HEDDA GABLER.
ACT FIRST.
ACT SECOND.
ACT THIRD.
ACT FOURTH.
FOOTNOTES.
INTRODUCTION
From
Munich, on June 29, 1890, Ibsen wrote to the Swedish poet, Count Carl
Soilsky: "Our intention has all along been to spend the summer
in the Tyrol again. But circumstances are against our doing so. I am
at present engaged upon a new dramatic work, which for several
reasons has made very slow progress, and I do not leave Munich until
I can take with me the completed first draft. There is little or no
prospect of my being able to complete it in July." Ibsen did not
leave Munich at all that season. On October 30 he wrote: "At
present I am utterly engrossed in a new play. Not one leisure hour
have I had for several months." Three weeks later (November 20)
he wrote to his French translator, Count Prozor: "My new play is
finished; the manuscript went off to Copenhagen the day before
yesterday.... It produces a curious feeling of emptiness to be thus
suddenly separated from a work which has occupied one's time and
thoughts for several months, to the exclusion of all else. But it is
a good thing, too, to have done with it. The constant intercourse
with the fictitious personages was beginning to make me quite
nervous." To the same correspondent he wrote on December 4: "The
title of the play is
Hedda Gabler. My
intention in giving it this name was to indicate that Hedda, as a
personality, is to be regarded rather as her father's daughter than
as her husband's wife. It was not my desire to deal in this play with
so-called problems. What I principally wanted to do was to depict
human beings, human emotions, and human destinies, upon a groundwork
of certain of the social conditions and principles of the present
day."So
far we read the history of the play in the official
"Correspondence."(A)
Some interesting glimpses into the poet's moods during the period
between the completion of
The Lady from the Sea
and the publication of
Hedda Gabler are to
be found in the series of letters to Fraulein Emilie Bardach, of
Vienna, published by Dr. George Brandes.(B)
This young lady Ibsen met at Gossensass in the Tyrol in the autumn of
1889. The record of their brief friendship belongs to the history of
The Master Builder
rather than to that of
Hedda Gabler, but
the allusions to his work in his letters to her during the winter of
1889 demand some examination.So
early as October 7, 1889, he writes to her: "A new poem begins
to dawn in me. I will execute it this winter, and try to transfer to
it the bright atmosphere of the summer. But I feel that it will end
in sadness—such is my nature." Was this "dawning"
poem Hedda Gabler?
Or was it rather The
Master Builder that
was germinating in his mind? Who shall say? The latter hypothesis
seems the more probable, for it is hard to believe that at any stage
in the incubation of
Hedda Gabler he can
have conceived it as even beginning in gaiety. A week later, however,
he appears to have made up his mind that the time had not come for
the poetic utilisation of his recent experiences. He writes on
October 15: "Here I sit as usual at my writing-table. Now I
would fain work, but am unable to. My fancy, indeed, is very active.
But it always wanders away ours. I cannot repress my summer
memories—nor do I wish to. I live through my experience again and
again and yet again. To transmute it all into a poem, I find, in the
meantime, impossible." Clearly, then, he felt that his
imagination ought to have been engaged on some theme having no
relation to his summer experiences—the theme, no doubt, of
Hedda Gabler. In
his next letter, dated October 29, he writes: "Do not be
troubled because I cannot, in the meantime, create (dichten).
In reality I am for ever creating, or, at any rate, dreaming of
something which, when in the fulness of time it ripens, will reveal
itself as a creation (Dichtung)."
On November 19 he says: "I am very busily occupied with
preparations for my new poem. I sit almost the whole day at my
writing-table. Go out only in the evening for a little while."
The five following letters contain no allusion to the play; but on
September 18, 1890, he wrote: "My wife and son are at present at
Riva, on the Lake of Garda, and will probably remain there until the
middle of October, or even longer. Thus I am quite alone here, and
cannot get away. The new play on which I am at present engaged will
probably not be ready until November, though I sit at my
writing-table daily, and almost the whole day long."Here
ends the history of
Hedda Gabler, so
far as the poet's letters carry us. Its hard clear outlines, and
perhaps somewhat bleak atmosphere, seem to have resulted from a sort
of reaction against the sentimental "dreamery" begotten of
his Gossensass experiences. He sought refuge in the chill materialism
of Hedda from the ardent transcendentalism of Hilda, whom he already
heard knocking at the door. He was not yet in the mood to deal with
her on the plane of poetry.(C)Hedda
Gabler was
published in Copenhagen on December 16, 1890. This was the first of
Ibsen's plays to be translated from proof-sheets and published in
England and America almost simultaneously with its first appearance
in Scandinavia. The earliest theatrical performance took place at the
Residenz Theater, Munich, on the last day of January 1891, in the
presence of the poet, Frau Conrad-Ramlo playing the title-part. The
Lessing Theater, Berlin, followed suit on February 10. Not till
February 25 was the play seen in Copenhagen, with Fru Hennings as
Hedda. On the following night it was given for the first time in
Christiania, the Norwegian Hedda being Froken Constance Bruun. It was
this production which the poet saw when he visited the Christiania
Theater for the first time after his return to Norway, August 28,
1891. It would take pages to give even the baldest list of the
productions and revivals of
Hedda Gabler in
Scandinavia and Germany, where it has always ranked among Ibsen's
most popular works. The admirable production of the play by Miss
Elizabeth Robins and Miss Marion Lea, at the Vaudeville Theatre,
London, April 20, 1891, may rank as the second great step towards the
popularisation of Ibsen in England, the first being the
Charrington-Achurch production of
A Doll's House in
1889. Miss Robins afterwards repeated her fine performance of Hedda
many times, in London, in the English provinces, and in New York. The
character has also been acted in London by Eleonora Duse, and as I
write (March, 5, 1907) by Mrs. Patrick Campbell, at the Court
Theatre. In Australia and America, Hedda has frequently been acted by
Miss Nance O'Neill and other actresses—quite recently by a Russian
actress, Madame Alla Nazimova, who (playing in English) seems to have
made a notable success both in this part and in Nora. The first
French Hedda Gabler was Mlle. Marthe Brandes, who played the part at
the Vaudeville Theatre, Paris, on December 17, 1891, the performance
being introduced by a lecture by M. Jules Lemaitre. In Holland, in
Italy, in Russia, the play has been acted times without number. In
short (as might easily have been foretold) it has rivalled
A Doll's House in
world-wide popularity.It
has been suggested,(D)
I think without sufficient ground, that Ibsen deliberately conceived
Hedda Gabler as an
"international" play, and that the scene is really the
"west end" of any European city. To me it seems quite clear
that Ibsen had Christiania in mind, and the Christiania of a somewhat
earlier period than the 'nineties. The electric cars, telephones, and
other conspicuous factors in the life of a modern capital are notably
absent from the play. There is no electric light in Secretary Falk's
villa. It is still the habit for ladies to return on foot from
evening parties, with gallant swains escorting them. This
"suburbanism," which so distressed the London critics of
1891, was characteristic of the Christiania Ibsen himself had known
in the 'sixties—the Christiania of
Love's Comedy—rather
than of the greatly extended and modernised city of the end of the
century. Moreover Lovborg's allusions to the fiord, and the suggested
picture of Sheriff Elvsted, his family and his avocations are all
distinctively Norwegian. The truth seems to be very simple—the
environment and the subsidiary personages are all thoroughly
national, but Hedda herself is an "international" type, a
product of civilisation by no means peculiar to Norway.We
cannot point to any individual model or models who "sat to"
Ibsen for the character of Hedda.(E)
The late Grant Allen declared that Hedda was "nothing more nor
less than the girl we take down to dinner in London nineteen times
out of twenty"; in which case Ibsen must have suffered from a
superfluidity of models, rather than from any difficulty in finding
one. But the fact is that in this, as in all other instances, the
word "model" must be taken in a very different sense from
that in which it is commonly used in painting. Ibsen undoubtedly used
models for this trait and that, but never for a whole figure. If his
characters can be called portraits at all, they are composite
portraits. Even when it seems pretty clear that the initial impulse
towards the creation of a particular character came from some
individual, the original figure is entirely transmuted in the process
of harmonisation with the dramatic scheme. We need not, therefore,
look for a definite prototype of Hedda; but Dr. Brandes shows that
two of that lady's exploits were probably suggested by the anecdotic
history of the day.Ibsen
had no doubt heard how the wife of a well-known Norwegian composer,
in a fit of raging jealousy excited by her husband's prolonged
absence from home, burnt the manuscript of a symphony which he had
just finished. The circumstances under which Hedda burns Lovborg's
manuscript are, of course, entirely different and infinitely more
dramatic; but here we have merely another instance of the
dramatisation or "poetisation" of the raw material of life.
Again, a still more painful incident probably came to his knowledge
about the same time. A beautiful and very intellectual woman was
married to a well-known man who had been addicted to drink, but had
entirely conquered the vice. One day a mad whim seized her to put his
self-mastery and her power over him to the test. As it happened to be
his birthday, she rolled into his study a small keg of brandy, and
then withdrew. She returned some time after wards to find that he had
broached the keg, and lay insensible on the floor. In this anecdote
we cannot but recognise the germ, not only of Hedda's temptation of
Lovborg, but of a large part of her character."Thus,"
says Dr. Brandes, "out of small and scattered traits of reality
Ibsen fashioned his close-knit and profoundly thought-out works of
art."For
the character of Eilert Lovborg, again, Ibsen seem unquestionably to
have borrowed several traits from a definite original. A young Danish
man of letters, whom Dr. Brandes calls Holm, was an enthusiastic
admirer of Ibsen, and came to be on very friendly terms with him. One
day Ibsen was astonished to receive, in Munich, a parcel addressed
from Berlin by this young man, containing, without a word of
explanation, a packet of his (Ibsen's) letters, and a photograph
which he had presented to Holm. Ibsen brooded and brooded over the
incident, and at last came to the conclusion that the young man had
intended to return her letters and photograph to a young lady to whom
he was known to be attached, and had in a fit of aberration mixed up
the two objects of his worship. Some time after, Holm appeared at
Ibsen's rooms. He talked quite rationally, but professed to have no
knowledge whatever of the letter-incident, though he admitted the
truth of Ibsen's conjecture that the "belle dame sans merci"
had demanded the return of her letters and portrait. Ibsen was
determined to get at the root of the mystery; and a little inquiry
into his young friend's habits revealed the fact that he broke his
fast on a bottle of port wine, consumed a bottle of Rhine wine at
lunch, of Burgundy at dinner, and finished off the evening with one
or two more bottles of port. Then he heard, too, how, in the course
of a night's carouse, Holm had lost the manuscript of a book; and in
these traits he saw the outline of the figure of Eilert Lovborg.Some
time elapsed, and again Ibsen received a postal packet from Holm.
This one contained his will, in which Ibsen figured as his residuary
legatee. But many other legatees were mentioned in the instrument—all
of them ladies, such as Fraulein Alma Rothbart, of Bremen, and
Fraulein Elise Kraushaar, of Berlin. The bequests to these
meritorious spinsters were so generous that their sum considerably
exceeded the amount of the testator's property. Ibsen gently but
firmly declined the proffered inheritance; but Holm's will no doubt
suggested to him the figure of that red-haired "Mademoiselle
Diana," who is heard of but not seen in
Hedda Gabler, and
enabled him to add some further traits to the portraiture of Lovborg.
When the play appeared, Holm recognised himself with glee in the
character of the bibulous man of letters, and thereafter adopted
"Eilert Lovborg" as his pseudonym. I do not, therefore, see
why Dr. Brandes should suppress his real name; but I willingly
imitate him in erring on the side of discretion. The poor fellow died
several years ago.Some
critics have been greatly troubled as to the precise meaning of
Hedda's fantastic vision of Lovborg "with vine-leaves in his
hair." Surely this is a very obvious image or symbol of the
beautiful, the ideal, aspect of bacchic elation and revelry. Antique
art, or I am much mistaken, shows us many figures of Dionysus himself
and his followers with vine-leaves entwined their hair. To Ibsen's
mind, at any rate, the image had long been familiar. In
Peer Gynt (Act iv.
sc. 8), when Peer, having carried off Anitra, finds himself in a
particularly festive mood, he cries: "Were there vine-leaves
around, I would garland my brow." Again, in
Emperor and Galilean
(Pt. ii. Act 1) where Julian, in the procession of Dionysus,
impersonates the god himself, it is directed that he shall wear a
wreath of vine-leaves. Professor Dietrichson relates that among the
young artists whose society Ibsen frequented during his first years
in Rome, it was customary, at their little festivals, for the
revellers to deck themselves in this fashion. But the image is so
obvious that there is no need to trace it to any personal experience.
The attempt to place Hedda's vine-leaves among Ibsen's obscurities is
an example of the firm resolution not to understand which animated
the criticism of the 'nineties.Dr.
Brandes has dealt very severely with the character of Eilert Lovborg,
alleging that we cannot believe in the genius attributed to him. But
where is he described as a genius? The poet represents him as a very
able student of sociology; but that is quite a different thing from
attributing to him such genius as must necessarily shine forth in
every word he utters. Dr. Brandes, indeed, declines to believe even
in his ability as a sociologist, on the ground that it is idle to
write about the social development of the future. "To our
prosaic minds," he says, "it may seem as if the most
sensible utterance on the subject is that of the fool of the play:
'The future! Good heavens, we know nothing of the future.'" The
best retort to this criticism is that which Eilert himself makes:
"There's a thing or two to be said about it all the same."
The intelligent forecasting of the future (as Mr. H. G. Wells has
shown) is not only clearly distinguishable from fantastic Utopianism,
but is indispensable to any large statesmanship or enlightened social
activity. With very real and very great respect for Dr. Brandes, I
cannot think that he has been fortunate in his treatment of Lovborg's
character. It has been represented as an absurdity that he would
think of reading abstracts from his new book to a man like Tesman,
whom he despises. But though Tesman is a ninny, he is, as Hedda says,
a "specialist"—he is a competent, plodding student of his
subject. Lovborg may quite naturally wish to see how his new method,
or his excursion into a new field, strikes the average scholar of the
Tesman type. He is, in fact, "trying it on the dog"—neither
an unreasonable nor an unusual proceeding. There is, no doubt, a
certain improbability in the way in which Lovborg is represented as
carrying his manuscript around, and especially in Mrs. Elvsted's
production of his rough draft from her pocket; but these are
mechanical trifles, on which only a niggling criticism would dream of
laying stress.Of
all Ibsen's works,
Hedda Gabler is the
most detached, the most objective—a character-study pure and
simple. It is impossible—or so it seems to me—to extract any sort
of general idea from it. One cannot even call it a satire, unless one
is prepared to apply that term to the record of a "case" in
a work of criminology. Reverting to Dumas's dictum that a play should
contain "a painting, a judgment, an ideal," we may say the
Hedda Gabler
fulfils only the first of these requirements. The poet does not even
pass judgment on his heroine: he simply paints her full-length
portrait with scientific impassivity. But what a portrait! How
searching in insight, how brilliant in colouring, how rich in detail!
Grant Allen's remark, above quoted, was, of course, a whimsical
exaggeration; the Hedda type is not so common as all that, else the
world would quickly come to an end. But particular traits and
tendencies of the Hedda type are very common in modern life, and not
only among women. Hyperaesthesia lies at the root of her tragedy.
With a keenly critical, relentlessly solvent intelligence, she
combines a morbid shrinking from all the gross and prosaic detail of
the sensual life. She has nothing to take her out of herself—not a
single intellectual interest or moral enthusiasm. She cherishes, in a
languid way, a petty social ambition; and even that she finds
obstructed and baffled. At the same time she learns that another
woman has had the courage to love and venture all, where she, in her
cowardice, only hankered and refrained. Her malign egoism rises up
uncontrolled, and calls to its aid her quick and subtle intellect.
She ruins the other woman's happiness, but in doing so incurs a
danger from which her sense of personal dignity revolts. Life has no
such charm for her that she cares to purchase it at the cost of
squalid humiliation and self-contempt. The good and the bad in her
alike impel her to have done with it all; and a pistol-shot ends what
is surely one of the most poignant character-tragedies in literature.
Ibsen's brain never worked at higher pressure than in the conception
and adjustment of those "crowded hours" in which Hedda,
tangled in the web of Will and Circumstance, struggles on till she is
too weary to struggle any more.It
may not be superfluous to note that the "a" in "Gabler"
should be sounded long and full, like the "a" in
"Garden"—NOT like the "a" in "gable"
or in "gabble."W.
A.(A)Letters
214, 216, 217, 219.
(B)In the
Ibsen volume of Die
Literatur
(Berlin).
(C)Dr.
Julius Elias (Neue
deutsche Rundschau,
December 1906, p. 1462)
makes the curious assertion that the character of Thea Elvsted
was
in part borrowed from this "Gossensasser Hildetypus."
It is hard to
see how even Gibes' ingenuity could distil from the same flower
two
such different essences as Thea and Hilda.
(D)See
article by Herman Bang in
Neue deutsche Rundschau,
December
1906, p. 1495.
(E)Dr. Brahm
(Neue deutsche
Rundschau, December
1906, P. 1422) says
that after the first performance of
Hedda Gabler in
Berlin Ibsen
confided to him that the character had been suggested by a
German
lady whom he met in Munich, and who did not shoot, but poisoned
herself. Nothing more seems to be known of this lady.
See, too,
an article by Julius Elias in the same magazine, p. 1460.
ACT FIRST.
A spacious, handsome, and
tastefully furnished drawing room,decorated in dark colours. In the back, a wide doorway
withcurtains drawn back, leading into a smaller room
decoratedin the same style as the drawing-room. In the
right-handwall of the front room, a folding door leading out to
thehall. In the opposite wall, on the left, a glass door,
alsowith curtains drawn back. Through the panes can be
seenpart of a verandah outside, and trees covered with
autumnfoliage. An oval table, with a cover on it, and
surroundedby chairs, stands well forward. In front, by the wall
onthe right, a wide stove of dark porcelain, a
high-backedarm-chair, a cushioned foot-rest, and two footstools.
Asettee, with a small round table in front of it, fills
theupper right-hand corner. In front, on the left, a
littleway from the wall, a sofa. Further back than the
glassdoor, a piano. On either side of the doorway at the
backa whatnot with terra-cotta and majolica
ornaments.—Against the back wall of the inner room a sofa, with
atable, and one or two chairs. Over the sofa hangs
theportrait of a handsome elderly man in a General's
uniform.Over the table a hanging lamp, with an opal glass
shade.—Anumber of bouquets are arranged about the drawing-room,
invases and glasses. Others lie upon the tables. The
floorsin both rooms are covered with thick carpets.—Morning
light.The sun shines in through the glass door.MISS JULIANA TESMAN, with her bonnet on a carrying a
parasol,comes in from the hall, followed by BERTA, who carries
abouquet wrapped in paper. MISS TESMAN is a comely and
pleasant-looking lady of about sixty-five. She is nicely but
simplydressed in a grey walking-costume. BERTA is a
middle-agedwoman of plain and rather countrified appearance.MISS TESMAN.[Stops close to the door, listens, and says softly:] Upon my
word, I don't believe they are stirring yet!BERTA.[Also softly.] I told you so, Miss. Remember how late the
steamboat got in last night. And then, when they got home!—good
Lord, what a lot the young mistress had to unpack before she could
get to bed.MISS TESMAN.Well well—let them have their sleep out. But let us see that
they get a good breath of the fresh morning air when they do
appear.[She goes to the glass door and throws it open.BERTA.[Beside the table, at a loss what to do with the bouquet in
her hand.] I declare there isn't a bit of room left. I think I'll
put it down here, Miss. [She places it on the piano.MISS TESMAN.So you've got a new mistress now, my dear Berta. Heaven knows
it was a wrench to me to part with you.BERTA.[On the point of weeping.] And do you think it wasn't hard
for me, too, Miss? After all the blessed years I've been with you
and Miss Rina.(1))MISS TESMAN.We must make the best of it, Berta. There was nothing else to
be done. George can't do without you, you see-he absolutely can't.
He has had you to look after him ever since he was a little
boy.BERTA.Ah but, Miss Julia, I can't help thinking of Miss Rina lying
helpless at home there, poor thing. And with only that new girl
too! She'll never learn to take proper care of an
invalid.MISS TESMAN.Oh, I shall manage to train her. And of course, you know, I
shall take most of it upon myself. You needn't be uneasy about my
poor sister, my dear Berta.BERTA.Well, but there's another thing, Miss. I'm so mortally afraid
I shan't be able to suit the young mistress.MISS TESMAN.Oh well—just at first there may be one or two
things—BERTA.Most like she'll be terrible grand in her ways.MISS TESMAN.Well, you can't wonder at that—General Gabler's daughter!
Think of the sort of life she was accustomed to in her father's
time. Don't you remember how we used to see her riding down the
road along with the General? In that long black habit—and with
feathers in her hat?BERTA.Yes, indeed—I remember well enough!—But, good Lord, I should
never have dreamt in those days that she and Master George would
make a match of it.MISS TESMAN.Nor I.—But by-the-bye, Berta—while I think of it: in future
you mustn't say Master George. You must say Dr. Tesman.BERTA.Yes, the young mistress spoke of that too—last night—the
moment they set foot in the house. Is it true then,
Miss?MISS TESMAN.Yes, indeed it is. Only think, Berta—some foreign university
has made him a doctor—while he has been abroad, you understand. I
hadn't heard a word about it, until he told me himself upon the
pier.BERTA.Well well, he's clever enough for anything, he is. But I
didn't think he'd have gone in for doctoring people.MISS TESMAN.No no, it's not that sort of doctor he is. [Nods
significantly.] But let me tell you, we may have to call him
something still grander before long.BERTA.You don't say so! What can that be, Miss?MISS TESMAN.[Smiling.] H'm—wouldn't you like to know! [With emotion.] Ah,
dear dear—if my poor brother could only look up from his grave now,
and see what his little boy has grown into! [Looks around.] But
bless me, Berta—why have you done this? Taken the chintz covers off
all the furniture.BERTA.Th [...]