Abstract
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.
Highlights
An Enemy of the People has always been one of Ibsen’s most popular plays, ibseno logy 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
Summary
An Enemy of the People has always been one of Ibsen’s most popular plays, ibseno logy often dismisses it as a revolutionary pamphlet and the critique of the tyranny of the compact majority and the mediocrity of parliamentary democracy. S obzirom na to da je riječ o jedinom Platonovu dijalogu koji se odvija na otvorenom prostoru, zanimljivo je istaknuti da Platon odabire odvesti Sokrata i Fedra upravo do izvora čiste vode, vrela koje je, kao što ćemo vidjeti u nastavku, središnji topos Ibsenova Neprijatelja naroda.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
