592 Ibsen, Henrik
manuscript and encourages a frantic Løvborg to
commit suicide. Her husband and Mrs. Elvstd dedi-
cate themselves to recovering the lost manuscript
through reconstruction and rewriting from notes
that Mrs. Elvstd still possesses. Hedda foresees a
scandalous involvement in Løvborg’s death as he
is accidentally killed with the gun that Hedda had
given him. Distraught, she commits suicide.
The play’s apparent simplicity of design and
form and its relatively plain dialogue hides many
layers of meaning. It has been valued as an impor-
tant feminist document for its perceptive social
criticism and psychological insights. It continues to
grow in public estimation and remains one of the
most frequently performed plays with the possible
exception of one or two of Shakespeare’s plays.
Gulshan Taneja
ethicS in Hedda Gabler
Addressing the audience at the Festival of the
Women’s Rights League, Ibsen remarked that
My task has been the description of human-
ity. To be sure whenever such a description is
felt to be reasonably true, the reader will read
his own thoughts and sentiments into the
work of the poet. They are then attributed to
the poet; but incorrectly so. . . . (1880)Despite an artist’s urge to create characters
objectively conceived as organic wholes who would,
much like real humanity, represent a myriad of hues,
works of art often restrict themselves to a limited
aspect of human existence to illustrate major prin-
ciples and eternal truths. Even though there are
multiple levels of complexity in the character of
Hedda, Ibsen, expectedly, tips the balance to high-
light a specific, limited trajectory of his thought on
an issue of major importance.
Depending on how one wants to look at it, the
character of Hedda can come across as a victim at
the hands of patriarchal society, a totally amoral and
self-centered human being, a manipulative individ-
ual, or a victim of circumstance. Yet there is no doubt
that Ibsen’s one major thrust in Hedda Gabler is the
narrow question of the sense of right and wrong
in the context of human affairs. In the character of
Hedda, he projects an individual marked by a total
absence of any notion of ethical interest. No ethical
consideration governs her life, nor does she suspect
any in the lives of people she interacts with. In his
notes on the play Ibsen described her character as
one who makes “Great demands upon life and upon
the joy of life” (1889–90).
Hedda’s choice of George as a husband is moti-
vated by her growing years—she is already 29—a
diminishing flock of admirers, and George’s pos-
session of a villa once owned by the widow of a
cabinet minister. Even though beyond his means,
George secures the villa and goes on a six-month-
long honeymoon to please his bride. Hedda is
bored with George’s academic preoccupations. She
loathes him when it appears that he might not get
the much coveted professorship at the university, as
then she may not have the means to live in style and
affluence. She is convulsed with disgust and hatred
when she discovers that Løvborg, her former lover
whom she had rejected, might secure the much
sought after university position. That a mousy Thea,
her husband’s former sweetheart, Hedda’s one-time
classmate and friend, had inspired Løvborg with
her love and devotion to complete his new book,
which would ensure his superseding George, fires
her anger even more. She herself had rejected
Løvborg’s suit, believing he lacked potential for
social and financial upward mobility. This for her is
now a matter of great gnawing regret. For this she
loathes herself even more. Hedda’s Machiavellian
manipulations result in the destruction of the man-
uscript and she convinces a traumatized Løvborg to
commit suicide.
Løvborg dies in a brawl. Hedda finds herself
trapped in a likely social scandal, as it in her pistol
that Løvborg uses in the scuffle in which he dies.
Her only option appears to be to accept Judge
Brack’s offer and become his mistress to escape the
scandal that could erupt at any moment. Both the
possibility of a scandal as well as personal humili-
ation at the hands of Judge Brack, whom she finds
repulsive, shatter her completely and she kills herself.
Ibsen has no illusion that ethical considerations
must forever remain supreme. He believes that, to a
degree, these are matters of mutually agreed upon
beliefs in a community of people. He makes a per-