Just a word of warning about Hedda. You probably won’t like her, but she’s a fascinating literary creation. She’s more complicated than you think (if my past experience is any indicator). The actress Kate Burton (daughter of Richard Burton, who was a great Shakespearean actor as well as a movie star and celebrity) called Hedda “a female Hamlet.” I’m not sure I‘d go that far, but she’s more than just a “mean girl“.
There are reasons for everything she does, (although sometimes they are dark even to her). Take the “bonnet incident”. I think you can take her at face value when she tells Judge Brack that she doesn’t know why she does things like that.
Here's the key do understanding Hedda: have you ever really wanted to do something, but then couldn't or wouldn't do it, because -- what would people say?!? Like Hamlet, deep down she may be a coward.
(A still from Heddatron (Hedda Gabler with robots). Cool.
Hello, Leonard’s here, too.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of robots (see the Heddatron image above) committing suicide with some dead general’s pistols borders on repulsive. I don’t know if that actually happens in Heddatron, but the idea is…it’s just the worst. That aside, any guesses as to what disgraced Lovborg in the first place?
Hello Leonard, its Jacob.
DeleteYour question is one that I was going to ask actually. The only idea that I have is that he was faced with public drunkenness charges or even fighting with the police while intoxicated. The only reason I say this is because he was drunk at the bachelor party and fought with the police. It's possible something similar happened previously. Of course however, I could be completely wrong.
Hi Jacob,
DeleteI had nearly the same thoughts as I was reading this. I also thought that he was known as the town drunk, or something along those lines. This is because during one particular scene when he was at the Tesman's house he kept refusing to drink the punch (I just assumed it was an alcoholic punch), as if he was trying his best to maintain his sobriety. Hedda then teases Løvborg about the fact that he's afraid to have a drink because he won't have the courage to stop. This hints at the fact that he could have a drinking problem. Then after Løvborg still refuses to drink it shows that maybe he has changed and Hedda assures Thea that she had no reason to worry that Løvborg would relapse into his old ways. However, Løvborg then becomes offended that Thea would think that of him and he takes a drink. You can assume that he's definitely an alcoholic by this point based solely on the fact that Thea then freaks out that he had a drink and tries to stop him from having another like she knows if he has this drink he won't be able to stop. But then again, I just realized that if everyone knew he was a drunk and that if he has one drink he won't be able to stop, why then did they pressure him into having the punch? Maybe they wanted to test the accusations that he changed from his old habits?
Anyway, this is the one particular scene that came to mind as I was reading your comment so I thought I'd share.
Wow, well I believe you solidified my speculation quite well. To answer (or try to at least) your question, I don't believe the characters pressured him out of malice. I believe they were genuinely trying to make him comfortable in their home. The only reason why Tesman may have pressured Løvborg to drink was because he didn't want competition for his promotion, or even in his field of study. However, this may be a bit of a stretch because I do not believe there was an overwhelming amount of evidence to fully support this claim.
DeleteI recognize that piping up two weeks later may seem a little odd, but...
DeleteBrooke, superb insight. Your explanation blew me (and my question) away. In a word- wow.
And Jacob, I agree with you. Jorgen seems a little naive to me, and I don't think he'd try to reduce Lovborg's competence with alcohol.
So was I the only one who was confused by the ending? Somebody commits suicide and I guess its supposed to be assumed that it was Hedda. But the judge said her gun was with the police, so how would she have gotten a gun in that short time?? She was talking to the rest of the characters, then the next thing they know she's dead. So was it not Hedda that committed suicide? And if it was, I really don't understand how she did it.
ReplyDeleteI believe that it was stated that there was a pair of pistols (perhaps dueling pistols). She had given one to Løvborg and kept one to herself. However, as a side note, does anybody else think that it's odd to literally play with a gun as a grown individual? I mean, she did almost kill the judge if I remember correctly by shooting towards him in a playful manner.
DeleteThe thing that I found weird with Hedda's suicide is that she saw it as her one chance to freedom. It seems as if she felt like the judge had a hold on her, and it is said throughout the play that she does not like scandal, and she doesn't like having her life being held in the hands of others. Because she felt the judge had her in his grasps, she seemed to have felt that suicide was her answer. Does anyone understand what I'm kind of going at? It makes sense, but I guess I don't understand why she would do something that extreme to escape from the scandal. -Tiffany Tran
DeleteTiffany, in my opinion (for however much it's worth to you), you're right. She feels rather uncomfortable in her society as it stands, and being at the mercy of another-- especially Brack, who had been chasing her at one time and could thus be placed "below her"-- was unbearable.
Delete~Leonard
I agree with you completely!! It definitely felt odd to me that she would even feel so uncomfortable in her society, especially when she was desired by so many.
DeleteHi guys! Sorry to comment on this so late, but I agree with both Leonard and Tiffany. While reading the play, I found that put simply, Hedda was bored with her life and the role she played in society. She was not amused by Tesman's efforts to please her, as well as by her husband's profession. It seems as though the sole reason she married Tesman was because it made sense, and marriage at Hedda's age was 'the norm'. Though Hedda seemed to have the ideal life, as she was well off and was highly regarded by men, clearly she was not content. Hedda sought to find freedom. Taking a step back, we can see that she has been the possession of men her entire life. She most likely needed more room to find herself as an individual, before marrying off. As Tiffany mentioned, she feels controlled (especially by Brack), and suffocated in her society. In addition, she refuses to accept her reality (as she does not acknowledge that she is pregnant), and instead sees life through rose-tinted glasses. For example, when Lovborg contemplates suicide, Hedda views it as a beautiful death, mostly because suicide is the only aspect of her life that Hedda can control. Though Hedda's actions seem reckless and impulsive, (such as when she burns Lovborg's book), she simply yearns for freedom, and she does this by rebelling what society views as acceptable. Thus, her final act of suicide sets her free.
Delete~Alyssa Hurlbut
Hey Alyssa! Sorry to reply so late, but I couldn't of put that better myself. I remember this similar theme you referenced as we discussed it in AP English III. I liked that you seemed to have put a twist on the idea of death in the play; that was refreshing. Your words helped to sort the thoughts in my head, so thank you! - Morgan Martens
DeleteI find it rather amusing that Hedda wasn't moved in the slightest over Lovborg's death. She actually seemed quite excited over his presumably suicidal death. I mean, in her state of mind, I probably would be too; she got to twist the fates with nearly absolute power (and as we all know, absolute power corrupts absolutely). And, to avoid any repercussions (either legally or of her own being), she put a bullet into herself. She was probably quite content and resolved with her life and was perfectly okay with letting go of everything, seeing as how she stated earlier that she longed to change a man's fate. Congratulations, Hedda, you have accomplished all you have ever dreamed in your own twisted little world.
ReplyDelete-Michael Marandino
Also, I am not sure if anybody else noticed, but I do believe that Hedda blamed Mademoiselle Diana for what she actually did in most scenarios. For instance, the rumor of Diana threatening Lovborg with a gun was very probably Hedda, not Diana. Diana, it seems, takes the place in history of much of Hedda's interactions with Lovborg. Am I crazy, pointing out the obvious, or am I possibly correct in my conclusion?
DeleteThe thing was Hedda is that she is very manipulative, as we have all seen. Reading your comment after I posted mine really helps clarify the questions I had. As for Lovborg's death, I was shocked to see Hedda reacted so excitedly. I guess I should've noticed it was coming due to the fact on how twisted she is.
DeleteSo I've only read Act 1 so far, but I want to make sure what I'm thinking is correct or not. Hedda married Tesman but she really doesn't love him she loves Lövborg as does Mrs. Elvated. Miss Juliana believes that Hedda is pregnant (as do I for that matter) and Hedda absolutely dislikes Miss Juliana. Then again I'm only on Act 1 so I could be completely wrong about all of this.
ReplyDeleteI believe that is correct, although I think Miss Juliana was hinting about a baby. What I mean by this is that she was postulating about said child and wanted them to have one. I could be wrong though as this was the way I interpreted it and Ibsen could have meant otherwise.
DeleteTo say that she "loves" Lövborg is a bit of a stretch; if anything, I would say the two share an infatuation for each other. As the play continues, you come to this understanding of how broken Hedda's concept of "love" is -- for one, she completely disregards the principles of what marriage is supposed to symbolize by being dishonest and unfaithful with her husband Tesman. Furthermore, it is quite evident that she enjoys toying with the three men (Tesman, Brack, and Lövborg) for their love interest because, to her, its a means to spice up what is her dull life. Maybe at some point Hedda had felt what we know as love towards Lövborg, but in her current state I don't think she is even capable of such an emotion.
DeleteI believe your response is quite true, Jordan. To me, she comes across as someone who knows she is wanted by many men, and she uses that to her ability to create a large amount of lust in her life. And she does it without creating so much scandal. Love is definitely something Hedda is incapable of feeling.
Delete-Tiffany Tran
I agree with Jordan, she isn't able to feel it, I believe she doesn't want to lose the control and invulnerability she has on herself and others. I also think Hedda is ill with boredom. She seems depressed in a way in which she's never satisfied. She's unpredictable, manipulative, dishonest, dangerous and pretty. All ingredients for a snake of a person. I can't remember who suggests to Hedda that she find a vocation, but I agree. It could remove some insanity from her and if she can't find true passion for a person then maybe she could find it in something else.
DeleteI agree with Jordan as well, Hedda appears to be incapable of fully understanding love. She is not in love with Lovborg, Brack, or even Tesman. Of the three men, however, I think Hedda is most fascinated by Lovborg, because he is the most exciting in her eyes. It is clear that Hedda will go to great lengths to rebel against societal norms, so seeing as Lovborg was once an alcoholic and an outcast, Hedda is drawn to his rebellious past the most. She encourages Lovborg to continue acting in this defiant manner, which is illustrated by her nearly forcing him into taking the drink during his visit. To go back to what Jordan said, she toys with the men in order to 'spice up her dull life', and if I were to pick one of the three, I would say Lovborg is the man that she is most drawn to, solely because of his shady past.
Delete~Alyssa Hurlbut
Act 2 notes:
ReplyDeleteHedda is not a very nice person. She's defiantly the women that Lövborg use to talk to. I'm not quite sure what is going on between Hedda and the Judge. I think that this was the authors way of explaining how Hedda feels. She does not love her husband at all and she hates his job. She doesn't like Thea either and she's definitely toying with Thea and Lövborgs relationship. I'm not quite sure but I believe that Lövborg loved Hedda in a sense and wants to know what her true feelings were for him. Now Thea loves him but he only sees her as a friend. Thea is totally and completely afraid of Hedda now and honestly I don't think she can trust her I know I wouldn't. This story would make a great soap opera.
Act 3 notes:
ReplyDeleteSo the men were out late partying and Lövborg got extremely drunk and lost his manuscript and made a fool out of himself, now he can not be seen in public and must leave. So, Hedda must have had some type of "love" feeling for Lövborg because she keeps saying "vine-leaves" and he knew what that meant. So, I'm guessing she hates Thea because she burns the manuscript saying "I'm burning your child Thea" I'm just not quite sure why she hates her, since she saids that she never cared for Lövborg in the first place. And what is this thing with the pistol? Why did she want to kill him once upon a time?
Act 4 notes:
ReplyDeleteI did not see this ending coming. At first I believed that she did not care that it was basically her fault that Lövborg died; although why she gave him the pistol in the first place I do not know. Obviously now we realize that she did feel guilty to the point she felt the need to shoot herself. What a twist!
I think the key thing is to connect Hedda's actions with what she thinks of suicide. She apparently considers it a noble ending, which at least partially justifies why she seemed excited over Judge Brack's report of Lovborg's suicide. I believe she gave Eilert one pistol in order to execute his "noble ending"...and kept the other gun for her own.
Delete~Leonard
Catarena, I love all of the insights you've put for each act! I think that Hedda did not feel any guilt whatsoever in Lovborg's death. I believe that once she found out it might not have been an actual suicide, she panicked at the fact that she was going to be caught up in some huge scandal because it was her gun. While reading, I picked up on the fact that Hedda hates scandal...so much. And so, going off with Leonard said, Hedda saw Lovborg's "suicide" as a beautiful thing. To her, she saw suicide as her only answer to freedom, to avoid such scandals. Just my opinion though :)
DeleteOh this play... I do not believe I have been so irked by a singular character in my entire life. Hedda, in all her glory is by far the most conniving person in literary history. You can most defiantly say she has rubbed me the wrong way. On the back cover of my play book it states " Depending on the interpretation, Hedda may be portrayed as an idealistic heroine fighting society, a victim of circumstance, a prototypical feminist, or a manipulative villain. " My question to you is how can she be anything other than a manipulative villain? The odds of being anything else are most definitely NOT in her favor. Example one~ she "mistakes " Miss Tesman's bonnet for the maid's bonnet. However, we learn it was not a mistake, and she only did it for the sheer pleasure of doing so. Example 2~ she basically forces Thea to tell her the real reason she is at Hedda's house, and the most horrifying thing is she gets Thea's name wrong in the process showing she does not care at all about Thea. Example 3~ she plots to have a "triangle " love affair with Judge Brack and her husband. Example 4~ she burns Lovborg's manuscript , not because it is his and she feels it is competing with her husband's work, but rather because it was also Thea's work as well. When Hedda burns it she also pretends as if she is burning Thea's child. Example 5~ She gives Lovborg a pistol and tells him to commit suicide in a beautiful way.
ReplyDeleteI know this has been rather a rant on how much Hedda bothers me, but when I am done seething I will post about the play overall. That is all for now!
~Jenna Minto
I think some might say "a heroine fighting society" due to the customs for women during that time period. For decades before and decades after 1890, it wasn't likely women had jobs of their own and many would often be conflicted with being an individual. I can kind of see Hedda in that sense, but I 100% agree with you Jenna. She rebelled against her expected role in society, but in a horrible way. She might have been fighting but it wasn't for a cause, it was for herself. She definitely is no heroine.
DeleteI completely agree Jenna! I quite frankly find her to be more of a villain than a heroine. Along with all of the examples you have highlighted, I couldn't help but notice all of the times Hedda spoke under her breath or quietly laughed to herself during the pivotal points in the play. I found these acts to be outrageously manipulative and equally as aggravating. It was almost as though she was taunting the other characters with their very own secrets. I understand that the time period was different, and she may have felt suffocated in her situation, but I am struggling to find any reason as to why her actions should be celebrated and her character should be praised as a heroine.
Delete-Jenny Jacobs
I agree, to a point, with the idea that Hedda is more of a villain than a heroine, but there are aspects of her life that make you wonder just for a second what you would do in her situation. I mean, I don’t think any of us would necessarily act as drastically as Hedda did, but there’s definitely more to her than what’s on the surface. I realize this seems to contradict a lot of my original post (which I still stand by), but I find the situation too complex to take a strictly black-or-white stand on. When you take the time to think about it, there’s a point in Act II when she’s talking about George’s respectability, and it seems like she marries him out of convenience. In her head, I believe she does see her marriage as a logical choice, despite the fact that it isn’t what she wants and makes her long for her old Gabler life back. In essence, her attempt to find a comfortable life causes her to settle for mediocrity, and thus, she is miserable. And the classic “head versus heart” struggle is something universally relatable. Of course, it doesn’t negate the fact that she’s at least a little delusional, but it’s something to consider.
DeleteWhile I definitely agree that a lot of her actions were overly drastic and cruel, I think her motivations could still lead one to consider her a heroine, especially for this time period. In my opinion, Hedda feels absolutely trapped by a society in which she is given very little control over her own life. Her feelings were probably aggravated by her pregnancy, which, despite her refusal to acknowledge it, is taking even more control away from her. Even her body is no longer her own, and she knows that once the baby is born, she will forever be thought of as a mother instead of her own person. Because she is losing control of herself, she takes every opportunity to take control of others. She embarrasses George's aunt to get her to leave, to prove that she is in control of her house. She manipulates Thea, because she needs to have power over someone. She destroys the manuscript because she can, and in that moment had absolute control over something. Finally, when she sees that Brack will have her under his control for the rest of her life, she kills herself in one final act of defiance. The last thing she could control in her life was her death, and as her life is spiraling out of control around her she is still able to die "beautifully." To me, all of her actions show a women desperate to rebel against a society that is crushing her. I would argue that because of her motivations, she could be considered a heroine, albeit a deeply flawed one.
DeleteNow that I have been thinking about this play ,it has occurred to me that I cannot figure out exactly why Hedda despises Thea.. suggestions?
ReplyDeleteLifelong envy beginning at childhood, or just her hostile personality, perhaps?
DeleteThea's slightly younger than Hedda, had spent time with her ex "comrade," was valued intellectually by him. But that doesn't explain childhood dislike obviously. I think jealously is just inevitable when it comes to some girls.
DeleteI do believe it was possibly jealousy! Otherwise Ibsen may not have taken the time to describe her beauty as she enters the Tesman household.
DeleteI think I have to agree with Elena on this matter. I believe that Hedda is completely jealous of Thea. Whether it be because she spent so much time with her, the fact that she has true feelings for him, or even the fact that he could be developing feelings for her. Either way I think that Hedda doesn't want to share Lovborg even though he isn't even "hers" anymore. Also, I think that since Thea and Lovborg wrote the book together, they share a bond that Lovborg and Hedda probably never had. Lastly, (I read this book awhile ago so I'm not 100% that this actually happened but I think it did) Thea told Hedda that her relationship with Lovborg wont work out because he still has feelings for a past lover (Hedda). With her deceitful mind, she probably realized that even with everything Thea tried to do for Lovborg, he still liked Hedda more. With this, she was probably cruel to her because she knew that she was better than her. Again I could have made up that last part, but I do really think that's something Hedda would do.
DeleteI think there could be another reason for Hedda to hate Thea so much. Hedda is desperate to get control over her life, and cannot stand the thought of being controlled by a man. However, because society dictates that a woman must marry, she was forced into a loveless marriage. I think that to Hedda, Thea represents the ideal Victorian era housewife. She is very beautiful, feminine, and is not as headstrong or stubborn as Hedda (though she does leave her husband, showing her courage.) Hedda resents the society she is a part of, that subjugates her to just being a housewife. However, Thea willingly devotes herself to a man. Maybe, Hedda hates Thea because she represents all that Hedda cannot stand in Victorian society, and represents an ideal that Hedda will never live up to.
DeleteMolli I absolutely love your insight on this!
DeleteTo add on to Mollis intuition on the topic of Hedda resenting Thea due to her Victorian housewife aura, if I remember correctly, Thea had left her husband and declared to Hedda that she was never going back. I believe that the main reason for Heddas bitterness towards Thea is due to the fact that Thea was able to do what Hedda wants to do. Hedda is clearly unhappy with Tesman and does not desire to be with him for an extended period of time. Thea was able to have the courage to leave her husband and not go back. In addition, Thea found someone who she seems to actually love and long to be with and that happens to be Lovborg. I believe that Hedda wishes that she had the audacity to leave an unhappy marriage and be with a man whom she actually yearns to be around.
DeleteIn the scene where Hedda, Mrs. Elvsted, and Lovborg are sitting drinking punch with each other and confidential information is revealed about Elvsted by Hedda she reminds me of a character from Gossip Girl. Speaks as if every sentence is planned out, like there's something up her sleeve. And Hedda obviously is trying to either create or destroy something between Lovborg and Elvsted.
ReplyDeleteI take it the punch contains alcohol? Lovborg continuously refuses any until he and Elvsted become flustered. Then he's drinking it like he never even questioned it.
I'll have more to say as I finish it later, but that particular scene is what grabbed my attention most so far. Conversation is like an art, and so can manipulation be, sadly. And Hedda's too good at it.
After reading Act I, I get the sense that Hedda is a very shallow, spoiled girl. From the way she criticizes the lighting in the room, the maid's hat, and the piano, it seems that she focuses on the negatives around her. When she says that the piano doesn't match the drawing room, she decides that she wishes to buy a new one and move the old one to a different room, rather than simply exchanging the old one. This shows her affluent stature and her arrogance.
ReplyDeleteFrom Act I, Hedda is being portrayed as an arrogant, spoiled girl. Simply by the way she talks to her own husband shows that she's harshly quick to judge, an example being how she talked about Miss Rysing's hair choice, or her husband's past relationship standing with her. Being this kind of person, she seems to put Tesman in an awkward spot when he talks to her in even a casual conversation and keeps him on his toes in a way, just constantly thinking about the correct thing to say.
ReplyDeleteGood Lord, what a play this was. The love and absolute loathing I had for Hedda was awesome. Just her ability to manipulate the characters and just throw so much shade and get away with it was wicked in my opinion. The way she had Thea wrapped around her finger and was toying with her when she was teasing Lovberg just made me love her character. I'm not saying I love the cruelty but the way that she would wield her power and come off as so innocent was what made me want to keep reading. *Spoiler About the End* I am a little unsure about the ending though, I understand that Hedda shot herself but the motive behind it is what gets me. A part of me wants to believe that it was being a victim of her circumstances made her act out and become so manipulative and conniving. Then confronted with the death of the one person she shared some bond with gone she couldn't live anymore. The other part of me believes that Hedda, thinking she had such control of Lovberg, thought he wouldn't kill himself, but when he did she lost the one thing she controlled in her life. Hedda thriving the entire play of being able to control others then losing all control and even saying she was a slave to Judge Brock drove her to suicide.
ReplyDeleteHi Jordan,
DeleteYour opinion on the ending I think is fascinating. I never thought of it that way. I think that you make a really good point about the fact that she finally realized that she couldn't control everyone, and that was something that she really didn't want to learn. I think this (in her mind) could be a reason for suicide. Also, she kept talking about how beautiful Lovborgs death (and we all know how cold and dark Heddas life was) so maybe she finally wanted something beautiful for herself? I don't really know. I think the ending can be interpreted so many different ways and that's what makes it such a good ending.
I really struggled with the ending too, but after reading some of the comments on here I have to agree with both of Brooke's theories. I cant rationalize any other explanation for Hedda's suicide besides the fact that she needed to have control. Throughout the entire play Hedda is portrayed as a higher class being that Tesman is lucky to have. Equally portrayed is her boredom and uneasiness with living a simple life. I don't think Hedda believed she could stay with Tesman in their current situation and remain of such high esteem, and thus resorted to her incredible manipulation and cruelty. In my opinion, when Lovborg is unable to deliver the beautiful death she had wished for, she decided to take matters into her own hands. What really struck me was when she was spoke so highly of Lovborg for being courageous enough to take his own life. I think Hedda felt her own suicide would give her the best of both worlds, so to speak. She would be "courageous" enough to do it herself and die a "beautiful" death by her own standards which would forever be remembered. I hope this makes a little more sense!
Delete-Jenny Jacobs
Jordan I really like your interpretation of the ending, I never thought about it like that. I also agree with Brooke that the ending is good because the ending can be interpreted in so many different ways.
DeleteAfter reading this play I can honestly say that Hedda is one of the most interesting characters I've read in a long time. Her whim to just do whatever for the sake of her own amusement does make her self centered, but it also makes her entertaining to read. I thought Ibsen did a fantastic job developing her character. By the end of the play I could predict how Hedda would react to certain events. Did anybody else see the end coming? I thought there was no other way the story could have ended, then with Hedda killing herself. I wasn't shocked at all because throughout the whole story Hedda is unhappy and generally disappointed with her life. Then once she felt as is she was a "slave" to Brack, I knew she was done for. Did anyone else see this ending a different way? -Gabby Heilman
ReplyDeleteI also believe that there was no other way that the story could have ended. Throughout the book, she is utterly un-satisfied with her life. It would be impossible for there to be a fulfilling ending without Hedda's death because of her inability to be fulfilled in life. It was clear to me that this death would come in the form of suicide as soon as her idealistic views on the subject were revealed.
Delete-Lora Giguere
I believe the best part of this play was definitely in the development of Hedda’s character. I was surprised by her ability to make me dislike (maybe even despise) her so much. Hedda came across as both dishonest and manipulative to me, and I found myself wondering why Henrik Ibsen would give us a character like that. At times, I was shocked by Hedda’s response to different events as well as the actions she took throughout the play. I felt that Hedda is deceitful throughout the entirety of the play as she tells very different things to the other characters with whom she interacts. Along with this dishonesty she exhibits, Hedda seems able to manipulate just about any other character in very selfish ways. In all honesty, I did not predict the ending of the story taking the dark turn it did. However, after Lovborg’s suicide, it became apparent to me that this death greatly distressed Hedda. It seems odd to me that Hedda sees suicide as a thing of beauty when she told Lovborg to end it all. That was, perhaps, the most startling moment in the play for me. I wondered, as I was reading this section, what it would feel like to see this play on the stage. It seemed odder still that Hedda would choose to kill herself because she did not strike me as a character who would choose this fate. She seems like a powerful character (along with being deceitful and manipulative). Ibsen created a truly compelling character in Hedda.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was reading this Hedda reminded me so much of Regina George from Mean Girls. Hedda seemed to believe that the entire world revolved around her and that the world had to exist in the exact way she wanted it. I found it surprising that despite her iron grip on the lives of everyone around her, she was bored beyond belief. You'd think that she would have gotten more entertainment out of being a puppet master to her friends and family. I also found it interesting that Hedda was her own worst enemy. She married Tesman, a man who could never meet her expectations, because she was “tired of the single life”. If anyone would do, why didn't she pick a man of her own social and financial status? Instead she’s “slumming it” with Tesman and then she complains about it. I really wasn't surprised when she committed suicide. Her superficial version of life would seem quite bleak if her control was slipping in the way that it was towards the end of the play.
ReplyDeletelol, Regina, yes.
DeleteI honestly have to say this is my favorite comment on this blog so far. I think that your interpretation of it is absolutely perfect. The fact that she literally has everything she could ever imagine and shes still bored and unhappy is basically a huge "upgrade" on the saying that everybody wants what they dont have. In a way it makes her relatable but at the same time it makes her unrelatable because of the fact that she does take it to another level.
DeleteTurner, I really agree with your interpretation of Hedda's marriage. I do think that she deliberately chose to marry Tesman knowing fully well that he wouldn't live up to her expectations. This is cruel of her, but also expected. She is twisted enough that this is an act of normalcy. Marrying "beneath" her also probably gave her the amount of ammunition to be able to guilt-trip and manipulate those around her. Her air of superiority and disconnectedness added to this as well.
DeleteYes! This is completely accurate. I also find it very surprising she wan't more entertained by the fact that she could literally control everyone around her. I guess some people can never be pleased. I do agree with Aziz in the fact that she married beneath her because it gave her access to people she can easily control. If she had married someone with a little more confidence and superiority than Tesman, she couldn't get away with half the things she does throughout the story.
DeleteHedda was one of those characters that you hate as a person and love as a character. Any book/play that can make you angry is a good one, just like dramatic television shows and movies that make you try to talk to characters on the screen into making the right decisions. In small ways, I can relate to Hedda, as a girl. I haven't lied to loved ones, persuaded a friend to kill themselves, and I'm not very picky about home furnishings, but there have definitely been times in my life where I've been so utterly bored and desolate that I've done stupid, somewhat random things for no other reason other than to fill the void. Hedda was clearly depressed into insanity.
ReplyDeleteI don't often like reading plays, but as I began reading I found myself not wanting to take a break. Good play.
Well, after a few days of thinking- props to Henrik Ibsen! He has successfully been able to immerse a bunch of 21st century high school students in a play written in 1890! Although I am not very fond of Hedda, and her conniving ways, I couldn't put the play down. Ibsen creates her into an unlikable character, but I was always shocked and unaware of what she was about to do next. That takes a lot of skill.
ReplyDeleteAbout the ending~ I can't say I was too surprised, especially after Brack taunted her with being in his debt. Suicide to Hedda was also a romantic and tragic way to die; she did not think of it as cowardly. It was the only other thing she could control at that moment as well because if she committed suicide it would be by her own free will and Brack could not have any say either. So,overall, it was an intriguing play, and most definitely not boring.
Ok, so I just started getting into this blogging thing. It was intimidating, I admit. Let me just say, I found a ton of these comments fascinating, and I’m probably going to reply to them after I post this, so consider yourself warned. Hedda’s character in this play eluded me a little bit at first– certainly the central conflicts and themes of the story revolve around her, but she’s not your stereotypical protagonist. Going into the play, I expected to truly feel for Hedda. I anticipated that she would be the type of character whose inner turmoil (about which I knew little at the time) would evoke compassion in me as a reader. Both the foreword and the blurb on the back cover (of the edition I read from, at least) drew attention to Hedda as a victim of her time and circumstance. I can’t deny this per se, but certainly my foremost opinion of Hedda was not that she was a hopeless and lame casualty of the Victorian era. In fact, I didn’t feel much sympathy for her at all, shocking myself a little with my lack of pity for her. It’s not that I expected her to be a likable character ; the aforementioned foreword pretty clearly indicates that she’s not going to be an upstanding character. Mr. Mac let us know in his intro above, too, that we probably wouldn’t like her. For some reason though, I expected that I, a product of a more modern and radical age, would feel some sympathy for Hedda as a woman. After all, in her time, it can be safely said that women, on the whole, were oppressed within society. Regardless, I found myself detesting Hedda for most of the play, which seems to be pretty common amongst us. The ending, however, confounded me, in the same way that it seems to have confounded at least a few others. Like I said, throughout the play, I felt little sympathy for Hedda. She came off mostly as superficial and devious. At times, she was even threatening and scary. In the end, when she committed suicide, though, I did feel bad for her a bit…just not in the way I expected to. I didn’t necessarily sympathize with her plight; moreso, I thought she was a bit pathetic in her absolute need for power and control. Her existence largely revolves around her ability to manipulate and strike a sort of fear within those who surround her. In the end, it almost seems as if Hedda interpreted the judge suggesting (in reference to her supposed death wish) that “We say these things, but never really mean them…” (102) as a challenge. When she felt that the judge had gained power over her, it pushed her over the edge in convincing her to regain the upper hand. Perhaps more importantly, if she did the unexpected, she’d evade the social norm. Nonetheless, I’ve read that pride can be the ugliest trait, and it seems to ring true in Hedda’s case.
ReplyDelete-Emma Fay
Also, while I'm thinking about it, what did you all think of Tesman (George)? I’m not sure that this is necessarily central to the heart of the play, and I know he’s not as despicable as Hedda, but I thought he was frustrating nonetheless. I can't quite put my finger on why, but I found his character to be strangely offputting. Maybe it was the way he was so in awe of Hedda while simultaneously seeming sort of oblivious to her true character. Thoughts?
ReplyDelete-Emma
I found George to be, put blatantly, a rather ignorant, lovestricken, and reckless/uncareful character throughout the play. I think I know exactly what you are saying, Emma. We all know the expression "ignorance is bliss," and I believe George Tesman to be the poster child for this expression.
DeleteI'm reluctant to pin bad adjectives on Jorgen (George in your edition), though it's plainly obvious he was something of a fool. I, too, get the sense he was ignorant, but I disagree-- ever so slightly-- with Mike here. He was naive, I think. He didn't really do his "homework" when it came to ascertaining Hedda's character. This could very well have been due to being "lovestruck". I'm not absolutely certain if he was reckless...after all, while courting Hedda, he (at least in my translated edition) walked her home after dinner. That was observant of contemporary social norms; it wasn't some illicit back-door approach.
Delete~Leonard
So I'm not really sure why I think this, but through the entire play all I could think of was that Jorgen was desperate. I feel like he knows he "got the girl" that everyone wants and now he desperately doesnt want to loose her so he does anything to make her happy. Because when you think about it, he literally did everything for her even some of the things that the reader wondered why he did. I dont really think he loves her, I think, like I said, he just wanted to be married and have that sense of love just like Hedda did (at one point). I know this is completely out of the box thinking and I'm probably wrong, he probably is just oblivious, but thats honestly what I thought so I thought Id share.
DeleteI felt bad for George at times but mostly I just found him irritating. He was a flake; his opinions were all over the place. He was jealous of Lovborg but he wanted to help him. He was dedicated to his career but he was willing to drop everything to re-write the manuscript. He was horrified Hedda burned the manuscript until she told him why, then he was happy. George's inability to have a backbone was almost as frustrating as Hedda.
DeleteGeorge was very bland to me. He was so desperate to please Hedda all the time. I understand that a husband should please their wife, however, his actions desired attention for her. To me, it wasn't out of love: it was more "lovestruck" like most of you guys said. His character was very annoying.
DeleteI agree, Tiffany. George was a somewhat boring character. He spent his life trying to please Hedda, rather than being his own person. He also seemed extremely naive, in that he never acknowledged any suspicions regarding his wife's past with both Brack and Lovborg.
DeleteI agree with Alyssa, he was very naive and almost childlike. He would sway in any direction someone would push him and I think that's one reason Hedda probably married him, she can control him as she pleases. He also probably liked the idea of having the perfect wife, the wonderful home, being the perfect husband. Not much personality there, most likely done so to make room for Hedda's. I'm glad there's discussion on another character rather than Hedda, it's just as interesting analyzing the way other characters interact with her and why they're a certain way. Reading these, I learned things I didn't really take the time to notice before.
DeleteHis character genuinely made me angry. How can someone be that blind to how cruel Hedda is. How does it not bother him that she treats his family badly? I know he is blinded by his love for her, but still his character was a tad annoying in how dumb he was. I was also put off from his character by how jealous he was over Lovborg. It made him seem a little pathetic. With all of this being said, I did think he had a redeeming quality of being a good person. He cared about the people he loved very dearly. He also didn't destroy Lovborg's book when he found it, and after Hedda destroyed it he tried to help recreated it. He had a really good heart, he is just really oblivious.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI found Hedda’s reaction to Lövborg 's death interesting. Her excitement might stem from knowing that she had control over it and that she had power over the situation, and as we all could tell, Hedda was very conscious of power. Knowing it was her pistol that killed him and her actions that lead him to do it was probably the leading factor of her excitement and not the fact that he was dead. Her obsession with power can be seen in the way she killed herself. No note, no goodbye,she just takes the gun and shoots herself. She’s not trying to make a statement or manipulate anyone, it is a pure act of what she sees as self defense, albeit, an extreme one. This shows many character traits like selfishness and brashness. I was also impressed with Hedda’s ability to just be plain annoying and childish. Most of her actions are intended to spite or disrespect someone else. A prime example of this being when she fires randomly in the general direction of the Judge. She may not have been aiming, but that doesn't mean it wasn't entirely dangerous. One wrong shot (or probably lucky from Hedda’s perspective) and the play would have had an entirely different plot that revolved around her direct murder rather than an indirect one.
ReplyDeleteI was just reading through all these comments and I couldn't help but enjoy reading this one! I love your description of Hedda being brash ! Just thought I would tell you I liked your comment.
DeleteThanks!
DeletePersonally, I really enjoyed this book. Hedda is twisted, and definitely bored with her own life. Going on her honey moon and realizing Tesman has something to be invested in besides her, probably just pissed her off. Tesman has a passion where as Hedda has just had money to buy her entertainment her whole life. Definitely a wake up call, but also well deserved since she isn't the type to follow her own heart.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I also wanted to say that I think Hedda putting the bullet through her head says something. She could've done the deed plenty of other ways. But I think it had to do with her being involved with everyone's business. Her mind was just flooded with it all, and she just couldn't bare it. I'm just ranting, I don't actually know why she chose to put a bullet through her head and not her heart, or stomach, etc. But if anyone has any insight on that please do share.
-Meghan Noble
I mean, punching bullet holes in any vital organ would achieve the same physical effect.
DeleteEven so, I find it interesting that you connected the whole mental imbalance deal to Hedda's choice of...target. It vaguely reminds you of how you'd rub a sore shoulder (after a rough day of tumbling, perhaps) to ease the pain, in the sense that you're targeting the affected area. Granted, suicide and self-administered massages give you different results, but I can kinda see what you're saying.
If you want to take it even further, her heart is really quite empty-- empty of guilt, empty of any deep passions, etc.-- so maybe she chose to, uh...aim elsewhere.
~Leonard
Loved your insight on the book Meghan! And Leonard, your comment was spot on. I definitely agree with both of you. And Meghan, I never thought of Hedda's suicide to be of utmost importance, and the fact that you connected her mental state to her head (place of target) really changed my view on her death.
DeleteI think you're on something with that, Meghan. I kept trying to somehow connect her suicide with her telling Lovborg to "do it beautifully." I had wondered if she thought she was doing it beautifully. And when she said "beautifully," I couldn't tell if she meant in a modest way, like in a way with not much gore and mess, or if she meant like dramatically or theatrically. Then again, Lovborg shot himself in the chest if I recall? Around his heart? and in contrast Hedda shot her head. I think both says something about each character, and they're differences. Lovborg had passion for his work and what it seemed for Hedda, while Hedda was heartless. I could just be pulling things out of nowhere, it may or may not have been intentional from the author. But I still wonder if Hedda wanted to and thought she was doing it beautifully, dramatically, in a way to remember. Thank you guys for making me think more about her suicide. Like Tiffany, I wasn't thinking much of it either, I was expecting it throughout the whole book and didn't really concern myself at first.
DeleteElena, I will admit a great length of time has passed since I read the play, but I think Lovborg wasn't shot in the heart. Judge Brack just made that up to comfort Thea. I think what actually happened was that Eilert was shot in the abdomen, so it was presumably messy.
DeleteI don't think the revelation of the truth about the circumstances did anything to help Hedda. Her idea of "beautifully" was shattered-- she gave Eilert the gun for the "noble act"-- so in a sense she lost control over that, too, furthering a sense of hopelessness.
And we're glad that we could give you some insight!
~Leonard
It seems like most of what could be said has been, but here's my take
ReplyDeleteHedda was clearly bored with the life she lead, from childhood until she committed suicide. I agree that her actions were of power craving; she said, to Judge Brack I believe, that she wanted to have complete power over someone. This stems from her lack of control her entire life, but she is drastic about it(which I think may be one of the things that makes her such an interesting character.) People as a general whole don't think this way. To go to the extreme extent that she did as to lead Eilert Lovborg to kill himself, and to follow it up with her own suicide, leads me to believe that there is also a mental aspect to her actions. From learning about antisocial personalities in Criminology, she seems to fit the bill. She tried to manipulate and control everybody, and took her opinions to extreme measures. For her, it was easy to put people under her spell so to speak, because of her beauty.
She definitely did make an interesting character to depict. Her actions were often unpredictable, and slightly disproportionate to what we would deem reasonable. The part where she told Judge Brack that she was glad that he didn't have control over her foreshadowed her suicide when she later realized that he did.
Happy rest of summer everyone!
Nick
This is so spot on, I feel like you read my mind!! I just wanted to let you know that I really appreciated your post. I just feel like I have the same take you have and I just wanted to let you know that!
DeleteThanks Meghan! :)
DeleteI totally agree with you, Nick! She never wanted to live the life that was living, and in that era of time, women had barely any self-sufficient rights. They had to be escorted by men outside of the home. Hedda had always wanted the freedom of her own life, but could never truly reach it without the manipulation of other people.
DeleteAlthough i found Hedda to be a twisted and miserable human being, i really enjoyed this book from start to finish. I was in awe by some of things Hedda said and did but figured that is just the type of person she is. She often said different things to two different people, thus showing her tendency to untruthfulness but also exposing her need for power. She thrived on the fact Tesman thought she was trying to please him and in return, Tesman went to great lengths to try and please her back. The ending displays her incredibly twisted need to control, as she provides the pistol that Lovborg uses to kill himself. She is thrilled with the fact he went through with it, as if she thought that was the ultimate show of courage. In the act of killing herself, no one would be able to have any power over here and she is making one last statement about the type of person she is. Anyone who has taken psychology would have a field day analyzing Hedda and Tesman alike.
ReplyDelete~Grace Lavertu
This blog is really cool, because every time I look on someone has said something insightful that I would have never said.
DeleteYou are so right! I like the way you phrased it, that she needs to be in control. It's the simplest explanation for all of her actions throughout the play, from the bonnet incident to her suicide. You can analyze the play all you want for her intrinsic motivation and look for something fancy to credit, but really, that's what it is, that she just feels the need to be in control of everything in her life.
Serena Lotreck
I know that Hedda's marriage is based off societal pressures and not love, but I cannot bring myself to feel any sympathy for her. In Act II, when Ejlert guesses correctly that Hedda does not love Tesman, it is clear that he did. I find myself feeling more sympathy for him because the girl he loved was taken and is now unhappy and his method of coping is by alcoholism.
ReplyDeleteI am just finished with Act II and I have noticed something rather disturbing. Hedda seems to have a strange obsession with guns, pistols to be more exact. She plays with them at home and it is revealed that she threatened to shoot Ejlert with them when their friendship became too serious. A possible prediction of mine is that this obsession with guns may cone into play at the end, with either a murder or a suicide.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading on into Act III, I have seen myou prediction come true, although not with the correct character. Although Hedda gave Ejlert the pistol, I thought it would be her who would be the one to do the honors.
DeleteNever mind. I was correct from the beginning.
DeleteOkay so after reading the play, the first thought that came to my mind was the title. The play must be titled "Hedda Gabler" (Hedda's maiden name) rather than "Hedda Tesman" for a reason, right? My first rationale would be that though the play is set in the present, Hedda's aristocratic upbringing serves as the platform of reasoning for why Hedda is so bored with the mediocre society that she now lives in. Hedda also refuses to allow Tesman to see them as partners, and though she is technically bound to Tesman by marriage, the play portrays Hedda functioning as an individual. She acts in her own best interest, rather than coinciding with the "Tesman unit". Maybe there is more to the title than what I am seeing though. Any other insights?
ReplyDelete~Alyssa Hurlbut
I completely agree with you. That's what I was thinking too. Mr. Mac's description on the paper for the books said, "Shouldn't the book be called Hedda Tesman?" And I thought, no, I think it's called Hedda Gabler, because yes, she doesn't want to acknowledge her marriage with Tesman. Hedda's actions, her manipulating, the way she is, I'm guessing is how she had always been as a single woman. And being married, I think, has her stressed, she feels like she's lost some control. Doing what she did, messing with Lovborg and the people around her, that wasn't something done by a married woman, a settled woman, that was something done by the part of Hedda that was dying for her independence, that was done by an immature, young, crazy girl. Not a woman, a girl. I can't tell if I'm making any sense. I'm glad you brought up the title.
DeleteThe book isn't about a married woman, it's about a maiden at heart, a young, reckless girl unhappily confined in marriage.
DeleteYes, that makes sense, I completely agree! Naming the book Hedda Gabler, Hedda's maiden name, does introduce Hedda as more of an immature young girl, rather than a content, dependent married woman. I didn't think of it that way until I read your comment!
DeleteI think the play is titled Hedda Gabler rather Hedda Tesman becaus while Hedda is married in a legal sense, she is still a maiden. She does not love Tesman. Rather, she has a certain affinity for Ejlert. By titling the play Hedda Gabler, Henrik Ibsen is portraying the idea that she is still free to have her romantic affiliation with Ejlert.
DeleteOn my copy of the play there is a small excerpt stating that the reasoning for Ibsen's choice in title was most definitely so she would be portrayed as her father's daughter than Tesman's wife .
DeleteAlright, I am about to write my essay and I read Hedda Gabler at the way beginning of the summer and I forgot some of the plot. So, I went on SparkNotes to read the plot summary, and it said that it was "apparent that Hedda was pregnant". Like I said, I did read this awhile ago, but I honestly don't remember reading anything about Hedda being pregnant. I think I remember Mrs. Tesman hinting if they were going to get pregnant but I never knew she actually was. Did anyone else catch this??
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't say that it was "apparent"; in fact, it was kinda obscure to me and I only learned of the possibility once people started blogging.
DeleteMy advice to you is to turn a blind eye to that aspect of Hedda's life/character unless it's crucial to your paper.
~Leonard
Ya it took me a while to figure out that she was pregnant as well, but in the beginning of the play when Tesman kept pointing out how different Hedda looked and Hedda continuously avoided his comments, I figured that there was something weird going on. After reading further and finding out that Hedda wanted to avoid the reality that she was faced with, I started to realize that she might have been pregnant and not wanted to accept this...if that makes any sense! I guess you could kind of tie that into your essay if you talk about how Hedda could not bring herself to face or accept her reality.
DeleteI too thought that Mrs. Tesman was hinting at her getting pregnant, because Mrs. Tesman wanted to take care of it. I remember Hedda getting annoyed at her for that, but I don't think she was pregnant.. I could be wrong, who knows.
ReplyDeleteThat is exactly what I thought. I thought she said something like "oh whens the baby coming?" almost as a joke like any mother (or aunt) would say to a newlywed but I didn't think she was serious.
DeleteThere are several instances in the book where they hint that she is pregnant. For instance, it is repeatedly mentioned that she has "filled out" over her and Tesman's honeymoon. In the final act, after the news of Aunt Rina's death, Tesman and Hedda have a conversation where she says, "I suppose I should tell you that we're going to have--" and then cuts herself off, telling Tesman to talk to his aunt for an explanation--the woman who has repeatedly dropped hints about children. Whether this confirms that she was pregnant or not, it definitely raises the possibility.
DeleteI agree with Shannen, especially because in the very beginning, they're talking about what they're going to do with rooms in the house, and they're talking about some specific room and Aunt Julia says something similar to, "Well you'll have a use for it soon *wink face*" and Julia seems to know what's going on.
DeleteI would have to agree with Shannen and Serena. From the very beginning I had a feeling something was going on, especially because of the way Hedda never really acknowledged any of the comments or hints regarding the topic. This led me to become suspicious of Hedda because I thought that maybe she was trying to hide the fact that she was pregnant.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI didn’t like Hedda. There, I said it. I actually hated her, if I’m being completely honest.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I love this play, and I found Hedda to absolutely and hauntingly fascinating.
It was mentioned several times in the book that she was raised by her militant father. From a young age, she wasn’t taught the conventional teachings a young girl would be, instead learning to ride horses and shoot. Her entire life, she was exposed to the strict confines women were expected to adhere to, but was raised in a manner that was a stark contrast, and that provides insight on why she craved and expressed desire for individuality. She wanted independence and freedom, but she also wanted to protect herself--which is why marrying Tesman was so safe. He would leave her be, and provide her with whatever she wanted, without demanding any mutual emotional connection, because he was happier imagining her love than living the reality that Hedda felt nothing toward him.
This also ties into why her relationship with Lovborg was so complex. Her initial connection to him was simply to get information. Through his stories and sense of adventure, Hedda could live vicariously through him, and get a sense of the freedom from social boundaries that she had always desired.
Once married to Tesman, she didn’t have any stimulation. Tesman was a scholar, someone who would not be adventurous, or live life “bravely” and “courageously” as she thought someone should. Tesman was content with his books, and his studying.
She had imagined so much more, and every one of her dark and distorted actions were her attempts at gaining control of her life, especially since she felt so out of control with her pregnancy. I’m not saying this excuses her actions, especially when she prompted Lovborg to kill himself. But I am saying that every action, while not immediately rational, are understandable in a twisted sort of way.
Killing herself at the end was her last attempt to be “courageous” and take charge of her life. To leap out of social boundaries, and mark herself as an individual.
“People don’t do such things,” Brack had said. But that was the point. Hedda wasn’t like any of those people. She was one of a kind.
This post doesn’t even begin to acknowledge everything that I think of Hedda, but it’s a start. I could spend hours talking about her, and her actions, because honestly, she is far more fascinating and complex than what is at the surface, and it’s exciting to delve deeper into her mind.
See I completely agree with everything you said.
DeleteBut I like Hedda.
I don't really know what it is that I like so much about her. I didn't really like her at first, and even when I finished the play I still wasn't really sure what I thought of her.
But then I started the essay.
I chose the topic of comparing the two female leads. Admittedly, I wasn't exactly sure what had just happened when I put down the play after reading it straight through. I didn't particularly get attached to any of the characters, and didn't understand the motivations of most of them. I didn't quite know what to think of Hedda, and I didn’t really understand what had happened. But as I began to search through it again, looking first for my essay points and later for quotes to support them, I started to unravel all the knots. Because of the way I chose to write my essay, the comparison points that I chose, I really had to delve deep into who Hedda really was, why she did what she did because of the way her life turned out. I think you worded everything I said much more eloquently and concisely, but doing my research for the essay really helped me understand the play much more. And for some inexplicable reason, I really like Hedda.
Maybe it’s that she actually is a strong female character, whereas Eustacia is completely defined within the limits of her relationships with men. Maybe it’s that she’s looking for something completely unnamable, undefinable, and I relate to that. I don’t really know, but I like her all the same.
Serena Lotreck
The ending of this play reminded me of one of my favorite books we read in AP English III, The Awakening by Kate Chopin.At the end of that book,which also takes place in the Victorian era, Edna walks into the sea, committing suicide. Her suicide was her one final act of defiance against a society that did not allow her control over her own life. Throughout the book, Edna attempts to define herself as a person outside of her marriage and her children. However, she eventually comes to the conclusion that she will never be able to find a place in society that accepts her, so she takes her own life in a desperate attempt to free herself from society's demands. To me, a lot of that was echoed in the ending of Hedda Gabler. Hedda spends the play desperately trying to gain control over something in her life, even if this involves cruelly manipulating others. Because of women's role in Victorian society, Hedda did not have control over her own life. She had to marry George, because society dictated that women had to marry. Then, she became pregnant. This took away any control she had left over her life. She refused to acknowledge her pregnancy, and had to know that as soon as she gave birth, her entire life would be dictated by her position as a mother. In both works, children represent women's constraints in society, constraints that both Hedda and Edna longed to break free from. Ultimately, Hedda also takes her own life, in what I believe was one final attempt to gain control over her life. She is able to die how she wanted to, "beautifully." In both Hedda Gabler and The Awakening, the protagonists choose suicide, as they both believe it is their only option to break free of society's expectations for them and finally have control over their lives.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking along similar lines when I was reading and thinking about this play. Your statement was very thorough so I am not to sure how much I can add to this idea except for one small detail. I remember Mrs. Morrison had talked about how the age that the two stories take place in (as you said, the Victorian Era) were the pinnacle of class and society. However, I find it ironic that while these times were viewed as such, they were very much gilded. Chopin and Ibsen both recognize this fact by showing how their leading ladies (if you will) handle themselves. They were forced into a society with very stringent rules and their lack of control over their lives led them to their respective ends. The social rule of the time forced them to outwardly appear well put together, yet it is evident that they were mentally falling apart.
Delete-Jacob Burns
I agree with Molly, Hedda committed suicide as an act of defiance against her society. In this way, Hedda and Eustacia in The Return of the Native are similar, as they are both slaves of their realities. While Hedda's main goal was to escape the hold that society had on her and the mediocrity that she had mistakenly settled for, Eustacia's goal was to escape the Heath and the restrictions that it placed on her. Both women could never be satisfied under their circumstances, so they chose to free themselves by performing that final act of suicide. A smaller detail that tied the two together would be the fact that they were ignorant to the value of money. Eustacia wanted to escape the Heath, but finally realized that she needed money to do so. Hedda, as well, mocked her husband for having been so concerned with welfare (most likely due to the fact that she was raised in a wealthy family, so she never had to worry about money). That being said, Hedda and Eustacia wanted to escape reality, but were ignorant as to the practicalities that were necessary to aid in this escape.
ReplyDeletePersonally I really enjoyed the play. While in the beginning I could not really get into it, by the end I could not put this play down. I was so intrigued by Heddas attitude and how she manipulated the other characters. The way that Hedda toyed around with Mrs. Elvsted while at the same time playing with Lövborg really captivated me. I also found it interesting when Hedda gave Lövborg the gun and told him to commit suicide. I thought that this foreshadowed Heddas own suicide. Thus at the end of the play I was not that surprised when Hedda shot herself because along with what I said before she was also playing around with her pistols the entire play and was not happy with her marriage.
ReplyDeleteYeah the entire scene when Lovborg and Hedda were talking about suicide being a "beautiful thing" was major foreshadowing. However I think that the reason Brack knew it was Hedda's pistol edged her on to ultimately kill herself as well. Wonderful twist in the play.
DeleteAt the end of the story, when Brack was explaining how Ejlert had taken his own life and Hedda said that it was a thing of beauty, my first reaction was to realize how twisted she really was. However, upon giving the subject more thought, I came to the conclusion that Hedda envied Ejlert for killing himself. He was unhappy with his life, as was she. He had the courage to take action, though. She wanted so desperately to escape the trapped life that she lived but was not able to do so. When Ejlert took the matter into his own hands, she looked at it as a heroic act of bravery. Thus is why when Brack told her how Ejlert had accidentally shot himself on the stomach rather than purposefully in the chest, Hedda was disappointed.
ReplyDeleteI think that Ejlert's death inspired Hedda's suicide. She was too afraid to take matters into her own hands, but upon seeing that it could be done, she gained the courage to end her suffering in her unhappy marriage.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Hedda was encouraged by the example set by Lovborg. When Brack was explaining how Lovborg killed himself and Hedda was so strangely taken by the "beauty" of it, I think it gave her the push she needed to realize that it was a plausible course of action for her to take as well and one she could feel good (in her twisted way) about
DeleteI hate to contradict anything but Hedda was the one who originally handed Ejlert her own gun and told him to commit suicide "beautifuly"... therefore it would have been her idea in the first place? Although Hedda is cowardly, she is also brash and impulsive
DeleteWhen it come's to Hedda's suicide, I am inclined to agree with Jenna and believe this is not the first time that she has thought about the premise of killing herself. To me, Hedda was portrayed as a very volatile character who was not afraid to take matters into her own hands when she deemed it necessary. One of the first major instances of this is when the reader learns about how Lövborg's former lover threatened to kill him with a pistol (we later find out this was Hedda attempting to murder Lövborg). Clearly, Hedda is not afraid to take the life of someone else, and perhaps this is the result of having a military figure as a father. Regardless, Hedda was in a downward spiral from the beginning of the play, and I found it only inevitable that she finally decided to take her own life. With a baby on the way, she knew she would become anchored to the dull Tesman, and to her this meant a life of complete unhappiness. With Lövborg now dead, there were less and less options for her to escape her life of misery. Perhaps in that sense Lövborg's suicide catalyzed her own death, but I don't believe it gave her any more courage than she already had to end her own life. -- Jordan Shea
DeleteIn agreement with Pieter, Hedda's attitude fascinated me! Throughout the entire play Hedda seemed distant from the other characters and from her true personality which she had hidden. This allowed the reader/audience to insinuate her true attitude and I believe that for me, personally, that added to my interest level of Hedda as she took on the role of the main character throughout the play. Hedda's inability to connect with her inner-self ultimately led to her tragic death, which I also agree was foreseen.
ReplyDelete-Devan Carmody
This isn’t really about the play itself, but I thought some of you might find this interesting.
ReplyDeleteJ. M. Barrie (The author of Peter Pan) actually wrote a parody of this play back in 1891. It takes place after Hedda’s death in a future where Thea and Tesman are married. However, Thea is unhappy with her marriage because of her desire for promiscuity. There then is some dialogue between her grandfather and herself, and eventually her grandmother, who decides to break away from the confines of being a good wife, and free herself from a life she’s unhappy with. They then mock the idea of dying “beautifully” by getting Hedda’s pistols and arguing over where the most poetic place to shoot oneself is.
Even though it is a parody, I feel like it emphasizes some of the most important parts of Ibsen’s play: Hedda’s desire for freedom, her choice to end her life in order to gain control, her unhappy marriage to George, and George’s ability to be love Hedda blindly and ignore her faults.
Here’s a little rhyme that Barrie wrote in the play:
“You, take a Hedda, you’re a toff
She’s like her pistol, she goes off
Of Ibsen women, boys beware
They all have vine leaves in their hair.”
If any of you are interested in reading it, it’s called "Ibsen’s Ghost" or "Toole Up to Date". If you go on Google Books and look up Delphi Complete Works of J. M. Barrie it will be in there.
That's so cool!
DeleteThe rhyme does a really good job of concisely summing up pretty much the entire play.
I'm impressed, Barrie!
Serena Lotreck
Hedda's death in this story is a hot topic on this blog. In my opinion her suicide was caused by Brack now being able to control her. At the end of the story Brack admits to her that he knows that the pistol used to kill Eilert was hers. He says he will keep this information to himself however. Hedda then realizes and tells Brack that she is now under his command because of this knowledge. Brack insures her it will not be used as leverage, but shortly after Hedda kills herself. This need for control was foreshadowed earlier in the book. During a conversation between Brack and Hedda, Hedda tells Brack that he has no dirt on her and cannot control her. Brack admits this is true and says she knows everything about everyone. Hedda needs to be able to control everyone she knows with the dirty secrets they tell her. She acts like their friend and uses it against them as leverage. However, when she loses her leverage against Brack and realizes he has gained some against her, she doesn't know how to function under the circumstances. Finally, she decides to take her own life. I'm not sure if anyone else agrees, but this is how I interpreted her death.
ReplyDelete-Connor Parent
Connor, I agree with your theory that her suicide was caused by a lack of feeling control, but I think that there was more to it than Bracks control over her. We watch Hedda struggle through much of the book with this problem; not just with Brack. I feel as though throughout the whole book Hedda struggles to get a grip on her life and feel some sort of control. She feels like she can't escape her loveless marriage, and that she has no control over that. She is scrambling to get even an ounce of what she feels like is control the whole book. Regarding the "bonnet incident", Hedda exhibits her inability to even control her own actions and words. She is aware that she shouldn't be saying these things, but for whatever reason she cannot help herself. This poisonous habit of hers is a prime example of her lack of control.
ReplyDelete"Poisonous" is a strong word. While I don't disapprove of its use, do you consider it toxic to Hedda, the people who surround her, the readers of the play, or some combination of the above?
Delete~Leonard
After reading both the works this summer I would have to put this play in second place to the novel. I feel that many of the problems I had with it steamed from it being a play. The problem I have with plays is I find it very difficult to read a play to oneself and thought it would have been much better if done in a group, seen performed, or if it had just simply been a novel. Another thing I found was how short it seemed, even for a play, something which I think comes from most of the “action” in it was characters talking behind each-others backs. The characters themselves were decent enough but after reading Return of the Native I think my opinion of them is lesser due to how similar they were between books yet how much better executed it was in the novel, and that itself isn’t really a gripe with the play as they simply don’t have the same amount of time to establish characters as a novel does. One thing I did find slightly ridiculous was the over exaggerated actions and dialogue of the characters seemed, which I can understand as it is the only way to convey emotions when performing, but nonetheless was still a bit too much when reading. Though I wouldn’t necessarily call this book bad by any means, I feel that much of the glamor of it was lost in reading rather than seeing it performed.
ReplyDelete-Ian Cook
I agree. One of the things that frustrated me about this play is the fact that much of the action happened away from the main character, Hedda. She didn't really do a lot, and only heard about what other people did while she was at home. The only action that occurred was when Hedda burned Lovberg's book. Even her suicide was only heard, not seen. I think that if the play was performed, the audience would witness more of the events firsthand and perhaps gain a greater understanding of the positions of the main characters.
DeleteWhile I probably wouldn't put the play second place to The Return of the Native, I do have to agree with you that the play was rather short. Because of this, we as the readers missed out on a lot of possible character development as the majority of the characters stayed fairly linear throughout the whole story. Maybe its because I haven't read the book in so long, but I can only recall Lövborg undergoing serious changes to his character. Can we really say that Hedda changed at all significantly during this play? To me, it seemed that she started off the play as a lonely and miserable women who would manipulate the three men (Brack, Tesman, and Lövborg) in order to feel some sort of satisfaction in her life. She knew that a life with Tesman would be a miserable one, and with Lövborg dead, her chances of being happy were becoming slimmer and slimmer. I feel that Hedda ended the play just as she began it as a miserable women looking for a means to be happy. Perhaps she realized that this happiness could not be found in life, and decided to find it in death. This being said, I do not think she changed drastically throughout the play; I merely think she just became more and more desperate. -- Jordan Shea
DeleteI agree with Ian because I too feel as though it's hard to follow when not being "performed" as a play.
ReplyDeleteI believe that this play was very good. I liked it from the start mainly because I was so caught up in the fact that I strongly disliked Hedda. Right from the start, Hedda was just very annoying. Her rude behavior to everyone was extremely irritating, from being angry at the open shades and making the comments about Aunt Julle's hat. As the play went on, she got increasingly strange, playing with guns and pretending to shoot Brack. Her strange behavior was at an all time high when she made Lovborg promise to commit a beautiful suicide, instead of trying to convince him to stop. All of her behavior kept me into the story and made it very easy to see that she herself was going to commit suicide at the end. As messed up as it was I believe that her personality is what made the play intriguing.
ReplyDeleteI found that I enjoyed this play and found it very interesting. However, Hedda's character was very irksome to me, which, in turn, made the play slightly less enjoyable at times. But, just like Steven said, I feel that her actions are part of what kept me intrigued during the play. Also, I thought that the plot of the play, meaning its characters and their conflicts as a whole, was very interesting. I found that part of it was similar to The Return of the Native in that there were former relationships jeopardizing current relationships. In The Return of the Native, there was the whole fiasco with Wildeve and Eustacia while she was with Clym, and in this play there was Hedda and her former relationship with Lovborg creating a few problems in her current marriage with Tesman. Also in the play there was Thea hoping to recover her relationship with Lovborg even though she was already married. These conflicts were interesting to me and they were another part of the play that kept me intrigued. As a whole, I thought the play was well put together and interesting.
ReplyDeleteI personally found this story to be very engaging. Hedda, as a character, was certainly despicable and unlikable. With this being said, there is quite a bit to take in. The title of this work is Hedda Gabler, Hedda’s maiden name. The significance of this is reflected in Hedda’s relationship with her husband. It is very clear that she doesn’t love him, and is manipulative and unfaithful towards him. The usage of Gabler and not Tesman, her married name is representative of this lack of loyalty. This can be seen in her insistence of the purchase of expensive items and her particular manner of living, one that intimidated both George’s elderly aunt and the house maid. Hedda definitely knew that her social status before marriage was higher than that of her husband’s, as her father was the famed General Gabler, and she almost uses this against him to guilt him into trying to please her every wish. I believe she does this out of sheer boredom with her life and pride. Hedda pursues somewhat suggestive and inappropriate relationships with the men in this story, albeit in different ways. She definitely does this, as many others have stated, to exercise a sense of control over as many people as she could. Her burning of the manuscript destroyed both the hopes of her husband and Eilert, and as Molli wrote earlier, represented her final act of defiance against society. Hedda could not simply leave this world whilst being at the mercy of the Judge. She needed to be in control, and felt that this could only be achieved by death.
ReplyDelete-Aziz Sandhu
While it the burning was an act of defiance against society, I think it was more a defiance against the people that she surrounded herself with. The burning of the manuscript was extremely symbolic. In her eyes, it represented everything that she didn't have. By burning the manuscript, she was destroying the life's work of Eilert, and Thea--whom she hated because she was willing to defy society like Hedda wanted to, and was happy when Hedda wasn't. The manuscript represented the labors of Thea and Eilert combined, and she had rage and envy over the accomplishment. By burning it, and forcing Eilert to tell Thea that he was lost their life's work, it gave her a twisted sense of control, as well as satisfaction to see Thea crumble and realize her work had amounted to nothing. But like you said, true control could only be achieved by her death.
DeleteThere so much insight on this blog that added to my understanding of the play. I came to the conclusion, like many others, that Hedda's need for control is what drives the premise of this story. I also thought that it was interesting that her father was a famed General because the military is so oftentimes associated with order and discipline. Maybe her upbringing as the privileged General's daughter had to do with her psychological mindset and necessity for control that led to her death. Also, she died by a gunshot, perhaps another nod to the military? Just a thought, I found this connection to be interesting.
ReplyDelete-Aziz Sandhu
I never thought of the military connection and I think that's a really interesting way to look at it. That kind of rigid upbringing could have effected Hedda's behavior as an adult.
DeleteThat's so true. Thanks for this new perspecitve Aziz!
DeleteI think you're right about the military influence. As her father was essentially a "man's man," she grew up learning how to ride horses and shoot. Instead of learning the traditional womanly lessons that were imposed upon females in the day, she was trained to have masculine qualities, which carried over into her adulthood and made it difficult for her to be a "wife." Since her father was a General, and she was raised in a household without much compassion, she learned how to be independent and an individual. When she married George and was forced into a role that was the opposite of her upbringing, I think that would also be why she was so desperate for control.
DeleteAlso, since this is a play we obviously don't get insights into the thoughts of the characters at all so that may be more the reason that this detail about her father is so important. It may be another explanation for the title and how its her maiden name. Thanks for the feedback guys!
DeleteI have a question. I was flipping back through the play, and I found a scene that confused me. In the beginning, after George's aunt left, he and Hedda argue over her use of "Miss Tesman". Hedda refuses to call her by her first name, but concedes to call her "Aunt". This confused me because wouldn't calling her by her first name be more impersonal than "Aunt"? George insists that since she's part of the family now, she should call her by her first name, but I don't see how "Aunt" isn't more familial than her first name. If someone would try to explain this to me, I'd be grateful!
ReplyDeleteSo I think I have this mostly right: The confusing part comes from how the culture was different during the time the play takes place. First names were, and still somewhat are today, considered informal or to be only used with people you know very well, this was especially true during the late 19th century when the play occurs. During the time it would have been rude to call someone you barely knew by their first name as that would normally be reserved for close friends and family. George must have seen Hedda still referring to his aunt on a last name basis as cold and unfriendly since Hedda and her are now family and he must have thought that Hedda calling her by her much more personal first name would likely improve he relationship between the two. Settling to call her "Aunt" however would have been a middle ground as aunt/uncle can refer to someone who is related to you or someone not related to you, the latter being more of a title or sign of respect than anything else. This way calling her "Aunt" would be ambiguous to which one Hedda was referring, making it less formal the Miss Tesman's first name but more personal than just "Miss Tesman".
DeleteThat makes so much sense! Thanks so much, Ian!
DeleteI enjoyed this play and found the characters quite interesting, however the way Hedda and the other characters in the play interacted I found to be very strange. Hedda seemed to be rebellious and believe people should go their own path and against society. The way she acted however seemed psychopathic. She did not care for anyone else and only wanted to have control over people. She did not care that Lovborg killed himself, and in fact led him to do it. She also treated everyone else horribly, with underhanded comments or just outright insults. Most of the other characters however, did not seem to really take notice save a few times. I find it hard to believe anyone would associate themselves with Hedda the way she talked to people, let alone that someone would actually marry her. I also found her beliefs of rebellion to be hypocritical as she leeched off of everyone else, living off of Tesmans money and living in a house paid for by Tesmans aunt. Everything she does is cause trouble to everyone around her, even in her death the only thing she accomplished was causing pain for Tesman. The author did do a great job of making me hate Hedda and pity the other characters in the play. The only one I liked was Brack, as he was smart enough to beat Hedda at her own game, leading to the death of the character I hated. I did enjoy this book and believe it is a great insight into life and the culture at the time.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading this play, it held my attention throughout. I can't decide if Hedda was insane or absolutely evil. I can not think of a character in a book that I have hated quite as much as Hedda. She can only be described as a manipulative gold digger who used everyone around her to get what she wants. Hedda was a terrible person and how Tesman could not have caught on to her true personality after being alone with her for six months is mind blowing. Hedda cared about no one but herself and in the end when Brack had outsmarted her she would rather take her own like than have someone else have power over her. I personally did not see her taking her own life coming and was very shocked and relieved at the same time to see her go. Hedda used everyone around her as pawns and it made for an interesting read but I still can't get over her hatred for everyone around her, even the people she supposedly loved.
ReplyDeleteHedda showed a complete disregard for caring about other people's feelings and how she treated people, even those close to her. It seemed to me like Hedda just saw everyone she knew as a tool to just boost her own social status or for her own personal gain. She showed almost no respect for her husband throughout the entire story. When George's relative was dying, he asked Hedda to come with him to see her. A normal compassionate wife would have not questioned this request and would have followed him and shown her deepest condolences. However, this is not the case with Hedda as she simply states that she does not know her well enough to really care. This lack of simpathy and compassion along with her constant manipulation made her character very hard to like, but making me want to read more as i constantly wondered what her nex play was.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I also noticed Hedda's lack of respect for her husband and his family at the beginning of the play, when she insulted his aunt's hat. She also refused to call her by her name, and only reluctantly agreed to call her "Aunt." She didn't try to get close to her new extended family at all. I think that it is because Hedda just didn't care enough to make the effort.
DeleteI didn't necessarily mind this play. It wasn't my favorite, but it wasn't my least favorite either. I did not like Hedda, as the introduction to this blog suggested, but I could tolerate it. I read this book while I read Return of the Native and since this book/play went by at a faster rate, I found myself more committed to finishing it in a brisk manner. I saw the ending coming from a mile away, yet I was still inclined to get to it and see if I was correct. Just like Return of the Native, there was not a wide variety of characters that could be easily liked and sided with. Almost everyone had a deeper darker side that one character or another did not know of. I found this book to be full of people who were truly concerned about their own good, rather than the welfare of others in an effort to make themselves happy. So, this was not a terribly slow read.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad we have an essay to write on this play. It has forced me to look with more depth, not only into the story as a whole, but more importantly into the characters. I believe Ibsen did a great job in creating each one of his characters. Additionally, the way he has them interact so intricately truly makes the piece more powerful and passionate for the reader.
ReplyDeleteI despised Hedda with a burning passion. She is the classic definition of a gold digger. In my opinion, she got what she deserved. She exhausted all her options, so I guess in her mind it was fit to end her life. I believe this was because she could no longer dig for gold. She was a player who played everybody to the very last minute of her life. She manipulated people into doing what she wanted, and when they were no longer of service, she dismissed them. This was absolutely despicable and because of that she was my least favorite character in the entire play.
ReplyDeleteAs this is a play, I think it is very important to discuss the dialogue. Ibsen pays a lot of attention to the language of the time, especially regarding the various ways of using the pronoun "you". Much of the dialogue is short and crisp back and forth between the characters. Unlike many other plays there are no long monologues which makes this a fairly fast paced piece. There are also several instances within the play where Hedda's secret thoughts are expressed vocally, but because of the fast paced nature of the dialogue none of the other characters seem to pick up on her subtle hints which i find interesting. It helps portray the idea that Hedda is the only one with power in this situation.
ReplyDeleteWhile I can see why so many people hated Hedda so much, I for one, did not. I think that from the beginning, she was destined to kill herself. I feel as though she was so unsatisfied with not only her life, but with herself, that nothing would have made her happy, and she was doomed to commit suicide. I think that she married Tesman in the first place, not because of the money, but because she did not think she would get anybody better. To think that you must settle for somebody you could never love would shake anybody up, especially a girl with such a cushy upbringing. I don't see her as an outright cruel person, but rather a woman that is, shall we say, losing her marbles. One particular part stood out to me in the play was when she keeps asking about the vine leaves, and how she seems to focus on how disappointing it is to her that Ejlert did not shoot himself in the head. At this point in the play, she has obviously lost all hope, and thinks that all that is left for a person so full of despair is for them to leave the final mark of a 'grand death' on the world. To me, she was just more tragic than mean.
ReplyDelete