Point taken, but I believe you misunderstood my statement (as it was not an argument, but, as in modern drama, a comment on society, be it right or wrong, good or evil. And that was the biggest run-on sentence ever. Ok not ever. Paul's run-on's are insane...). I never imagined 'ideas' and 'religion' to 'fix' politics (I've gone quote happy). On the contrary. Ibsen actually states that there has to be substance behind ideas such as the French revolutionary 'liberty, equality, and fraternity'.
You can't deny that without the mass's approval, these notions are ridiculous. A person's mindset, though it may be dictated by society, is where the real revolution begins.
The civil war ended slavery, or so it taught. But how is it that the full effect of this was not realized until some 100 years later, in the 1960's? It's because no matter what the government says, people will believe what they want to believe, or what they were raised to believe.
Now I'm not proposing any remedy to this predicament, and it would be insane and improbable to do so. I am merely, in the spirit of Ibsen, pointing out something that I consider extremely important. The concept of a revolution of the mind happens quite frequently in history. If you need a definite example of this, sit a 70 year old woman and an 18 year old girl in the same room and have them talk about sex. People in the world today have become more open in their dealings with sex (whether that be good thing or a bad thing). Most woman in my grandmom's generation can't even bring themselves to say the dreaded "V" word.
Now, you may say that this was an effect of society on the people, and that's why this change occured. But in reality, what is society? There's no little man (that I know of...) at the top of the world pulling strings and telling people what they should belive. Social change comes about because there is a change in the thinking of the people.
It is only by 'the reasonable freedom of the individual' that Democracy works. You can argue with this all you want, but then you'd be denying pretty much everything that the writer's of the declaration wanted for this country. But just because they wrote it down on paper and went to war doesn't mean that there was an immediate change in the way people thought.
Ibsen never wanted to change the world. He didn't set out to propose a way to remedy the mistakes made by his forefathers. His only goal was social commentary. And that's exactly what social commentary is: commenting on the state of society and bringing up questions that make people think, but that might not necessarily have a concrete answer.
It's spelled Swedish, Paul... But you know I love 'em more than you do!
You can't deny that without the mass's approval, these notions are ridiculous. A person's mindset, though it may be dictated by society, is where the real revolution begins.
The civil war ended slavery, or so it taught. But how is it that the full effect of this was not realized until some 100 years later, in the 1960's? It's because no matter what the government says, people will believe what they want to believe, or what they were raised to believe.
Now I'm not proposing any remedy to this predicament, and it would be insane and improbable to do so. I am merely, in the spirit of Ibsen, pointing out something that I consider extremely important. The concept of a revolution of the mind happens quite frequently in history. If you need a definite example of this, sit a 70 year old woman and an 18 year old girl in the same room and have them talk about sex. People in the world today have become more open in their dealings with sex (whether that be good thing or a bad thing). Most woman in my grandmom's generation can't even bring themselves to say the dreaded "V" word.
Now, you may say that this was an effect of society on the people, and that's why this change occured. But in reality, what is society? There's no little man (that I know of...) at the top of the world pulling strings and telling people what they should belive. Social change comes about because there is a change in the thinking of the people.
It is only by 'the reasonable freedom of the individual' that Democracy works. You can argue with this all you want, but then you'd be denying pretty much everything that the writer's of the declaration wanted for this country. But just because they wrote it down on paper and went to war doesn't mean that there was an immediate change in the way people thought.
Ibsen never wanted to change the world. He didn't set out to propose a way to remedy the mistakes made by his forefathers. His only goal was social commentary. And that's exactly what social commentary is: commenting on the state of society and bringing up questions that make people think, but that might not necessarily have a concrete answer.
It's spelled Swedish, Paul... But you know I love 'em more than you do!
Reply
Leave a comment