Dr. Thomas Stockmann’s Idealism in Henrik Ibsen’s "An Enemy of The People"

Introduction

Henrik Ibsen’s “An Enemy of the People” is a compelling drama that scrutinizes political concepts such as democracy. Throughout the play, Ibsen explores how democracy can be manipulated and its potential to dehumanize individuals. It is remarkable how Ibsen illustrates this through Dr. Stockmann, exemplifying how corrupt and manipulative democracy can become. However, what is even more fascinating is how much of a dreamer Dr. Stockmann is. His idealism was essential for developing the drama, demonstrating that being unrealistic is a significant factor when attempting to reform society, particularly when the individual holds an established position. His excessive idealism led him to be rash, causing him to focus narrowly on his goal to help society and ultimately alienate himself from it. Everyone is aware of Dr. Stockmann’s noble intentions for the community. In Act I, it becomes evident that he merely wishes to serve his town by revealing the unethical nature of the baths due to sanitary issues.

Dr. Thomas Stockmann’s Idealism in Henrik Ibsen’s "An Enemy of The People"

Furthermore, knowing that the doctor’s brother is the mayor of the town, Dr. Stockmann challenges the mayor because of his beliefs and his desire to immediately resolve the issues surrounding the baths to prevent diseases. However, as the story progresses, he rushes headlong into the problem without a comprehensive plan, becoming the proverbial big bad wolf. Despite having few negative traits, his daringness or rashness becomes his downfall. He acts illogically. In Act II, the mayor clearly states that completely renovating their primary source of income will devastate the town. He explains that the town’s economy will suffer if the baths remain under renovation for a prolonged period, which could take years to repay the debt. Dr. Stockmann fails to grasp the severity of the situation and challenges authority almost instantly without a strategic plan. While his intentions are admirable, they are futile if he cannot be realistic and see the broader picture.

Another flaw in Dr. Stockmann's character is his persistent tunnel vision regarding the issue. Despite being repeatedly warned about the repercussions of immediately addressing the problem, he dismisses these warnings and clings to his progressive ideas. Given the town’s precarious state, it was evident that gradual repairs to the baths were preferable to a hasty overhaul. Dr. Stockmann could have envisioned a broader strategy, one that involved properly defending and supporting his case to persuade the mayor. In reality, there was a significant possibility that the two brothers could have collaborated to devise a plan to address the unsanitary baths. As the mayor suggests, they could resolve it over a few years, but immediate action would ruin the town’s economy. Nevertheless, Dr. Stockmann disregards the facts presented. In Act III, he plots to expose the sanitary issues to the public, blinded by his goals and urge to rectify the problem, neglecting the facts. Although corruption is evident, such as the mayor manipulating the townsmen by forcing Hovstad to cancel the publishing, Dr. Stockmann fails to recognize what could have been achieved in the long run. When Hovstad betrays him, he becomes enraged, blaming the majority and calling them foolish for believing the mayor instead of him. His emotional response leads to tunnel vision, yet he had the means to execute his plans for the town effectively.

The mayor’s manipulation of the public was driven by the necessity to prevent the town from incurring debt. Under a democratic system, the mayor was pressured because majority rule would lead to heavy public criticism, potentially resulting in the town’s downfall. While it is morally wrong to manipulate the public from a respected position, even for the greater good, both parties made mistakes. Dr. Stockmann had the option to retreat and collaborate with his brother instead of immediately appealing to the public to force governmental action on the baths. Ultimately, his idealism led to his separation from society. His aforementioned traits stem from his radical idealism, which ultimately led to his downfall. Despite his successful societal position, he chose to challenge and impose his ideals on the town rather than carefully considering his options. Though he exposed the flaws of a democratic society, he himself caused the city to turn against him. His insistence on being right and informing the public overshadowed his practicality and ability to recognize that the town was unprepared. His ideas were commendable; he had excellent plans to inform and assist the city. However, he acted alone and out of frustration. Although the mayor’s cunning was evident, Dr. Stockmann failed to realize he was pushing his ideas into an issue that could not be easily and immediately resolved. In the final act, even when given the opportunity to leave and regain his dignity, he stubbornly adhered to his ideals, like a fool. He could have retreated and rebuilt his standing. People were already vandalizing his home, and he was effectively exiled. Yet, he clung to his ideals, inevitably endangering himself and his family. His stubbornness led to his estrangement from society, making him an enemy.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Dr. Stockmann’s idealistic nature cost him his place in society. His rashness and daring, in contrast to a more level-headed approach, exacerbated problems. He failed to perceive what was rational and logical. Furthermore, his ideas caused tunnel vision, preventing him from seeing the larger picture. Despite the town’s economic condition, he persisted, plotting against authority to prove his point. While he exposed the government’s corrupt tendencies, there were better options for the town’s welfare. His intentions were undoubtedly noble, yet he was ironically “lynched.” Dr. Stockmann’s character exemplifies an extremist idealist who challenged democracy and attempted to critique it but failed due to his absurdity in handling the situation, ultimately becoming an enemy of the people (Ibsen, 1882).

References

Ibsen, H. (1882). An Enemy of the People. Gyldendal.