The Wild Duck Journal #4

To what extent have you found it possible, in your consideration of literary works, to searate the individual from his or her public role?

In both Oedipus and The Wild Duck I have found it difficult to seperate the characters from their public roles.

In Oedipus, he probably would have been viewed very differently had he not been a king.  As the king, he has people depending on him to solve the problems plauging their city (which are being caused by Oedipus himself).  Since it is his responsibility to help these people as king, it emphasizes his self-centeredness that he denies the truth for a while as self-preservation.  Had he been a common person, his defensive reaction would probably seem more logical, he's just trying to save himself.  However, since he is in the role of helping his people then it creates a self-centered character when he tries to save himself at first.

Also, in The Wild Duck it is hard to view Werle's actions in any other manner as cut-throat and selfish when we know that he is wealthy and well known.  Especially knowing the Old Ekdal lives in shame mostly becuase of Werle emphasizes a cold-hearted aspect to him.  Also, his affair and setting up Hjalmar with the Gina (whom Werle had an affair with) to disguise the pregnancy adds to a cold character.  Had he not been wealthy it may have seemed that he was making fair business decisions and trying to patch up a mistake.  His wealth and social status though add an element of Werle being above everyone else and getting his way.  It also makes him seem like he is covering his behind by firing Ekdal for the business mistake and setting up Hjalmar with his mistress.  It makes it seem that his business, money and social status are the only things important to him, creating a cold character.