king. Let
people bow and scrape to him, as if to a king . (p. 947)

Later, he also blames Ella for his misfortune. Borkman. He

thought I was behind your refusals your constant rejection. So he
took revenge He used them and that put an end to me, for a
time, at least. You see, all that was your doing, Ella (p. 982).
Because of his failure, he even becomes somewhat misogynistic
Borkman. (full of indignation) Oh, these women! They corrupt
and distort our lives! They completely botch up our destinies our
paths to glory (p. 978). Borkmans evasive attitude towards his
failure betrays the cowardly nature of his character, which is
reminiscent of Hjalmar in The Wild Duck. The excuses that he uses
to defend himself are completely unjustifiable. Borkman, for
example, has never trusted his wife, hiding from her the problems
in his job. Mrs. Borkman. Never one single word to let me know
what his position was. Never an inkling of where he got his funds
(p. 947). In this respect, Borkman is comparable to Bernick in The
Pillars of Society. When Bernick complains that his wife Betty can
never offer him any help, Lona frankly points out, Because youve
never shared your lifework with her. Youve never had an open and
honest relationship with her (102). It is obvious that these men do
not treat their wives as their equals. Instead, the women are
[ 145 ]

chengzhou he
regarded as their properties for showing off their status and power.
This is like what Gerald N. Izenberg writes in Modernism and
Masculinity: A wifes cultural involvement and attainments were
necessary contributions to her husbands social standing and thus
his masculinity.15
His experience of being put into prison and losing power makes
Borkman deeply ashamed of himself. For 8 years, he would not get
out of his salon in the day for fear of meeting people. The burden of
bourgeois masculinity kills him. For Borkman, to be a man one
must have power over others. Working men are not regarded as
real men. Interestingly, he has not given up his hope. Like an
emperor in exile, he waits for a deputation to restore him to
financial command that protects his megalomania from utter
collapse. He might be shocked at his son Erharts view of life. As a
man of a new generation, he does not share the same conception of
man and masculinity. He actually hates the family atmosphere both
with his aunt and with his mother and father. He does not want
work, but joy and happiness. He finds it in Mrs. Wilson, a rich
widow. They decide to leave the local Norwegian community,
which is usually stuffy as in many other Ibsen plays. Erharts refusal
to help rebuild his life for him has stirred in him a desperate fear of
the future and shattered his sense of self-identity, which drives him
out of the house. With an urgent wish to define his own identity
afresh, he walks in the cold winter night to seek for a solution.
Obviously this awareness of self-reliance after his sons departure
does not free him but confronts him with a deep conflict between
his dream and reality. The realization of complete failure bereaves
him of any hope in his life. It was a freezing hand of metal that
seized his heart (p. 1023). Yet, as death is approaching, he has not
completely lost his original vision for social progress. Borkmans
death, as John Northam said, is not devoid of positive meaning in
that he shows himself determined to re-affirm his old vision of
social progress and a possible role he might have played in it.16
In Ibsens plays, public masculinity and private happiness are
treated as antithetical parts of masculine identity and practice. In
fact, the patriarchal society is dominated by a dualism between the
public and the private on which masculinity as well as gender is
often predicated. For men, it is difficult to reconcile career success
[ 146 ]

Ibsens Men in Trouble

and aspiration with emotional warmth and intimacy. At the heart
of the crisis of masculinity, says Antony Clare, is a problem with
the reconciliation of the private and the public, the intimate and the
interpersonal, the emotional and the rational.17 Ibsens men are
unable to solve the conflicts innate in their masculinity, and some
of them choose to die. However, the deaths of Solness and
Borkman, in my opinion, are not tragedy, because the two
protagonists have aroused complex emotions among the audiences
and readers. The endings of the two plays are sad, but not tragic. I
agree with Kittang in that what happened to the two men is
melodramatic rather than tragic. we deal with two protagonists
who cast their critical realism in forms that are more related to
melodrama than tragedy.18 The melodramatic style of many of his
late plays starting from The Wild Duck can be partly attributed to
Ibsens double perspectives on masculinity.
Ibsens portrait of masculinity is an important source for
critiquing the usual interpretation of mens relationship to
modernity, emphasizing mens dominance and capability. Instead,
men are in a complex relationship with the capitalist social and
economic systems, in which they often become alienated within the
capitalist mode of economic production. While working class men
might be more obviously oppressed and alienated by capitalism, the
self-estrangement for middle class men can be equally profound.19
Ibsen in his modern plays dramatizes the alienation of professional
men in the capitalist system. Psychologically, the bourgeois men
under Ibsens pen turn out to be not as confident, brave and
autonomous as they used to appear. We are made to believe that it
is perhaps men, not women, who are the more insecure and fragile
sex. Actually, men in Ibsens plays seem to be in a constant state of
uncertainty about their own gender identities always in a state of
having to prove their male identity. In this sense, Ibsens
observations of men and their inner tensions are no less profound
and illuminating than those of his female characters.
In Ibsens dramatic works there are a number of female
characters who share the male visions of power, for example,
Hedda, Rebecca and Hilde, who are shown to be very capable,
energetic and inspiring. In contrast, men like Solness, Rosmer and
Helmer are, as has been argued, female constructs. For example, it
[ 147 ]

chengzhou he
is Rebecca who builds Rosmer up to what he is at the end of the
drama; it is from her he has his Nietzschean vision of happy,
guiltless noble human beings. In The Master Builder, Hilde has the
power to urge Solness to do what she wants him to do. The power
structure in A Dolls House is completely reversed in the end:
Helmer becomes helpless and desperate, while Nora is determined
and firm. Ibsens men are really in trouble, they either fail to
achieve their goal or even become complete losers.
Conclusion
It is now generally acknowledged that Ibsen is more a poet than a
philosopher. His treatment of masculinity and power is dramatic as
well as poetic. The same theme of manhood in jeopardy recurs
time and again in Ibsens plays. It is perhaps not completely
unfounded to say that what Ibsen dramatized so powerfully in his
plays is perhaps not so much the problem of women as a
nineteenth-century crisis of masculinity. The exposition of fragile
masculinity, its hopes and its weaknesses is just as thrilling and
enchanting as his dramatic representation of modern women in his
prose plays.
1 Quoted in Gail Finney, Ibsen and Feminism, in James McFarlane (ed.), The
Cambridge Companion to Ibsen, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994,
p. 93.
2 If not otherwise stated, all quotations of Ibsens plays are taken from Ibsen the
Complete Major Prose Plays, tr. Rolf Fjelde, New York: Penguin, 1978.
3 Lis Mller, Power and Masculinity (Review on Ibsens Heroisme), Ibsen
Studies, Vol. III, No. 1 (2003), p. 123.
4 George L. Mosse, The Image of Man: The Creation of Modern Masculinity, New
York: Oxford University Press, 1996, p. 77.
5 Mairtin Mac an Ghaill (ed.), Understanding Masculinities: Social Relations and
Cultural Arenas, Buckingham: Open University Press, 1996, p. 107.
6 Michael Mangan, Staging Masculinities: History, Gender, Performance, Hampshire:
Palgrave Macmillan, p. 168.
7 R.W. Connell, Masculinities, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995,
p. 23.
8 G. Fourner & E. Reynaud, La sainte virilite, Questions feministes, 3, p. 31.
Quoted in Gill Allwood, French Feminisms, London: UCL Press, 1998, pp. 4647.
[ 148 ]

Ibsens Men in Trouble

9 James W. McFarlane (ed.), The Oxford Ibsen, Oxford: Oxford University Press,
19601977, v, p. 436.
10 Larry May, Robert Strikwerda, and Patrick D. Hopkins (eds.), Rethinking
Masculinity: Philosophical Explorations in Light of Feminism, New York: Rowman
& Littlefield, 2nd Edition, 1996, p. 196.
11 For a more detailed discussion of this, see Kristian Smidt, Ibsen Translated, Oslo:
Solum Forlag, 2000, pp. 8990.
12 Toril Moi, Henrik Ibsen and the Birth of Modernism, Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2006, p. 233.
13 Ibid.
14 James L. Calderwood, The Master Builder and the Failure of Symbolic
Success, Modern Drama, Vol. XXVII, No. 4 (1984), 616636, p. 619.
15 Gerald N. Izenberg, Modernism and Masculinity, Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 2000, p. 7.
16 John Northam, John Gabriel Borkman and the Swansong, Contemporary
Approaches to Ibsen, vol. 8, 1994, p. 137.
17 Antony Clare, On Men, Masculinity in Crisis, London: Vintage, 2000, p. 212.
18 The Norwegian origial is as follows: ... har vi med to skodespel a gjere som
stype sin kritiske realisme i former meir i slekt med melodramaet enn med
tragedien. See Atle Kittang, Ibsens Heroisme, Oslo: Gyldendal, 2002, p. 245.
19 Mairtin Mac an Ghaill (ed.), Understanding Masculinities: Social Relations and
Cultural Arenas, p. 103.
Chengzhou He, dr. art of University of Oslo, is professor of English and drama at
Nanjing University, China. He is author of Henrik Ibsen and Modern Chinese Drama
(Oslo, 2004) and editor of two other books. His articles appear in Modern Language
Quarterly, Comparative Drama, Ibsen Studies, Perspectives: Studies on Translatology and
other English and Chinese academic journals. His forthcoming book is on modern
Scandinavian literature, mainly focused on Ibsen, Hamsun and Strindberg. E-mail:
chengzhou@nju.edu.cn

[ 149 ]