**********************************
 The Western Canon Mailing List
 Moderator: Paul John Barnette Jr.
 Activation Date: March 8, 1997
 Current Date:  August 5, 1997
 Current Membership: 90
 **********************************
 
 Some final thoughts on "Peer Gynt" and comments/thoughts on Paul's post:
 
 I still don't know what to think of the play!  It is so different than anything else that I
 have trouble knowing where to start.  Acts four and five point out (to me, anyway) that this
 play works better on the printed page.  I would hate to see this play performed now--the mind
 is a much more effective medium to maintain the surreal qualities.  Plus, portraying a troll
 on stage would take away the fascinating aspect of these creatures.  The point of humans'
 troll-like behavior would be lost by portraying a troll in human-like terms.
 
 My favorite part of the play is clearly Act four.  We see Peer as a grown-up version of Acts
 I - III; still a dreamer but with some accomplishments under his belt.  Peer is living out
 the troll maxims ("To thyself be -- enough" and "Go round about") to the hilt.  He defines
 his philosophy very well to the other travellers:
         "The Gyntish Self...it is a host
         of appetites, desires, and wishes;
         the Gyntish Self--it is a sea
         of fancies, cravings, and demands;
         in short--what stirs inside my breast
         and makes me live my life as Me."
 
 But he is "out-Peer"ed several times in the act, first by the travellers and later by Anitra.
 The asylum still comes as a shock, even after all the other unreal activity before it.  Peer
 is responsible for one man's death and watches another die...the natural conclusion when
 Absolute Reason is dead.
 
 At times, the play's universality suffers from Ibsen's satire:  his attacks on other nations
 (the caricature of the fellow-travellers) and on politics (the madhouse) seem a bit personal
 and pointed.  The one place it works is his attack on critics when Peer returns home.  And of
 course, the story was totally lost on the villagers!
 
 Act five shows Peer later in life and at his least likable (troll-like, if you will).  Death,
 present in Acts three and four, is a constant in Act five.  I liked the view of the
 here-after presented by the Buttonmoulder, where souls are melted for re-birth.  However,
 those souls that distinguish themselves in life retain that person's identity.
 
 So what does Peer represent?  The closest character I can compare him to is Odysseus,
 constantly searching and experiencing life, but never quite obtaining what he is searching
 for.  It's like Ibsen wanted to show Peer as Man, for better or worse in all his complexity.
 While there is a lot of troll-like behavior on Peer's part, there is also a chance for
 redemption and a strong desire not to be reduced (melted down) for common use.  It is a
 complex play because Man is a complex being.  Solveig is a difficult function for me to
 interpret.  I would say she is the potential for redemption that is possible for Man to
 obtain.  I'm not sure, though, what that redemption is in Ibsen's mind.
 
 If I had to use one word to describe the play, it would be weird (and that isn't meant
 badly--in fact, that is it's appeal to me).  I agree it raises more questions than it
 answers, which makes me want to read it again years down the road and see how my
 interpretations have changed as my experiences have changed me.
 
 Coherent thoughts on this play prove a challenge to me since it is so disjointed.  However, I
 would love any follow-up on my interpretations.
 
 Dwight
 
 *********************************************************
 The Western Canon Mailing List
 pbarnett@geocities.com
 The Western Canon WWW Site
 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/6681/index.html
 *********************************************************