An Enemy of the People

[Tkill93]

I've just finished reading this amazing play. Has anyone else read it? If not heres a summary of the plot.

 

Dr. Stockmann is the popular citizen of a small coastal town in Norway. The town has recently invested a large amount of public and private money towards the development of baths, a project led by Dr. Stockmann and his brother, the Mayor. The town is expecting a surge in tourism and prosperity from the new baths, said to be of great medicinal value and as such, the baths are the pride of the town. However, as the baths are starting to succeed, Dr. Stockmann discovers that waste products from the town's tannery are contaminating the baths causing serious illness among the tourists. He expects this important discovery to be his greatest achievement, and promptly sends a detailed report to the Mayor, which includes a proposed solution, which would come at a considerable cost to the town.

 

But to his surprise, Stockmann finds it difficult to get through to the authorities. They seem unable to appreciate the seriousness of the issue and unwilling to publicly acknowledge and address the problem because it could mean financial ruin for the town. As the conflict ensues, the Mayor warns his brother that he should "acquiesce in subordinating himself to the community". Stockmann refuses to accept this, and rents a hall in order to hold a town meeting and convince the people to close the baths.

 

The townspeople - eagerly awaiting the prosperity that the baths are believed will bring - refuse to accept Stockmann's claims, as his friends and allies, who had explicitly given support for his campaign, turn against him en masse. He is taunted and denounced as a lunatic, an "Enemy of the People." In a scathing rebuke of both the Victorian notion of community and the principles of democracy, Dr. Stockmann proclaims that in matters of right and wrong, the individual is superior to the multitude, who are easily led by self-advancing demagogues. Stockmann sums up Ibsen's denunciation of the masses, with the memorable quote "...the strongest man in the world is the man who stands most alone."

 

Do you agree with what he does? Would you do things differently? Would you stand up for what you believe in even if it means it will jeopardize the peoples around you?

[Bloodrun]

ok lets see if this works this time lol

 

hmmm, well you see, Martin Luther King did the same thing, he stood up against the government, the people, and who who stood for slavery, and his efforts, his time, pain and love, that he poured into his devotions, helped in the long run, but it also ended up getting him killed, but i wouldnt take that into fualt becuase if he has the courage to stand up to all those people, just to do what is right! then who are we to blame, and persecue (SP)?! I dont on the other hand, believe that people who do stand up, should be punished, i was raised, to believe in what i thought, and to speak my mind, i was also told that we have the right to speak, Freedom of Speech, and that we have the right to publish what need be to get our believes across, Freedom of Press. =/

[Abstract [Atrocity]]

It's simple... try to help the people, telling them about

the risks of what you're going to do. If they don't like

it, walk away. After a while, come back and see how

they've done without your help. If they're still as bad

and they want your help, say no and laguh evilly.

[Mad Hopz]

Well, I find it disturbing how people get so wrapped up in their own gain that they do not realize the consequences of certain things. Ignorance will end up being the doom of mankind. We ignore things. We are ignorant of many things. "Enemy of the People" is the name that the people of the town gave him. When in fact, he could have been "The Savior of The Town." The one who stopped the town from financial ruin. Now, what will happen to the town? Eventually, no tourists will come and the town will be bankrupt. Then, the people will be saying, "Why didn't we listen to Dr. Stockmann?" By then, it will be too late. Ignorance ruins one town, but that's just the start.

 

I would probably not stand up for what I believe in if it puts other people in harm's way. If a greater amount of people would be hurt if i stood up than if i didn't, i would definitely find a way to prove my point.

[Tkill93]

It's simple... try to help the people' date=' telling them about

the risks of what you're going to do. If they don't like

it, walk away. After a while, come back and see how

they've done without your help. If they're still as bad

and they want your help, say no and laguh evilly.

[/quote']

 

Why say no? If they do want your help eventually wouldnt you want to help for the good of everyone? To help prevent people from serious illness? Even if they didnt want your help at first would you want to seize the opportunity?

[Abstract [Atrocity]]

It's simple... try to help the people' date=' telling them about

the risks of what you're going to do. If they don't like

it, walk away. After a while, come back and see how

they've done without your help. If they're still as bad

and they want your help, say no and laguh evilly.

[/quote']

 

Why say no? If they do want your help eventually wouldnt you want to help for the good of everyone? To help prevent people from serious illness? Even if they didnt want your help at first would you want to seize the opportunity?

 

wouldn't the town's reputation be ruined by then?

You could help the town out, but it would take a

lot of work to convince people to come back.

[Bloodrun]

It's simple... try to help the people' date=' telling them about

the risks of what you're going to do. If they don't like

it, walk away. After a while, come back and see how

they've done without your help. If they're still as bad

and they want your help, say no and laguh evilly.

[/quote']

 

Why say no? If they do want your help eventually wouldnt you want to help for the good of everyone? To help prevent people from serious illness? Even if they didnt want your help at first would you want to seize the opportunity?

 

wouldn't the town's reputation be ruined by then?

You could help the town out, but it would take a

lot of work to convince people to come back.

 

ok well if the first you said they needed help, and they said, and you went away,

then they realized you were right, and you come back, and they ask you for help, that would be rather easy to help them, and its either help them, of loose them, which one would yuh! choose?!

[Static]

I've just finished reading this amazing play. Has anyone else read it? If not heres a summary of the plot.

 

Dr. Stockmann is the popular citizen of a small coastal town in Norway. The town has recently invested a large amount of public and private money towards the development of baths' date=' a project led by Dr. Stockmann and his brother, the Mayor. The town is expecting a surge in tourism and prosperity from the new baths, said to be of great medicinal value and as such, the baths are the pride of the town. However, as the baths are starting to succeed, Dr. Stockmann discovers that waste products from the town's tannery are contaminating the baths causing serious illness among the tourists. He expects this important discovery to be his greatest achievement, and promptly sends a detailed report to the Mayor, which includes a proposed solution, which would come at a considerable cost to the town.

 

But to his surprise, Stockmann finds it difficult to get through to the authorities. They seem unable to appreciate the seriousness of the issue and unwilling to publicly acknowledge and address the problem because it could mean financial ruin for the town. As the conflict ensues, the Mayor warns his brother that he should "acquiesce in subordinating himself to the community". Stockmann refuses to accept this, and rents a hall in order to hold a town meeting and convince the people to close the baths.

 

The townspeople - eagerly awaiting the prosperity that the baths are believed will bring - refuse to accept Stockmann's claims, as his friends and allies, who had explicitly given support for his campaign, turn against him en masse. He is taunted and denounced as a lunatic, an "Enemy of the People." In a scathing rebuke of both the Victorian notion of community and the principles of democracy, Dr. Stockmann proclaims that [b']in matters of right and wrong, the individual is superior to the multitude[/b], who are easily led by self-advancing demagogues. Stockmann sums up Ibsen's denunciation of the masses, with the memorable quote "...the strongest man in the world is the man who stands most alone."

 

Do you agree with what he does? Would you do things differently? Would you stand up for what you believe in even if it means it will jeopardize the peoples around you?

 

I think if people are idiots, you should explain to them why they are making a bad decision. The bolded quote is something I agree with wholeheartedly, but it also applies for everything outside of "right and wrong". This sorta goes against the grain of America's founding principles, which were written by John Locke originally, that the community knows best, and is better and more important than the individual. He was a flawed man to say the least, but he helps explain why mr stockman was correct to say that what he knew was right was right.

 

However, That quote.

"...the strongest man in the world is the man who stands most alone."

 

Is flawed, the most morally sound, that kind of strong, would be correct, but the strongest implies power, and he clearly did not have the power to change anything at first. What makes a nation strong? Its people! Thus, power power is in numbers. Moral obligation is most powerful however, in the self.