An Enemy of the People

Jessica Ruiz-Jones 11-20-2013

An Enemy of the People was a fantastic play to use for the analysis of the historical aspects of theater, and the message it portrayed was very relevant in regards to what was happening in the world during the late 19th century. Set in Norway, the small coastal town in which the play is set has been prospering, and the area is becoming a popular health resort. Things are looking up as business increases, but Thomas Stockmann has made a discovery that is threatening the livelihood of the community. Unfortunately, this discovery causes massive upheaval, and the audience gets to watch as democracy has a negative effect on everyone living in the community.

During this time in history, Norway was a Unitary parliamentary constitutional monarchy (Yahoo). A form of democracy, this way of government has its problems. A major issue is that voters can be irrational, just as we saw in the play. This viewing experience showed how democracy influenced the people of Norway in just one small town, and it sheds light on how history can repeat itself in the future. The people made their decision to ignore the strong warnings made by Stockmann even though their lives and health were potentially at stake.

The viewers of this film are also shown a bit of history of how the press has long been influenced by the government. At the beginning of the play, the newspaper reporters Hovstad and Aslaksen are very excited to cover the story of Stockmann’s discovery. After all, this would save the entire community from severe health problems or even death, not to mention the well-being of the tourists who kept their town thriving. However, once they found out how much it would cost and the time it would take to fix the issue, they quickly drop the story and move to the other end of the spectrum. I work at a television station, and I have noticed this still happens today. Certain stories are avoided, because it may clash with governmental agenda despite the fact that releasing the story is best for the people.

A strong theme during the course of the play was one of power. We watch as the characters struggle to gain the acceptance of the public in order to carry out their agenda. On one hand, there is an agenda for change in order to save the people of the community, and on the other, there is the fact that releasing the information would cause a decline in prosperity. Power struggle has long been an issue throughout history, and watching this film made me understand that history truly does repeat itself. We live in a democratically-driven society, and many people either just trust that the government knows what they are doing or do not care to find out. While a large group of people in the play did show up for the meeting, there were more who did not. This shows me that democratic societies have long allowed for a huge percentage of discrepancy regarding the decisions that are made, and it takes a much more interpretive approach in order to make decisions that will incorporate the right changes to take place.

It was also interesting to see how influential media was during this time. There was no television, and this gave the newspaper industry a high level of power. We watched as the Mayor and his brother struggled to get their version of the story to the public. In modern society, we have access to a broader array of news outlets, and this allows for us to discover certain truths on our own. During this time in history, however, there was one primary form of media, and I have never considered how such a monopoly can impact society. But, as we saw, the people had one outlet that influenced their opinions, even if there was a bias involved.

Another historical aspect that we are shown is how society functioned during this time in Norway. The Mayor made the comment in regards to Hovstad that, “It is a curious thing that these farmer’s sons never seem to lose their want of tact.” We clearly see a strong division of class in this statement, insinuating that Hovstad was somewhat of a hillbilly or redneck. Ironically, he had earlier made the comment that “There is an excellent spirit of toleration in the town… an admirable municipal spirit. And it all springs from the fact of our having a great common interest to unite us” (An Enemy).

While he seems to believe that the community has a strong sense of unity, he clearly states that there is division. This is still a problem in today’s society. While we have elected our first African American president, we still see issues of class division in today’s world. I found it interesting that the Mayor made two such opposite statements, and this shows that there was a large amount of hypocrisy that plagued Norway’s governmental system in the early 19th century.

Near the end of the play, we watched as the Stockmann family was publically ridiculed to the point that their children were sent home from school, and people were endangering them by throwing rocks through their windows. The United States has long been known as a new world of opportunity, and we saw a unique account of a reason why a family would have immigrated here. While the circumstances were extreme, this shows how people in other countries viewed ours during this time. While Dr. Stockmann seemed to see this as a great opportunity, we also get another point of view. Mrs. Stockmann is against the move, and she is content with the community she already lives in. I found this to be an interesting example of the historical opinions people of other countries had of the U.S.

The scene where the meeting took place was disheartening, but it showed how easily the people of this time were influenced by those in power. We watched as the Mayor used the majority to his advantage while also doing everything in his power to please them. On the other hand, Stockmann tried to enlighten the people of the stupidity of the masses. The reliance leaders of democracies have on the public both then and now cause them to lie, and this is something that has changed very little over time (Analysis).

An Enemy of the People was a play that criticized democracy in a very intriguing way while also showed how standing up for your beliefs and self-respect is respectable, even if you are in the minority. It provides a historical viewpoint of how the majority is not always right, and this can cause enormous problems for society as a whole. Having seen this film, I have a new outlook on our current democratic governmental system. We see that the media we rely on so much often has a fear to report the truth, and this has caused me to desire a more cognitive and interpretive way of seeing the things that are reported to be true, because they might just not be so.

Works Cited

“Norway a Democracy” Yahoo Answers. March 2013. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index…

“An Enemy of the People.” Shmoop. 18 Oct.2013. http://www.shmoop.com/enemy-of-th…/society-class-quotes.html

“Analysis.” Sparknotes. http://www.sparknotes.com/l…/enemyofthepeople/section6.rhtml.

American Association of Community Theater. “Costume Designer.” http://www.aact.org/people/costumedesigner.html