To what extent does Ibsens Hedda Gabler update the conventions of Greek tragedy that can be found in Euripides Medea?

International Baccalaureate World Literature

C. Wild

To what extent does Ibsen’s ‘Hedda Gabler’ update the conventions of Greek tragedy that can be found in Euripides’ ‘Medea’?

‘But now comes the funny part, Hedda. Or should I really say the tragic part!’ From the outset, Henrik Ibsen’s realist play ‘Hedda Gabler’ perverts and mutates the conventions of Greek tragedy which can be found in Euripides’ drama, ‘Medea’. But to what extent does it do this? It can be seen, at least from the surface, ‘Hedda Gabler’ is re imagining Greek tragedy to the greatest of extents, insofar as, in the quotation above, the characters themselves are unsure as to what genre this play, which presents so many Aristotelian conventions, such as the idea of a clear exposition and temporal intensity, found throughout Medea, is representing. In this essay, I will show how Ibsen has subtly and successfully manipulated Euripides’ classic to his own ends, and how, in my opinion, he updates the conventions found therein to a great extent in order to further his own desires of dramatic impact, increase the importance of the character of Eilert Loevborg, and to make the bathetic death of Hedda Gabler allow the audience to truly question the nature of the play.

When answering this question it is vital to consider the elements of farce that make the genre of this text questionable. But for what purpose does Ibsen create such farce? Indeed, it cannot be said that the characters are aware of such reason, as Hedda herself exclaims, ‘Why does everything I touch become mean and ludicrous?’ Her character flaw will even stain upon her death, which shall be examined in the next paragraph. The character of Hedda is placed so as to create both dramatic and comedic moments. Much like the character of Medea, she is ruthless, a beacon of power and masculinity in a world comprised of emasculated male figures and conforming females. But the character of Hedda presents another dimension to the audience, for even though we see Medea as a manipulator, one who is able to shift and adapt her character to undermine and ruthlessly control others, ‘Jason, please forgive me for what I said,’ this is simply all she is. Ibsen updates this convention, one that can be seen in plays such as Electra, and adds a new dimension to it by introducing the concept of farce within the protagonist. For Hedda, the very essence of married middle class life can be considered a farce. Married to a man she considers dull and stolid, she at times wonders to herself why she pursued such a life if only out of boredom, 'It's this wretched poverty that makes life so hateful. And ludicrous. Well it is!'Once again we see how Ibsen has visited the Euripidean tragic convention of the reversal of the sexes, and broadened and deepened its impact. The protagonists share similar emotions, 'It is my husband that I hate' declares Medea, and 'I've been bored to death,'but Hedda shows the wit and sarcasm that befits the contemporary audience, whereas Medea is cold and tragic throughout. Hedda models herself on the tragic Greek heroine, something that will be examined later relating to her relationship with Loevborg, and her obsession with this follows her even to her tragicomic death, a subject that shall be examined now.

This is a preview of the whole essay

The climatic and cathartic death of Hedda Gabler herself is a crucial point in the play to examine in order to fully answer the question. It holds many links to the Greek tragedy that it echoes, as, much like any action during a Greek tragedy, it occurs off-stage. However, there is much more connecting her death with the traditions and conformations of Aristotelian theatre than simply the location; it is necessary to examine the cause, and the farcical final line of the play. Once again the theme of farce is very much present, we see how Brack exclaims, rather than focusing on the horror of the event, is instead shocked at the lack of decorum, 'But, good God! People don't do such things!'Brack considers her death a social lapse, inconsiderate even, rather than a horrific and tragic revelation about the grip of patriarchy. Ibsen has chosen to comment on the rule of patriarchy in this fashion by perverting the original purpose of the off-stage action, which was either for practical purposes, or because, to the Greek audience, the consequences of such actions were far more important than the depictions of the acts themselves. Medea herself can be heard from off-stage before her appearance, 'Oh misery! How wretched I am! I want to die!', and, in contrast to Hedda's off-stage actions, they anticipate the character and her entrance, rather than emphasising the questionable tragic nature of her death. In this way we see how Ibsen not only updates the conventions, by manipulating them for a different purpose, but also uses the tragedy conventions to echo those of his influences, and thus enhance the nature of his own characters and events. With this knowledge, we must now examine the Thespian and wild character of Eilert Loevborg, the one who is admired so much by Hedda for his ability to defy convention and tradition, and to be a true male icon, unlike Tesman, and his Euripidean counterpart Jason.

The role of Loevborg, and his extravagant and Thespian lifestyle, is typical perhaps of a comedic Greek character, perhaps even echoing Bacchus, the God of rejoicing and wine, and indeed, the God to which the festival at which Medea would have been performed was dedicated. But it is the relationship between Loevborg and Hedda that so effect the outcome of the play, and which causes so much interest. For Hedda, Loevborg is the free spirit whom she can mould, to live out the desires that she, terrified of scandal, could never dream to do herself. 'For once in my life I want to have the power to shape a man's destiny,'I believe also that Hedda, much like Medea, believes that women still lack the respect and standing to appear on centre stage as it were, 'We may not have the means to achieve nobility, our cleverness lies in crafting evil.'Thus she must remain behind the scenes, in control, the reason why she threatens Loevborg with the pistols when he makes a pass at her; such breach of control could never be permitted. Again, this control is the reason why Hedda is so elated upon news of Loevborg's death; 'I am saying there's beauty in what he has done,'and why she is so disgusted when she hears how he has really died, wounded 'in the – stomach', an unglamorous end for her Thespian idol.

To conclude, throughout this essay I have attempted to show and explain how Ibsen, in his play Hedda Gabler, has updated and twisted the conventions of Greek tragedy that can be found within Euripides' classic tragedy Medea. I have examined how the death of Hedda, in particular the location and reaction to it, utilises and manipulates convention to create drama and enable the audience to draw their own conclusion from the action. The nature of the Thespian Loevborg, and how Hedda lives through him, shows how Medea's character has been twisted and changed, that Hedda is no longer seeking revenge and equality, in the perhaps two dimensional Euripidean world that Medea inhabits, but also control and success. I believe that there are many ways in which Ibsen has updated the conventions of Greek tragedy, and that it is the use of farce throughout that presents this text as a truly modernised Greek tragedy.