Questioning the commonly held assumption in critical reception that Ibsenʼs symbol of the wild duck was influenced by Darwinʼs theory, I want to argue that the wild duck flew into Ibsenʼs play all the way from Platoʼs aporetic dialogue The Theaetetus. Following Lacanʼs reading of Plato, I want to examine the connection between the Socratic position towards knowledge – especially the rupture between knowledge and truth – and the treatment of dramatic dialogue in Ibsenʼs The Wild Duck and Krležaʼs The Glembays.
Although An Enemy of the People has always been one of Ibsen’s most popular plays, ibsenology often dismisses it as a revolutionary pamphlet and the critique of the tyranny of the compact majority and the mediocrity of parliamentary democracy. Instead of focusing on the conflict that arises between the Conservatives and the Liberals, minority and majority, I want to draw attention to Ibsen’s poetic revolt. Building on Derrida’s study of the pharmakon in the Phaedrus, I argue that Ibsen continues to investigate the conflict between the speaker and the listener, between the actor and the audience, between speech and writing.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.