The Master’s Fall: The Fall of the Bourgeoisie Through the Fall of Patriarchy

Abstract

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Additional informationNotes on contributorsFarid ManouchehrianFARID MANOUCHEHRIAN recently completed his master's degree in Ibsen Studies at the University of Oslo's Centre for Ibsen Studies. Email: manouchehrian.f@gmail.comNotes1 As Byron Nordstrom notes, until the last decade of the nineteenth century, “Women never reached an age of legal independence,” and “their rights to own property were restricted” (2000 Nordstrom, Byron J. 2000. Scandinavia since 1500. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar], 250).2 The idea that male protagonists subjugate their wife’s fortune in order to advance their social status is not, however, limited to the three plays written from 1892 to 1896. It can be traced back to Ibsen’s very first play, Catiline (1850), in which Catiline sells his wife’s childhood home “for the purposes of bribery” so that he obtains the Senate “consulship” (Ibsen 1970 Ibsen, Henrik. 1970. The Oxford Ibsen: Volume I, Early Plays. Translated by James McFarlane and Graham Orton. London: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar], 53–56).3 The view to which Miller refers is also noted by Maurice Maeterlinck (1905 Maeterlinck, Maurice. 1905. The Treasure of the Humble. Translated by Alfred Sutro. New York: Dodd, Mead, and Co. [Google Scholar], 114–119), and later by Orley I. Holtan (1970 Holtan, I. Orley. 1970. Mythic Patterns in Ibsen’s Last Plays. Minnesota: The University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar], 16).4 As a case in point, Chengzhou He maintains that “Among Ibsen’s last twelve plays, the first quartet […] has been generally known as Ibsen’s social problem dramas” (2003 He, Chengzhou. 2003. “Ibsen and Chinese Problem Drama.” Ibsen Studies 3 (1): 54–70. doi:10.1080/15021860304317.[Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar], 54). See also Michael Meyer (1971 Meyer, Michael. 1971. Ibsen: A Biography. Garden City, New York: Doubleday. [Google Scholar], 512), Thomas David (1983 David, Thomas. 1983. Modern Dramatists: Henrik Ibsen. London: Macmillan. [Google Scholar], 101–102), Naomi Lebowitz (1990 Lebowitz, Naomi. 1990. Ibsen and the Great World. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. [Google Scholar], 130), Lars Nylander (2005 Nylander, Lars. 2005. “Between Desire and Ethics.” Ibsen Studies 5 (1): 105–110.[Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar], 106), and Elizabeth Wright (2010 Wright, Elizabeth. 2010. “Re-Interpreting the Master Builder: A Response to J.S. Hurst.” Forum for Modern Language Studies 46 (3): 297–309. doi:10.1093/fmls/cqq009.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], 303–304).5 Emphasis on biographical, psychological, or existential aspects of The Master Builder can also be seen in Eva Le Gallienne (1970 Gallienne, Eva Le. 1970. “Introduction of the Master Builder 1955.” In Henrik Ibsen: A Critical Anthology Edited by James McFarlane. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd. [Google Scholar], 423), James McFarlane (1989 McFarlane, James. 1989. Ibsen and Meaning. Norwich: Norvik Press. [Google Scholar], 272), Harold Clurman (1977 Clurman, Harold. 1977. Ibsen. New York: Macmillan.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 167–168), Brian Crow (1981 Crow, Brian. 1981. “Romantic Ambivalence in the Master Builder.” Studies in Romanticism 20 (2): 203–223. doi:10.2307/25600296.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], 204), Bjørn Hemmer (1994 Hemmer, Bjørn. 1994. “Ibsen and the Realistic Problem Drama.” In The Cambridge Companion to Ibsen, edited by James McFarlane, 12–26. New York: Cambridge University Press.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 71), Michael Goldman (1999 Goldman, Michael. 1999. Ibsen: The Dramaturgy of Fear. New York: Columbia University Press. [Google Scholar], 44), Theoharis C. Theoharis (1999 Theoharis, Constantine Theoharis. 1999. Ibsen’s Drama: Right Action and Tragic Joy. London: Macmillan Press Ltd. [Google Scholar], 152), and Jørgen Dines Johansen (2002 Johansen, Jørgen Dines. 2002. “Mimetic and Diegetic Space in Ibsen’s Late Plays.” Ibsen and the Arts: Painting - Sculpture - Architecture. Ibsen Conference in Rome, 24–27 October 2001, 133–149. [Google Scholar], 147–148).6 Albeit in a different context, James L. Calderwood argues that “Ibsen’s entire oeuvre, viewed diachronically, can become whole, and wholly understood, only when his late plays beginning with The Master Builder are informed by his earlier ones, uniting the romanticism and realism of the past within their symbolic structures” (1984 Calderwood, James L. 1984. “The Master Builder and Failure of Symbolic Success.” Modern Drama 27 (4): 617–637. doi:10.3138/md.27.4.617.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], 624).7 Jameson’s political interpretation of literary texts is underpinned by his concentric frameworks—the “three horizons” which he identifies as political, social, and historical (1983, 60). My reading of Solness’s symbolic fall takes place on both the political and the social levels. To elaborate, Jameson posits that on the political level, “the object of study […] as the individual work is grasped essentially as a symbolic act” (1983, 61). He further underlines that “a symbolic act is on the one hand affirmed as a genuine act, albeit on the symbolic level, while on the other it is registered as an act which is ‘merely’ symbolic, its resolutions imaginary ones that leave the real untouched, suitably dramatizes the ambiguous status of art and culture” (1983, 66). To understand the literary text as a symbolic act on the social level, Jameson notes that “For Marxism, the very content of a class ideology is relational, in the sense that its values are always actively in situation with respect to the opposing class and defined against the latter.” He remarks that “a ruling class ideology will explore various strategies of the legitimation of its own power position, while an oppositional culture or ideology will, often in covert and disguised strategies, seek to contest and to undermine the dominant value system” (1983, 69).8 It must be noted that the origin of this quotation is from Frode Helland’s book, namely “Melankoliens Spill: En Studie i Henrik Ibsens Siste Dramaer, in which he writes, “For Aline har selve tanken om ‘rigtigt hjem’ blitt en umulighet. […] Hun har hatt et hjem som nå er ødelagt, og ‘det nye’ kan aldri lege tapet av det gamle” (2000, 90). I have used Mark Sandberg’s translation.9 The presupposition reinforcing the notion that the death of the children is Aline’s fault is also mentioned by Orley I. Holtan (1970 Holtan, I. Orley. 1970. Mythic Patterns in Ibsen’s Last Plays. Minnesota: The University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar], 100), Hansgerd Delbrück (2000 Delbrück, Hansgerd. 2000. “Falling for the Sphinx: The Heritage of the Oedipus Myth in Henrik Ibsen’s the Master Builder.” Ibsen Studies 1 (1): 30–53. doi:10.1080/15021860008574040.[Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar], 36–37), Jon Morgan Stokkeland (2016 Stokkeland, Jon Morgan. 2016. “The Poet and the Laws of Life: Narcissism and Object Relatedness in Ibsen’s Late Plays.” American Imago 73 (3): 307–324. doi:10.1353/aim.2016.0016.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], 317), and Yuji Omori (2018 Omori, Yuji. 2018. “A Homeless Architect: Nietzschean Philosophy of the Earth in the Great God Brown.” The Eugene O’Neill Review 39 (2): 279–293. doi:10.5325/eugeoneirevi.39.2.0279.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], 285).10 See also James L. Calderwood (1984 Calderwood, James L. 1984. “The Master Builder and Failure of Symbolic Success.” Modern Drama 27 (4): 617–637. doi:10.3138/md.27.4.617.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], 621) and Gail Finney (1994 Finney, Gail. 1994. “Ibsen and Feminism.” In The Cambridge Companion to Ibsen, edited by James McFarlane, 89–105New York: Cambridge University Press.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 102).11 Among Ibsen’s critics, Eleanor Marx, Karl Marx’s youngest daughter, is one of the first intellectuals who “hailed Ibsen as a spokesman of […] Marxism, Socialism and Fabianism” (Durbach 1994 Durbach, Errol. 1994. “A Century of Ibsen Criticism: Marxism, Propaganda and Shaw, Varieties of Ibsenite Criticism.” In The Cambridge Companion to Ibsen, edited by James McFarlane, 233–251. New York: Cambridge University Press.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 233). For Eleanor, “the ‘miracle’ was Marxist change with its promise of economic and intellectual emancipation for women and workers alike” (Durbach 1994 Durbach, Errol. 1994. “A Century of Ibsen Criticism: Marxism, Propaganda and Shaw, Varieties of Ibsenite Criticism.” In The Cambridge Companion to Ibsen, edited by James McFarlane, 233–251. New York: Cambridge University Press.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 234). As a socialist, she believed that “the struggle is primarily class-based, not gender-based” (Durbach 1994 Durbach, Errol. 1994. “A Century of Ibsen Criticism: Marxism, Propaganda and Shaw, Varieties of Ibsenite Criticism.” In The Cambridge Companion to Ibsen, edited by James McFarlane, 233–251. New York: Cambridge University Press.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 235). Since bourgeois hegemony is inextricably intertwined with patriarchal ideology, in my view, associating Ibsen with only one cause (gender or class conflict) might result in a dogmatic approach to his works. Hence, I suggest that in each of his late plays Ibsen observes his society from different angles and provides distinct symbolic resolutions for social conflicts.12 It is important to note that I do not consider Hilde is a savior of the working class. As I will further argue, I only suggest that one of the interpretations of Hilde’s role is that she has a plan to take back Aline’s property by encouraging Solness to climb of the new house and overcome his fear of Ragnar. Therefore, resolving the class contradiction is just one of the implications of Hilde’s strategy to save Aline from patriarchal oppression.13 See also Richard Schechner (1962 Schechner, Richard. 1962. “The Unexpected Visitor in Ibsen’s Late Plays.” In Educational Theatre Journal 14 (2): 120–127. doi:10.2307/3204527.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 125), Ronald Gray (1977 Gray, Ronald. 1977. Ibsen – A Dissenting View: A Study of the Last Twelve Plays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar], 161), Thomas David (1983 David, Thomas. 1983. Modern Dramatists: Henrik Ibsen. London: Macmillan. [Google Scholar], 123), James McFarlane (1989 McFarlane, James. 1989. Ibsen and Meaning. Norwich: Norvik Press. [Google Scholar], 295), Naomi Lebowitz (1990 Lebowitz, Naomi. 1990. Ibsen and the Great World. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. [Google Scholar], 49 and 135), Benjamin Bennett (1990 Bennett, Benjamin. 1990. Theater as Problem: Modern Drama and Its Place in Literature. New York: Cornell University Press.[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 22), Michael Goldman (1999 Goldman, Michael. 1999. Ibsen: The Dramaturgy of Fear. New York: Columbia University Press. [Google Scholar], 44), Theoharis C. Theoharis (1999 Theoharis, Constantine Theoharis. 1999. Ibsen’s Drama: Right Action and Tragic Joy. London: Macmillan Press Ltd. [Google Scholar],150), and Camilla Chun-Pai Hsieh (2010 Chun-Pai Hsieh, Camilla. 2010. “Control, Surrender and Self-Transcendence: Notes on Shakespeare’s the Tempest and Ibsen’s the Master Builder.” In Ibsen and the Modern Self, edited by Kwok-kan Tam, Terry Siu-han Yip and Forde Helland. Hong Kong: Open University of Hong Kong Press. [Google Scholar], 234).14 Olivia Noble Gunn also argues that tower-climbing is both “confirming and contradicting Solness’s vision, enabling and undoing his plan, mimicking a similarly circular or rising and collapsing pattern in its climber’s at once certain and guilty self-understanding” (2015 Gunn, Olivia Noble. 2015. “The Master Builder’s Tragic Quotidian.” Ibsen Studies 15 (1): 40–65. doi:10.1080/15021866.2015.1087715.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], 56).