1505-Modern European Drama [BAHE-DSC16-S6-CC4] Cover Jan25.

pdf - January 21, 2025

MODERN EUROPEAN DRAMA

[FOR LIMITED CIRCULATION]

Editorial Board

P. K. Satapathy, Dr. Seema Suri

Content Writers

P. K. Satapathy, Dr. Himani Kapoor,

Ruchika Bhatia
Academic Coordinator

Deekshant Awasthi

Department of Distance and Continuing Education

E-mail: ddceprinting@col.du.ac.in
english@col.du.ac.in

Published by:
Department of Distance and Continuing Education
Campus of Open Learning, School of Open Learning,
University of Delhi, Delhi-110007

Printed by:
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 MODERN EUROPEAN DRAMA

Disclaimer

Corrections/Modifications/Suggestions proposed by Statutory Body, DU/

Stakeholder/s in the Self Learning Material (SLM) will be incorporated in
the next edition. However, these corrections/modifications/suggestions will be
uploaded on the website https://sol.du.ac.in. Any feedback or suggestions may
be sent at the email- feedbackslm@col.du.ac.in

Printed at: Taxmann Publications Pvt. Ltd., 21/35, West Punjabi Bagh,
New Delhi - 110026 (2550 Copies, 2025)

Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi
 Syllabus
Modern European Drama

Syllabus Mapping
Unit - I:
1. Henrik Ibsen: Ghosts (1881) Pages 1–42
Unit - II:
2. Bertolt Brecht: Mother Courage and Her Children (1939) Pages 43–69
Unit - III:
3. Eugené Ionesco: Rhinoceros (1959) Pages 70–92

Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,

School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

Syllebus.indd 1 01-Jan-25 4:09:51 PM

Syllebus.indd 2 01-Jan-25 4:09:51 PM
 Contents

Title Prepared by Edited by Pg. No.

Unit-I
1. Henrik Ibsen, Ghosts P. K. Satapathy P. K. Satapathy 1
Unit-II
2. Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage Dr. Himani Kapoor Dr. Seema Suri 43
and Her Children
Unit-III
3. Eugené Ionesco, The Rhinoceros Ruchika Bhatia Dr. Seema Suri 70

PAGE i
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

TOC.indd 1 01-Jan-25 4:11:16 PM

TOC.indd 2 01-Jan-25 4:11:16 PM
 U N I T

I(1)
Ghosts
Henrik Ibsen

P. K. Satapathy

Structure
1.1 Introduction: Modern European Drama
1.2 Learning Objectives
1.3 Ibsen: Brief Biographical Notes
1.4 Ibsen the Dramatist
1.5 Ghosts: A Critical Summary
1.6 Ibsen and Realism/Naturalism
1.7 Important Themes in Ghosts
1.8 Ibsen’s Technique of Characterization
1.9 Major Characters in Ghosts
1.10 Summing Up
1.11 References and Suggested Readings

1.1 Introduction: Modern European Drama

Modern European drama developed in the transitional phase between the late nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries. It marked a break from the theatre conventions of earlier
periods. The radical changes to the theatre tradition were triggered by the rapid changes
that were taking place in Europe during this period. Rapid industrialization, urbaniza-
tion, and the upheavals of war, which collectively influenced the broader socio-political
environment, contributed significantly to reshaping the contours of European Theatre.
This was a significant departure from romantic idealism and formulaic plots of the 19th
century theatre. Playwrights began to focus on everyday life and the struggles and moral
dilemmas of ordinary individuals. However, if we must point out some specific factors
that shaped the contours of modern European drama, then it must be the rise of two ma-
jor and interrelated movements, realism and naturalism. They sought to depict life with
greater accuracy and complexity than their predecessors. The realist movement, pioneered
by figures such as Henrik Ibsen and Anton Chekhov, sought to portray characters and

PAGE 1
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 1 01-Jan-25 4:41:01 PM

 Modern European Drama

situations with psychological depth and authenticity, reflecting the multifaceted nature of
human experience. Naturalism gave it a kind of scientific veneer. We will discuss these
two related movements in some detail in a later section.
Ibsen, an important figure in this transition, ushered in a new kind of theatre that
redefined theatre practice in significant ways. In terms of themes, Ibsen introduced hitherto
taboo subjects like gender inequality, hereditary sin, and moral hypocrisy. His plays, such
as A Doll’s House and Ghosts, challenged social norms and engaged with contemporary
debates about individual autonomy and social justice. In terms of technique, apart from
the use of realist stage settings and everyday language, he refined the nascent realism of
the Problem Plays by adding a layer of psychological realism in depicting his characters.
Similarly, Anton Chekhov’s work, including plays like The Cherry Orchard and Uncle Van-
ya, explored the subtleties of human relationships and the often-unspoken tensions within
families and society. This was a new kind of theatre that had started looking inwards.
The early 20th century saw the emergence of avant-garde and experimental approaches
that further expanded the boundaries of theatrical expression. Playwrights such as Bertolt
Brecht and Samuel Beckett contributed to the development of new forms and techniques.
Brecht’s Epic Theatre introduced the concept of “alienation” or “distancing” that com-
pelled the audience to be active participants rather than passive consumers of theatre. On
the other hand, Samuel Beckett explored existential themes and the absurdity of human
existence in plays like Waiting for Godot. The exploration of identity, memory, and the
fragmentation of reality became central to the work of many playwrights.
Overall, modern European drama represents a dynamic and innovative chapter in the
history of theatre. It explores the complexities of human existence and its engagement with
contemporary social and philosophical issues. The diversity of theatre practices and thematic
concerns made it an extremely vibrant and interesting period. In this paper you will get to
sample a few Modern European plays. You will also get to know how this drama evolved
under various circumstances and appreciate the rich variety of dramatic practices adopted by
different dramatists. However, in this lesson we will only engage with the dramatic art of Ibsen
who, as mentioned earlier, was a key figure in the development of Modern European drama.

1.2 Learning Objectives

After going through this lesson, you would be able to:
‹ Develop a critical understanding of nineteenth and twentieth-century European theatre.
‹ Understand the socio-cultural and political landscape that shaped Modern European
drama.

2 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 2 01-Jan-25 4:41:02 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

‹ Appreciate the contemporary relevance of European drama in terms of its articulations

of the issues of individual liberty, position of women, and issues of power and
domination.
‹ Write a critical note on realism and naturalism in theatre.
‹ Appreciate how theatre serves as a medium to interrogate dominant cultural practices
and enable social change.
‹ Write critical notes on various aspects of Ibsen’s play Ghosts.

1.3 Ibsen: Brief Biographical Notes

Henrik Ibsen was born on March 20, 1828, in Skien, a small port town in Norway. The
Ibsen family initially lived in relative prosperity, but when Henrik was seven years old,
his father’s business failed, leading to financial ruin. The family moved to a smaller, more
isolated house in the countryside. This period of financial hardship had a profound impact
on Ibsen’s outlook and future writing. As a child, Ibsen was shy and introverted. He later
described his childhood as lonely and marked by a sense of exclusion. Due to financial
troubles Ibsen left home and moved to Grimstad, a small coastal town, where he worked
as an apprentice pharmacist. During this time, he fathered an illegitimate child with a
servant named Else Sophie Jensdatter. The child, a boy named Hans Jacob Henriksen,
was born in 1846. Although Ibsen acknowledged the boy and supported him financially,
he had little direct contact with him. This early episode of fatherhood and the resulting
social stigma might have influenced his complex portrayals of family dynamics and hidden
moral transgressions in his later plays.
Ibsen spent six years in Grimstad, where he began to study for his university entrance
exams. It was during this period that he developed an interest in literature, theatre, and
history, and he began writing his first plays. However, his initial attempts to pass the
university exams were unsuccessful, and he never completed his formal education. In
1850, Ibsen moved to Christiania (now Oslo) to pursue a career in the arts. His first play,
Catiline, was published the same year. Though it garnered little attention, it set him off
on his journey as a dramatist. Ibsen’s financial struggles, however, were hardly over. He
tried to support himself by writing for newspapers and doing various other odd jobs with
very little success. But he remained committed to writing plays despite repeated failures
to find acceptance. Finally, when he found a job as theatre director at the Norwegian
Theatre in Bergen in 1851, he had some financial stability. The six years that he spent
writing and directing plays at Bergen gave him valuable experience in stagecraft. Ibsen,

PAGE 3
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 3 08-Jan-25 2:33:38 AM

 Modern European Drama

during this period, produced and directed a large number of plays, honing his skills both
as a playwright and a stage manager. In 1858, Ibsen married Suzannah Thoresen, the
daughter of a well-known Norwegian clergyman and writer. Suzannah was a strong-willed
woman who shared Ibsen’s passion for literature. Their marriage was based on mutual
respect and intellectual companionship. However, it was not without its difficulties. The
couple had one son, Sigurd Ibsen, born in 1859, who later became a prominent political
figure and served as the Norwegian prime minister in Stockholm from 1903 to 1905.
Ibsen’s relationship with his son was often strained because Sigurd did not follow in his
intellectual footsteps. The complexity of the parental roles that Ibsen often explored in
his plays is perhaps a reflection of his own distant and sometimes authoritarian attitude
toward his own family.
Ibsen and Suzannah spent significant periods of time apart. Between 1864 and 1891,
Ibsen lived in Italy and Germany, while Suzannah managed their household and raised
their son under not so helpful circumstances. This separation from family and the dis-
tance from his home country had its impact on his literary career as well as his family
relationships in contrasting ways. Suzannah took on most of the parenting responsibilities.
Ibsen had high expectations from Sigurd and was a distant father, not very different from
the detached male figures found in many of his plays. Suzannah’s role in managing the
family and supporting Ibsen’s career was crucial. But Ibsen’s reserved, introverted na-
ture, combined with long periods of separation due to his travels created some emotional
distance between them. That, however, did not hinder Ibsen’s growth as a dramatist. On
the contrary, the distance from family and home gave Ibsen the requisite critical distance
to deal with Norwegian society and social relationship with a fair degree of detachment
in his plays.
After 27 long years in Europe and a successful literary career, Ibsen returned to
Christiania (Oslo) in 1891. His later years were spent in relative comfort. He continued
to write plays until his health began to decline. In 1900, Ibsen suffered a series of strokes
that left him partially paralyzed and unable to write. His public appearances became rare,
and he spent the last six years of his life in poor health, largely confined to his home. In
all these later years, Suzannah remained his steadfast companion and cared for him till
his death on May 23, 1906, in Christiania. Henrik Ibsen’s personal life was as complex
and layered as the characters in his plays.

1.4 Ibsen the Dramatist

Ibsen had an interesting career in the theatre which can be roughly seen as; a) an early
romantic phase followed by, b) mature social realism and c) the late symbolist phase. He
4 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 4 01-Jan-25 4:41:02 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

worked as the artistic director of the Norwegian Theatre in Christiania (now Oslo), where
he continued to experiment with drama and directed other writers’ works. Norwegian
Theatre at the time, focused on themes of historical grandeur, mythology, and national
identity, which resonated with the growing sense of Norwegian independence. Ibsen was,
naturally, drawn to these themes and ideas. His wrote Catiline, his first play, when he
was just 22. Not surprisingly, this play reflects his youthful interest in classical history
and political rebellion. Set in ancient Rome, the play takes us back in history to explore
themes of personal ambition, political intrigue, and revolution through the character of
a Roman senator Catiline who attempted to overthrow the Roman Republic. There was
nothing new in the play in so far as the structure, dialogues, and the theme. It failed to
garner both popular as well as critical interest. What is noteworthy though is the fact that
it did indicate the direction Ibsen was travelling. From this early play we can already see
that Ibsen was interested in exploring socio-political issues and the issue of social mo-
rality. The plays that followed like The Burial Mound (1850) followed, more or less the
same pattern with a progressive focus on the question of national identity and women’s
issues. We can regard this early period as essentially a period of experimentation and a
search for a distinct theater. Though Ibsen was making some progress, it wasn’t enough.
Ibsen was quite frustrated with the lack of success in theatre, both in terms of criti-
cal appreciation and popular acceptance. Though he continued to work hard at his art he
was unhappy. To compound the problem further he felt hemmed in by the conservative
cultural values of Norwegian society that allowed him very little creative freedom. He was
progressively growing critical of this backward-looking Norwegian society and culture.
All these factors forced him to shift base away from Norway. Finally, he left Norway in
1864 in search of that elusive success. After leaving Norway, he primarily lived in Italy
and Germany. The financial support of friends, along with state grants from Norway, en-
abled him to write without the pressure of supporting himself through other work. This
move marked a turning point in his career. He could now break away from the historical
dramas and romanticized narratives of his early works and begin exploring the social and
psychological realism for which he would, later, become famous.
Peer Gynt (1867) could be considered as Ibsen’s first major work. This play was,
essentially, a poetic and symbolic exploration of Norwegian identity, folklore, and fantasy.
His early works had helped him develop some command over dramatic form, stagecraft,
and character development. Though he preferred the verse form and generally followed the
romantic play format, this play marked a transition in his theatre style from romanticism
to a more structured realism. The play is still thematically rooted in the Norwegian myths,
culture and landscapes but its form and language are largely experimental. The play’s mix

PAGE 5
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 5 01-Jan-25 4:41:03 PM

 Modern European Drama

of verse and prose, its fluid shifts between reality and fantasy add a new dimension to
Ibsen’s play writing. Peer Gynt may not be as realistic in its narrative style as his later
plays, but the character’s psychological journey anticipates the more focused social and
personal struggles of his later plays. Though Ibsen’s work moved toward a sharper, more
realistic critique of society, many of the existential themes in Peer Gynt remained central
to his concerns as a playwright in later years.
When Ibsen tasted success with Peer Gynt, he was almost forty years old. It took
him another twelve years to shake off the baggage of Norwegian myth, nationalism and
the romantic play format to arrive at a completely different kind of play with A Doll’s
House (1879). It was a path breaking play both in its subject matter and its treatment,
and it created a stir because it foregrounded the issues of gender roles, marriage, personal
freedom, and challenged the traditional conservative social norms of the late 19th century.
The ending of the play, where Nora Helmer decides to leave her husband and children to
find her own identity, was both shocking and controversial, especially in a society that
expected the women to adhere to their roles as devoted wives and mothers. The publication
of this play was indeed significant not just for Ibsen but also for contemporary theatre.
The period, spanning roughly from the late 1870s to the 1890s, marks the maturing of
Ibsen into a playwright, with a deep focus on realism, social critique, and psychological
depth. It was during this time that Ibsen established himself as a key figure in the de-
velopment of modern drama.
A Doll’s House was followed in quick succession by a series of plays that explored
various social issues in a realistic/naturalistic way. In Ghosts (1881), Ibsen explores the
destructive consequences of social hypocrisy and moral repression, particularly through
the themes of inherited guilt, venereal disease, and the corrosive effects of maintaining
public facades. Since this play will be discussed in detail later, we will just make a passing
remark that at the time of its publication it was a scandal for addressing taboo subjects
and remains one of his most controversial plays. His next play, An Enemy of the People
(1882), explores the conflict between individual morality and the will of the majority. It
portrays the ethical struggle of a doctor who exposes a public health issue in his town’s
spa, only to be ostracized by the community. The play delves into the themes of truth,
integrity, and the dangers of populism. By the late 1880’s, Ibsen’s interest was shifting
from the outer world into the inner conflicts of human beings, especially the psycho-
logical and existential dilemmas that go beyond social critique. The Wild Duck (1884)
explores the tension between idealism and reality; the wild duck itself serves as a symbol
of wounded, fragile lives. The play moves towards Ibsen’s interest in how truth can be
destructive. Hedda Gabler (1890) focuses on a powerful and deeply troubled protagonist,

6 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 6 01-Jan-25 4:41:03 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

Hedda, who feels trapped by society’s expectations and her own desires for control and
influence. Hedda’s manipulation of those around her reveal themes of power, freedom, and
existential despair. As his themes went through various transitions, so did his technique.
Realism, that had served him well while dealing with social issues, would not allow him
to delve into the mysteries of the human condition and its complexities. So, he started
resorting to generous doses of complex symbolism in his later plays.
Ibsen returned to Norway in 1891. During his time away from home, he achieved
fame and acceptance as one of the most influential playwrights of his era. The decision
to return home was perhaps influenced by, a) the growing recognition at home and b) his
declining health and the need for stability. Back at home, he had hoped for some sense of
peace in his later years. But he suffered a series of strokes in 1890, which significantly
affected his ability to write and work. Though he remained active on the social circuit,
declining health drove Ibsen to delve deeper into the inner life of the mind rather than
the external social realities. This change can be seen in the increasingly symbolic nature
of his characters and settings of his later plays. This change of direction towards an in-
trospective, psychological drama is seen in plays like The Master Builder (1892) and the
plays that follow. Themes like guilt, ambition, existential dread come to dominate his later
plays. The characters in these plays wrestle with personal demons, guilt, ambition, and
existential crises. They are often on a quest for self-fulfillment or trapped in conflicting
desires between duty and personal freedom.
When We Dead Awaken (1899) is Ibsen’s last play. This play is often seen as a re-
flection on his own life and career as an artist. The central character, Arnold Rubek, is
an aging sculptor who encounters Irene, a former muse who feels that Rubek “killed” her
spirit to create his greatest work. Both characters grapple with regrets over their past de-
cisions, particularly the sacrifices they made for the sake of art. The play reflects Ibsen’s
deeper concern with the spiritual emptiness that can result from single-minded ambition.
By adopting symbolism in his later plays, Ibsen was able to push the boundaries of theatre
and shape the trajectory of modern drama.
Check Your Progress 1
i) How is Modern European Drama different from earlier dramatic practices?
ii) What were the circumstances under which Ibsen started working in the theatre?
iii) Why did Ibsen leave Norway in 1864 and how did it affect his career as a
dramatist?
iv) We can see three different phases in Ibsen’s growth as a dramatist. What are these
three phases?

PAGE 7
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 7 01-Jan-25 4:41:03 PM

 Modern European Drama

1.5 Ghosts: A Critical Summary

Though controversial at the time of its publication, Ghosts remains one of Ibsen’s most
important and influential works that continues to provoke thought and debate on the nature
of human responsibility, freedom, and the oppressive power of social norms. What we are
going to do in this section is to try and present a critical summary of the play. So, apart
from providing a bare outline of the plot and important events in the play, we will try and
provide some critical reflections on them. You are, however, advised to read the play in
detail and not treat this summary as a substitute for the actual text.
1.5.1 Act I: Critical Summary
Ghosts is a play in three acts with a linear plot structure that gradually unveils layers
of truth, and invites the audience to engage with issues like moral ambiguity, restrictive
social system, inherited sin, personal ambition, and gender roles. The first Act of a play,
as you already know, is expected to lay the groundwork for the play’s central themes,
characters, and conflicts. The first Act also establishes the psychological and moral
landscape in which the drama will unfold. As you will see, Act I of Ghosts manages to
achieve all these objectives remarkably well. Ghosts opens in the parlour of Mrs. Helene
Alving’s home. She is preparing for the opening of an orphanage built in memory of her
late husband, Captain Alving. Several key characters are introduced at this stage, and the
stage is set for conflicts that will unfold later in the play. The play opens with a conver-
sation between Regina Engstrand, Mrs. Alving’s maid, and her father Jakob Engstrand, a
carpenter. Engstrand tries to convince Regina to leave the Alving household and work at a
sailors’ establishment he is building. Regina resists, as she wants to stay in Mrs. Alving’s
household, where she feels she has a chance for a better life:
Regina: We’ll see, all right! What, me? When I’ve been brought up by a lady like
Mrs. Alving? - treated almost like one of the family here? Me go back with you - to a
place like that? Tcha!
(Act I: 23)1.
Engstrand’s manipulations to get Regina back and her desire to escape the lower-class
life sets up a subplot related to ambition and deception. Act I prepares the audience for the
unfolding of the play’s major themes. It sets the stage for the unraveling of family secrets,
introducing key characters who represent contrasting worldviews. The central tensions be-
tween social expectations and personal truth are slowly revealed through subtle exchanges
preparing the audience for the deeper revelations to come later. As you must have noticed,
 ll references to the play are from Henrik Ibsen. Ghosts and Other Plays. Translated by Peter Watts,
1. A
Penguin, 1964.
8 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 8 01-Jan-25 4:41:03 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

the orphanage plays a dual symbolic role in the narrative. On the surface, it is a charitable
institution meant to honour Captain Alving’s legacy and provide care for orphaned chil-
dren. However, for Mrs. Alving, it is also a way to rid herself of her late husband’s tainted
wealth. By dedicating Captain Alving’s money to the orphanage, she hopes to cleanse herself
of the painful memories and moral burden of his immoral life. The orphanage, therefore,
represents a kind of moral facade; a way for Mrs. Alving to suppress and hide the truth of
her husband’s debauchery, from society. It seems that society values respectable appearance
over uncomfortable truths under a veneer of respectability, a theme that Ibsen explores in
the play. At the same time, it foreshadows the inevitable failure of such repression, as the
past refuses to remain buried.
As the play unfolds, it becomes clear that Mrs. Alving is not merely a dutiful wid-
ow who wants to preserve her husband’s memory. Her conversation with Pastor Manders
reveals the depth of her dissatisfaction with the social expectations that have shaped her
life. She tells Manders the truth about her husband:
Mrs. Alving: Now, Mr Manders, I’m going to tell you the truth. I’d promised myself
that you should hear it one day…and no one but you.
Pastor Manders: What is the truth?
Mrs. Alving: The truth is this: that my husband was just as dissolute when he died as
he had been all his life. (Act I:49)
Years ago, she tried to escape her unhappy marriage by fleeing to Manders, but he
convinced her to return to Captain Alving, citing her duty as a wife. We see the oppressive
power of religious and social norms that forces women like Mrs. Alving into subservient
roles, denying them agency over their own lives. She had to obey Manders and returned
to her husband, but at a great personal cost. Consequently, with the passage of time, Mrs.
Alving develops a more critical view of these conventional values. She is now openly
skeptical of Manders’ conservative moralization, and her views on marriage, duty, and
individual freedom are more progressive. However, she hasn’t been able to break free of
the same social expectations that have always dominated her life. This failure is reflected
in her decision to construct the orphanage in her husband’s name, a decision motivated
by her need to keep up appearances. Pastor Manders is shocked by Mrs. Alving’s admis-
sions and critical views. He is the voice of society, upholding rigid standards of duty,
respectability, and religious morality and ever so willing to sacrifice the truth of people’s
lives to preserve a ‘good reputation’. This tension between Mrs. Alving’s evolving per-
spective and Manders’ rigid conservatism is one of the central conflicts of the play: the
clash between the individual’s desire for truth and freedom, and the repressive forces of
social convention.

PAGE 9
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 9 01-Jan-25 4:41:03 PM

 Modern European Drama

Osvald Alving, Mrs. Alving’s son, returns home after living for many years abroad
in Paris, where he was pursuing a career as an artist. His return is filled with a sense of
foreboding. From the outset, Osvald appears physically and emotionally weak, casting a
shadow over what should be a joyful reunion. His illness becomes symbolic of the play’s
central theme of heredity, particularly the transmission of moral and physical degradation
from one generation to the next. Osvald is unaware of his father’s true nature, having
grown up with an idealized image of him. Mrs. Alving sent Osvald away at a young age
to shield him from the corrupting influence of his father’s immoral behavior. However,
despite her efforts, Osvald has inherited more than just his father’s name; he has inher-
ited a debilitating illness (which the audience later learns is syphilis), a direct result of
Captain Alving’s debauchery. This idea of inherited sin is central to Ibsen’s critique of
the hypocrisy within social structures. No matter how hard Mrs. Alving tries to escape
her husband’s legacy, it continues to haunt her and her son, a reminder that the sins of
the past have real and lasting consequences. Osvald’s artistic, bohemian lifestyle and his
liberal ideas contrast sharply with the conservative values of Pastor Manders. The gen-
erational divide between Osvald and the older characters further accentuates the tension
between new, progressive ideals and the traditional moral framework that characters like
Manders defend. Osvald’s perspective on life and morality is more aligned with modern,
cosmopolitan views and his return from Paris symbolizes a confrontation between the
repressive social values of the past and the freer, more liberated attitudes of the present.
The sub-plot involving Jacob Engstrand, and his daughter Regina adds another layer
of moral complexity to the narrative. Engstrand is a carpenter who presents himself as a
repentant sinner, eager to open a “home for sailors” as a means of making amends for his
past wrongdoings. However, Engstrand is a manipulative and self-serving character, using
religious language and piety as a cover for his selfish ambitions. He tries to convince
Regina, who works as Mrs. Alving’s maid, to come with him and work at the sailors’
home not because he wants his daughter at home but rather to have a young woman
work as a hostess and entertain sailors. But she resists, because she aspires to a higher
social standing. Later, Regina would realise the futility of her aspirations when she learns
that Engstrand is not her real father and that she is the illegitimate daughter of Captain
Alving. That makes her Osvald’s half-sister. That, unfortunately, is the end of any possi-
ble romantic relationship that she might have imagined with Osvald. Her ambition to rise
above her station through a romantic liaison with Osvald reflects the limitations placed
on women in a patriarchal society, where marriage is often seen as the only means of
social mobility. At the same time, her character embodies the theme of concealed truths,
as her true parentage is one of the many secrets that will eventually come to light, fur-

10 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 10 01-Jan-25 4:41:04 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

ther complicating the relationships between the characters. Engstrand’s hypocrisy mirrors
the hypocrisy of society at large, where appearances and public morality often mask per-
sonal ambition and deceit. He manipulates Pastor Manders by appealing to his sense of
charity and religious duty. But the reality is different, and the audience can see through
his facade. However, Engstrand’s scheming is only but a reflection of the moral double
standards that is prevalent in society.
We can say that Act I prepares the groundwork for the tragic events that will unfold
in the later acts. The “ghosts” that Mrs. Alving refers to at the end of Act I, are already
present, though they have not yet fully revealed themselves. Act I is rich in foreshadow-
ing, particularly in the way Mrs. Alving speaks of her husband’s sins and the orphanage’s
significance. The audience senses that these buried secrets will soon come to the surface,
threatening to destroy the carefully constructed lives of the characters. Osvald’s illness
and Regina’s ambiguous status hint at the tragic consequences of the sins of the previous
generation. The Act ends with Mrs. Alving accidentally overhearing, what appears to be an
intimate exchange between Regina and Osvald in the dining room. When Pastor Manders
enquires about what was happening, she replies:
Pastor manders (Upset): What’s happening? Mrs Alving - what is it?
Mrs. Alving (hoarsely): “Ghosts! The couple in the conservatory - walking again. (Act I :54).
She expresses her belief that the sins of the past, particularly her husband’s immoral
actions, still haunt the present, suggesting that the “ghosts” of the past are not easily bur-
ied. Act I of Ghosts sets the stage for the disintegration of the Alving family’s carefully
maintained image of respectability. Mrs. Alving’s struggle to reconcile her desire for truth
with the pressures of social convention, Osvald’s impending illness, and the lurking secrets
of Captain Alving’s past create a mood of growing unease. The act raises fundamental
questions about moral responsibility, inherited guilt, and the impossibility of escaping the
consequences of one’s past.

Summary of Key Events:

‹ Regina and Engstrand’s conversation: Engstrand tries to manipulate Regina into
joining him in his shady business venture, but she refuses.
‹ Pastor Manders’ arrival: He and Mrs. Alving discuss the orphanage’s opening
and revisit her troubled marriage to Captain Alving. They also discuss the issue of
insurance for the Orphanage. Manders rejects the idea because insuring the Orphanage
would give the impression that they did not trust in ‘Divine Providence’.

PAGE 11
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 11 01-Jan-25 4:41:04 PM

 Modern European Drama

‹ Mrs. Alving reveals her husband’s true nature: She explains how her late husband’s
moral failings were hidden from society, and how Manders’ advice had once forced
her back into a toxic marriage.
‹ Osvald’s return: Osvald, who was living as an artist in Paris returns. What should
have become a joyous event is offset by a mysterious health problem that Osvald
brings back with him.
‹ The discussion of moral issues: While Mrs. Alving and Pastor Manders debate
social morality the situation takes a turn with Mrs Alving overhearing a conversation
between Osvald and Rigina. This strengthens Mrs. Alving belief that the ghosts of
the past sins continue to haunt the present.
Check Your Progress 2
i) Who are the key characters introduced in Act I?
ii) What is the importance of Act I in Ghosts?
iii) What does the Orphanage symbolize?
iv) What are the major themes introduced in Act I?
v) What is Mrs. Alving referring to when she says, “Ghosts! The couple in the
conservatory - walking again.”?

1.5.2 Act II: Critical Summary

In Act II, the action deepens further as Ibsen gradually develops the central themes of
the play. This act serves as the turning point where the internal conflicts of the characters
come to the fore, and the facade of respectability that Mrs. Alving has worked so hard to
maintain begins to crumble under the weight of past sins and hidden truths.
At the start of the act, Mrs. Alving confesses to Pastor Manders about the reality of her
marriage to Captain Alving. She reveals that Captain Alving, a highly respected member of
the community, is the father of Regina. This is an unsettling revelation that Pastor Manders
finds hard to believe or at least pretends to do so:
Pastor Manders: To her – Oh, but Engstrand isn’t… Good heavens, Mrs Alving, that
can’t be true. There must be some mistake.
Mrs. Alving: There’s no mistake at all. I’m afraid. Johanna had to confess the whole
thing to me, and my husband couldn’t deny it. So the only thing to do was to hush it up.
(Act II:56)
This is a truth that Mrs. Alving had hidden for years, to protect her son Osvald, and
to conform to social norms. She keeps Osvald away from the truth because it is expected
12 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 12 01-Jan-25 4:41:04 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

that a son must grow up to love and respect his father. Mrs. Alving’s confession is partic-
ularly important because it exposes the moral hypocrisy at the heart of the play. Society
holds up Captain Alving as a paragon of virtue, despite his immoral behavior, simply be-
cause outward appearances were maintained. Mrs. Alving’s decision to build an orphanage
in his name is part of this attempt to erase any possibility of his sins from surfacing in
public, thereby insulating Captain Alving’s reputation forever. However, she admits that
the building of the orphanage is also her way of freeing herself from the past. By giving
away Captain Alving’s wealth, she hopes to close the chapter of his corrupting influence.
Manders, who had preached about a wife’s duty to her husband and forced Mrs.
Alving to suppress her desire for independence, and sacrifice her own happiness for the
sake of appearances, is shocked by Mrs. Alving’s revelations. But instead of condemning
Captain Alving’s debauchery, he tries to sweep it under the carpet by passing it off as
youthful indiscretions. His response reflects his belief in the importance of maintaining
appearances at all costs and reveals his inability to recognize the real harm that social
expectations can cause. Manders disagrees with Mrs. Alving’s desire to be truthful with
Osvald. He thinks it is proper for Osvald to continue believing in the myth of his father’s
respectability.
Mrs. Alving (Looking fixedly at him): If I were the woman I ought to be, I should take
Osvald on one side and say: ‘Listen, my boy, your father was a dissolute man-’
Pastor Manders: Heaven forbid!
…
Pastor Manders: Do you call it cowardice to do your plain duty? Have you forgotten that
a child should love and honour his father and mother?
…
Mrs. Alving: Yes, thanks to my regard for duty, I’ve been lying to my boy for years on
end. What a coward - what a coward I’ve been! (Act II: 59)
For Manders, protecting the family’s reputation is more important than confronting
uncomfortable truths. This interaction between Mrs. Alving and Pastor Manders highlights
the hollowness of institutionalized morality. Manders remains blind to the harm that this
hypocrisy inflicts on individuals, especially women like Mrs. Alving, who are forced to
conform to these social rules at great personal cost.
A key theme in Act II is heredity, particularly as it relates to the transmission of sin
from one generation to the next. At the end, Mrs. Alving’s efforts to shield Osvald from
his father’s corrupting influence are futile. The true horror of Captain Alving’s legacy is
revealed through Osvald’s illness, which is a result of the syphilis he has inherited from

PAGE 13
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 13 01-Jan-25 4:41:04 PM

 Modern European Drama

his father. In this sense, Osvald becomes the literal and metaphorical embodiment of
Captain Alving’s sins. Osvald’s condition is a tragic manifestation of the theme of genetic
determinism; the idea that the consequences of one generation’s sins is passed down to
the next through bloodlines.
Osvald: At last he said: ‘You have been more or less riddled from your birth.’ The actual
word he used was ‘vermoulu’.
Mrs. Alving (anxiously) What did he mean by that?
Osvald: I didn’t understand either, and I asked him to explain. Then the old cynic said-
(He clenches his fists.) Oh…!
Mrs. Alving: What did he say?
Osvald: He said, ‘The sins of the fathers are visited on the children….’
Mrs. Alving: The sins of the fathers-! (Act II:74)
Mrs. Alving had hoped that distance would protect Osvald from his father’s immoral
influence. But now she is forced to confront the fact that heredity is an inescapable force.
Osvald’s illness represents not only the physical consequences of his father’s promiscuity
but also the moral and psychological burden that he carries as a part of his family leg-
acy. Ibsen emphasizes the tragic inevitability of this hereditary transmission of guilt and
suffering.
Another character who plays a significant role in Act II is Engstrand, the carpenter
who is supposedly Regina’s father. Engstrand’s appearance in this act adds to the play’s
critique of moral hypocrisy. He pretends to be a repentant sinner who wants to atone
his past mistakes by building a sailors’ home. Engstrand’s offer is a ploy to manipulate
Manders. And he is able to do that by using religious and moral language that appeals
to Manders social and religious conservatism. Engstrand’s claim that he acted out of
compassion in raising Regina is simply not true. Pure self-interest and the possibility of
reaping some future dividends is what motivated Engstrand to take the blame. He seeks
Manders’ approval and financial support for his scheme, but the audience is aware that
his motivations are far from pure. Engstrand’s character represents the type of moral du-
plicity that permeates society; people who use the appearance of virtue to hide their true,
self-serving nature.
The orphanage that Mrs. Alving funds in her late husband’s name serves as a powerful
symbol in the play. It represents Mrs. Alving’s attempt to atone for the past and to rid
herself of Captain Alving’s corrupting influence. However, the orphanage also embodies
the social tendency to cover up unpleasant truths with superficial gestures of charity and

14 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 14 01-Jan-25 4:41:04 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

respectability. The eventual burning down of the orphanage foreshadows the collapse of
the false narratives that Mrs. Alving constructed around her husband’s legacy. The fire
symbolizes the inevitability of truth coming to light, despite attempts to suppress it.
The title ‘Ghosts’ holds the key to the thematic core of Act II. Mrs. Alving reflects on
how she and the others in the play are haunted by the “ghosts” of the past. As she says:
I’m haunted by ghosts...But I’m inclined to think that we’re all ghosts, Pastor Manders;
it’s not only the things that we’ve inherited from our fathers and mothers that live on in
us, but all sorts of old dead ideas and old dead beliefs, and things of that sort. They’re
not actually alive in us, but they’re rooted there all the same, and we can’t rid ourselves
of them…. And we are, all of us, afraid of the light. (Act II: 61)
This statement reveals that the past exerts a powerful influence over the present,
especially through the inherited consequences of sin and moral failure. Interestingly, as
you must have noticed, the play begins on a cold, rainy and dark day. In fact, the dark
and brooding weather reflects the mood of the play. In this context, Osvald’s yearning
for the sun is symbolic of the desire to break free of the ghosts of the past. Act II not
only unravels the various hidden family secrets but also sets up the tragic trajectory of
the characters’ lives, particularly Osvald, who is doomed to suffer the consequences of
his father’s sins despite Mrs. Alving’s desperate attempts to protect him. Ibsen’s use of
symbolism, particularly the orphanage and the idea of “ghosts,” reinforces the notion
that the past cannot be buried or ignored. It continues to haunt the present and destroy
the lives of those who try to suppress it. It can only be dispelled by the sun, or in other
words, the truth.

Summary of Key Events:

‹ Mrs. Alving tells Pastor Manders that Regina is Captain Alving’s illegitimate
daughter: The Act opens with the revelation that Captain Alving is the real father
of Regina. Mrs. Alving kept it a secret to maintain appearances and to give Regina
a better life. Though Pastor Manders seems to have had an inkling about this truth
he struggles to accept it. Further, he tries to defend the Captain on dubious grounds.
‹ Tension between social norms and personal truth is heightened: Pastor Manders
is appalled by Mrs. Alving’s revelations. He insists that Mrs. Alving should continue
hiding the truth to preserve Captain Alving’s respectable image.
‹ Mrs. Alving begins to realize the full impact of heredity: Mrs. Alving grapples
with the idea that Osvald’s illness is the result of his father’s sins. She confronts
the devastating reality that heredity, both moral and physical, is inescapable.

PAGE 15
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 15 01-Jan-25 4:41:04 PM

 Modern European Drama

‹ Jacob Engstrand manipulates Pastor Manders: Pastor Manders confronts Engstrand

with the truth of Regina’s status. He accuses Engstrand of being untruthful and
immoral. But Engstrand turns the tables on Pastor Manders by pretending to be a
morally upright man and being a good father to Regina and a good husband to her
mother. He is able to convince Pastor Manders to support his plan to open a sailors’
home. Engstrand uses the guise of piety and charity to deceive Manders.
‹ Mrs. Alving and Pastor Manders discuss the past: Mrs. Alving reveals more about
the true nature of her late husband, Captain Alving, who led a life of debauchery.
She explains her long-standing decision to hide his immoral behavior from the public
to protect the family’s reputation.
‹ Osvald reveals his worsening illness: Mrs. Alving is deeply concerned about her
son Osvald’s declining health. Osvald explains that he suffers from a mysterious
illness (later revealed as syphilis), which, he was told by the doctor, is inherited
from his father’s immoral lifestyle. He refuses to believe the doctor, blaming his
own lifestyle instead. Osvald expresses despair and hints at a bleak future. This will
later lead to catastrophic consequences.
‹ Osvald talks about the Joy of Living: Osvald tells her mother that he can’t stay
at home with her because it was gloomy. The gloominess is both literally and
metaphorically true. There is no joy of living at home because there is nothing to
do. He believes that his own salvation lay with Regina who is full of the joy of
living. He is not yet aware of the fact that Regina is his half-sister, and he expresses
the desire to have her as his wife.
‹ The Act ends with the news of fire at the Orphanage: As the weight of hidden
truths becomes unbearable, Mrs. Alving faces the tragic consequences of the choices
made in the past. The problem is compounded further by the fact that the Orphanage
is now on fire. The tension mounts, setting the stage for the emotional and physical
collapse that will follow in the final act.

Check Your Progress 3

i) How does Engstrand convince Pastor Manders to support his plan for a ‘sailors’
home’?
ii) What does Mrs. Alving reveal about Regina in this Act and what was Pastor
Manders response?
iii) What is Osvald suffering from?
iv) Why is Pastor Manders reluctant to insure the Orphanage?

16 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 16 01-Jan-25 4:41:04 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

1.5.3 Act III: Critical Summary

In Act III, the emotional and thematic tensions that have been simmering throughout the
play reach their devastating conclusion. The act presents the inescapable consequences of
hidden sins, hereditary guilt, and the moral decay festering beneath the facade of social
respectability. All these elements are tied together at the end. The act opens after the or-
phanage has burned down. This fire is not just a literal event. It signals the collapse of
the false world that Mrs. Alving was living in. In terms of dramatic action, the movement
now turns inward. This is a very short act where most of the characters exit the scene
leaving only the mother and son together at the end.
The orphanage, built on a foundation of lies and denial, could not endure, much like
the respectability Mrs. Alving had tried to maintain. The fire breaks out after some wood
shavings catch fire. The actual source of the fire is not revealed leaving enough scope for
wild speculation. Pastor Manders is horrified at the fire but is quick to attribute it to the
wickedness of the house. He takes the high moral ground to condemn Mrs. Alving and
Osvalds modern ideas. He refuses to see the fire as symbolic of the deeper issues lurk-
ing beneath the surface, clinging instead to his rigid sense of morality. In contrast, Mrs.
Alving, who has already begun to question traditional values, does not share his view. She
sees the fire at the Orphanage for what it is: the destruction of a false image that could
no longer be sustained. This incident also has a darker side. The entire exchange between
Manders and Engstrand about the fire exposes the underbelly of society.
Pastor Manders: Yes, but my dear fellow, how-?
Engstrand: Jakob Engstrand is like a guardian angel, sir, that’s what he is.
Pastor Manders: No no, I certainly couldn’t allow that.
Engstrand: Ah, you will in the end. Someone I know has taken the blame for another
man once before.
Pastor Manders: Jakob! (Grasping his hand) You’re a man in a thousand! Well, you shall
have help with your Seaman’s Refuse - you can rely on that. (Act III: 89)
Engstrand finds in the fire an opportunity to blackmail Manders into supporting his
lodging house for sailors. He has very little difficulty in convincing Manders that the
fire was a consequence of Manders own carelessness. However, he manages to strike a
deal with Manders. He is ready to take the blame for Manders mistake, just as he did for
Captain Alving, in exchange for Manders support for Engstrand’s plans of setting up a
home for sailors. Ironically, Engstrand promises to name the establishment after Captain
Alving. This exchange is a sharp indictment of the hypocrisy on both sides, the layman

PAGE 17
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 17 01-Jan-25 4:41:04 PM

 Modern European Drama

and the clergy. If Engstrand’s scheming immorality deserves to be condemned so does

the moral bankruptcy of Pastor Manders.
As the act progresses, Osvald confesses to his mother the full extent of his illness.
He is suffering from syphilitic paralysis, a degenerative condition. Osvald describes the
terror he feels at the prospect of losing control of his mind and body. His words are
filled with foreboding, and he reveals that the disease has already begun to affect his
mental faculties, leading to periods of confusion and forgetfulness. This revelation is the
culmination of the theme of hereditary guilt that is threaded through the play. Osvald’s
illness embodies the idea that sins are passed down from one generation to the next. Mrs.
Alving’s attempts to shield her son ultimately fail. The “ghosts” of the past manifest
physically in Osvald’s disease.
Osvald’s illness is also symbolic of the broader moral decay that haunts the Alving
family. While Captain Alving’s legacy has infected Osvald’s body, the lies and deceptions
surrounding the family have poisoned their lives. The inevitability of Osvald’s end is a
cruel reminder that, no matter what, the past has a way of catching up with the present.
At this point Osvald is full of self-loathing and is vulnerable. Mrs Alving decides to reveal
the truth about the father to the son hoping that the truth will lessen Osvald’s burden. In
this confession, Ibsen deftly shifts the blame away from an individual to the oppressive
social conventions that emaciate men and women from within. Captain Alving, accord-
ing to Mrs Alving, was not entirely to blame for the sorry state of affairs that they find
themselves in now. It was the constrictive and joyless morality of everyday living that
led him down the path of dissolution and that she herself was of little help.
Mrs. Alving: And then this boy, so full of the joy of living…had to live here in a second-rate
town where there were no pleasures, but only dissipations. He had no aim in life, only an
official position. He had no work that he could throw himself into heart and soul, only
routine. Not a single one of his friends knew what the joy of living really meant - they
were just idlers and topers…
Osvald: Mother:
Mrs. Alving: And so the inevitable happened.
Osvald: The inevitable?
Mrs. Alving: You said yourself this evening what would happen to you if you stayed at home.
Osvald: Do you mean to say that my father…?
Mrs. Alving: Your poor father could never find any outlet for this overwhelming joy of
living that was in him. And I didn’t bring any sunshine into his life either. (Act III:92)

18 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 18 01-Jan-25 4:41:05 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

This revelation couldn’t have come at a worse time for Osvald and Regina. They both
had been planning on a life together though for different reasons. For Regina, Osvald was
that magic door that would let her into the world of high society, way above her current
station in life. For Osvald, aware as he is about his debilitating condition, Regina provided
the hope for escape when the time came for it. Both are left devastated. Regina, instead of
sticking around to tend to a sick Osvald, decides to leave with whatever she could salvage
from her wasted time at the Alving house. While Regina’s departure can be seen as a selfish
attempt to carve out a future for herself, it is nothing but a pragmatic step to escape from
the entanglements of the Alving household. Regina’s exit highlights the precarious condition
that women in general and women from the lower strata in particular, find themselves in.
Regina, like Mrs. Alving, has been trapped by circumstances beyond her control, and her
departure is both a rejection of the family’s moral corruption and an acknowledgment of
her own limited options in a society that offers little freedom to women of her class.
Following Regina’s departure, the atmosphere shifts dramatically. A palpable urgency
resonates in Osvald’s voice, while Mrs. Alving exhibits a poignant sense of helplessness.
In one of the most heart-wrenching moments of the play, Osvald implores his mother to
assist him in dying when the disease reaches its terminal phase. He confides that he has
brought a packet of morphine with him, expressing a desire for her to administer it when
he can no longer care for himself. This request thrusts Mrs. Alving into an excruciating
moral quandary. On the one hand, she is a mother who loves her son deeply and cannot
bear the thought of seeing him suffer and on the other hand she is horrified by the idea
of helping him end his life. However, on the other hand, she is appalled by the notion
of aiding him in ending his life. Osvald’s desperate plea for euthanasia prompts intricate
questions regarding the essence of mercy, suffering and personal autonomy. Osvald, fearing
the erosion of his independence, perceives death as the sole escape from the torment of
his illness. For him, the prospect of existing in a state of mental and physical incapaci-
tation is simply intolerable. For him, the idea of living in a state of mental and physical
incapacitation is unbearable. Osvald, with his bohemian and modern values, believes in
personal freedom and the right to choose the manner of his death. Mrs. Alving, on the
other hand, shaped by religious norms, is repulsed by the idea of taking a life, even out
of compassion. She has grappled with the tension between her instinct to shield him from
pain and the necessity of confronting the stark truths of their shared history. Now, she
faces a critical decision: should she honor his wish and alleviate his suffering, or should
she adhere to the rigid moral and religious frameworks. The struggle within her, although
profound, reflects broader conversations about duty and desire.
The climactic scene is undeniably tragic. Osvald, who has been increasingly plagued
by his illness, collapses into a state of mental disarray. He repeatedly pleads for “the sun”
PAGE 19
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 19 08-Jan-25 2:34:17 AM

 Modern European Drama

(a metaphor for the tranquility and relief he desperately yearns for amidst his suffering).
This moment is profoundly symbolic, as the sun signifies both light and life. As Osvald
slips into unconsciousness, Mrs. Alving finds herself alone with the packet of morphine
he had entrusted to her. The conclusion is ambiguous: Mrs. Alving holds the morphine,
yet she remains uncertain about whether she will administer it to her son. However, this
tension underscores the weight of her dilemma. Ibsen leaves this decision unresolved,
allowing the audience to grapple with the same moral dilemma that Mrs. Alving faces.
Should she honour her son’s wish and give him peace, or should she let him live, even if
it meant prolonging his suffering? This ambiguity is crucial to the play’s thematic depth.
Mrs. Alving is torn between personal morality and social expectations, between love and
duty, and between freedom and repression not knowing what to do. She stands frozen,
staring at this excruciatingly painful situation with horror. The ending leaves the audience
with no clear answers and much to struggle with.
Osvald (still tonelessly): The sun, the sun…
Mrs. Alving (springing up in despair, grasping her hair in both hands, screams): I can’t
bear it! (Whispering as though paralysed) I can’t bear it…never! (Suddenly) Where did
he put them? (Hurriedly feeling in his coat) Here! (She shrinks back a few paces and
cries) No no no…Yes! No no… (She stands a step or two away from him, with her hands
twisted in her hair, staring at him in speechless horror.)
Osvald (Sitting motionless as before, says): The sun…the sun. (Act III: 101-102)
Act III of Ghosts brings Ibsen’s exploration of inherited guilt, social hypocrisy, and
moral conflict to a devastating conclusion. The destruction of the Orphanage, Osvald’s
illness, Regina’s departure, and Mrs. Alving’s final torment illustrate the inescapability
of the past and the profound consequences of suppressing the truth. Ibsen’s portrayal of
Mrs. Alving’s struggle to reconcile her love for her son with the realities of his inherit-
ed disease offers a powerful critique of the social norms that demand conformity at the
expense of individual freedom and truth. In the end, the “ghosts” that haunt the Alving
family are not just the sins of the past but also the moral and social structures that prevent
the characters from living authentic lives.

Summary of Key Events:

‹ The orphanage burns down: Mrs. Alving and Pastor Manders learn that the orphanage,
built in Captain Alving’s memory, has been destroyed by fire. Pastor Manders feels
guilty for not insuring the orphanage and is persuaded by Jacob Engstrand to cover
up the incident as an accident.

20 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 20 08-Jan-25 2:35:39 AM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

‹ Osvald reveals the severity of his illness: Osvald confesses to Mrs. Alving that
his illness (syphilitic paralysis) is serious and that the disease has started affecting
his brain and body, causing increasing debilitation and mental lapses.
‹ Mrs. Alving tells Regina the truth about her parentage: Mrs. Alving reveals to
Regina that she is the illegitimate daughter of Captain Alving, making her Osvald’s
half-sister. This revelation destroys any romantic possibility between Regina and
Osvald.
‹ Regina leaves the household: Regina rejects the burden of her parentage and decides
to return to Engstrand, choosing to join his plan to open a sailors’ home.
‹ Mother and son are left alone: After Regina leaves Osvald asks his mother to
help him die when the time comes. Osvald, dreading the loss of his autonomy, asks
Mrs. Alving to administer morphine when he can no longer care for himself. He
shows her the morphine he has been carrying as a means of ending his life when
the disease takes full control.
‹ Osvald suffers a mental collapse: Osvald succumbs to a seizure and becomes
unresponsive, repeatedly asking for “the sun”. Mrs. Alving is left with the morphine
in her hand, unsure about what is to be done.
‹ Ambiguous ending: The play ends with Mrs. Alving unable to make a choice. The
ending is left open and unresolved.

Check Your Progress 4

i) How does Engstrand manage to make Pastor Manders agree to his proposal?
ii) What does the exchange between Engstrand and Pastor Manders reveal about their
characters?
iii) What does Mrs. Alving reveal about Regina in this act? and how does it affect
the relationship between Regina and Osvald?
iv) What happens to Osvald at the end?
v) Why is the ending left ambiguous?

1.6 Ibsen and Realism/Naturalism

In this section, we will briefly discuss some of the influences that shaped Ibsen’s dramatic
art as well as his own thinking on theatre. We must keep in mind the fact that Ibsen was
writing at a time when Europe was going through some radical transformations. Space

PAGE 21
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 21 01-Jan-25 4:41:05 PM

 Modern European Drama

does not permit us to discuss all the impulses that contributed to the general literary
landscape, but we will try to touch upon some significant developments that had a direct
bearing on Ibsen’s drama. The 19th century Europe was marked by sweeping social, polit-
ical, and intellectual changes. It was an era shaped by the Industrial Revolution, scientific
advancements, nationalist movements, and the rise of the middle class. Though all these
changes had their impact on the state of the Theatre in varying degrees, we will discuss
two major developments that had a direct impact on Ibsen’s career as a playwright.
The first is related to the political developments taking place all over Europe. The
rise of nationalism, particularly in countries striving for independence or unification, was
an important development in so far as theatre was concerned. Playwrights used the stage
to assert national identity and explore the cultural and historical roots of their nations.
Historical plays portraying the struggle for national unity or independence resonated deeply
with contemporary audiences. This, in turn, encouraged Romanticism in the theatre. So,
what we see in early 19th-century drama is a kind of intermeshing of Nationalism and Ro-
manticism. We lack the space to discuss in detail the various nuances of both these terms,
but it will suffice to say that while Nationalism tried to unite people for a common cause
and a shared past, Romanticism provided that shared heritage by making visible elements
from their local myths and stories in glorious light so that it would inspire people to regain
that glorious past. Hence, dramatists often feature heroic figures caught up in emotional
and moral struggles in their plays. The other aspect of Romanticism was that it prioritized
emotion, intuition, and imagination over the Enlightenment ideas of reason and intellect.
In this way, it contrasted with the later movement toward realism, but it nonetheless set
the stage for a new focus on the individual’s inner life, which would continue to evolve
through the century in more nuanced ways later, particularly in psychological realism.
As you must have noticed in our earlier discussion in section 1.3, many of Ibsen’s early
plays are influenced by these two impulses.
The second important development that directly impacted Ibsen’s work, especially the
realist phase, is the scientific and industrial revolution and its various ramifications. The
Industrial Revolution brought unprecedented technological advances which in turn led to
the growth of industries, urbanization, a new working class, and significant changes in the
social structures. The growing middle class began to exert cultural and economic influence.
The theatre, traditionally a pastime for the aristocracy, became a place for the middle class
to assert their values and perspectives. The demands of this audience for more realistic,
relatable content brought in significant changes in theatre. Further, the economic inequality
between the wealthy upper class and the poor working class led to new social tensions.
In this fast-changing world, religion struggled to hold its sway over the people thereby

22 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 22 01-Jan-25 4:41:05 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

putting the traditional value systems under strain. All these developments had prepared the
ground for a shift away from Romanticism in the theatre. The final push towards Realism
in theatre came from the intellectual and scientific developments that were taking shape
simultaneously, especially Darwin’s theory of evolution and scientific positivism.
Ibsen was a perceptive observer of these changes happening around him. While his
initial foray into theatre reflects his enthusiasm for romanticism and nationalism, he was
soon looking to break away from it. His early plays, influenced by Norwegian nationalism
and myths, did not bring him the success or the recognition that he was looking for. The
public taste, as discussed earlier, was changing. So, he was looking to broaden his horizon
and find an appropriate theatrical expression. The intellectual and scientific developments
and the new social configurations demanded a technique that could give expression to the
new realities. One model which was readily available for Ibsen, was the well-made play
of Eugene Scribe (1791-1861). Scribe is a French dramatist, best known for formalizing
the structure of the well-made play, a formulaic but tightly constructed approach to dra-
ma. His plays were built around a clear, logical progression of plot, where every action
and line of dialogue advanced the story. He emphasized intricate plotting and suspense,
usually revolving around secrets, misunderstandings, and surprising reversals. A typical
Scribe play would open with clear exposition, providing essential background and set-up
for the ensuing action followed by a dramatic event or piece of information that sets off
the main events of the plot. Gradually the plot becomes increasingly complex, often in-
volving secrets, mistaken identities, or hidden relationships. This is followed by a dramatic
reversal often due to a new piece of information leading to the resolution of the conflict.
So, it would, typically, follow an order-conflict- disorder- and finally restoration of order
formula. The entire emphasis was on a logical unfolding of the plot and a final resolution.
Scribe was a prodigious writer and soon his influence spread to other parts of Europe
and England as well. It will be erroneous to assume that his only contribution was neatly
laid out plots or the element of surprise in them. Scribe can be credited with some inno-
vations which later, in the skillful hands of a dramatist like Ibsen, became key features of
modern realist theatre. One such innovation was to introduce characters from the real world,
characters that the play going audience could easily identify with. Coupled with that, his
comedies were built around day-to-day issues of modern bourgeois society. It was about the
new middle class and its social and material aspirations. Not surprisingly, his plays were
enormously popular with audiences, particularly the French middle class. His works were
entertaining, accessible, and built around relatable social situations. Ibsen, who was already
looking to break out of the romantic conventions, found the structural innovations of Scribe
an extremely useful foundation for writing his realist and naturalist play.

PAGE 23
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 23 01-Jan-25 4:41:05 PM

 Modern European Drama

Another impulse that influenced Ibsen was the Naturalism of Emily Zola. Both Zola
and Ibsen were writing around the same time, and it would be fairly accurate to say that
they ware of each other’s work. Though Zola is known for his fiction writing, he made
some very important contributions to the theatre as well. One of the key contributions
was the call to adopt naturalistic techniques in the theatre to present the audience with,
as he called it, ‘a slice of life’. Zola was impressed by the method of close observation
used in natural sciences and the Darwinian theories about heredity and environment in
human development. Zola fused all these elements together to advocate for a theatre that
would; a) be realistic in its conception and in conformity with human psychology and
behaviour, b) have flesh and blood characters whose actions, speech, and behaviour would
be in conformity with heredity and the environment, and c) and the setting on the stage
should be realistic and natural rather than theatrical and flashy. The general principle that
Zola had in mind was that literature must be a tool of enquiry into the nature of human
beings and the things around it rather than just a source of amusement. Ibsen, as we know,
was working on similar lines for reasons we have already discussed. By the time Ibsen
wrote A Dolls House (1879), he had already figured out the theatrical innovations that
would usher in realism. So, we see most of the elements of what would go on to define
naturalism in theatre already present in this play. All the characters like Nora, Torvald,
Mrs. Linde, and others are drawn from contemporary society. They speak the everyday
language of the common people and behave according to their motivations and character
traits. The play with its feminist theme, not surprisingly, was hailed as a milestone.

1.6.1 Naturalism in Ghosts

From the time A Dolls House was published, the trajectory of Ibsen’s development as
a dramatist can be seen as a logical progression. Ghosts was published two years down
the line and marks a maturing of the process that began earlier. Ibsen’s realism is further
refined and intensified in this play. It might seem like we are using the terms realism
and naturalism interchangeably but that is not the case. Unlike realist plays, naturalis-
tic plays dive deeper into the human psyche to unravel motivations and the impact of
heredity and environment. In that sense, Ibsen moves beyond A Dolls House in Ghosts.
In terms of technique the play is naturalistic in its orientation as well as execution. The
setting and timeframe are compressed to give it a sense of immediacy. All the action in
all three Acts happen in the large garden room of the Alving house and it all happens
in the course of one day. The descriptions of the room and the setting make it a mini-
malistic and ordinary room that one could find in any other house of similarly situated
people. The stage directions and arrangements are minimalistic as well. Everything looks
realistic and believable. What makes this ordinary setting extraordinary is the effect that

24 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 24 01-Jan-25 4:41:06 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

is created by the atmosphere, the pace at which things move, the tone, tenor, and the
everyday quality of the language used in the dialogues. The frequent coming and going
of character in a small space, made darker by the cloudy atmosphere and the anxiety that
underpins the exchanges between the characters, creates a sense of claustrophobia. The
characters feel hemmed in by their circumstances and this feeling is clearly conveyed to
the audience. The dramatic tension, arising out of the hidden secrets slowly tumbling out
of the cupboards, is heightened further by this sense of claustrophobia. The trigger for all
this is Osvald’s return from Paris and the inauguration of an Orphanage built to honour
his father, Captain Alving.
As discussed earlier, Ibsen was highly influenced by the social Darwinism prevalent
at that time and believed that human character was determined by environment and hered-
ity. This is something that is central to naturalistic plays and the same is true for Ibsen’s
Ghosts. The characters in the play are complex, multidimensional, and are determined by
environment, heredity, and their own special circumstances. Characters like Osvald and
Regina suffer the consequences of the past actions of their father, Captain Alving. The
plot is centered around the dramatic unfolding of Captain Alving’s past debauchery and
wasted life that impinges on the lives of the children with devastating effect. But at the
beginning of the play much of the information about Captain Alving’s past is hidden.
The dramatic unfolding of these hidden secrets not only creates a heightened dramatic
interest but also creates a sense of foreboding. Keeping most of the key determinants of
the plot offstage is most certainly deliberate and attests to Ibsen’s extraordinary skills as
a dramatist. He avoids any kind of sensationalism by keeping the debauchery of Captain
Alving offstage, and thereby keeping the focus firmly on the psychological and heredi-
tary consequences of his actions rather than the actions themselves. The title of the play
springs from this operation focusing on future consequences of past actions. It also serves
as a warning to the audience that the ghosts of present action will rise later irrespective
of how hard you try to bury them. In Ghosts, this foreshadowing begins right at the be-
ginning in the unnatural father daughter relationship that we witness. Ibsen delves deep
into the psychological realism of characters by exploring their pasts, personal flaws, moral
dilemmas they face, and the social circumstances that shape them. This allows him to
delineate characters in all their complexity as they are shaped by the circumstances on
which they have no control. If Osvald’s present condition is determined by his father`s
sin, Mrs. Alving’s profound despair and moral ambiguity is shaped by her circumstances
and her gender. Each character has a story, a part of which he controls and a part which
is beyond his control. This sense of an environmental determinism is further accentuated
by the symbolism infused by Ibsen. The play is punctuated with symbols like ‘ghosts’
(persistent of the past), the ‘sun’ (warmth of truth that sets up a contrast with the moral

PAGE 25
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 25 01-Jan-25 4:41:06 PM

 Modern European Drama

and psychological darkness around) and the ‘fire’ (inevitable destruction of untruths). Each
one of them reinforces the major themes of the play. Ibsen’s use of symbolism in this
play is measured and enhances the naturalistic feel. Overall, we can say that Ibsen’s mul-
tidimensional exploration of character and social issues, minimalistic setting, compressed
time frame, and use of everyday language, hallmarks of naturalistic plays, makes Ghosts
a good example of a naturalist play.
Check Your Progress 5
i) What were the factors that influenced the realist turn in Modern European Drama?
ii) What were the main features of the well-made-play of Eugene Scribe?
iii) How did Emily Zola influence Modern European Drama?
iv) What are the major naturalistic elements of Ghosts?

1.7 Important Themes in Ghosts

The major themes of Ghosts reflect Ibsen’s broader critique of 19th century Norwegian
society’s moral hypocrisy, rigid social structures, and dubious moral values. Ibsen presents
characters trapped in a complex web of social hypocrisy, personal responsibilities, and
inherited sins. He tries to lay bare the deep tensions between the search for individual
freedom within the oppressive socio-cultural and environmental determinants that shape
human life. Some of the major themes in Ghosts are discussed below:

1.7.1 Heredity and Sin in Ibsen’s Ghosts

One of the central themes of the play is the idea of heredity and its relationship to sin.
Ibsen explores the ways in which the sins and actions of one generation are passed down
to the next, both biologically and morally. Heredity, in the play, serves as a fatalistic
force that shapes the destiny of the characters, particularly in the case of Osvald, who
suffers the consequences of his father’s sins. In Ghosts, heredity becomes the primary
mechanism through which sin is transmitted, ultimately trapping the younger generation
in the consequences of the previous one’s moral failures. Mrs. Alving tries to shield her
son, Osvald, from his father’s influence by sending him away at a young age. However,
despite her efforts, Captain Alving’s sins catch up with Osvald in the form of inherited
syphilis. Osvald’s syphilis, a physical manifestation of his father’s sins, serves as a met-
aphor for the corrupting influence of past immorality and social hypocrisy. The disease
symbolizes not just the hereditary curse of his father’s behavior, but also the moral decay
that permeates the family and society at large.

26 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 26 01-Jan-25 4:41:06 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

Ibsen’s critique of the transmission of sin is not limited to heredity alone. He also
holds society responsible for perpetuating the cycle of sin through its rigid moral codes
and its tendency to hide uncomfortable truths. Mrs. Alving reveals that she stayed with her
husband despite his infidelity and moral failings due to social expectations and religious
duty. It is Pastor Manders who convinces Mrs. Alving to endure her suffering in silence
for the sake of maintaining the facade of respectability. He urges her to sacrifice her own
happiness and that of her son for the sake of upholding social norms. Manders represents
conventional morality and religious dogma. He says, “…What right have we mortals to
happiness? No, we have our duty to do, Mrs. Alving; and it was your duty to cleave to
the man you had chosen, and to whom you were joined in holy matrimony.” (Ghosts,
Act I: 46). This attitude highlights his social complicity in perpetuating the sins of the
father by enforcing a moral code that prevents people like Mrs. Alving from escaping
toxic relationships or speaking the truth. Her decision to stay with Captain Alving, largely
influenced by the social and religious expectations voiced by Pastor Manders, results in
Osvald’s ultimate doom. By repressing the truth about her husband, Mrs. Alving inadver-
tently sets the stage for her son’s downfall.
The title of the play, Ghosts, serves as a metaphor for the lingering influence of past
sins and the inescapable nature of heredity. As Mrs. Alving declares, “I’m haunted by
ghosts...we’re all ghosts…its not only the things that we’ve inherited from our fathers and
mothers that live on in us, but all sorts of old ideas and old dead beliefs, and things of
that sort…we can’t rid ourselves of them….And we are, all of us, so pitifully afraid of the
light” (Ghosts, Act II:61). This passage is self-explanatory. She is referring to the moral
and psychological remnants of the past that continue to shape the present and that people
are shaped in such a way that they are not only comfortable with lies and deceits but are
also afraid of facing the truth, the light. These “ghosts” represent the hidden truths, the
suppressed desires, and the unacknowledged sins that persist through generations, shaping
the lives of the living. Ibsen suggests that by refusing to confront these truths openly,
society allows them to continue their destructive influence.
Osvald’s illness is the most literal manifestation of this haunting. The syphilis he
inherits from his father is the ultimate “ghost” that comes to claim him. This illness,
however, is not merely a physical one, it is symbolic of the spiritual and moral decay
that the characters have inherited from previous generations. The disease represents the
corrupting influence of suppressed truths and the moral compromises that Mrs. Alving
and others have made to conform to prevailing social expectations.
Mrs. Alving’s decision to finally speak openly about her husband’s failings comes too
late. Her attempt to escape the “ghosts” of her past by establishing a progressive orphanage

PAGE 27
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 27 01-Jan-25 4:41:06 PM

 Modern European Drama

in her husband’s memory is ironically destroyed fire. This fire serves as a symbol of the
futility of trying to atone for sins through external gestures, while the internal, hidden truths
remain unresolved. The hereditary curse that Osvald bears culminates in the play’s tragic
conclusion, where he begs his mother to help him end his life as the effects of syphilis
worsen. His plea, “Mother, give me the sun” (Ghosts, Act III: 101), is a heart-wrenching
cry for release from the burden he has inherited. This request for “the sun” represents
his desire for clarity, freedom, and a release from the darkness of the past. Mrs. Alving,
faced with the reality of the hereditary curse that has claimed her son is left powerless.
In Ghosts, Ibsen carefully weaves the themes of heredity and sin to critique the
moral and social systems of his time. The play suggests a grim determinism, where the
sins of one generation inevitably shape the fate of the next and attempts to suppress or
deny these truths only lead to greater tragedy. Through the characters of Mrs. Alving and
Osvald, Ibsen portrays the inescapable legacy of sin, not only as a biological inheritance
but also as a social burden. Heredity, in this context, becomes a metaphor for the way
in which moral corruption is passed down and perpetuated by a hypocritical society that
refuses to confront its own flaws. By exposing the destructive power of these “ghosts,”
Ibsen challenges the audience to rethink the moral structures that govern their lives and
to confront the truths that society prefers to hide away.

Check Your Progress 6

i) What are the ‘ghosts’ that Mrs. Alving refers to?
ii) What does Osvalds illness signify?
iii) How does social and religious morality affect the characters in Ghosts?

1.7.2 Social Morality and the Position of Women

In Ghosts, Ibsen condemns the repressive social morality of 19th-century bourgeois soci-
ety, especially when it concerns the status of women. In grappling with the devastating
consequences of unyielding social expectations, moral hypocrisy and prescribed roles for
women, the play becomes a blistering critique of how these systems of social order ensnare
individuals, especially women. Ghosts demonstrate Ibsen’s view of the time’s dominant
social morality of value, the value of social propriety over individual truth.
Ibsen’s portrayal of social morality in Ghosts reveals the dominance of conventional
values that prioritize public appearance over individual truth. In this society, personal
freedom and happiness are often sacrificed to maintain a veneer of respectability. Indi-
vidual liberty and joy are too often surrendered for the sake of a facade of propriety in

28 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 28 01-Jan-25 4:41:06 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

this society. Pastor Manders represents this rigid observance of social mores. He is more
worried about maintaining social decorum than deeper moral issues. For instance, when
Pastor Manders urges Mrs. Alving not to insure the orphanage he does so because it might
suggest a lack of faith. He rejects a practical and pragmatic course of action, as subsequent
events prove, with devastating consequences. This reveals how superficial moral values
can lead to disastrous consequences, both figuratively and literally.
The title of the play, Ghosts, is rather appropriate as well. As Mrs. Alving describes
it, these oppressive forces (Ghosts) are invisible presences that tell people how to be and
what to think. Ibsen is quite sharp in his critique of society’s unwillingness to confront
uncomfortable truths, preferring instead to maintain false appearances, even at the cost
of personal well-being. Women in the play, particularly Mrs. Alving and Regina, are the
worst hit by the undesirable effects of social morality confined and contained as they are
by the narrow roles imposed on them by society. They are expected to serve as moral
pillars of the family, even at the expense of their own needs and desires. Mrs. Alving
life is a good example of how social morality traps women in a cycle of repression and
self-sacrifice. As a young woman, she was forced to endure a loveless and abusive marriage
to Captain Alving, a man of loose morals and destructive behavior. Despite his infidelity
and immoral actions, she had to remain in her marriage and fulfill her ‘duty’ as a wife
to preserve the family’s image.
Mrs. Alving’s decision to build the orphanage in memory of her husband was part of
her attempt to mask the reality of his immorality. However, in doing so, she is complicit
in perpetuating the lie that her husband was a respectable man. But we can understand
her compulsions. In a society which forces women to suppress the truth and maintain the
appearance of moral righteousness, even when they know that the reality is far from ideal,
is hardly an ideal society. However, Mrs. Alving’s journey throughout the play reflects
a gradual awakening. We see that Ibsen’s women characters do display the courage and
the necessary moral strength to face the truth and change the course of their lives. Mrs.
Alving realizes that her adherence to social expectations has caused her to live a life of
emotional repression. She confesses to Pastor Manders that she sent Osvald away so that
he could escape from the oppressive social morality that had destroyed her own happi-
ness. Despite her efforts, she ultimately cannot protect her son from the consequences of
his father’s sins.
Another character who is trapped within the system is Regina, the maid and ille-
gitimate daughter of Captain Alving. Her life demonstrates another aspect of how social
morality restricts opportunities for women. She makes efforts to climb above her station
and achieve a better life. She flirts with Osvald, hoping that a romantic relationship with

PAGE 29
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 29 01-Jan-25 4:41:06 PM

 Modern European Drama

him could provide her with upward mobility. However, Regina’s dreams are shattered
when she learns that she is Osvald’s half-sister. This revelation destroys any chance of
a relationship with Osvald and, more broadly, any hope of escaping her position. Her
illegitimate birth, a direct result of the sexual hypocrisy of the male-dominated society,
ensures that she remains marginalized. Despite her limited resources, she is not afraid to
leave the Alving household to chart a new course. Regina ultimately decides to return to
her father, Jacob Engstrand, who plans to open a sailors’ home. Regina’s fate reflects how
women of her class and background are trapped by social structures that prevent social
advancement except through an advantageous marriage. But that route is now closed for
her. So, she departs. But would she be able to improve her social standing at the sailors
home? Even her father’s sailors’ home, which he presents as a respectable venture, is
tainted by his moral corruption. The role he envisages for Regina is one of a hostess to
sea faring men. He tempts Regina with the possibility of finding a suitable man at his
establishment. Regina has no choice but to follow her father. But she is not defeated.
She hopes to make something out of her life at her father’s establishment. So, it seems
that women like Regina, despite their mental strength and agency, are constantly caught
in systems of exploitation.
Ibsen exposes the double standards in the social morality of the time, particularly
in how men and women are judged differently for the same behavior. Captain Alving’s
debauchery and infidelity is largely ignored or covered up by society. This is revealed in
the conversation between Mrs. Alving and Pastor Manders.
Pastor Manders: Just think! For a miserable three hundred dollars to go and marry a
fallen woman!
Mrs. Alving: Then what do you think of me? I went and married a fallen man.
…
Mrs. Alving: Do you really think that when I went to the alter with Alving, he was any
purer than Johanna was when Engstrand married her?
Pastor Manders: Ah, but there is all the difference in the world between…
Mrs. Alving: Not so much really. Of course there was a big difference in the price. A
miserable three hundred dollars, and a whole fortune. (Ghosts, Act II: 57)
Pastor Manders thinks there is a world of difference between his infidelity and the
maid he seduces. That is why he has no hesitation calling her a ‘fallen woman’. But for
the same sin, he is not willing to call Captain Alving ‘a fallen man’. He is still considered
a respectable man, and even in death. His memory is preserved by the orphanage built in
his name. On the other hand, Mrs. Alving and Regina face harsh judgment and limited

30 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 30 16-Jan-25 4:07:49 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

options because of his immoral behavior. The social role assigned to women as the moral
guardians of the family is nothing short sheer hypocrisy. Mrs. Alving is expected to keep
up appearances, even as she suffers in a marriage that destroys her happiness. Regina, as
an illegitimate daughter, is forced to bear the burden of her father’s sins, while Captain
Alving faces no public consequences for his actions. This double standard highlights how
women are disproportionately punished for moral failings, even when they are not directly
responsible for them.
Although the position of women in Ghosts is largely one of subservience, Ibsen also
presents moments of female agency and resistance. Mrs. Alving’s eventual rejection of
Pastor Manders moral authority and her open criticism of social expectations represent a
bold challenge to the conventions of the time. She questions the validity of the rigid moral
code that has shaped her life and contributed to her suffering. Mrs. Alving’s desire to
embrace the truth, even at great personal cost, reflects her growing sense of independence
and her recognition that the lies and deceptions of society are unsustainable. Regina, too,
exhibits a degree of agency in her decision to leave the Alving household. Although her
options are limited, she chooses to pursue a different path rather than remain confined by
the constraints of the household or by the legacy of her father’s actions. Her departure
represents a refusal to accept her predetermined role, even if the alternatives are not ideal.
Ghosts is a scathing critique of the social morality that traps individuals, especially
women, within suffocating environments. The play exposes how society’s obsession with
outward respectability often leads to hypocrisy, repression, and the perpetuation of moral
decay. Women are shown to bear the brunt of these social forces, as they are forced to
confirm to socially acceptable subservient roles. Through the characters of Mrs. Alving
and Regina, Ibsen illustrates both the damaging effects of these constraints as well as the
potential for resistance, even in the face of overwhelming social odds.

Check Your Progress 7

i) Ibsen’s women characters are forced to carry the burden of social morality. Would
you agree?
ii) Mrs. Alving’s journey is one of the passive acceptances sof reality to active
engagement with the reality. Would it be a fair assessment of Mrs. Alving’s
character?
iii) Ibsen’s women characters are victim of their social circumstances and yet they
display a rare agency to try and change their circumstances. Discuss.

PAGE 31
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 31 01-Jan-25 4:41:06 PM

 Modern European Drama

1.8 Ibsen’s Technique of Characterization

Henrik Ibsen’s Ghosts showcases social, psychological, and existential themes through
his characterization techniques. His characters are complex and deep, serving as symbolic
representations of broader issues. Ibsen’s psychological realism in characterization is a
significant contribution to Modern European Drama, with each character believable and
rounded. His characters are crafted with remarkable depth and complexity, serving not
only as individuals with distinct personalities but also as symbolic representations of the
broader issues the play addresses. His approach to characterization in Ghosts reflects his
broader commitment to realism and his ability to infuse his characters with psychological
nuance.
Characters in Ghosts are portrayed with a deep inner life, filled with conflicts, desires,
and motivations that make them life like. Ibsen creates characters that are shaped by their
past experiences, social circumstances, and inner conflicts. For example, Mrs. Alving is
portrayed as a woman struggling with the consequences of years of repression and social
expectations. She has been forced to maintain a facade of respectability even though this
facade has caused her deep suffering and disillusionment. Her decision to send her son
Osvald away and her concealment of the truth about her husband’s debauchery are not
exactly moral failings. They are the consequences of social pressures and her desire to
protect her son.
Similarly, Osvald, apart from being a victim of inherited illness, is a young man
grappling with disillusionment, existential despair, and a yearning for freedom. His trag-
ic condition is depicted with sensitivity. Hunted by his father’s legacy, he yearns for a
life that is meaningful and joyous. As you can see, Ibsen is fairly successful in creating
multi-dimensional characters. They are not defined by simple moral categories of good or
bad. Though some of their actions are morally questionable, their complex psychological
make up redeems them.
Characters in Ghosts are psychologically realistic but they also have a symbolic
function. Most of the characters are presented either as victims of some social evil or as
embodying some social evil and sometimes a mixture of both. For instance, Mrs. Alving
and Osvald are victims of inherited sin and social hypocrisy. While Mrs. Alving suffers
the consequences of keeping up appearances, Osvald is a victim of the “ghosts” of the
past. He is haunted by his father’s immoral actions and doomed to suffer consequences.
Pastor Manders symbolizes the moral rigidity and hypocrisy of organized religion and its

32 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 32 01-Jan-25 4:41:07 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

authority. His concern for appearances, rather than genuine moral integrity, reflects the
hollowness of religious institutions. Regina represents the struggle for social mobility and
the limited role of women in a patriarchal society. Though she aspires to a higher social
status, she is ultimately trapped by the limitations of her birth and gender. And, finally,
Engstrand serves as a symbol of opportunism and moral ambiguity. By creating characters
that serve as symbols, Ibsen gives the play a broader thematic resonance. The personal
struggles of the characters reflect the larger social, moral, and existential dilemmas of
the times.
Another key feature of Ibsen’s technique in developing his characters is the use of
dialogue and action. Ibsen avoids direct exposition of characters, allowing them rather
to reveal themselves gradually through their interactions with each other. Ibsen avoids
lengthy monologues or overt declarations of character motivations, opting instead for
naturalistic dialogue that allows the audience to infer the complexities of the characters’
inner lives. For instance, Mrs. Alving’s gradual revelations about her past emerge through
conversations with Pastor Manders and Osvald. The characters’ dialogues are often filled
with a subtext that hints at deeper truths that are not immediately stated, thereby creating
a sense of mystery and psychological tension. The characters’ actions also reveal their
personalities and moral standing. Pastor Manders’s reluctance to insure the orphanage, for
example, reveals his obsession with maintaining appearances, while Mrs. Alving’s decision
to reveal the truth demonstrates her ultimate rejection of social moral straight jacketing.
Most of the character in Ghosts are, in some way or the other, striving for a better
life or a sense of liberation. And yet, ironically, they are trapped by forces beyond their
control. The tragic irony of their respective situations heightens the emotional impact
of the play, and the audience is invited to empathize with the characters as they try to
escape their fate. Ironically again, this attempt at escape leads them deeper into tragedy.
For example, Mrs. Alving’s attempts to protect Osvald prove to be counterproductive be-
cause it pushes Osvald further into the trap. Similarly, Regina’s desire for social mobility
is undone by the revelation of her illegitimate birth, which ties her to the very life she
hoped to escape. Though Ibsen’s characters are fully realized individuals, each with their
own inner conflicts and desires, they are also vehicles for exploring the broader themes
of the play like social repression, inheritance, and moral decay. Through naturalistic di-
alogue, subtext, and carefully crafted interactions, Ibsen reveals the complexities of his
characters, making them both tragic and deeply human. In Ghosts, Ibsen’s technique of
characterization serves as a powerful tool for examining the individual’s struggle against
the constraints of society and the ghosts of the past.

PAGE 33
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 33 01-Jan-25 4:41:07 PM

 Modern European Drama

Check Your Progress 8

i) What is psychological realism and how does Ibsen use it to create multidimensional
characters?
ii) How does Ibsen use tragic irony to heighten the emotional impact of the play?
iii) What are the major features of Ibsen’s technique of characterization?

1.9 Major Characters in Ghosts

1.9.1 Mrs. Alving

Mrs. Helene Alving, the central character of Ghosts. She is a woman shaped by her past,
her society, and her gradual realization that the ‘ghosts’ of the past can only be shaken
off by the truth. She is the widow of Captain Alving. Her entire life has been a struggle
against the oppressive norms of 19th-century society. She is a tragic figure, not because of
any fatal flaw in character, but because she is an undeserving victim of prevailing social
morality and conventions that she is unable to escape.
Mrs. Alving is married to Captain Alving, a respectable and influential figure. However,
everything is not hunky dory. There is a significant mismatch between outward appearance
and inward reality in this marriage. Captain Alving is, in fact, a morally degenerate man.
Though Mrs. Alving is aware of his debauchery, she is trapped in this marriage without
any possibility of escape. She did try to break free from this situation by fleeing from her
husband and seeking refuge with Pastor Manders, but it ended in failure. Manders ensured
that she returned to her husband, sacrificing her personal desires and enduring years of
misery to maintain the illusion of respectability. This decision represents a critical mo-
ment in Mrs. Alving’s life, setting the stage for the internal conflicts that would play out
later in the play. Mrs. Alving is a product of a society where the women are expected to
uphold ideals of chastity, submission, and self-sacrifice. Ibsen portrays her as a victim of
these oppressive norms. She returns to Captain Alving, despite knowing his true nature,
because she has nowhere to turn to. She chooses to conceal the truth about her marriage
and continues to play the role of the dutiful wife. It is easy for us to judge her separated
as we are from her special circumstances. But we must keep in mind that she had very
little choice after Pastor Manders refused to help her. However, in her attempt to uphold
the outward respectability of the Alving family name, Mrs. Alving is complicit in perpet-
uating a lie that will have devastating consequences later for her son.

34 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 34 01-Jan-25 4:41:07 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

Mrs. Alving’s role as a mother is central to the play and to her character develop-
ment. For her, Osvald is both her hope for the future and the tragic embodiment of the
past. Throughout the play, Mrs. Alving seeks to protect Osvald from the truth about his
father. This would be the normal response of a mother under adverse conditions. How-
ever, Osvald’s return from Paris with symptoms of syphilis, a hereditary consequence of
Captain Alving’s debauchery, shatters this hope. Mrs. Alving’s idealized vision of her son
as an artist and a representative of the future collapses as she realizes that Osvald too is
haunted by the “ghosts” of the past. She is forced to acknowledge the need to reveal the
truth to Osvald and Regina.
Mrs. Alving undergoes a significant transformation, evolving from a woman who
passively gives in to social and moral conventions to one who recognizes the need to
rebel against them. But she is not yet ready to make a complete break. Her construction
of the orphanage is a case in point. The Orphanage, built in her husband’s memory, is
an ironic reflection on the ambiguous situation she finds herself in. The Orphanage, as
she knows, is not going to free her from the past because it is a meaningless and empty
gesture. And yet she goes ahead with it. Her discussions with Pastor Manders serve as
key moments in her intellectual and emotional awakening. As the play progresses, she
grows more assertive in questioning Mander’s views on duty, morality, and the sanctity
of marriage. She begins to see the hypocrisy of the society around her, especially the way
it sanctifies immoral men like her husband while condemning women who try to break
free from their subjugation.
By the final act of the play, Mrs. Alving has become fully aware of the forces that
have shaped her life. She realizes that the true “ghosts” of her life are not just the memory
of her husband’s sins, but the social norms that have kept her trapped in a false existence.
She decides to reject her won passivity and become proactive in asserting the truth. Despite
her awakening, Mrs. Alving’s story ends tragically. Osvald’s illness and eventual plea for
euthanasia highlight the inescapable consequences of the past. Mrs. Alving is confronted
with the unbearable choice between allowing her son to suffer a living death and helping
him to end his misery. The play closes at this moment of indecision, leaving Mrs. Alving
in a state of existential torment. Her love for her son, her guilt over the choices she has
made, and the ghosts that haunt them both culminate in a devastating moral crisis. This
is what makes Mrs. Alving a deeply tragic figure and yet at the same time a woman of
immense strength.

1.9.2 Pastor Manders

Pastor Manders is a clergyman with considerable authority, both religious and social.
Manders serves as a foil to Mrs. Alving. Ibsen primarily uses the character of Manders to

PAGE 35
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 35 01-Jan-25 4:41:07 PM

 Modern European Drama

critique institutionalized religion and its role in perpetuating a stifling social order. Pastor
Manders is introduced as a spiritual guide and advisor to Mrs. Alving. His presence in the
Alving household at the start of the play is directly tied to his role as the moral overseer
of the orphanage being constructed in Captain Alving’s memory. His involvement in the
project itself, as it turns out, is ironical because it seeks to honor a man whose private
life was corrupt and immoral. Manders does not question this hypocrisy. He is rather com-
mitted to preserving it. His unwavering belief in the sanctity of reputation and appearance
illustrates his shallow understanding of morality. He believes that by keeping the truth of
Captain Alving’s debauchery hidden, society can move forward without confronting the
unpleasant realities of the past. This is a major flaw in Manders’ character. His moral
compass is dictated by public opinion rather than any true spiritual insight.
When Mrs. Alving fled from her husband’s abusive behavior and sought Manders’
help, he had sent her back to her husband, citing her “duty” as a wife. This moment is
central to understanding Manders’ character. His advice is not based on empathy or un-
derstanding, but on a rigid interpretation of social roles. He is incapable of understanding
Mrs. Alving’s need to escape from her oppressive marriage because he himself is trapped
within the confines of conventional thinking. He fears the judgment of others more than
the emotional and spiritual well-being of the individuals under his care. This is evident
throughout the play as he constantly worries about appearances, reputation, and how his
decisions will be perceived by others.
Manders is also a hypocrite. He preaches morality and virtue but has no qualms about
compromising with those virtues for saving his own skin. His superficial understanding
of morality is particularly evident in his interaction with Regina and her father, Jakob
Engstrand. Engstrand is a disreputable man, yet Manders is easily manipulated by him.
Manders’ hypocrisy is set up as a counterfoil to Mrs. Alving’s growing awareness of the
darker, more complicated truths that lie beneath the surface of society. While Mrs. Alving
begins to question the validity of conventional morality, Manders clings to it, unable to
see the hypocrisy in his own behavior. For example, when the orphanage is destroyed by
fire due to his own carelessness (he refused to insure it because he feared the scandal
of appearing faithless), he immediately tries to deflect responsibility on to the wicked
household of Mrs. Alving. And as soon as Engstrand is ready to take the blame, his views
on Engstrand’s character changes dramatically. Obviously, he is a selfish man, and he is
concerned with his own image rather than taking responsibility for his mistakes. And yet
Manders sees himself as Mrs. Alving’s moral superior. He is judgmental but his judgments
are based on an outdated social morality rather than any real understanding of right and
wrong. Mrs. Alving’s increasing frustration with Manders reflects her realization that his

36 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 36 01-Jan-25 4:41:07 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

guidance has been a significant factor in her life’s miseries. She trusted him in the past,
allowing him to send her back to her abusive husband, but now she sees that his advice
was more about protecting social order than protecting her as an individual.
It may not be erroneous to say that Pastor Manders is indirectly responsible for much
of the tragedy that unfolds in Ghosts. At the end, Manders remains largely unrepentant
and unaffected by the suffering of Mrs. Alving and Osvald, and the people supposed to be
under his care. Unlike Mrs. Alving, who undergoes a painful but necessary awakening to
the reality of her situation, Manders retreats into his moral platitudes, unwilling or unable
to confront the complexity of the world around him and achieve genuine moral insight.
He represents the kind of moral conservatism that Ibsen sought to criticize.

1.9.3 Osvald
Osvald’s life is a living example of the idea that Ghosts of the past live on in the present.
He returns home from Paris after spending considerable time abroad as an artist, only
to reveal that he is suffering from a mysterious illness. We come to know, in the course
of the play, that he is suffering from hereditary syphilis. His illness is both a physical
and symbolic manifestation of the “ghosts” of his father’s sins. His fate is sealed by his
father’s sins and moral failings. Ibsen uses Osvald’s plight to critique the idea that one
can hide or suppress the truth indefinitely. The “ghosts” of the past will always resurface
and exert their influence on the present and future. Osvald’s pays the price for the web
of lies and untruths supposedly created to protect him and maintain the appearance of
respectability and social morality.
Having grown up in the shadow of the idealized image of his father, Osvald is
shattered to learn that he is suffering from the dreaded syphilis. He blames himself for
wasting his own life. He is doubly shattered when he learns the truth about Captain
Alving’s debauchery. This revelation is devastating not only because it destroys Osvald’s
image of his father, but also because it casts a shadow over his own life. He comes to
realize that the father he admired was not the moral figure he had been led to believe.
Osvald’s disillusionment extends beyond his personal life. His experiences as an artist
in Paris, where he sought freedom and creativity, left him cynical about life because he
found that even in the Bohemian circles of Paris, true freedom or happiness was hardly
ever understood. His desire to live a “joyous” life turns into an existential despair by his
illness and social circumstances.
Osvald wants to be free. His desire for liberation is also evident in his plea to his
mother at the end of the play. As his illness progresses and he faces the prospect of losing
his mental faculties, he begs Mrs. Alving to help him end his life when the time comes.

PAGE 37
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 37 01-Jan-25 4:41:07 PM

 Modern European Drama

This request for euthanasia is Osvald’s final attempt to exert control over his own fate,
to escape the legacy of his father’s sins and the inevitable decline that his illness will
bring. His desire to die with dignity, rather than live out his life in a state of helplessness,
reflects his need for agency in a world that has largely denied him any real freedom.
The relationship between Osvald and his mother, ironically, turns into a relationship of
deep dependence, both emotionally and physically. He has returned from Paris because his
illness had become quite serious. He was hoping to find some solace in the love and care
of her mother as well as Regina. But things turn out contrary to what he had hoped for.
After learning that Osvald is her half-brother Regina leaves the house. And now Osvald
only has his mother to turn to. He becomes increasingly reliant on Mrs. Alving for care,
culminating in his final request that she assist him in ending his life. This dependence
contrasts with his earlier desire for independence and freedom. This tragic irony of his
situation is not lost on the audience. Osvald, who once sought to live freely, is now trapped
by his illness and must rely on his mother to release him from his suffering.
Osvald is a victim of forces beyond his control and that makes him a tragic figure.
Unlike many of Ibsen’s other characters, Osvald does not make choices that lead to his
downfall. Instead, he is doomed by circumstances he did not create. The sense of inevita-
bility is what makes Osvald’s tragedy so profound. He is a young man who should have
had his whole life ahead of him, but he is instead condemned to suffer for the sins of
his father. His attempts to live a meaningful, joyous life are continually thwarted by the
reality of his illness and the weight of his family’s past.

1.9.4 Regina
Regina is presented as the daughter of Jakob Engstrand. But we know later that she is
indeed the half-sister of Osvald, and that Engstrand is her foster father. This fact itself
puts her in a complex and ambiguous situation. Instead of benefiting from the fact that
she is Captain Alving’s daughter, she is condemned to a life of marginal existence. Regi-
na represents the conflicts between aspirations to transcend social systems and the need
for moral compromise. Her ambition, her complicated relationship with her origins, and
her part in the play’s larger tragedy all serve to define her character. Regina has a strong
desire to elevate herself from the start of the play. She longs to rise above her station
because she is unhappy in her role as a servant in the Alving home. Her relationships
with other characters, especially her contempt for her presumed father, Jakob Engstrand,
and her wish to keep her distance from him, reflect this aim.
Regina’s social situation is problematic. She belongs to the Alving household and yet
she exits on its margins. While her desire for self-improvement is natural, her willing-

38 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 38 01-Jan-25 4:41:07 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

ness to use others, particularly Osvald, as a means of escaping her circumstances reveals
a willingness to compromise her morals. Regina’s aspiration for social mobility is not
based on any intrinsic sense of personal merit or accomplishment because she has none.
She relies on her ability to manipulate her relationships and present herself in a way that
might attract attention from those above her. This makes her character somewhat oppor-
tunistic. We can see this in her relationship with Osvald. On the surface, it appears that
she is romantically interested in him, and there is a mutual attraction between the two.
However, as the play progresses, it becomes clear that Regina’s interest in Osvald is not
solely based on love or affection. She sees in Osvald a potential means of escaping her
life as a servant. Regina’s relationship with Osvald becomes more complicated when it
is revealed that they are, in fact, half-siblings. This revelation devastates her. The very
relationship that she hoped would provide her with a way out of her difficult life is tainted
by the moral corruption of the previous generation. Her dreams of social mobility and a
better future crumbled under the weight of her inherited identity. Regina ultimately returns
to Engstrand at the end of the play. This return is not motivated by any reconciliation or
affection for Engstrand, but rather by necessity. It underscores the tragic limitations of
her situation.
Regina can also be seen as a foil to Mrs. Alving. Both women are, in different ways,
victims of the same system, but their responses to the system differ. Mrs. Alving, after
years of repression and self-sacrifice, is disillusioned with the institutions of marriage,
religion, and social respectability. Regina, on the other hand, is still striving to succeed
within that very system, hoping to use her beauty, charm, and relationships to climb
the social ladder. Mrs. Alving ultimately seeks freedom through truth and transparency.
Regina is only interested in improving her social status. The contrast between the two
women highlights the different ways in which they navigate the same oppressive social
structures. Regina fails to achieve her goals. But her options are limited by her gender
and her class. She can only hope to improve her situation through marriage or relation-
ships with men of higher social standing. Her return to Engstrand at the end of the play
is a bitter acknowledgment of the fact that, despite her best efforts, she cannot escape
the circumstances of her birth.
It is easy to brand Regina as a morally ambiguous character. However, we can see
that she acts the way she acts because of the limited options available to her as a young
woman of lower social standing. In a world where her value is largely determined by
her beauty and her relationships with men, Regina’s opportunism is nothing more than a
survival strategy.

PAGE 39
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 39 01-Jan-25 4:41:08 PM

 Modern European Drama

1.9.5 Engstrand
Jakob Engstrand is a minor but important character in the play. He is a figure of practi-
cal self-interest and opportunism. As a working-class man with a questionable moral, he
navigates his way around in the society with cunning and deception. Engstrand is intro-
duced as a carpenter, a man of humble means, and the supposed father of Regina. His
social position contrasts with the wealth and influence of the other characters, such as
Mrs. Alving and Pastor Manders. This class difference explains and puts in perspective
Engstrand’s actions. His life is a constant struggle for economic survival, and his moral
flexibility seems to be a response to his social circumstances.
Engstrand’s moral outlook is pragmatic, and he has no qualms about bending the
truth or manipulating others to achieve his goals. A prime example of this is his rela-
tionship with Pastor Manders. Engstrand deftly plays on the pastor’s sense of guilt and
moral obligation, convincing him to support his project against Manders better judgement.
Engstrand knows that Manders is more concerned with appearances and public perception
than with the truth, and he uses this knowledge to manipulate Manders into backing his
plan. When the orphanage burns down, most likely due to Manders’ own negligence,
Engstrand quickly steps in to cover for the pastor, offering to take the blame for the
fire in exchange for financial support for his seamen’s home. This moment exemplifies
Engstrand’s opportunism. He seizes the opportunity to exploit Manders’ vulnerability with
both hands and turns the situation to his advantage.
Engstrand claims to be Regina’s father, knowing very well that it is a lie. This is a
morally questionable act but for him morality is of very little use if it can’t help him with
financial independence. By claiming paternity, he legitimizes Regina’s birth in exchange
for cash and the possibility of reaping future benefits. She represents a potential source of
financial or social leverage. Engstrand’s moral code is highly fluid, driven more by survival
and personal gain than by any real concern for right and wrong. As a lower-class man
in a rigidly hierarchical society, his survival depends on his ability to navigate a system
that is often stacked against him. In this sense, Engstrand is less of an inherently immoral
person and more of a pragmatist. Ibsen presents him as a product of his environment.
Engstrand plays a key role in Ibsen’s exploration of the themes of hypocrisy and moral
decay. While Mrs. Alving and Pastor Manders are more directly involved in the play’s
exploration of duty, guilt, and personal morality, Engstrand represents the underbelly of
the society that Ibsen is critiquing. His ability to manipulate the moral systems in place
demonstrates how easily social and moral values can be subverted when society values
appearances at the cost of truth.

40 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 40 01-Jan-25 4:41:08 PM

 Ghosts Henrik Ibsen

Check Your Progress 9

i) Would it be correct to say that Mrs. Alving is defined by her passivity? Discuss.
ii) How does Ibsen explore the theme of inherited sin and its consequences in the
character of Osvald?
iii) Regina is nothing but an opportunist. Do you agree with this statement? Give your
reasons.
iv) Engstrand dubious moral standards seem less damaging when we compare it with
Pastor Manders. Discuss.

1.10 Summing Up
‹ Ibsen contributed immensely to the development of Modern European Drama. He
broke new grounds in terms of the dramatic techniques he used and the themes he
explored. He was instrumental in introducing realism and naturalism in theater.
‹ Ghosts marks a significant departure from the traditional forms of theater. It boldly
confronted moral taboos, such as sexual transgressions, illegitimacy, venereal disease,
and euthanasia, topics that were considered scandalous in Ibsen’s time. Ghosts directly
challenged the conventional morality of the 19th century, particularly the institutions
of marriage, religion, and family.
‹ The play’s central metaphor of “ghosts” deals with the idea that the past haunts the
present, both psychologically and physically and eventually destroys individuals and
families.
‹ Ibsen’s use of realism in Ghosts was groundbreaking especially in terms of character
development. His characters are psychologically complex, filled with internal conflicts,
and driven by hidden motives, making them more human and relatable than the stock
figures of earlier melodrama. This deep psychological insight, along with naturalistic
dialogue, set a new standard for drama. By focusing on real-life dilemmas rather than
romanticized or idealized conflicts, Ibsen brought an uncomfortable but necessary
honesty to the stage, reflecting the uncertainties of modern life.
‹ Though Ghosts was condemned for its perceived immorality at that time, it paved the
way for a more honest exploration of human behavior and social issues in theater. It
helped usher in a new era of dramatic realism that influenced later playwrights such
as Chekhov, Shaw, and Strindberg, and laid the groundwork for modern tragic theater.

PAGE 41
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 41 01-Jan-25 4:41:08 PM

 Modern European Drama

‹ Finally, Ghosts is considered a cornerstone of modern drama for its courage in

addressing uncomfortable truths and its influence on the form and content of European
theater.

1.11 References and Suggested Readings

Bowerbank, Sylvia. “The Symbolic Role of Light in Ibsen’s Ghosts.” Modern Drama,
vol. 18, No. 3, (1975): 263-272.
Corrigan Robert W. “The Sun Always Rises: Ibsen’s Ghosts as Tragedy?” Education
Theatre Journal. Vol.11 No.3 (1959): 171-180
Esslin, Martin. “Ibsen and Modern Drama.” Ibsen and the Theatre: Essays in Celebration
of the 150th Anniversary of Henrik Ibsen’s Birth. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 1980.
71-82.
Mortensen, Ellen. “Ibsen and the scandalous: Ghosts and Hedda Gabler.” Ibsen Studies
7.2 (2007): 169-187.
Hemmer, Bjorn. “Ibsen and the realistic problem drama.” The Cambridge Companion to
Ibsen. Ed. James McFarlane. Cambridge: CUP, 1994.
Ibsen, Henrik. Ghosts and Other Plays, Translated by Peter Watts. Penguin, 1964.
Moi, Toril. Ibsen and the Drama of Modernity. Cambridge: CUP, 2012.
Nagpal, Payal. Ed. Henrik Ibsen: Ghosts. Delhi: Worldview Publications, 2016.
Styan, J. L. Ibsen’s Drama: Right Action and Tragic Joy. Cambridge: CUP, 1971.

42 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 42 01-Jan-25 4:41:08 PM

 U N I T

II(2)
Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

Dr. Himani Kapoor

Structure
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Learning Objectives
2.3 Introduction to the Author and His Work
2.4 Epic Theatre
2.5 Historical Setting of the Play
2.6 Critical Commentary
2.7 Characters
2.8 Themes
2.9 Summing Up
2.10 Works Cited and Further Reading

2.1 Introduction
Bertolt Brecht’s Mother Courage and Her Children: A Chronicle of the Thirty Years War,
written in 1939 and premiered in 1941, is considered one of the most significant works
of twentieth century theatre. Originally written in German as Mutter Courage und ihre
Kinder, the play is set against the backdrop of the Thirty Years War (1618--648) that
had a powerful impact on European history. The protagonist, Mother Courage is a war
profiteer who works as a tradeswoman, selling her goods to soldiers while struggling to
protect her three children. The play was written at the time when Nazism was on a rise
in Germany and was first performed at the onset of World War II.

2.2 Learning Objectives

After reading this lesson, you will be able to:
‹ Understand the play as a commentary on war.
‹ Discuss the significance of epic theatre within the framework of 20th-century
Modernist Drama.

PAGE 43
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 43 01-Jan-25 4:41:08 PM

 Modern European Drama

‹ Understand modern European drama in the context of Brecht’s politics.

‹ Contextualize the play in its socio-historical background.
‹ Evaluate Brecht’s ideas on drama, capitalism, and war.
‹ Engage with different interpretations of the text.

2.3 Introduction to the Author and His Work

The Life of Bertolt Brecht
Bertolt Brecht (1898 – 1956) was a renowned playwright, theatre practitioner, and poet of
the 20th century. He was born in 1898 to an upper middle-class family in Augsburg, Ger-
many. He attended the Augsburg Grammar School and was in his teens when World War I
broke out in 1914. From an early age, Brecht developed pacifist views and, as he matured,
he grew increasingly critical of class divisions, viewing himself as a rebel (Chatterjee
xiii). Developing a talent for writing in the early phases of his life, he wrote and locally
published his first poems, short stories, and a play, The Bible, in 1914. During the war,
he was also inducted into military service around 1917, and this traumatic experience left
a deep emotional impact on him. Brecht had a keen understanding of the political events
of his charged times. The success of his early plays Baal (1918) and Drums in the Night
(1922) set the tone for his later journey as a playwright, and he was awarded the Kleist
prize, as the most promising young playwright of the year in 1922.
By now, Brecht had made several important contacts and had grown close to well-
known theatre artists like Max Reinhart and Erwin Piscator. He was working on his theories
about drama and theatre and produced several plays which became critical and commercial
successes. The Threepenny Opera (1928) was one such play that also helped him develop
his style of theatre, which he called epic theatre. He married the actress Helene Weigel
the next year and devised many new didactic plays, or Lehrstück, like The Fight over the
Ocean (1929) and The Measures Taken (1930). Some of his Marxist plays include St Joan
of Stockyards (1931), a radio play, and an adaptation of Maxim Gorky’s novel The Mother
(1932). Many of these plays were co-written with other authors. Elizabeth Hauptmann
was one of his primary collaborators, who shares credit for many of his notable works.
In 1933, with the rise of the Nazi Party, Brecht fled Germany to take refuge abroad
and stayed shortly in Prague, Vienna, Paris, London, Moscow and New York. Eventually,
he lost his German citizenship and the right to return to Germany. Some of his highly
celebrated and mature plays were written during his years of exile. These include The Life
of Galileo (1938), Mother Courage and her Children (1939), Mr. Puntila and his Hired

44 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 44 01-Jan-25 4:41:09 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

Man Matti (1940), and The Good Woman of Setzuan (1941). As Europe became harder
for him to survive the war, he migrated to the United States in 1941. While in America,
he wrote some scripts for Hollywood and some new plays as well. However, his stay in
America was not very fruitful, as some of his plans did not materialize. Furthermore, he
was also summoned by the House of Un-American Activities for Communist sympathies.
Subsequently, he left America, finally settling back in post-war East Germany in 1948.
Mother Courage and her Children was produced in 1949, becoming a great success. He
established the Berliner Ensemble, the German Theatre Company, in 1949 and, with state
patronage, he was further able to experiment with his stage productions. With many of
his plays being runaway successes over the years, Brecht became a very successful and
celebrated theatre practitioner across the world. He wrote and directed a few new plays
afterwards and passed away in the year 1956. His legacy lives through his revolutionary
plays and pathbreaking stage practices.

2.4 Epic Theatre

Throughout his career as a dramatist, Brecht kept innovating and continued to develop
his theories on theatre. While he was growing in popularity as a dramatist, Hitler’s Nazi
party was on the rise. In this atmosphere of fear and censorship, Brecht had reason to
believe that a powerful form of art, like theatre, could have a higher purpose. His concep-
tualization of epic theatre was, therefore, a step towards the education and sensitization
of the audience.
Before the onset of modernist theatre, the romanticism of German theatre artists like
Goethe and Schiller dominated the stage. These plays emphasised idealism, melodrama,
and heightened emotions. Brecht wanted to depart from such conventions of theatre, as
they tended to take the given reality as something inevitable and irreconcilable (Chatterjee
xxvi). He also departed from early modernist theories of theatre which treated drama as
a slice of life. Theatre practitioners like Stanislavsky had proposed that life on stage was
an imitation of real life. For Brecht, this too was not a genuine portrayal of reality, in
fact it further falsified reality and inspired empathy in the audience which, according to
him, interfered with their critical engagement with the subject matter. Brecht, therefore,
wanted an audience that was who was alert, yet detached. For Brecht, the ideas that the
play conveyed, were more crucial to the play than its plot. So, he called this new kind
of theatre “epic theatre”.
While the term “epic” to describe a dramatic form sounds counter-intuitive, the idea
behind this terminology was that, just like an epic, the separate sections of the epic theatre

PAGE 45
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 45 01-Jan-25 4:41:09 PM

 Modern European Drama

would be distinct and complete units in themselves. In his essay, “Theatre for Pleasure,
or Theatre for Instruction”, he explains, “with an epic work, as opposed to a dramatic
one, one can, as it were, take a pair of scissors and cut it into individual pieces, which
remain fully capable of life” (70). He also coined the term “Verfremdung” or “verfrem-
dungseffect” translated as differencing, estrangement or distancing effect, that would de-
familiarize the audience from the events of the play. Furthermore, he argues that in epic
theatre, the spectator is not allowed to submit to an event uncritically. Unlike dramatic
theatre, the spectator is, therefore, lulled out of his traditional way of thinking to be
startled and think afresh (71). The basic aim of epic theatre was to educate its audience
by forcing them to see the play from a detached, “alienated” point of view, rather than
being emotionally involved.
A method that Brecht followed to create a Verfremdungeffect was the literalization of
theatre (Brecht “Literalization of Theatre”). He used statistics, cartoons, maps, and placards
so that a documentary effect could be produced. Each episode, therefore, would be framed
in a different setting, almost as a play-within a play, and these episodes would connect
with each other. The props, the stage setting and, even music, are very important aspects
of epic theatre, as all these devices help the audience to critically engage with the play.
The props and set design communicate to the audience, what kind of dramatic experience
is being presented. It can be entertaining and instructive, but not cathartic. Katherine
Hollander describes this succinctly in the context of Mother Courage and her Children.
For example, it is not necessary that Anna Fierling’s dress be a perfect seventeenth
Century replica, accurate down to the last historical detail, but audiences will notice,
the spoon hanging from her jacket, the pocket of her knife, or the care with which she
handles the coin purse, and see the social meanings in these objects and gestures....
Props can tell a story, just as words or gestures do, and set design and lighting, too,
can contribute to the audience’s understanding of the social and economic realities
within which that story unfolds (32)
You will also notice, that there are significant gaps between the scenes. For instance, Scene II
takes place two years after Scene I, and Scene III occurs three years after Scene II. Sim-
ilarly, the setting of all the scenes keeps changing. Mother Courage moves from Sweden,
to Poland in Scene I and II, Scene V informs us that she has been to Moravia, Bavaria,
Italy, and again to Bavaria. This episodic nature adds to the distancing effect. Each ep-
isode, though brief, stands alone as a complete unit, and yet, continuity is maintained.
Brecht also introduced various innovative techniques to create this distancing effect. For
instance, stage directions for each scene are displayed on placards by the actors, often

46 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 46 01-Jan-25 4:41:09 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

giving away the plot of that scene in advance. In the first scene, for example, the placard
reads, “The Canteen Woman, Anna Fierling, commonly known as Mother Courage loses
a Son” (Brecht 23). These techniques encourage a sense of detachment in the audience,
shifting the focus from simply following the storyline, or getting emotionally carried away
by the realism of the scene. The attempt, therefore, is to educate and sensitise the audience.

2.5 Historical Setting of the Play

Brecht sets his anti-war play in one of the longest political conflicts in European history.
The Thirty Years War initially erupted between Protestants and Catholics in 1618, but it
soon became a complex and longstanding political conflict that engulfed most European
powers of that era. Though it finally ended in 1648 with the Treaty of Westphalia, it had
caused great damage to most of the civilian populations of both Catholic and Protestant
beliefs and killed millions of people.
The war began when the ruler of Bohemia (now, the Czech Republic), Ferdinand
II wanted to impose Catholicism over a largely Protestant territory. This, however, be-
came contentious, and a war erupted between Denmark and Bohemia. While this phase
remained essentially localized and religious, more armies kept joining the war, and it
soon took a political turn. Soon, Sweden, Poland, Netherlands, and Spain joined the war,
making it one of the longest conflicts in the seventeenth century. At a religious level,
the war was between the Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists (three different
Christian denominations). However, these alliances kept shifting, and rulers chose to
politically align with opposing religious factions to annex more territory. At a human
level, though, the war left most of Europe devastated. The armies of both sides plundered
farms, villages, towns, and cities as they marched ahead, leaving them ravaged for years
to come. With the widespread disease and starvation, the war caused a massive loss of
human life, with the German population shrinking to half (Chatterjee xxxvii).
Brecht uses this intertwined religious and political context to make a sharp critique
of war. When he was writing the play, he was still in Germany, a little before World
War II erupted. The Thirty Years War provides the perfect context to Brecht to critique
the politics and power dynamics of war itself. Furthermore, Brecht’s idea was also to
show a bottom-up version of history, or a “worm’s eye view” of history, where, great
historical events are only background to the events happening to common people, in a
way blocking out the larger history of the Thirty Years War (Kuhn 105).

PAGE 47
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 47 01-Jan-25 4:41:09 PM

 Modern European Drama

2.6 Critical Commentary

Scene I
Overview
The play begins in the year 1624, in Dalarna, a province in Sweden. The war has been
going on for several years, and the first scene captures the short span of the truce during
the Swedish-Polish conflict. The play begins with an ironic exchange between a recruiting
officer and a sergeant, who lament the absence of war which, according to them, should
continue, because it provides ordinary citizens with a sense of order. The recruiting officer
is looking for more soldiers, as the ones in his regiment run away or commit suicide. At
this point, Mother Courage enters and gives her “sales pitch” which is a song. Her words,
“Boots they will march in till they die!” emphasise the fatalism of the war (Brecht 24).
The soldiers ask her for her permit and requisite paperwork to do business during the war.
As she does not have any legitimate papers authorizing her trade, the recruiting officers
ask her to introduce her children. She starts introducing them one by one. All three of
her children have been fathered by different men. The banter with the Sergeant enrages
Eilif, her eldest son, who is supposed to be the bravest of them all.
Looking at Mother Courage’s sons, the Recruiting Officer (who presumably gets a
commission on each of his recruits) asks why her sons, both with a good physique, have
not enlisted in the army. To this Mother Courage gets defensive, flatly refusing to let either
of her sons get recruited. She is very clear about the fact that soldiers are destined to die
at war. In order to avoid the argument, and to ward off the possibility of her sons being
enlisted in the army, she takes out a knife to scare the officers. Initially, the Sergeant and
recruiting officer try to reason with her, suggesting that the war has bestowed so much
on her, that she should contribute something to the war as well. However, Mother Cour-
age disagrees, and retorts that the Sergeant too, is destined to have a short life span. She
claims that she can foretell the future, and starts a charade, folding a chit with a black
cross and putting it with blank pieces of paper. The Sergeant picks the one with a cross,
suggesting that he is going to be killed in the war. However, this demonstration does not
end here. The Sergeant asks both her sons to pick a chit each. Ironically, each of her
children also choose black crosses, indicating that they too will die in war as soldiers.
To Mother Courage’s dismay, even the slip that Kattrin chooses has a black cross on it,
indicating that Mother Courage is going to lose all her children to war. What starts as
a deceitful charade, meant to fool the officers, ends on a serious note for her, as she is
forced to confront the danger of being in a war zone.

48 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 48 01-Jan-25 4:41:09 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

The conversation continues, and the two army men distract Mother Courage by start-
ing to bargain over a belt that the Sergeant wants to purchase from her. As the two get
busy, the recruiting officer offers to take Eilif for a drink and goes away with him. Kattrin
tries to draw her mother’s attention, but being speech-impaired, she can only make a few
grunting noises, and jump up and down from the wagon. All this while Mother Courage
is busy with the bargaining. After selling the belt to the Sergeant, she realizes that Eilif
has been taken away by the recruiting officer, leaving her disconcerted and shocked. The
scene ends with the Sergeant saying that the War will take something from you, if you
live off the war. The contradiction between Mother Courage’s aspirations and intentions
become clear: she will not be able to maintain her family with profits from war while
keeping them safely out of it.

Analysis
This ironic exchange between the two army men establishes for the audience that the
war has been normalized by the army, to the extent that they see peace as abnormal. The
recruiting officer is clearly unable to recruit enough people for the war. He mentions that
the men he recruits are unfit to be soldiers,
I do get my hands on some character
and squint at him so I don’t notice he’s pigeon chested
and has varicose veins. I get him drunk and
relaxed, he signs on the dotted line. (23)
If the physically unhealthy men are being recruited for the war, it indicates that the war
is already being fought at a disadvantage.
Mother Courage’s wagon also plays an important part throughout the play, changing
shape as the play progresses. In the early scenes it’s a wagon, with ample space, and with
enough merchandise on it. Later, as the play progress it becomes only a cart, indicating
the change in the family’s financial standing. While all her children are fathered by dif-
ferent men, there is confusion about their real parentage. Eilif’s father seems to have a
Finnish name, but Eilif remembers him as a French man. Similarly, Swiss cheese had a
Swiss father, but he has inherited the qualities of a Hungarian man, Feyos, and is named
after him as well. While these details may go unnoticed by viewers, many some scholars
suggest that this could be a subtle attack on Hitler’s theory of racial purity (Chatterjee
85). Critics also question the maternal qualities of Mother Courage. Irrespective of her
profiteering and dependence on the war, Mother Courage is very firm about not send-
ing her sons to the war front. She is well aware that soldiers at the lowest rung of the

PAGE 49
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 49 01-Jan-25 4:41:09 PM

 Modern European Drama

hierarchy, are at risk of death. Yet, throughout the play, her instinct to make a profit gets
in the way of caring for her children.
Notice the names given by Brecht to the various characters. Mother Courage is never
called by her real name. She gets her name because she had once taken her wagon to
sell bread at a war front. She admits that even at that time, her sole concern was that the
bread was getting mouldy. Financial interest and her business acumen is, in many ways,
her tragic flaw. The recruiting officer and Sergeant shrewdly manipulate her instincts.
When they are unable to convince her, they distract her by offering to buy her goods, so
that the recruiting officer gets a chance to persuade her son to enlist in the army.
Scene II
Overview
Two years have passed and now Mother Courage is in Poland, with the Swedish army.
The war is still going on, and for Mother Courage, this is an apt time to make enough
profit. Sweden has taken over Poland, and the Swedish soldiers are in need of supplies,
as there is serious scarcity of resources in the city.
The scene begins, with Mother Courage standing next to the tent of the Commander,
where his cook is trying to strike a bargain with her. The Cook and Mother Courage are
arguing over the price of a capon (a large fattened chicken). While they are not able to
reach a compromise, Mother Courage describes the situation of the ordinary peasants in
the province. She claims that people have been chasing after rats and even boiled leather
would be a delicacy for the common people as there is an extreme shortage of goods
during these times. While they are still arguing, Mother Courage overhears a conversation
in the next tent and immediately recognizes that it is the voice of her son Eilif.
Eilif, now a soldier, is in a conversation with the Sergeant about a raid he conducted
on the peasants and killed them. He brags about how he found their hidden oxen, deceived
them that he is going to purchase from them, and in a weak moment, killed several of
them. A Chaplain is also accompanying them, and he disapproves of the killings. Howev-
er, by now, he too has become cynical about the war, and says that Christian adages like
“Love thy neighbour” are all meant for times when people have food to eat and amidst
war, such morality need not apply. As she hears about Eilif’s adventure, Mother Courage
suddenly gets angry and delivers a short monologue about the need for good leadership
in the army.
The scene ends with a song where Mother Courage sings The Parable of a Fishwife
warning a soldier not to go into the sea, but the soldier does not listen and drowns. When

50 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 50 01-Jan-25 4:41:09 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

the song ends, Eilif realizes that his mother is in the kitchen and warmly meets her. After
brief exchange Mother Courage informs Eilif (and the audience) that his brother Swiss
Cheese is also in the army, but he is not on the trenches. To her relief, he is a paymaster
(an official who is responsible for payment of wages). She slaps Eilif, casually reprimand-
ing him for putting himself in danger.

Analysis
Mother Courage’s comments about the severity of the situation during the war seem to
be an exaggeration. Nevertheless, she points to the fact that it is the common people who
suffer during war. Historical records show that the thirty years war exacerbated epidemics
and starvation among civilian populations. Eilif’s story of luring the peasants for the price
of the oxen is also noteworthy. As the peasants are left with little or nothing to eat, the
chance to sell their hidden oxen is enough to entice them. However, Eilif kills the peas-
ants with absolutely no cognisance of the morality of his action. His actions are in fact
praised by the Commander, who compares him to Caesar, “you have the makings of a
Caesar” (38). Like Eilif, he has lost his moral compass and does not think of the gravity
of such a brutal killing of the innocent civilians. Even though Mother Courage sees Eilif
as intelligent as well as brave, this action exhibits the traits and the cunning of a street
fighter. As Thomson describes him, “He is a uniformed mugger, licensed by war to round
off robbery with murder, and it is evidence of Mother Courage’s limited understanding
that she cannot entirely suppress pride in him” (Thomson 31).
Like the previous scene, this scene too, points to the atrocities of the war. Mother
Courage emphasizes that the demand for virtue is both flawed and hypocritical, as insisting
on the moral integrity of the powerless often exposes the inefficiency and corruption of
those in positions of authority.
All virtues which a
well-regulated country with a good king or a good
general wouldn’t need. In a good country virtues
wouldn’t be necessary. Everybody could be quite
ordinary, middling, and, for all I care, cowards. (39)
Mother Courage does realize that the need for brave and courageous soldiers is a sign of
poor leadership in the army, nevertheless, she fails to accept that Eilif’s collaboration in
wartime atrocities goes against his own interests.

PAGE 51
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 51 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Modern European Drama

Check Your Progress

i) What is epic theatre?
ii) Why does Mother Courage pretend that she can predict the future?
iii) How does Mother Courage lose Eilif?
iv) What is the significance of the Parable of the Fishwife?

Scene III
Overview
One of the longest, and most eventful scenes of the play, the title of Scene III itself
indicates that Mother Courage’s younger son, Swiss Cheese is going to die. The scene
opens three years after the previous one, and the war has continued. Mother Courage folds
laundry on a clothesline, and tries to strike a deal with an officer who wants to sell her
a bag of bullets, so that he can buy more alcohol. Courage chastises the army man for
selling off the bullets for profit, even while the soldiers in the regiment would not have
anything to fight with. The officer suggests that she can sell the bullets to the other reg-
iment, as they are out of bullets. Her younger son, Swiss Cheese accompanies them, as
does a young sex worker by the name Yvette Pottier. In a quick conversation with Swiss
Cheese, Mother Courage reminds him that he has been recruited by the army because he
is so honest and simple (or naïve) that he will never think of stealing anything from the
army. She also remarks that new countries have joined the war, making it possible for
her business to flourish.
We are now introduced to Yvette’s story as well: jilted by her lover who was a Dutch
Cook, Yvette came to the war front following him. However, as she has no other means
to support herself, she now works as a prostitute, but soldiers avoid her.
Meanwhile, Mother Courage does not want Kattrin to listen to Yvette’s story as she
hopes Kattrin gets married when the war ends. However, Kattrin does try on Yvette’s
shoes in the scene symbolising her repressed sexuality. The Cook and the Chaplain enter,
with a message from Eilif that he wants some money. As the three discuss the war, the
darker side of the war gets exposed. Both, Mother Courage and the Cook are aware that
the war will only serve the profiteering motives of people in power. While the Chaplain
seems to justify war on religious lines, his claims lack conviction.
There is a sudden attack by a Chirstian army, and everyone runs for cover: the Cook
leaves; Mother Courage smears dirt on Kattrin’s face to protect her from the soldiers; the
Chaplain, being a Protestant cleric hides his identity and Courage reluctantly lends him a

52 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 52 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

cloak, and they frantically also take off the Swedish flag from their wagon. At this point,
Swiss Cheese enters with a cashbox in hand, that he is saving from the enemy, and hides
it in the wagon. As three more days pass, Swiss Cheese becomes restless, thinking that his
regiment would be looking for him, so, at a crucial moment, when his mother is away, he
decides to hide the cashbox near the river, so that he can save it from the Christian Army
and hand it over to his regiment when the right time comes. While this intention is honest,
his decision to move the cashbox is a foolish one, as spies of the enemy camp are keep-
ing an eye on him. Even as he carries the cashbox away from the wagon, Kattrin tries to
convey to him that he is in danger, but Swiss Cheese does not take the hints, and is even-
tually caught by the enemy camp. All this while, Mother Courage had been away to buy a
Catholic flag and some meat. As she returns, two soldiers drag Swiss Cheese, asking him
about the hidden cashbox. The soldier asks Swiss Cheese if he knows Mother Courage, but
both Mother Courage and Swiss Cheese have to pretend that they do not know each other.
As her son is taken away, Mother Courage tries her best to save him from getting
hanged. With the help of Yvette, who is now sleeping with one of the Sergeants of the
Catholic Army, Mother Courage tries to procure money for Swiss Cheese’s ransom. They
decide to sell their wagon to the Sergeant, who would offer money for the ransom. Mother
Courage initially plans to use the money from Swiss Cheese’s cashbox to retrieve her
loss. However, she later gets to know that Swiss Cheese, under torture and duress, has
revealed the location of the cash box to the enemy camp. The only choice that Mother
Courage has now, is to either give up her business or her son. Though she knows that
time is very crucial, she continues to haggle on the amount of the ransom, which finally
costs the life of her son. They hear the sound of drums rolling, and it is an indication of
the execution of her honest and naive son.

Analysis
In the beginning of the scene the use of the cannon to hang laundry, correctly depicts the
reducing alertness of the Swedish Army. They are taken by complete surprise as they are
overtaken by the Catholic soldiers as the scene progresses. Mother Courage is happy that
more countries are joining the war. However, she does not realise that this development
would cause the war to be more severe, as now, both her sons are in the army.
Swiss Cheese’s devotion to his honesty is so extreme that it gets in the way of clear
judgement. His mother knows and warns him not to “overdo” his sense of honesty (52).
This act of trying to return the cashbox is such an act of honesty (and foolishness), that
causes him, and his mother to be dishonest at another crucial time, in the same Scene,
when they have to lie to the Christian soldiers that they don’t know each other.

PAGE 53
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 53 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Modern European Drama

It is interesting to note that even though this is ostensibly a religious war, religious
affiliation does not matter much to the soldiers, or to Mother Courage. Even though their
army has been overtaken by the opposing forces, she can simply change the wagon flag
to switch alliances. She also affirms that her religious affiliation has never got into the
way of her business.
The exchange between the Chaplain, the Cook and Mother Courage about the war is
also noteworthy because both the Cook and Mother Courage know that common civilians
are only harmed in war. While the Cook talks about the increased taxes, Mother Courage
remarks:
Who’s defeated? The defeats and victories
of the fellows at the top aren’t always defeats
and victories for the fellows at the bottom (52).
This scene highlights Mother Courage’s character. Despite her indecisiveness, and delay
in making the final decision, she is restless to get a bargain fixed through Yvette. She
does not have a problem with paying two hundred guilders as ransom to save her son,
as she assumes that access to the cashbox will help her retrieve her loss. It’s only when
she realizes that she has to choose between her son and her livelihood, that she starts
rethinking her decision to buy Swiss Cheese’s freedom. This dilemma too, is because she
still has to care for Kattrin, who is dependent upon her.
Swiss Cheese clearly lacks the alertness that is innate to his mother. On the other hand,
Mother Courage’s tendency look for opportunities even in the face of adversity causes her
tremendous loss. Even when her eldest son, Eilif is taken by the army officer, she is busy
bargaining the price of a belt. Both times, her strength gets in the way of her intentions
for her sons.
Brecht’s anti-war commentary is at its height in this scene as war is now being won by
the opposing forces. Despite this change in the order, however, Mother Courage’s business
will expand and thrive as the war continues, and the Christians, in need of supplies, will
be forced to buy from Mother Courage, despite different political and religious affiliations.
Brecht makes a sharp critique of religion and religious war, indicating that religion fails
to deliver true justice to people, as any religious reasoning for the war is only a façade.
Scene IV
Overview
Mother Courage goes to an officer’s tent, to report the ransacking of her wagon. Her cart
has been vandalized, and she has been charged with a fine as well. As she awaits the

54 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 54 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

officer, the clerk warns her not to go ahead with the complaint. In the meantime, a young
soldier furiously enters, shortly followed by an old soldier. The young soldier complains
that the captain has taken away the money, and squandered it. The older soldier advises
him to stay calm, but the young soldier continues, aggressively swearing, and attempting
to lodge the complaint. Mother Courage sings the song of Capitulation, telling her own
story, about how she changed from being extremely idealistic about her beliefs and quick
to protest, but as she grew older, she realized that she too, had become used to the op-
pression, thereby imparting the lesson of capitulation. She tells the young soldier to wait
and complain, only when the anger is so big that he will not have to choose capitulation
as a recourse to his own survival. When the clerk asks Mother Courage to finally come
inside to make the complaint, she departs, having decided not to go ahead with it.

Analysis
This scene doesn’t just bring to light the depth of Courage’s ways of thinking, but is
also a commentary on normalization of oppression. Courage is not just advising capit-
ulation because of lack of will power. So oppressive is the system, that a single person
protesting would never make a difference. It is also interesting to see that the younger
soldier is livid with anger, but the older soldier is a lot more pragmatic, and practical.
Even though not protesting feels like a short-term goal over long term wellbeing, Mother
Courage’s self-realization comes when she notices the situation of the young soldier, and
decides, that no act of rebellion will ever make a difference unless it is sustained and
forceful. Sadly, people who have to earn and make a living, do not have the luxury to
do so. Mother Courage’s final decision to return is indicative of this wisdom, that is as
yet inaccessible to the young soldier. This scene, however brief, is considered as one of
the most significant by many scholars, as it describes the journey of Mother Courage,
who has changed from being a youthful idealist to a cynical realist. Eric Bentley writes,
“We discover that Mother Courage is not a happy Machiavellian, boasting of her realism
as an achievement. We find that she is deeply ashamed. And in finding this, we discover
in Courage the mother of those two roaring idealists (not to say again: martyrs) Swiss
Cheese and Kattrin” (Bentley 17).
Scene V
Overview
Two more years pass, and Mother Courage is now selling more supplies to soldiers. The
caption to the scene tells us that the war has covered a wide territory, and Mother Courage
has now moved across Poland, Moravia, Bavaria, and Italy. The most recent development
in the war is General Tilly’s (a Catholic General) siege of Magdeburg. The soldiers are

PAGE 55
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 55 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Modern European Drama

plundering the town. Mother Courage refuses to give liquor to a soldier who cannot pay.
This soldier is carrying a fur coat, most probably looted from the town. Soldiers are shown
to be misusing their power yet another time.
The Chaplain asks Mother Courage for bandages, as a peasant’s family has been in-
jured while taking care of their farm. Courage, despite seeing their plight refuses to help,
at which the Chaplain tears off some of the shirts meant for the soldiers into pieces so
as to make bandages out of them. Kattrin is also desperate to help people in need and
threatens her mother with a plank of wood. Just then, she hears the cries of a baby, and
she runs inside the house to save the child. Once back, Kattrin tends to the baby in her
lap, trying to sing her a lullaby. Despite the violence surrounding her, Mother Courage’s
sole concern remains her profit. As she laments the loss of the shirts, she snatches away
the fur coat from the drunk soldier.

Analysis
It is interesting to note how Mother Courage has changed affiliation smoothly from Prot-
estant to Christian Camp without any hesitation. While brief, the scene is very significant
for Brecht’s style of depicting historical events. The scene is set in the year 1631, when
General Tilly attacked the Protestant city of Magdeburg, causing the worst massacre of
the war. This remains one of the most cited events in the history of the Thirty Years War.
Yet, Brecht defamiliarizes his audiences by departing from conventional modes of his-
tory telling. Tilly’s victory and his funeral in the next scene are a mere backdrop to the
events happening in the lives of common people. This is another way of retelling history
from the perspective of the common man, or the bourgeois, a key element in Brechtian
Marxist politics.
Kattrin’s repressed desire for motherhood is highlighted at this point, too, when she
tries to sing a lullaby to the child whom she has saved. From this point onwards, Kat-
trin’s role in the play gains importance. This event sets the tone for Kattrin’s heroic act
of saving an entire town, towards the end of the play.
Scene VI
Overview
Set in 1632, the context for this scene is Tilly’s funeral. However, just like the previous
scene, this is only a backdrop to the events happening in the lives of the common peo-
ple. Tilly is now martyred at war, and Courage casually informs the audience about the
circumstances that caused his death. Due to a lack of supplies, there were fewer lamps
in his regiment, and, in the thick fog, the general marched in the wrong direction, lead-

56 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 56 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

ing to his death. His death was, therefore, a consequence of corruption in the army. The
Churches have been destroyed, so, at his funeral, there will be no bells to commemorate
his death. The soldiers are busy drinking and are not interested in attending his funeral.
Mother Courage is now rich and is enjoying her new wealth, though she is worried
that if the war ends, it will be the end of her business. Her only motive now is, to decide
whether to invest more in her merchandise; she does not care about the social or ethical
issues of the war. She discusses the war with the Chaplain, and both seem convinced that
the war may not end at all. As this conversation goes on, Kattrin, who, up until now was
hoping for the war to end, gets agitated. The revelation that the war may never end is a
shock to her, as she yearns for marriage, motherhood, and companionship. She stares at
the Chaplain and then runs out, but her mother directs her to get some supplies instead.
Mother Courage warns her that soldiers on the way might attempt to take away her goods,
so she should put up a good fight. As Kattrin leaves, Courage starts smoking a pipe, and
the Chaplain notices that it is the same pipe that was left by the Cook, indicating that
the Cook and Mother Courage may have a closer, perhaps a sexual relationship. Here, the
Chaplain, too, subtly indicates his interest that is dismissed by Mother Courage, firmly
and ironically stating that her only goal, now, is to get her children through the war, a
goal which she will not be able to achieve.
As Kattrin returns, they realize that she has been assaulted guarding her merchandise
from rioting soldiers, and has got a scar on her face as a result. This is the final blow
to the chances of her ever getting a decent companion. As Courage is nursing her wound
back, she offers Kattrin Yvette’s red boots, which she rejects and crawls into the cart,
indicating her resignation to her fate. Courage informs the Chaplain that Kattrin’s speech
impairment is the result of an assault early in her childhood, “A soldier stuck something
in her mouth when she was little” (81). Having failed to keep her children safe during
the war, Courage, curses the war, the only time in the entire play.

Analysis
While Mother Courage shows a hint of remorse at the general’s death, as it may end
the war, the Chaplain is entirely unfazed. He is convinced that no general’s death would
matter, as the Pope and the Emperor would ensure that the war continues one way or
another. No matter how heroic, a general’s death is therefore inconsequential, “Don’t be
childish, they grow on trees. There are always heroes” (75). As pointed out earlier, this is
intrinsic to Brecht’s philosophy of history and narrativization. This is his way of re-writ-
ing important historical episodes from the point of view of the bourgeois. General Tilly’s
funeral is registered as a minor event in the episode about Kattrin’s mugging. This scene

PAGE 57
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 57 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Modern European Drama

also offers a rich commentary on the normalization of violence. For Mother Courage and
the Chaplain, the war is a necessity. In fact, the Chaplain offers a very mundane everyday
analogy to comment on the inevitability of war “What happens to the hole when the cheese
is gone?” indicating that people would not understand peace, if it were not for war (76).
Scene VII
Overview
Unlike the previous scene, where Mother Courage is visibly distraught after the attack
on Kattrin, and curses the war, this scene begins with a rejoicing exclamation, “I won’t
let you spoil the war for me” (82). This is one of the shortest scenes in the play; the
idea here is to show how Mother Courage has prospered through these times. She starts
wearing a necklace of silver coins and rings on her fingers. Brecht wants to highlight
how the previous scenes have seemingly left no impact on her.

Analysis
The entire scene is, in a way, an antithesis of the previous scene. Brecht dispels the notion
that Mother Courage is unhappy with the war. This, again, is one of the devices used by
the playwright to make the audience critically engage with the play. This brings to the
fore, Mother Courage’s overall philosophy. She looks at war as a provider, and peace as
a disruption. Further, she also iterates that staying at one place is harmful: “Those who
stay at home are the first to go” (82). At the end of the play, even after losing everything,
Mother Courage will move on, in search of a better business opportunity.
Scene VIII
Overview
As more time passes, the war continues, and the scene begins with two peasants, a mother
and a son attempting to sell Mother Courage bedding belonging to the father because they
have nothing to eat. Suddenly, there is the sound of bells, and some voices are heard,
announcing that peace has been restored, as the Swedish king has been killed. On hearing
this news, the old woman faints but, her son wakes her up and they both leave.
As Mother Courage finds out more about the announcement, she learns that it has been
three months since peace was restored, but the news took very long to reach them. While
this is good news for the peasants like the ones we see in the beginning of the scene, for
Courage, this is not a happy moment. She has made several purchases, which, she fears,
will go waste now as the people will not buy her goods anymore. However, she does feel
hopeful about seeing her son Eilif again. On learning, that peace has been restored, the
Chaplain wants to come in his religious robes like before, and Mother Courage cautions

58 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 58 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

him to confirm whether peace has been restored for real, otherwise he stands the risk of
being punished. At this moment the Cook enters, looking a lot more worn out than in the
previous scenes. Since the Cook was employed by the commander of Eilif’s regiment,
Mother Courage hopes to see her son Eilif again. Perhaps the announcement of the war
coming to an end led to the termination of his duties as the Commander’s Cook. He has
not been paid for a long time, and with a severe shortage of raw materials, he is forced
to work with very little. He remains unpaid and insulted. As the Cook and Mother Cour-
age discuss the situation, the Chaplain enters again, this time in his religious clothing of
a Protestant cleric. With his religious authority back, he starts abusing the Cook as well
as Mother Courage, calling her a “hyena of the battlefield” (87).
Realizing that her supplies will go waste, Mother Courage decides to sell her goods
without losing any time. At this point, Yvette enters, looking much older and fatter than
before. She has gained riches by marrying an older Colonel and inheriting his wealth. On
seeing the Cook, she realizes that he is the same ex-lover who had abandoned her, and
this starts a heated exchange between the Cook and Yvette. Yvette warns Mother Courage
about the Cook and tells her to beware of him. As Mother Courage has now decided to
quickly sell her goods, she leaves immediately, along with Yvette. However, as she is
hopeful to see Eilif once again, she asks the Chaplain and the Cook to offer Eilif some
brandy in case he comes back.
Once she leaves, Eilif is seen entering with his hands tied, escorted by soldiers. He
is there to meet Mother Courage for one last time before he is given the death penalty,
as he has committed the crime of killing peasants during peacetime. He has been allowed
one last meeting with his mother, but since Mother Courage has left, this opportunity of
meeting her son for the last time is completely lost. The Cook and the Chaplain ask what
they should tell Mother Courage, and Eilif asks the two not to tell her anything at all:
CHAPLAIN: What shall we tell your mother?
EILIF: Tell her it was no different. Tell her it was the
same. Oh, tell her nothing (92).
As Eilif leaves, the Chaplain follows him, hoping to offer prayers in his last moments.
When Mother Courage returns, she asks for Eilif, but as directed by Eilif, the Cook hides
the information about his death sentence, and she continues to assume that Eilif is alive.

Analysis
Scene VIII fits Brecht’s description of Epic theatre. The audience is constantly made to
feel the irony of the whole situation. The characters are hardly able to distinguish between

PAGE 59
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 59 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Modern European Drama

war and peace. The commentary on the uncertainty about the war getting over is poignant,
as the people on the periphery have no way of knowing about the political situation at
the centre. This irony is further heightened as that the war returns once again in no time,
and this news too, like the news of the restoration of peace, reaches the civilians two
days late. The arbitrariness of the war is thus highlighted, making us wonder about the
plight of the common people.
The banter between the Cook and the Chaplain is significant, as both the men want
favours of Mother Courage, as they depend on her as a “feedbag” (Thomson 49). How-
ever, she chooses the Cook, and this marks the quiet exit of the Chaplain. The audience
does not see him again.
When peace is declared at the beginning of the scene, Kattrin, who has been waiting
for peace in the hope of companionship gives no reaction, “She won’t come out. Peace
is nothing to her, it was too long coming” (85). Here, Mother Courage also says that the
scar on Kattrin’s face is now hardly visible, but she feels that people stare at her. The
wound has a deep, psychological impact on Kattrin. She has now lost hope of ever living
the life she had always wanted.
Mother Courage’s business always distracts her from calamities that befall her chil-
dren. Even though she does not have a direct role to play in any of the children’s death,
her presence with the children would have made an enormous difference to protect them.
The Chaplain’s exit from the play at this point further brings to light the nature of his
opportunism. Now that he cannot profit from the war, he immediately goes back to his
other perhaps, parasitic status, of offering prayers for the dying. Even though Eilif does
not want him to come along, the Chaplain still follows him, looking to find money for
his religious services.
What was seen as an act of bravery during war, is seen as an unlawful, punishable
offense now. Eilif’s is Mother Courage’s bravest son, but his bravery seldom gets ahead
of bullying. A similar act of violence was rewarded earlier, and he was even compared
to Caesar in Scene II (38). Now he is being punished with a death sentence.

Check Your Progress

i) Why is Mother Courage unable to save Swiss Cheese?
ii) What does “The Song of the Great Capitulation” represent?
iii) Why does Kattrin get dejected after hearing that the way may never end?
iv) Why is Eilif punished? Why is he unable to meet his mother in his last moments?

60 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 60 01-Jan-25 4:41:10 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

Scene IX
Overview
Many more years pass. It has now been seventeen years since the war has been going
on, and the scene establishes that everyone is now tired of the war. Unlike the earlier
time, when some people had enough money to purchase goods from Mother Courage, now
everyone is starving, Mother Courage exclaims, “In Pomerania I hear the villagers have
been eating their younger children. Nuns have been caught committing robbery” (96).
Mother Courage’s business is now failing, and she, along with the Cook and Kattrin,
is forced to beg for food. The Cook reveals to Mother Courage that he would like to
take her to Utrecht, where his aunt has left him a small inn. Mother Courage agrees to
accompany him, believing that she will be able to save Kattrin from the war. The Cook
clarifies that Kattrin cannot accompany them. Despite the inn being too small for people
to depend on it, he was still willing to take Mother Courage with him, as she would be
a helping hand but, Kattrin would be a liability. In addition to this, Kattrin’s scar is an-
other reason for his decision, “I can’t have her in the inn. Customers don’t like having
something like that always before their eyes. You can’t blame them” (97).
They sing the Song of Solomon, mentioning great men like Solomon, Julius Caesar,
Socrates, and Saint Martin, who suffered on account of their virtues. In Mother Courage’s
world, therefore, virtue is never rewarded. Both her sons die on account of their virtues.
Her daughter will also see a tragic end in the next scene. While the Cook decides to leave,
Mother Courage, despite giving an honest thought to the idea of leaving decides not to
abandon Kattrin. As she returns to the cart, Kattrin takes out her bundle of clothes, intend-
ing to run away. She has heard the conversation between her mother and the Cook, and,
heartbroken, she aligns Mother Courage’s skirt with his trousers, indicating their sexual
relationship, and her mute resignation to the same. However, Mother Courage tells her that
she is not going anywhere. She throws the Cook’s clothes out of the cart. The Cook sees
this, and the scene ends here.

Analysis
The Song of Solomon is one of the most important songs in the play. Each of the figures
in the song corresponds to one of the children: Eilif has the courage of Caesar, Swiss
Cheese has the honesty of Socrates, and Kattrin has the kindness of St Martin. Just like
the heroes, all three children die because of their virtues too. Mother Courage has also
critiqued virtue in Scene II, where she says that virtues are needed by the people when
there is an irresponsible leadership at the top:
When a general or a king is stupid and leads his soldiers
into a trap, they need this virtue of courage.
PAGE 61
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 61 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 Modern European Drama

When he’s tightfisted and hasn’t enough soldiers, the

few he does have need the heroism of Hercules
another virtue. (39)
The war is now almost impossible to survive, with barely any means to live by and the
Cook wants the support of Mother Courage, perhaps because of her sharp business acumen,
but he refuses to take Kattrin. He does not try to coverup the true reasons for wanting to
leave Kattrin behind, citing her scar as the second reason for deserting her. The reference
to the scar (visible or invisible) reminds us that Kattrin is the ultimate symbol of wartime
atrocities on women. Mother Courage also mentions Kattrin’s inability to survive on her
own. “Cook, how could she pull the wagon by herself? The war frightens her. She can’t
bear it” (97). However, once she is back with Kattrin, she tells her that she is back only
for the wagon (101). Kattrin, and Mother Courage are the only ones left on stage.
Scene X
Overview
It is 1635 now, and Mother Courage and Kattrin are in Germany. As they are moving,
they hear music coming from inside a house. The residents are singing a song about home,
and, revel in the comfort of a warm home amidst the chaos. The scene is brief and only
the song plays, while Mother Courage and Kattrin stop to listen.
Our farmhouse gives us shelter.
The winter’s in a hurry
But we’ve no cause to worry.
We are warm
In the midst of the storm! (102)

Analysis
The scene brings to the fore, the symbolic relationship between the powerful and the
marginalized. There is a glaring disparity between the circumstances of Mother Courage
and the happy residents of the house. Even though there is poverty all across, the people
in the house are happy about their comforts, and remain indifferent to the hardships faced
by those outside.
Scene XI
Overview
It is now 1636, and they are in the Protestant town of Halle. The cart now stands near a
peasant’s house. Kattrin is therefore, alone. An army of Christian soldiers suddenly attacks
62 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 62 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

the peasants. They want to go further and ransack the town. Although the peasants are
initially unwilling to reveal the location of the town, they are intimidated and eventually
give in, agreeing to show the way to the nearby town. Kattrin is among these peasants,
as Mother Courage is once again absent, off buying cheap goods from shopkeepers.
Once the soldiers are away, the peasant women, pray for their family members in the
nearby town. They reiterate that they couldn’t do anything to save the people of the town
from being attacked. All townspeople are sleeping and no one can alert them for fear of
the Christian soldiers. The peasants pray to God, believing that nothing can be done to
save the town from being sieged. As a peasant’s wife prays for the little children in her
family, Kattrin rises to action and immediately takes the drum from her cart, climbs the
roof, and starts to beat the drum so as to alert the townspeople.
Everyone tries to take her down from the roof. The peasants try to place a ladder,
to force her to get down, but she pulls it to the roof. They threaten to stone her, but she
keeps drumming. The noise draws the soldiers back, who desperately try to stop her or
drown out the sound of her drum. In their frenzy, they even begin chopping wood to avoid
arousing suspicion among the townspeople. However, none of their efforts succeed, and
Kattrin beats the drum even more furiously. In frustration, the Lieutenant finally orders
her to be shot. This is her final act of sacrifice to save the children of the other town.
However, this act of benevolence marks her death.

Analysis
Kattrin’s final act of sacrifice also points to the irony of the war. The soldiers, in an
attempt to reach her start chopping wood, and later make even more noise, thus alerting
the people with their own actions. Like her two brothers, Kattrin dies because of her
dominant virtue of kindness and motherhood. It does not go unnoticed that this final
act of kindness is for the unseen children in the town. The chaos that unfolds as Kattrin
drums is significant, as no threat, warning, or bribe can sway her. Even when the soldiers
kick the cart to intimidate her, she remains defiant and refuses to back down. This is an
act of true courage, something that Mother Courage, despite her name, is never able to
demonstrate. Critics thus view Kattrin as the ultimate mother figure in the play. “Mother
Courage’s behaviour suggests a self-centred, and self-regarding mother-love confined to
her own children; Kattrin’s more universal mother-love embraces all children — peasant
and bourgeois, in country and town, and those seen as well as unseen.” (Chatterjee lvi).
The entire action takes place when Mother Courage is away, once again, chasing a short-
term business goal.

PAGE 63
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 63 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 Modern European Drama

Scene XII
Overview
In the final scene of the play, Mother Courage sings a lullaby to the dead body of Kattrin.
She still erroneously believes that her son Eilif is alive. In the final climax, however, she
goes out with the soldiers still looking for a way to survive, now without her children,
but still dragging her cart with her.
Analysis
Mother Courage has finally lost all her three children, and all die when she is away be-
cause of work. Yet, she seems to be unfazed, whether for the need to survive or simply
because it is her second nature to move on for business. In the beginning of the play,
Mother Courage is with her three children, her two grown up sons are pulling her wagon,
she is managing a relatively profitable business. The closing scene of the play is exactly
its opposite: Mother Courage is alone, on her own, her three children have all died because
of the war and the decisions that she has made. Her wagon is now a threadbare cart, and
she pulls it alone as she struggles to find strength through all these years of war. Yet,
she goes off, in search of the next best opportunity, as she refuses to learn anything from
her journey. In his notes, Brecht highlights this very refusal to learn anything as the flaw
that completely undoes Mother Courage. Some critics see this character trait of Mother
Courage as a sign of her indomitability: Eric Bentley writes:
Mother Courage is essentially courageous. . . . On she marches with her wagon after
all that has happened, a symbol of the way humanity itself goes on its way after all
that has happened, if it can find the courage. And after all we don’t have to wait for
the final scene to learn that we have to deal with a woman of considerable toughness
and resilience (Bentley 9).
The final scene thus completes the tragedy of Mother Courage. The soldier’s song echoes
the essence of war, “. . . And though it last three generations, We shall get nothing out of
it” (111).

Check Your Progress

i) Why does Mother Courage part ways with the Cook?
ii) What does “The Song of the Great Souls of this Earth” signify?
iii) Why is Mother Courage unable to save any of her children?
iv) What is the significance of Kattrin’s sacrifice at the end of the play?

64 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 64 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

2.7 Characters
Mother Courage
The titular character, Mother Courage, is a tradeswoman who makes money by selling es-
sential items to soldiers at war. Her real name, Anna Fierling is revealed in the beginning
of the play. It is only the Cook who addresses her by name. She has two sons, Eilif and
Swiss Cheese and a mute daughter, Kattrin all fathered by different men, and belonging
to different nationalities. Her fatal trait is her business instinct.
Brecht offers a critique of war through her character. By the end of the play, even
though she has lost all of her children, she goes back to continue with the business that
has tragically led to the death of all her children. Through her character, Brecht offers
a serious commentary on the futility and injustice of war, and capitalism. Brecht wanted
to paint Mother Courage as a truly unsympathetic character, who learns nothing from the
war. The end of the play significantly draws her as a selfish person who is constantly
preoccupied by short-term, immediate gain. However, many critics argue that Mother
Courage has the depth of a great tragic figure. She has no choice, but to suffer, endure
and move on. She is thus, a complex figure which can be seen as a human embodiment
of different roles put together. She is intelligent, but blind; self-regarding, but unselfish;
indomitable, yet cowardly (Chatterjee lxvi). Even though she often sides with war-mongers,
and war often makes her happy (as seen in Scene VII), she is bound by her personal duty
of motherhood, and tries sincerely to save her children, but ultimately fails.
Kattrin
Kattrin is the mute daughter of Mother Courage. As she is speech impaired, due to a child-
hood assault, she communicates only through gestures and grunting noises. She represents
the brutality of war, especially on innocent people and women. While her mother too,
aspires to get her married, these hopes are quashed as she is attacked by soldiers and her
face is scarred, virtually jeopardizing her chances of getting married, or having children.
She, however, turns out to be one of the most compassionate and courageous characters
of the play, saving many lives while sacrificing her own. She dreams of escaping war
and living a simple, free life, but that dream never comes to fruition. Her death marks
the absolute futility and injustice of war.
Eilif
Eilif is the eldest son of Mother Courage. He is brutish, violent, quick on his feet, and
thinks clearly in the face of adversity. During the war, when confronted with peasants,
he is able to manipulate them, choosing a weak moment to rob, and then murder them

PAGE 65
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 65 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 Modern European Drama

as well. Feeling no remorse for his actions, he represents the aggression and brutality of
war, “Tires you out, skinning peasants. Gives you an appetite” (Brecht 34). He enjoys the
advantage that power gives him, and this selfish act of bravado and aggression is reward-
ed by his commander. However, once the war ends, a similar act of brutish, ill-thought
violence is deemed unpardonable, and he is given the death sentence. The favourite of his
mother, Eilif seeks her in his final moments, perhaps believing that she would be able to
save him, but he is unable to meet her. He declines to pass any information to her, and
Mother Courage remains ignorant of his death throughout the rest of the play.
Swiss Cheese
Swiss Cheese is the younger son of Mother Courage. He is honest and loyal to the point
of delusion and stupidity. He becomes a paymaster in the army, but bound by his tre-
mendous sense of duty and loyalty, he wants to return the army cashbox to his regiment,
even when they have already been taken over by the opposing forces. This goes against
the advice of his mother, making him the first of Mother Courage’s children to die.
Swiss Cheese’s virtue is honesty, which makes him lose his sense of self-preservation.
He is not selective in his display of honesty, and he is equally honest with everyone, until
it reaches the point where he is captured by the Christian soldiers.
Cook
The Cook is Dutch, first introduced as a cook to the Commander of Eilif’s regiment. He
was also the lover of Yvette Pottier and abandoned her, but he sticks to Mother Courage
in the latter half of the play. Towards the end of the play, he parts ways with Mother
Courage, to work at his inn in Utrecht.
Chaplain
The Chaplain is a Protestant cleric, who is first seen with Eilif and his Commander.
However, he later joins Mother Courage and depends on her for survival. He personifies
Brecht’s critique of religion, as he is presented as a hypocrite and cowardly. He competes
with the Cook for Mother Courage’s companionship, but gets rejected. Throughout the play
he tries, futilely, to provide a religious justification for the war. Nevertheless, just before
his final exit from the play, he gives a moralizing sermon to Mother Courage, calling her
a “Hyena of the battlefield” (87).
Yvette Pottier
Yvette Pottier is a sex worker who also, like Mother Courage, follows the army for sur-
vival. She tells her story in the first half of the play, that she is a jilted lover of a Dutch
man, who is later revealed to be the Cook. She marries the elder brother of a sergeant

66 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 66 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

that she was once sleeping with, and inherits his property becoming rich. She is perhaps
the only character who, finally profits in the war.
Recruiting Officer
The recruiting officer is introduced in Scene I as a frustrated army man, looking for can-
non fodder. He recruits Eilif, while distracting his mother with the help of the Sergeant.
Sergeant
The Sergeant is introduced in Scene I. Like the Recruiting officer, he is also of the view
that war is necessary to bring a sense of order to society.

2.8 Themes
Mother courage as an Anti-war Play
The play offers a strong antiwar commentary. Mother Courage is a war profiteer, as she
depends on the war for survival. However, she does not want to sacrifice anything for
the war herself. Eilif, her eldest son, is the smartest. He is aggressive, quick on his feet,
and courageous, completely swayed by the narrative of war. However, his courage is not
the virtue that is useful to him. Just after Mother Courage hears about Eilif’s courage,
she calls out the bad leadership of the Commanding officers:
MOTHER COURAGE: Because he needs brave soldiers, that’s why. If his plan of
campaign was any good, why would he need brave soldiers, wouldn’t plain, ordinary
soldiers do? Whenever there are great virtues, it’s a sure sign something’s wrong
(Brecht 39).
You will also notice that there are no great battle scenes or depictions of war in the play.
Despite the heroic victory in Magdeburg, General Tilly dies because there were not enough
lamps with his regiment. The play is, thus, a critique of the conventional understanding of
war itself, and highlights that war can never benefit anyone. At many points in the play,
the characters break into discussions about the ongoing war. Brecht had lived through
World War I and wrote the play a little before the outbreak of World War II. He wanted
his audience to not simply be moved by the tragedy of Mother Courage, but contextualize
these discussions with their times, and critically engage with the themes.
Critique of Capitalism
Brecht was a firm believer in Marxism. Time and again, he points out that the people at
the top are unconcerned about the sufferings of the people at the lowest rung of society.
At times, Mother Courage is too focussed on making profit to notice that her children
are being harmed. Brecht also portrays her as an opportunist, for whom the news that the

PAGE 67
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 67 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 Modern European Drama

war has ended is disappointing. Since she defines herself solely through her work, she
is swayed by her desire to make a profit, even at the most crucial moments, irrespective
of her children’s safety. In his notes, Brecht remarks that this was one of the first large-
scale wars waged by capitalist powers in Europe, in the name of religion. He also looked
at Hitler’s campaign as an indication of the crisis of capitalism in an intensified form
(Chatterjee xxxvii).
Critique of Heroism and Virtue
Brecht offers a strong critique of traditional notions of heroism and patriotism, especially
through the character of Eilif. What is glorious and commendable in the face of war, is
actually illegal and unethical in other circumstances. Eilif’s pillaging of the peasants during
the war is considered a brave act whereas in reality, it is an act of coercion, wherein he
kills the peasants and robs them of their means to survival. As mentioned in the analysis
of Scene II, and Scene XI, virtue and bravery do not matter if the leadership is corrupt
and selfish. It is interesting that there are no martyrs in the play. While General Tilly sacks
Magdeburg in scene V, in the very next scene his funeral is a big disaster, as soldiers
are not willing to attend it and the bells won’t be tolled either. The Chaplain too says,
in Scene VI, that there is never a dearth of war heroes (Brecht 75). The play suggests
that war glorifies violence and that true heroism may involve resisting or surviving war,
rather than participating in it.
Gender and Power
Brecht’s portrayal of women is strong in many of his plays, perhaps owing to collabo-
ration with women writers like Elizabeth Hauptmann. In all respects, Mother Courage’s
characterization is unconventional and strongly rejects conventions of patriarchy. She is
bold, shrewd, quick-witted, and outsmarts some of her male comrades easily. Her mascu-
line traits of calculation, and profiteering often overpower feminine traits of motherhood
and nurture. Moreover, Kattrin’s story is also a strong representation of feminine suffering
during the war. Though Kattrin emerges as the real hero of war, her suffering should be
reviewed through the lens of gender. These two women embody strength and resilience,
but they are still ultimately powerless in the face of larger societal forces.
Religion and Hypocrisy
The character of the Chaplain is the primary example of the arbitrariness of religious
doctrine in the play. Brecht also chooses the setting of the Thirty Years War, where,
religious affiliation, though initially the cause for war, later becomes only a ruse. Here,
too, Mother Courage is easily able to switch sides and serve the Christian and Protestant
soldiers alike, mainly owing to the fact that it does not matter what she believes in, as
long as she keep providing the soldiers with what they need.
68 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 68 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 Bertolt Brecht, Mother Courage and Her Children

2.9 Summing Up
In this part of the study material, you have read about Bertolt Brecht’s iconic play, Mother
Courage and her Children. The first part of this lesson touches upon and the innovations
that are used to defamiliarize the audience so as to educate and inform them. Brecht’s
theories of epic theatre also throw light on how this play has been produced over the
years. The following sections provide a comprehensive analysis and critical commentary
of both the play and its context. Brecht’s work is explored as a critique of the futility of
war, offering a broader perspective on the intersection of war and capitalism, highlighting
how systemic societal injustices are often culturally normalized. The discussions about the
characters and themes would will further enable you to have a thorough understanding of
the play and its relevance in Modern European theatre.

2.10 Works Cited and Further Reading

Bentley, Eric. “Who is Mother Courage?” Mother Courage and her Children: A Chronicle
of the Thirty Years War. Translated by Eric Bentley, Grove Press, 1963, pp 9–18.
———. “Literalization of theatre: Notes on Threepenny Opera.” Brecht on Theatre: The
Development of an Aesthetic. Translated by John Willett, Metheun, 1974, pp. 43–47.
———. Mother Courage and her Children: A Chronicle of the Thirty Years War. Trans-
lated by Eric Bentley, Grove Press, 1963.
———. “Theatre for Pleasure or Theatre for Instruction.” Brecht on Theatre: The Devel-
opment of an Aesthetic. Translated by John Willett. Metheun, 1974, pp. 69–77.
Chatterjee, Ruby. “Introduction.” Mother Courage and her Children: A Chronicle of the
Thirty Years War. Translated by Eric Bentley, Oxford University Press, 1992.
Hollander, Katherine. “Is Mother Courage an Anti-War Play?” Mother Courage and Her
Children. United Kingdom, Bloomsbury Publishing, 2022, pp 33–35.
———.“Production History.” Mother Courage and Her Children. United Kingdom,
Bloomsbury Publishing, 2022, pp 29– 32.
Kuhn, Tom. “Brecht Reads Bruegel: ‘Verfremdung’, Gestic Realism and the Second Phase
of Brechtian Theory.” Monatshefte, vol. 105, no. 1, 2013, pp. 101–22. JSTOR, http://www.
jstor.org/stable/24549600. Accessed 11 Sept. 2024.
Thomson, Peter and Glendyr Sacks. editors. The Cambridge Companion to Brecht.
Cambridge University Press, 2006.

PAGE 69
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 69 01-Jan-25 4:41:11 PM

 U N I T

III(3)
Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

Ruchika Bhatia

Structure
3.1 Learning Objectives
3.2 The Theatre of the Absurd
3.3 About the Author
3.4 Influences on Ionesco’s Work
3.5 Rhinoceros: A Study Guide
3.6 Characterization
3.7 Important Themes
3.8 The Language of Rhinoceros
3.9 Long Answer Questions
3.10 Works Cited and Further Reading

3.1 Learning Objectives

The play Rhinoceros was first published in French as Le Rhinocéros in 1959. It was first
performed in Germany in 1960 and in many other cities; bringing its author Ionesco
international fame. This study material on Rhinoceros includes a brief discussion on the
Theatre of the Absurd, a detailed study guide, and analyses of important characters and
themes. After going through this study material, you should be able to;
‹ Understand the play as a political allegory,
‹ Write about the major issues raised by Ionesco, and
‹ Formulate your personal perspective on Rhinoceros.
The primary motive of this study material is to encourage students to develop their own
understanding and critique of several complexities offered by the play.

3.2 The Theatre of the Absurd

The Theatre of the Absurd, broadly speaking, refers to a style of writing followed by
European playwrights, between 1940 and 1960. It developed as a reaction to the horrors
70 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 70 01-Jan-25 4:41:12 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

of World War II and as a rebellion against traditional culture and literature. These writers
reflected on the futile human struggle to understand the meaning of existence. Existen-
tialism provided the philosophical underpinning for this theatre. ‘God is dead’: Friedrich
Nietzsche’s declaration encapsulated the loss of faith in a benevolent higher power. It
opposed the idea of human rationality, an intelligible universe, and the individual’s ca-
pacity for heroism. The 1940s saw the spread of the ideas of existentialist philosophers
like Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus, who viewed the human being as a reduced en-
tity, existing in isolation and alienation; living a purposeless life. According to Camus,
‘absurdity’ designated the condition of man in an alien, ‘unknown,’ and hostile universe.
He explained this in his philosophical essay, The Myth of Sisyphus (1942):
A world that can be explained by reasoning, however faulty, is a familiar world. But
in a universe that is suddenly deprived of illusions and of light, man feels a stranger.
His is an irremediable exile, because he is deprived of memories of a lost homeland
as much as he lacks the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his
life, the actor and his setting, truly constitutes the feeling of Absurdity. (4)
In 1961, Martin Esslin, a Hungarian-born English drama critic and scholar, published his
influential Theatre of the Absurd, in which he coined and defined the term:
The Theatre of the Absurd strives to express its sense of the senselessness of the
human condition and the inadequacy of the rational approach, by the open abandon-
ment of rational devices and discursive thought.
The principal absurdist playwrights were: Samuel Beckett, the most influential writer
of the movement, who wrote Waiting for Godot (1954) and Endgame (1958); Eugéne
Ionesco, French playwright of The Bald Soprano (1949) and The Lesson (1951); Jean
Genet, another French playwright who wrote The Maids (1947) and The Balcony (1956);
the English writer Harold Pinter, author of The Birthday Party (1957), The Homecoming
(1964), and Betrayal (1978); and Edward Albee, known for his The Zoo Story (1958) and
Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf ? (1962).
The main features of absurdist drama are suspension of language as a means to
communicate meaning, the absence of narrative continuity or sequential events, bizarre
scenery or character sketches which shock the readers or viewers, and the use of allego-
ry and metaphors to communicate meaning. These are some of the disruptive techniques
followed by the dramatists to break the harmony of the play and unnerve the audience,
forcing them to question their relevance.
Language ceases to be a mode of communication; it becomes a tool to obstruct log-
ic or definitive meaning. Ionesco himself was very perturbed with conventional writing

PAGE 71
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 71 01-Jan-25 4:41:12 PM

 Modern European Drama

and the way it promotes certainty of meaning. In times of terror and horror, World War
I onwards, the possibility of communicating experience was defied. This evasiveness of
language and ambiguity of meaning is critical for the Theatre of the Absurd. This partic-
ular dodginess of language makes it potentially dangerous, as multiplicity or diversity of
meaning is a threat for the absolutist regimes of society. The Theatre of the Absurd aims
to represent life as it is; unresolved, imperfect, and conflicting.
Samuel Beckett’s play, Waiting for Godot is a superb illustration of form being used
to establish a philosophical point. Two men, Vladimir and Estragon, are waiting for some-
one named Godot. Doing away with the conventional structure of drama, Beckett’s play
is static, ending with unresolved questions: who are the two men waiting for, what led to
this punishing wait, and whether Godot exists or not. Symbolically, the play demonstrates
how struggling for absolute control and coherence in human life is itself pointless. The
audience remains glued till the end with the hope that something will happen but it gets
thwarted. As the ideals of control, logic, heroism, and significance of human action get
subverted, a different picture of loneliness and despair in an unintelligible world emerges.

3.3 About the Author

Eugène Ionesco was a French playwright born on November 26, 1909, in Slatina, Roma-
nia. His father was a Romanian Orthodox Christian and his mother was French. He came
to Paris, France when he was only a year old and spent his early childhood there. His
father returned to Romania in 1916 and is believed to have died in the First World War.
However, in 1920 Ionesco learnt that he was alive, had divorced his mother, remarried,
and gained custody of the children. Ionesco went to live with him in Romania in 1922,
where he attended Saint Sava National School, and later studied French literature at the
University of Bucharest. He married Rodica Burileanu in 1936, and in 1938 returned to
France with his wife and daughter.
Ionesco started his writing career with poetry and criticism. He wrote No! (1934),
a satirical pamphlet that criticized prominent Romanian writers and The Grotesque and
Tragic Life of Victor Hugo; again, a satirical biography of the great French writer Vic-
tor Hugo. He started his career in theatre when he was in his forties. His first play La
Cantatrice Chauve (1948) was first performed with an English title, The Bald Soprano in
1950. His early plays were mainly one-act plays and mere absurdist sketches that were
critical of the bourgeoisie and conformism of any kind. A few examples are The Submis-
sion (1950), The Lesson (1950), Salutations (1950), The Future is in Eggs (1951) and
Victims of Duty (1952). Rhinoceros was written in 1959 and performed in Paris, where it

72 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 72 01-Jan-25 4:41:12 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

got excellent reviews. Ionesco died in 1994 and the inscription on his tombstone, in true
absurdist spirit, reads:
Pray to the I don’t-know-who: Jesus Christ, I hope.

3.4 Influences on Ionesco’s Work

Ionesco is a significant figure of the French avant-garde theatre. Avante-garde means
introduction of new, innovative and experimental ideas in art, music, literature, and the-
atre, which challenge the old and conventional ways. The French avant-garde was a 20th
century phenomenon involving many other significant movements such as Dadaism and
Surrealism. Dadaism was an early 20th century artistic movement originating in Zurich,
Switzerland around 1916 and then spreading to Berlin, whereas Surrealism was a succes-
sor movement. Both were a response to the destruction and horrors of World War I. The
damaging effects of World War I fostered a ‘negative’ art or ‘anti-art,’ which questioned
the rationality and fake values of modern bourgeois society. A few of the key figures of
Dadaism were Tristan Tzara, Francis Picabia, Marcel Duchamp, and Man Ray.
Surrealism revolted against all restraints and, instead, advocated free expression and
unhindered creativity. It was a breakaway from traditional values, standard morality, and
all forms of realistic, conventional art. Some famous surrealists were André Breton, Lou-
is Aragon and the painter Salvador Dali. The writings of Dylan Thomas, Henry Miller,
William Burroughs, and Thomas Pynchon were also influenced by this movement. The
surrealist innovations in writings were; broken syntax, a non-chronological or a seemingly
illogical order of events which encouraged free association, and an emphasis on bizarre
or shocking images.
Similar features can also be found in Ionesco’s writings — where he plays with
shocking, disparate images and language; which seem senseless at the surface level but
actually challenge and subvert any repressive authoritarian system.

3.5 Rhinoceros: A Study Guide

This part of the study guide includes a commentary on the three acts of Rhinoceros. Each
section has some questions at the end, to test your comprehension of the play. The main
issues are briefly discussed in the next two sections. Please remember that this study-
guide is meant to draw your attention to those aspects that have engaged commentators
and critics over the years. It is up to you to further explore them and develop your own
perspective. The page numbers refer to the Worldview edition of Rhinoceros. This edition
includes a chapter on the critical reception of the play, which you must read.
PAGE 73
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 73 01-Jan-25 4:41:12 PM

 Modern European Drama

Act I
The play begins in a provincial town of France, where two friends, Jean and Bérenger,
meet at a cafe. Jean is logical; a man of clarity, staunch ideas and opinions, but suffering
from excessive pride, whereas Bérenger is an indecisive simpleton; a passive, shy man
but an alcoholic. Jean rebukes Bérenger for being late and coming in a dishevelled state.
It is apparent that Bérenger has a hangover. His reply highlights his existential dilemma;
BÉRENGER. . . . I’m not made for the work I’m doing . . . every day at the office,
eight hours a day — and only three weeks’ holiday a year. (5)
The monotony of Bérenger’s existence is killing his soul, leading him to drink. Bérenger
notices his colleague Daisy pass by and confides in Jean about his feelings for her. He
does not feel worthy of her as he thinks she may be interested in another colleague —
Dudard, who is an accomplished, qualified man with a bright future.
The first act has a number of minor characters going about their daily business; the
Proprietor of the café, the Waitress, the Grocer, his Wife, the Housewife, an Old Gentle-
man and the Logician. Notice that they are not given any names or individualized by the
author. They represent ordinary people and help create an atmosphere of normal, mundane
existence as a backdrop to the appearance of the rhinos.
Suddenly, a rhinoceros is heard charging across the street, rummaging everything and
leaving everyone in shock. The rhinoceros does not appear on stage but its presence is
conveyed through sounds and the simultaneous, surprised exclamations of the people there.
“Oh! a rhinoceros” (6-7). Jean is amazed but Bérenger remains unfazed and keeps yawning.
The rhinoceros appears again, killing the Housewife’s pet cat. Jean and Bérenger get into
an argument over the second appearance of the rhinoceros; whether it was the same rhinoc-
eros or a different one, and its species—Asiatic or African. Bérenger accuses Jean of being a
show-off and Jean calls Bérenger “a bluffer and a liar” who has no interest in life and accuses
him of being an “Asiatic Mongol” (28). Jean leaves in anger and Bérenger feels remorseful.
Parallel to their conversation is the discussion between the Old Gentleman and the
Logician. The Logician is trying to explain that a syllogism is one that consists of “a
main proposition, a secondary one, and a conclusion,” and begins to give examples to
the old gentleman:
LOGICIAN. [to the OLD GENTLEMAN] Here is an example of syllogism. The cat
has four paws. Isidore and Fricot have four paws. Therefore Isidore and Fricot
are cats.
OLD GENTLEMAN. [to the LOGICIAN] My dog has four paws.
LOGICIAN. [to the OLD GENTLEMAN] Then it’s a cat. (16)
74 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 74 01-Jan-25 4:41:12 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

The conversation between them mocks at reason and logic, at the expense of the
character of the Logician. Throughout the first act, the conduct of the minor characters
is significant. In the middle of the chaos, after the appearance of the rhinoceroses, the
proprietor of the café is worried about the payment for the broken glasses that he will
recover from the waitress. The grocer hurries to sell a bottle of wine to the housewife
and the old gentleman loses no opportunity to flirt with the housewife.
Everyone turns to the Logician to resolve the confusion created by Jean after his
comment that there were two different rhinos. After a confusing exercise in the application
of logic, Bérenger points out that the problem is still unresolved. All that the logician
manages is to conclude that the question is “correctly posed” (34).

Check Your Progress 1

i) Why is Bérenger late? What does it tell us about him?
ii) Describe Jean’s character in detail and how is he different from his friend?
iii) What is the role of the minor characters in this act?
iv) What is the subject of the conversation between the Logician and the old gentleman?

Act II: Scene I

This scene is set in the office of a firm that publishes law books. Mr. Papillon, the Head
of the Department, is very “correctly” dressed in a dark blue suit and black tie. Dudard
is “thirty-five, grey suit, spectacled, and a young employee with a future” (36). There is
another employee—Botard, a former school teacher, who “knows everything, understands
everything, and judges everything” (37). Women are described in minimal terms; Daisy
the receptionist is “a young blond” and Mrs. Boeuf is “old, tearful, and breathless” (37).
The act begins with Botard’s refusal to believe that a cat was killed by a rhinoceros,
as mentioned in an obituary placed in the newspaper by its owner. Daisy interjects, saying
she has witnessed this incident and Dudard supports her. An argument takes place between
them. Dudard is a sensitive, logical, composed person, whereas Botard is a haughty intel-
lectual, proud of his “methodical mind” (38). He ridicules the news by suggesting that the
journalists are liars as they have not added any details about the gender, colour or breed
of the cat, nor have they mentioned details about the rhinoceros; whether it was Asiatic
or African. Notice how Botard, like Jean, is concerned with trivialities like the species
of the rhino rather than the bizarre phenomenon itself.
Bérenger, who also works at this office, arrives late and the receptionist, Daisy covers
up for him. He is drawn in to the discussion and attests to the existence of the rhinoceros.

PAGE 75
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 75 01-Jan-25 4:41:13 PM

 Modern European Drama

Botard dismisses the incident as an example of “collective psychosis” (43). He even goes
to the extent of giving the incident political overtones by suggesting that it is some kind
of “propaganda” (44). Botard and Papillon, like Jean, are aggressive, self-opinionated and
domineering. They believe they are always right because their conversations are mostly
driven by facts and logic.
Suddenly Mrs. Boeuf, the wife of another employee, enters the office, breathless and
flustered, as she has been chased all the way from her home by a rhinoceros. She has
come to inform them that her husband, who is out of town, has sent a telegram that he
is down with the flu and would be unable to report for work. Suddenly a rhinoceros is
heard creating a commotion downstairs, going round in circles and attempting to climb
the staircase, which breaks, leaving everyone trapped on the first floor. Everyone peers
down to look at it and Mrs Boeuf exclaims that it is her husband, who has transformed
into a rhinoceros. Mrs Boeuf faints and Bérenger tries to revive her. The characters seem
to be unaffected, speculating if such transformations are covered under insurance, if di-
vorcing such people/animals is a viable option; calculating whether the reported numbers
of transformations are exaggerations or not. Mrs Boeuf declares that she will not abandon
her husband and joins him by jumping down the shaft.
There is confusion and, once again, the argument revolves around identifying the
species of the rhinoceros. The occurrence of these rapid transformations is unquestioningly
accepted as another unfortunate, inexplicable phenomenon, but not as something unnatu-
ral or impossible. It is comical that even in such bizarre circumstances, Mr. Papillon is
worried about his work; ordering Daisy to type his letters and warning Bérenger that it
is not a holiday.
At this point there is confusion, and with reports of people metamorphosing into
rhinoceroses, the distinction between normal and abnormal is lost; hopelessness dominates
this part. The fire brigade come to rescue the employees trapped in the building.

Check Your Progress 2

(i) How are Botard and Dudard described in this scene? What are their respective
responses to the news?
(ii) There is a rhinoceros (unseen) in this scene. Who is this transformed animal and
what does it want? How do we get to know?
(iii) Comment on Mr. Papillon’s behaviour in this act?

76 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 76 01-Jan-25 4:41:13 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

Act II: Scene II

Bérenger is disturbed by the previous day’s argument with Jean, and decides to visit him
at his house. When Bérenger knocks at the door, Jean’s neighbour, an old man (also named
Jean) opens his door instead and tells Bérenger that Jean was in a foul mood the previous
night. The old man’s wife asks him to stop gossiping with strangers and he goes inside.
The introduction of another character named Jean, who also changes into a rhino is meant
to underline the interchange ability of characters. Ionesco probably meant to convey that
there is nothing singular about Jean’s transformation.
Jean is ill, suffering from an unknown sickness. Bérenger regrets the spat and re-
quests Jean’s forgiveness, but Jean seems to have forgotten about it and seems distracted.
Bérenger informs him about Mr Boeuf’s transformation. Jean disagrees with Bérenger’s
assumption that it must have been against Boeuf’s will and they begin to argue again:
JEAN. Nature has its own laws. Morality’s against Nature.
BÉRENGER. Are you suggesting we replace our laws by the law of the jungle.
JEAN. It would suit me, suit me fine. (65)
Jean’s anti-humanism comes to the fore. He speaks of a return to a more savage type
of existence for humanity. Bérenger points out that the rhinoceroses abide by the laws
of the jungle, which are chaotic and destructive. They create havoc wherever they go,
are particularly insensitive, and cannot conform to the norms of civilization. Jean asserts
that moral standards are only a human compulsion whereas the laws of nature are more
gratifying. He speaks of a return to “primeval integrity”: going to the extent of declaring
that Humanism is dead and those who follow it are just old sentimentalists (66).
Jean’s appearance starts to change quickly. Ionesco gives a complete description of
this physical transformation. First his skin starts to harden and turn green, then his voice
grows hoarse, and a bump in his head starts to develop into a distinct horn. Each time
he goes into the bathroom his skin hardens, turns greener, and his voice becomes incom-
prehensible. All this while, Bérenger tries to convince Jean to seek medical help but he
refuses. Instead, he pushes his friend away and begins to pace his apartment in an agitated
state. One can feel Bérenger’s desperation; he does not want to abandon his friend and
tries, as much as is possible for him, to prevent the metamorphosis.
Finally, the transformation is complete; Jean’s horn piercing the bathroom door indi-
cates that he has become a rhinoceros. As he tries to escape, Bérenger is horrified to see
that the Porter, the old Jean and his wife, have all turned into rhinoceroses. He tries to
run out but the street is full of rhinos. The orchestra pit is also lined with rhino heads.
A wall breaks down and Bérenger escapes.

PAGE 77
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 77 01-Jan-25 4:41:13 PM

 Modern European Drama

Read Jean’s observations carefully. Throughout this scene, he displays a sense of af-
finity with the rhinoceroses. In the beginning of their conversation, when Bérenger calls
the rhinos “wretched,” Jean objects (58). He feels disgusted with humans and, as Bérenger
observes, he is in a “misanthropic mood” (62). He defends Mr Boeuf’s metamorphosis,
ticking off Bérenger for presuming it was against his will. The point to note is that Jean’s
physical transformation is accompanied by a change in his outlook as well.
Check Your Progress 3
(i) Why do Jean and Bérenger argue in this act?
(ii) Describe the physical transformation of Jean in detail. What do you think is the
reason for such a change?
(iii) What is the significance of the appearance of Jean’s neighbour, also named Jean?
(iv) Apart from Jean, who else is transformed into a rhino in this act?

Act III
The whole town seems to have transformed into beasts. With the rhinoceroses roaming
the streets, Bérenger stays locked in his apartment. Terrified of becoming one himself,
he has nightmares and seeks refuge in brandy. For him, things are falling apart into an
unknown void, leaving him confused and bewildered. His cough is getting worse and he
fears that he has been infected. He yells at the rhinos for causing this horror and ruin.
Concerned about Bérenger, Dudard decides to visit him. Bérenger is in a state of
shock, agitated by this shocking transformation of the entire town and is unnerved, es-
pecially after losing his closest friend. Dudard tries to explain to him that Jean’s case
was an exception because he was “too excitable, a bit wild, an eccentric,” and assures
Bérenger that he is not infected (74). Bérenger is not convinced as Jean always seemed
in control of his mind. Dudard advises Bérenger not to obsess over it and concentrate on
getting back to normal.
Dudard reduces the abnormal transformations of humans into beasts as a matter of
“personal preferences” and urges Bérenger to disengage himself from the problem (78).
He informs Bérenger about Mr. Papillon’s transformation. Again, Bérenger regrets that
his boss did not resist the metamorphosis, to which Dudard replies:
DUDARD. . . . one has to keep an open mind—that’s essential to a scientific men-
tality. Everything is logical. To understand is to justify. (82)
Feeling cornered by Dudard’s arguments, Bérenger says he will consult the Logician.
At that moment he notices some rhinos passing his house, under the window. He notices

78 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 78 01-Jan-25 4:41:13 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

a boater hat, pierced by a rhinoceros horn and recognizes it as the Logician’s. He is dis-
mayed to find out that the Logician too has metamorphosed.
Daisy arrives to check on Bérenger and informs them about Botard’s conversion.
Botard’s last human words were: “one must move with the times” (87). All this while,
they are surrounded by the sounds of countless rhinoceroses in the streets. Dudard is
disturbed by Daisy’s visit and her obvious preference for Bérenger. Eventually Dudard
leaves, to join “the great universal family” (91).
Agonized by loneliness and alienation, Bérenger confesses his love for Daisy, which
she acknowledges and reciprocates. Seeking companionship in each other, they both decide
to live a normal life amidst the chaos. Daisy wants Bérenger to stop feeling guilty and
seek happiness even in these hopeless circumstances. She plans long romantic walks with
him. However, things between them start to worsen when Bérenger holds her, in some
way, responsible for Papillon’s transformation.
Bérenger begins to hope. He says that the responsibility of perpetuating the human
race is now on them since they are the last of their species left. However, Daisy is un-
comfortable, saying she does not want to have children as it was “a bore” and distances
herself from him (101). She begins to display signs of anxiety, saying that perhaps they
are the abnormal ones, whereas the real people have transformed into rhinoceroses and are
happy now. Daisy is disturbed when the phone rings and trumpeting noises are heard on
the line. The rhinoceroses have taken over the radio station. When they look out of the
window, they see all the firemen have transformed as well. All this while, rhinoceroses
can be heard making noises all around, even in the apartment above them. Rhino heads
are seen on the street outside.
Daisy questions the nature of love itself: “a morbid feeling” (101). Bérenger is out-
raged and slaps her but immediately apologizes. They make repeated attempts at recon-
ciliation but fail. Daisy seems to be disillusioned and sad. Perhaps she understands the
basic difference in their approach to the bizarre reality and realizes that Bérenger will
never be able to “escape into the world of the imagination,” as she advises him to (96).
Bérenger examines himself carefully in the mirror to check for any signs of change.
Meanwhile, Daisy abandons him and joins the rhinos. On realizing that Daisy has forsak-
en him, he introspects and is remorseful. Left completely alone, Bérenger is filled with
anxiety and suspicion. He is assailed by uncertainty and begins to be unsure of his own
existence, his physicality, his language, and his capacity to think, and doubts his own
sanity. He is broken by self-abasement and attempts to transform himself but fails.
At last, he looks at his own reflection in the mirror and gathers that he is responsible
for his plight. Yet again, he gets trapped in the blame game and pledges to take revenge
PAGE 79
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 79 01-Jan-25 4:41:13 PM

 Modern European Drama

on the rhinos. It is ironic how, in the end, he regrets not becoming one of the rhinos
and accuses himself of being a “human monster” (105). Suddenly, he snaps out of this
self-loathing and decides that he will not catapult; declaring that he will fight the rhinos.
It is this statement of his intent that makes Bérenger something of a hero.
Check Your Progress 4
(i) What are Botard’s last words as a human?
(ii) What are Dudard’s views on ‘rhinoceritis?’
(iii) How is the Logician identified in the end of Act III?
(iv) Why does Daisy abandon Bérenger in the end?
(v) What, in your opinion, is Bérenger’s tragedy and how does it make him a hero?

A Note on the Conclusion

In the end, Bérenger emerges as this heroic figure who escapes the thick-skinned transfor-
mation and is the last surviving human. He refuses to conform and follow the others. Let
us briefly examine the transformation of each character to better understand Bérenger’s
decision.
When her husband appears as a rhinoceros, Mrs Boeuf not only recognizes him but
can also relate to his agony. While Mr Papillon, Dudard and Botard speculate on the pos-
sibility of claiming insurance, the role of the trade union and the option of divorce, Mrs
Boeuf only wants to join her husband: “I can’t desert him, I can’t desert him now!” she
says (49). She jumps from the stairwell, lands on her husband’s back and gallops away
with him, pointing to her eventual transformation. Mrs Boeuf’s decision is impelled by
the human need for companionship, essential for existence. When Jean has an altercation
with Bérenger in Act II, he says:
JEAN. I tell you it’s not as bad as all that. After all, rhinoceros are living creatures
the same as us; they’ve got as much right to live as we have! Moral Standards!
I’m sick of moral standards! We need to go beyond moral standards! Nature has
its own laws. Morality’s against Nature. (65)
His empathetic stance towards the rhinos parallels his physical changes. Jean sees
no harm in indulgence and views moderation or restraint as unnatural. Anti-humanists
like him believe that nature teaches them to enjoy sensuality and all kinds of pleasures,
but it is human society which imposes constraints. They believe that free rule of animal
instincts is the route to a complete existence.

80 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 80 01-Jan-25 4:41:13 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

In the final act, Dudard comes to save Bérenger from remorse and guilt at Jean’s
transformation. Instead, Dudard himself gets over-involved with the problem, realizing that
he must not cease to support his employers and friends in these troubled times:
DUDARD. I’ve renounced marriage. I prefer the great universal family to the little
domestic one . . . It’s my duty to stick by them; I have to do my duty. (91)
Dudard’s problem is his unreflective acceptance of mass ideology and his intense faith
in the values of the masses. He stands for an exaggerated version of duty and brotherhood
which brings about his own doom. In the second act, Botard alleges that the entire phe-
nomenon is a conspiracy and a mass illusion but, in the face of the mass transformations,
he gives no intellectual justification for his own metamorphosis, except a statement that
“one must move with the times” (87).
In the last act, Ionesco undermines the notion of love as an antidote to all human
problems. Daisy questions her love for Bérenger and, as the couple distance themselves
from each other, the reader is conscious of their dwindling love, failing faith, and with-
ering mutual respect. Soon Daisy begins to be attracted to the rhinoceroses, as they are
“beautiful . . . They’re like gods” (103). For her, the beseeching roars of the animals are
musical, and their brutal strength is imploringly majestic. Daisy leaves Bérenger, disillu-
sioned with him and love itself.
In the end, consumed with guilt and self-doubt, Bérenger looks at his own reflection
in the mirror. He feels overwhelmed by the responsibility of convincing people to reverse
the changes:
BÉRENGER. Are the changes reversible, that’s the point? Are they reversible? It
would be a labour of Hercules, far beyond me. (104)
It gets increasingly difficult for Bérenger to retain his identity by refusing to conform.
From dismay and disgust, he moves to self-hatred, calling himself “a monster” (105). He
is conscious of his inner and outer struggle and how it is going to be impossible to keep
his individuality intact. But he gathers his courage and affirms that:
BÉRENGER. I’ll take on the whole of them! I’ll put up a fight against the lot of
them, the whole lot of them! I’m the last man left, and I’m staying that way
until the end. I’m not capitulating! (103)
Bérenger’s declaration of intent, never to yield, is what makes him acquire heroic dimen-
sions.
The interesting point to note is that none of the characters gives any political rea-
son for their transformation. Dudard suggests that people are transforming as they have

PAGE 81
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 81 01-Jan-25 4:41:13 PM

 Modern European Drama

caught “rhinoceritis” (73). He suggests that it is a kind of short-lived infection, giving the
transformations a pathological dimension. However, it is important to remember that, for
most of the characters in the play, it is a desire to remain with the crowd that compels
their metamorphosis.
A close reading of the play reinforces the point that Ionesco’s focus is on examining
the psychology of the crowd, comprising individuals who do not pause to evaluate the
implications of their decisions. In the play, the rhinoceros could stand for any ideology/
totalitarian system that seeks to repress and discourage individuality.

3.6 Characterization
Rhinoceros
It is important to understand that, in the play, the rhinoceroses are not natural animals, but
transformed creatures that have undergone this degradation through submission. The stage
directions by the playwright suggest that not even once is the animal fully revealed on
stage. One is mostly given impressions of their presence. In Act I, only noises of a heavy
beast approaching, a long trumpeting, followed by galloping, and the sound of panting
are heard. Later, people are left staring after the animal—suggesting that the monster has
left. In Act II, Scene I, when Mr. Bouef is downstairs, everyone in the office stares down
at the creature and comments on its movements and in Act II, Scene II, Jean’s complete
transformation is implied by Bérenger’s exclamations from the bathroom and finally, the
horn jutting out of the bathroom door. In the last act, the rhino heads that are seen moving
outside Bérenger’s apartment and the increasing volume of rhino trumpeting create the
impression of a whole town transformed into the beasts.
The rhinoceros is only partially shown: mostly the head or the horn. This ensures that
the focus in the play is not so much on the rhinoceros as it is on the process of transfor-
mation. The stage directions evoke a sense of danger and claustrophobia. The confusion
caused by the noises and shadows gradually escalates the horror.
According to Dudard, “rhinoceritis” is the disease that is responsible for the madness
and confusion between fantasy and reality, normal and abnormal in the play (73). It is
both contagious and dangerously attractive. Each transformed individual is corrupted in a
different way, as if his/her eccentricity is responsible for the abasement.
The natural rhinoceroses are solitary creatures who stay away from crowded places.
On the contrary, transformation is triggered by a herd-mentality, highlighting the un-nat-
uralness of the crowding human rhinos. Hence, the rhinoceroses reflect the collective

82 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 82 01-Jan-25 4:41:13 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

consciousness of society, which follows the herd without exercising its ability to think.
Ionesco is critical of the human tendency to seek safety in numbers and adopt an un-
questioning attitude towards powerful totalitarian regimes. Historians agree that, in the
play, Ionesco’s satire is directed towards the growing influence of fascist ideology in his
native Romania.
Bérenger
Bérenger represents Everyman, caught in the struggles of life. At first, he is this gentle
and likeable person, who is bored with the life he is leading, but lacks the strength of
character to change it. He resorts to excessive drinking to forget his difficulties. He lacks
restraint and cannot commit to anything in life, neither to his job nor his resolution to quit
drinking. The only saving grace is his unconditional love for Daisy but, towards the end,
he drives her away by trying to thrust the responsibility of saving the human race on her.
Bérenger suffers from a nagging weariness: he is battered by his struggles and seems
uninspired by Jean’s lecture on self-improvement. According to Edwin T. Williams,
Bérenger is surrounded by people who are governed by their “delusions”: Jean is a slave
to appearance and his intellectual egotism; the Logician is devoted to logic but fails to
understand that in a collapsing world, logic cannot explain everything; Dudard is obsessed
by a misplaced sense of duty towards others; and Botard is consumed by conceit and shal-
low values (688). But Bérenger is unaffected by these idiosyncratic beliefs and remains
detached till the end. He is aware of these contradictions but then does not conform to
any of them—neither to manners, nor logic, nor even to materialism. He is a stranger and
a misfit in society; a “Don Quixote,” as Dudard calls him (79).
Many critics feel a sense of uncertainty about Bérenger’s capacity to sustain his po-
sition, alone as he is in the end. However, if you read the play closely, you will observe
how Bérenger changes. In the first act, he is indifferent to the rhinoceroses when they
first appear and gets into an absurd argument with his friend after the second appear-
ance. Even in the second act, after Mr Bouef appears in his transformed state, Bérenger
is preoccupied with the species of the rhinos; wondering if they are Asiatic or African.
However, when he witnesses Jean transform into a beast in front of his own eyes, Bérenger
is concerned and offers to call a doctor. He tries his best to intervene and help Jean. By
the third act, a very different Bérenger appears before us. He voices his disappointment
with the transformation of Papillon and disagrees with Dudard’s “fatalism” (78). When
Dudard asks him what he plans to do about the situation he replies:
BÉRENGER. . . . I don’t know for the moment. I must think it over. I shall write
to the papers; I’ll draw up manifestos; I shall apply for an audience with the
mayor . . . (78)

PAGE 83
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 83 01-Jan-25 4:41:14 PM

 Modern European Drama

He is willing to take on the role of a messiah to save the human race. Although he
is not as learned as Dudard or as politically committed as Botard, he understands “intu-
itively” that what is happening is not right (83).
It is his stubborn refusal to follow the others, even when left alone, that makes
Bérenger heroic. From being a chronically lethargic man, who cannot see through the
pretentiousness of Jean, he becomes an unlikely symbol of brave resistance amidst mass
hysteria.
Jean
Jean is a contrast to Bérenger. He is meticulous in his dressing; first appearing in a brown
suit, red tie, stiff collar, and well-polished shoes. His first line in the play: “Oh, so you
managed to get here at last, Bérenger!” displays a deep sarcasm for Bérenger’s passiv-
ity and inactivity, whereas he himself is a self-righteous, egotistical figure (2). Unlike
Bérenger, who always doubts himself, Jean has a distinct clarity in his opinions and ideas.
Jean’s is a world of certainty and conviction. He represents aggressiveness, willpower and,
consequently, a sense of duty to act and be responsible for one’s actions.
Jean embodies Nietzsche’s concept of the ‘will to power,’ a prominent idea in his
philosophy which explains that mankind is constantly driven by this urge, this ambition
to gain power and strive for the highest position in life. The ambition or the will to
achieve is described by Nietzsche as an evolutionary force, whereby only the strongest
can survive. Jean’s astute will and rationality is reflected in all his actions, to the point
of arrogance. However, this seemingly exemplary Nietzschean figure comes across as a
hypocrite. He accuses Bérenger of coming late for the meeting though he arrives at the
same time as his friend. He lectures Bérenger on the need to become more cultured by
visiting museums and reading literary periodicals, but refuses to accompany him to the
museum because he wants to sleep.
Jean epitomizes the uncritical, self-assured class that echoes the ideas of other thinkers,
and is chauvinistic and narrow minded. When there is an argument about the rhinoceroses,
Jean makes racist remarks, commenting that Asians are “yellow” (28). As Jean begins to
transform, his ideas become simpler and more lucid. Even his sense of purpose gets clearer
and concentrated. He rejects the moral laws of society in favour of the laws of Nature,
because natural laws provide undisputed freedom of will and action. His preoccupation
with self-interest is now reinforced and any obstruction to its fulfilment must be trampled
upon by him. When Bérenger offers to bring a doctor, Jean threatens to trample him.
Although Jean is always seen to either patronize or ridicule Bérenger, his concern for
his friend is genuine. He, in his limited way, wants Bérenger to become a better person.

84 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 84 01-Jan-25 4:41:14 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

His advice to Bérenger to keep himself well-groomed and well informed arises from good
intentions. Bérenger’s comment that Jean has “a heart of gold” is not entirely incorrect (30).
Mr. Papillon
Mr. Papillon is the Head of the Department of the publication house. He is nearly forty
and is properly dressed in a dark blue suit with a rosette of the Legion of Honour. He
controls the employees with his inflexible dictates. He tells Daisy, the receptionist, to put
away the times sheets so that the late comers are penalized. When the employees discuss
the incident of the rhinoceros killing the pet cat, Papillon puts a check on the discussion.
He is dismissive of all arguments which are not in compliance with his ideas. He seems
more distressed by how to make replacements and compensate for the loss of work than
by the epidemic and its severity. Papillon is rude and unsympathetic towards Mrs Boeuf
when she comes to inform him that her husband was unable to come to office because of
the flu, and makes advances to Daisy by caressing her cheek when there is a commotion
in the office.
It is interesting to note that Ionesco sometimes makes use of animal imagery/names to
signify a much deeper meaning. For example, the English translation of the French word
‘Boeuf’ is ‘beef’ whereas ‘Papillon’ means a butterfly. Mrs Boeuf has no willpower and
merely follows her husband, and Papillon is an unsympathetic opportunist. He typifies
the predatory male who views a woman only as a subordinate and an object of pleasure.
Dudard
Dudard is another employee at the office: a young man with a bright future. He is a law
graduate and takes pride in his rationality and analytical skills. He is mostly defensive while
talking to Botard, who is his senior, because he sees Botard as a rival for his position in
the office. Too eager to prove his worth, he always argues with Botard and attempts to
establish himself as an equal. Botard artfully criticizes Dudard’s degrees, saying that he
lacks practical knowledge. Botard’s comments are an indirect satire on the intellectuals/
bourgeoisie, who have blind faith in rationality.
Aspiring for Daisy’s affections, Dudard is jealous of Bérenger. Though vocal in the
office, he has been unable to confess his feelings to her. However, he proves a good friend
to Bérenger, visiting him just after Jean’s transformation. He tries to console Bérenger
and comforts him by reassuring him that he has no chances of getting infected.
Dudard is captivated by ‘liberal humanism,’ but is oblivious to the dangers of mindless
conversion. He submits to a distorted sense of humanism, where he mistakes conformism
with mass welfare; believing that what the majority does must be for universal benefit,
and people should be allowed to do as they like. He is good-hearted and perceptive, but

PAGE 85
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 85 01-Jan-25 4:41:14 PM

 Modern European Drama

loses his rationality towards the end, since he aspires for a higher sense of allegiance even
though it is self-destructive. The reason for Dudard’s own transformation is his misplaced
sense of duty. He feels obligated to be with his employers and friends and views mankind
as his universal family, privileging it over the real family.
Botard
Botard is a senior staff member; sixty years of age and a former school teacher. He appears
to be a self-opinionated man. Assertive of his hierarchy, he is determined to push Dudard
as a junior and make him subservient. He feels threatened by his younger colleague’s
popularity and efficiency. He refuses to believe that the pet cat, whose obituary is placed
in the paper, was trampled by a rhinoceros on the streets and challenges Dudard’s argu-
ments. Botard behaves like a Mr Know-All, to the extent that knowledge becomes a vice.
He can only see things in his own limited way, dominated by conceit and shallowness.
Botard’s left-wing leanings are apparent from his announcement that he will take
up the matter of Mr. Boeuf’s insurance with the trade union of their firm. He echoes
Karl Marx when he dismisses the news of the rhinoceros as an example of mass hyste-
ria. Botard attempts to give the appearance of the rhinos a political dimension, calling
it a conspiracy and part of some propaganda. Dudard takes a dig at his association with
radical politics when he accuses Botard of being in the pay of a “furtive underground
organization” (44). It is ironic that Botard is unable to provide a convincing explanation
for the transformations and in the end, as reported by Daisy, his decision to convert is a
passive, uncritical desire to follow the masses.
Logician
The Logician symbolizes the inadequacy of logic to explain the world. The Logician relies
on deductive logic to solve problems and overemphasizes the relevance of the scientific
approach. His reliance on logic is ridiculed in his conversations with the old man, where
he proves that a dog is a cat. He symbolizes glorified Western logic, following the tradi-
tion of Aristotle, and Ionesco exposes its redundancy.
Syllogisms, which are a sequence of three propositions, in which the first and the
second imply the third as a conclusion, have been used over time to prove things. In the
play, the inadequacy of logic is parodied, through the character of the Logician, with his
absurd attempts to explain syllogisms to the old gentleman. Logic cannot be the only
paradigm to understand reality.
The Logician’s character is an interesting satire on the human desire to comprehend
and control. At the end of the first act, he is incapable of answering the questions raised
by the people around him. After a long and convoluted speech, all he succeeds in doing

86 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 86 08-Jan-25 2:37:59 AM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

is correctly posing the problem (34). Bérenger respects him a lot and decides to consult
him when he is unconvinced by Dudard’s viewpoint; only to discover that, like the others,
the Logician has also transformed into a rhino.
Daisy
There is no detailed physical description of Daisy, apart from “young blond typist” (15).
Daisy is presented as the love interest of Bérenger and as a sensitive human, she is there
to help him in difficult times. She does not have a strong personality though, as she gets
easily silenced and cornered by the male characters, especially Botard. She attempts to act
as the guiding principle in Bérenger’s life by asking him to limit his liquor consumption,
but fails to motivate him for a long time. Even when she is harassed by her boss, both
physically and mentally, she does not retaliate. Once she witnesses the chaos outside, she
seeks support in Bérenger and reciprocates his feelings for her. But Daisy changes quickly,
declining to be Bérenger’s partner in creating a new race because she finds it “boring”
(101). She challenges the idea of love amidst the building pressure of the world outside.
Daisy wants a normal life and does not want to share the responsibility of regener-
ating the human race with Bérenger. She blatantly rejects the role of Eve and, unsure of
their future, declares the futility of procreation. Instead, she seems attracted to the beauty
and singing of the rhinos. Her unconditional love for Bérenger is suddenly replaced by a
perverse fascination for the strength of the rhinos. Seemingly enraptured by the beauty of
the beasts outside and disillusioned with Bérenger, Daisy leaves him in the end.

3.7 Important Themes

The Rhinoceros as a political allegory
It is no coincidence that the shirts worn by the Iron Guard legionnaires, the Romanian
ultra-nationalist fascist party and the uniforms worn by Nazi occupiers in France in 1940
were both a dark green colour, akin to a rhinoceros’ hide. Ionescos’s Rhinoceros has been
interpreted as an allegory about the rise of Nazism and fascism before and during the
Second World War. However, it is important to remember that Rhinoceros is a parable,
an allegory about totalitarianism of any kind. Ionesco himself refused to identify the rhi-
noceros with either Nazism or fascism. His response is illustrative:
Rhinoceros is certainly an anti-Nazi play, yet it is also and mainly an attack on col-
lective hysteria and epidemics that lurk beneath the surface of reason and ideas but
are none the less serious collective diseases passed off as ideologies.
(Preface to the 1961 school edition)

PAGE 87
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 87 01-Jan-25 4:41:14 PM

 Modern European Drama

People always wish me to spell out whether I mean the rhinos to be fascists or com-
munists. Rhinoceritis is not an illness of the Right or the Left; it cannot be contained
within geo-political borders. Nor is it characteristic of a social class. It is the malady
of conformity which knows no bounds, no boundaries.
(A Note on Rhinoceros)
The humans in the play surrender to the disease and, as it acquires the proportions
of an epidemic, they fail to see it as an illness. They begin to think of this adversity as
advantageous and even natural. As more and more people transform, they all begin to
think of the rhinoceroses as more beautiful, majestic, and desirable. This turn of events
is alarming. As explained earlier, the play’s focus is on the human failure to use reason
or logic in such situations.
Rhinoceros offers a critical analysis of the political and social milieu of that time,
through the writer’s representation of the dangers of conformity. As a young man in the
Romania of the 1930s and 40s, Ionesco was disturbed by the growing fanaticism—among
young intellectuals, artists and writers—for Corneliu Codreanu, leader of the extreme right
wing Iron Guard. Many of them were friends of his. Disturbed by the political develop-
ments around him, Ionesco was inspired to write this play.
It is true that there is an inevitable strength in numbers, required for the success
of any movement, but when it transforms into an uncritical herd mentality, it becomes
dangerous. The playwright is critical of this blind faith of people on their leaders, who
eventually benefit from this ignorance and stupidity and neglect the needs of the mass-
es. Audiences, with the memory of the Holocaust fresh in their minds, immediately saw
answers to disturbing historical questions: how could so many people in a civilized so-
ciety have participated in the genocide of Jews, swayed by notions of Aryan supremacy
propagated by Hitler.

Ionesco’s Criticism of the Bourgeoisie

In Rhinoceros, Ionesco exposes the middle-class preoccupation with materialistic values
or social conventions. This class comprises people like Jean, Botard, Mr Papillon, and
Dudard. Bérenger, who is always weighed down, represents the anguish of the bourgeoisie,
unable to understand the true purpose of life.
Ionesco is critical of the bourgeoisie, who present themselves as custodians of ra-
tionality and morality. Their ineptness is demonstrated by their herd-like conformity. The
problem of the middle-class is that, consumed by aspirations and desires, it fails to reflect
and introspect. It becomes increasingly dehumanized and depersonalized. It is the indi-
vidual alone who has to bear the onus of self-scrutiny and self-improvement. Bérenger,

88 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 88 01-Jan-25 4:41:14 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

who acts as a foil, uncovers for us the dilemmas of the middle-class; the monotony and
boredom of a tedious routine, their enslavement by a consumerist psychology, and the
mass of prejudices to which they have succumbed. Bérenger exposes for us the stifling
and claustrophobic lives of the middle-class, who have no means of escape. His reliance
on alcohol is a way to retain sanity in this world of utter chaos and he struggles with
the oppressive middle-class lifestyle, which leaves no room for individuality and personal
development.
In the Rhinoceros, it is Jean, Botard, and Dudard who represent the educated, intel-
lectual class. Botard is the left-leaning rationalist; Dudard, the university-educated liberal
humanist; and Jean, the upwardly mobile man, with his middle-class ethics of self-control,
hard work, and self-improvement. In the first act, Jean creates a lot of confusion with his
query about the species of the rhinoceros, Asiatic or African. He also makes some racist
remarks. He quotes from great thinkers but, like the others, is unable to think for himself
in a crisis. Jean echoes the 17th century philosopher Rene Decartes:
JEAN. You don’t exist, my dear Bérenger, because you don’t think. Start thinking,
then you will. (17)
Botard also quotes from Karl Marx when ridiculing the hysteria generated by the
appearance of the rhinos:
BOTARD. An example of collective psychosis, Mr. Dudard. Just like religion — the
opiate of the people. (43)
Ionesco exposes the mindless posturing of these people. Confronted by a crisis, they
cannot exercise their reason. Jean is attracted by the primitive freedom enjoyed by the
rhinos, Dudard is driven by a sense of allegiance to the higher family and Botard desires
to move with the times: all abdicate their reason and surrender to the transformation. The
Rhinoceros is an indictment of a whole class that fails to fulfil its social responsibility.
In the end, it is the comparatively apolitical Bérenger who resists the transforma-
tion. Bérenger is unable to spell out the reasons for his defiance but claims that they are
“intuitive” (83). Ionesco commented that Bérenger’s resistance is all the more authentic
because it is a spiritual feeling.

3.8 The Language of Rhinoceros

At the onset of the play, on sighting a running rhino, each character echoes the same
reaction: “Oh, a rhinoceros!” (6). The repetition introduces an element of absurdity. It is
an apathetic response, considering the bizarre circumstances. The dialogues are also full
of clichés, especially those of Jean, Dudard, and Botard. Jean tells Bérenger “the superior
PAGE 89
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 89 01-Jan-25 4:41:14 PM

 Modern European Drama

man is the man who fulfils his duty” (5). Talking like a politician, he does not understand
the gravity of his statements. It exposes the predictability of people, lack of any originality
of ideas, and scarcity of expressions. The language blurs the distinction between the real
and unreal, the normal and the abnormal.
The dramatists of the Theatre of the Absurd believed that language was ill-equipped
to convey human experience as it was a limiting factor. In Rhinoceros, Ionesco uses
non-linguistic means to convey his dramatic message. The rhinoceros is a powerful met-
aphor for the dangers of mindless conformity, especially of the political kind. More than
the language, the metaphor/symbol of the rhinoceros contributes to the play’s meaning.
This is a distinctive characteristic of the playwrights of this genre.
Glossary
This section includes a brief definition of terms you may be unfamiliar with.
Fascism: Fascism is defined as a radical and authoritarian form of nationalism which
generally takes a terrorizing turn due to its intolerance and anti-democratic nature. Fas-
cism originated in Italy during the First World War and then spread to other regions, as
a substitute to the difficulties caused by economic disparity under communism. Fascism
aims to establish a totalitarian (a political system where the state holds absolute authority
over its subjects and controls both public and private spaces of the society) state — led
by a strong leader, mostly a dictator, who would resolve social and economic problems.
French Avant-Garde Theatre: Avant-garde theatre was an experimental theatre which
challenged the deliverance of perfect meaning, refused simple explanations, rejected con-
ventional ways of writing, made contesting use of language, and undermined authorial
autonomy by privileging the self-reliance of the readers. The most significant dramatist
of this time was Alfred Jarry, who is best known for his peculiar comic play Ubu Roi, in
which he challenges the figures of authority. Other important playwrights were Antonin
Artaud and Apollinaire. Influenced by these experimental writers, Martin Esslin coined the
term ‘Theatre of the Absurd,’ to describe the works of Samuel Beckett, Eugene Ionesco,
Jean Genet, and Arthur Adamov.
Humanism: It signifies a philosophical and moral pursuit of human life, through a deep-
er understanding of human nature. Early humanists focused on the study of the classics,
especially Latin. They worked extensively on the ideas of great thinkers such as Aristotle,
Plato, and Cicero. Around the nineteenth century, the word humanism came to stand for
the general values and ideas common to several Renaissance humanists. Renaissance hu-
manism emphasized the centrality and sovereignty of human beings in the entire universe
and the importance of studying literature that underlined morality and use of reason in

90 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 90 01-Jan-25 4:41:14 PM

 Eugené Ionesco, Rhinoceros

human life, as opposed to impulsive passions. It preferred rational thinking over religious
faith, suggesting that truth is revealed only by human experience. Samuel Johnson and
Matthew Arnold were notable humanists of their times.
Nazism: The ideology of the German Nazi party thrived on racism and anti-Semitism.
Believing in their racial superiority, Germanic people believed they were the true Aryans
or the race with most superior origins. Thereby, they aspired to establish a homogenous
society by overcoming social divisions and cleansing society by eradicating those they
perceived as racial inferiors, such as Jews. Offering itself as an alternative to Marxism
and Capitalism, Nazism arose as a pan-German movement and threatened other minori-
ties by its intolerance and radical extremism. Eventually, Hitler became the Chancellor of
Germany in 1933, and Nazis became a one-party state, whereby anarchy was established
and all unwanted elements such as Jews or political opponents were not just marginalized
but exterminated.
Syllogism: It is a deductive form of reasoning where the conclusion is drawn from two
different propositions. The final meaning is logically derived from two different statements
which are believed to be true. For example: a) Reptiles have no fur; b) All snakes are
reptiles; therefore c) All snakes have no fur.

3.9 Long Answer Questions

(i) Describe the main features of the Theatre of the Absurd.
(ii) Discuss Rhinoceros as a political allegory.
(iii) Is Bérenger a hero or an anti-hero? Discuss, giving suitable examples from the play.
(iv) Do you think that the absurd elements of the play dilute its political agenda? Give
reasons.

3.10 Works Cited and Further Reading

Cody, Gabrielle H, and Evert Sprinchorn. The Columbia Encyclopaedia of Modern Drama,
Volume I. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007:5-10, 117-120.
Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays. Translated by Justin O’Brien.
Penguin Classics, 2000.
Dobrez, L. A. C. The Existential and its Exits: Literary and Philosophical Perspectives
on the Works of Beckett, Ionesco, Genet & Pinter. London: The Athlone Press Ltd., 1986,
pp. 142-165.

PAGE 91
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 91 01-Jan-25 4:41:15 PM

 Modern European Drama

Pal, Swati (ed.). Modern European Drama: Ibsen to Beckett. New Delhi: Pencraft Inter-
national, 2012, pp. 164-210.
Prouse, Derek (trans.). Rhinoceros. Delhi: Worldview Publications, 2002.
Williams, Edwin T. “Cervantes and Ionesco and Dramatic Fantasy.” Hispania, 1962, 45
(4), pp 675-678.

92 PAGE
Department of Distance & Continuing Education, Campus of Open Learning,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi

DSC-16_Modern European Drama.indd 92 01-Jan-25 4:41:15 PM

1505-Modern European Drama [BAHE-DSC16-S6-CC4] Cover Jan25.pdf - January 21, 2025