Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in An Enemy of the People, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
Power and Public Opinion
Truth and the Media
Women, Family, and Duty
Individualism vs. Authority
Class Systems
Summary
Analysis
In the morning, Katherine brings Dr. Stockmann a brusque note from Peter, proposing a meeting at midday. Dr. Stockmann believes that his brother is jealous that he hasn’t made this important discovery himself, since he’s “so confoundedly afraid of anyone’s doing service to the town except himself.” Katherine urges her husband to be cautious and diplomatic with his brother, suggesting that he find some way to share the credit.
Morten Kiil, Katherine’s father, arrives at the house. He’s heard rumors about contamination in the water supply. Not understanding the concept of bacteria, he assumes that Dr. Stockmann is playing a prank on his brother by suggesting that animals no one can see have infected the water. He clearly doesn’t believe the story, but he hopes the town will fall for it, as revenge for kicking him off the council. Laughing slyly, he leaves the house.
While Dr. Stockmann considers his discovery an unalterable scientific fact, Morten and most others in the community see it as a political event, which can be used, altered, or ignored as the circumstances change. This suggests that success in the community is predicated on the ability to make political maneuvers, rather than more admirable qualities like honesty or integrity.
Themes
As he departs, Hovstad arrives. He takes Dr. Stockmann aside and says that, after considering the matter of the baths overnight, he’s realized its not an isolated incident; the “morass” of chemicals infecting the water is symbolic of the “morass” of incompetent authorities who control everything in the town. Somewhat taken aback, Dr. Stockmann points out that the town’s leaders are “men of ability and knowledge,” but Hovstad points out that they didn’t display much knowledge of the conduit pipes. He wants to write about the issue in the paper, in order to “break up this ring of self-opinionated old fossils” who control the town.
Hovstad is the first person to make the connection between the scientific contamination of the water and the moral contamination of society—specifically, the outsized amount of control wielded by wealthy elites. This is especially interesting given that these linked forms of contamination will form the center of Dr. Stockmann’s climactic speech at the public meeting—but by then, the moral issues he decries will include Hovstad’s hypocrisy.
Themes
Dr. Stockmann agrees that the town needs more progress and transparency, but he’s not ready to attack the leaders publicly, especially not his brother. Hovstad cajoles him by arguing that, as a journalist, he has no personal ambitions; he is of “humble origin” and views it as his journalistic duty to give other common people a greater voice in public life.
Here, Dr. Stockmann seems relatively traditional when it comes to the authorities. His reluctance to make a political statement contrasts starkly with his radicalism at the end of the play.
Themes
Get the entire An Enemy of the People LitChart as a printable PDF.
As Dr. Stockmann vacillates, Mr. Aslaksen interrupts the conference. He’s heard about Dr. Stockmann’s discovery and promises that the Householders’ association and the small tradesmen, whom he represents, will back him up. Dr. Stockmann doesn’t believe all this support is necessary, but Mr. Aslaksen pompously reassures him that he’s a man of utmost “moderation,” who wields power among the “compact majority.”
Mr. Aslaksen and Hovstad are eager to turn the discovery from a scientific matter into a political cause because it suits their agenda and gives the “compact majority” an opportunity to flex its muscles. Dr. Stockmann’s reluctance to get involved testifies to his good instincts, but he’ll soon succumb to the combination of power and ideology presented by the two “progressives.”
Themes
Mr. Aslaksen announces his plan to write a testimonial on behalf of the majority that thanks Dr. Stockmann without offending town leaders. Hovstad protests at this deference to town leaders, but Mr. Aslaksen waves him away, saying it’s useless to alienate those “on whom our welfare defends.” Refusing a glass of beer because of his leadership position in the temperance society, he departs, again promising the support of the “compact majority.”
Mr. Aslaksen claims to be the voice of the majority, but this passage shows that his allegiance to authorities makes all his actions meaningless. Dr. Stockmann does not as yet understand that these twisted loyalties will prevent him from being an effective ally against Peter.
Themes
Hovstad remains behind, complaining that Mr. Aslaksen is too timid to take a real stand against the authorities; he announces his intention to “put a little virility into these well-intentioned people.” Dr. Stockmann says he must not publish anything before he talks to his brother; but he concedes that if the conference goes badly, Hovstad can publish the entire report.
This passage shows the generous and fair-minded side of Dr. Stockmann’s character: even though he’s apprehensive about the upcoming meeting with his brother, he refuses to act against him publicly until he absolutely has to.
Themes
As Hovstad leaves, Dr. Stockmann reports proudly to Katherine and Petra that he has received support from the town’s “compact majority.” Katherine sounds distinctly unimpressed, asking “if that is a good thing for you,” but Dr. Stockmann is too excited to pay attention, imagining how much good he will be able to do for his native town.
Dr. Stockmann will ultimately present his critique of majoritarian politics as entirely his own discovery, but in fact it’s Katherine who first voices suspicion of the majority’s loyalty.
Themes
Peter Stockmann rings the bell and Katherine greets him cordially, but he dismisses the women for a private conference and immediately reprimands his brother for undertaking investigations without authorization. Peter says he can’t believe the “violent language” Dr. Stockmann has used in the report. He also says, without explaining the reason, that he consulted the town engineer on the costs of the doctor’s proposed repairs and found them to be astronomical; even worse, the baths would have to close for two years, which would cause the town to lose money and status as a popular place for spa cures. If the report goes public, he says, it will ruin the town.
Peter’s characterization of the report’s language as “violent” suggests that, like Morten Kiil, he sees it as a political attack rather than the result of scientific inquiry. While Dr. Stockmann views events like the water contamination entirely through their abstract or philosophical importance, Peter conceives of them in relation to material or social consequences.
Themes
In place of making expensive repairs, Peter says, Dr. Stockmann should simply treat people who fall ill; over the course of years, the baths committee can make subtle repairs to shift the water source. Dr. Stockmann is outraged and says he will never agree to such “trickery.” He accuses Peter of discounting his findings because he doesn’t want to admit that he erred in choosing the water source. Peter responds that he has to protect his reputation “in the interests of the town,” so that he can govern effectively and maintain respect.
Peter’s suggestion that they continue to allow townspeople and visitors to fall ill shows that he’s much more concerned with minimizing political fallout than with protecting the community. His conflation of his own reputation and interests with communal good allows him to govern selfishly while still believing that he is serving the people.
Themes
Dr. Stockmann reveals that he has shared the contents of the report with Hovstad and Billing, and he may not be able to keep it from the public. Peter accuses his brother of being “an extraordinarily independent man,” and threatens that there will be personal consequences—after all, he has always helped his brother find respectable occupations and provide for his family, but he won’t be able to do so if Dr. Stockmann writes incendiary articles about every idea that comes into his head. Dr. Stockmann says it’s the “duty of a citizen” to share his ideas with the public, but Peter counters that “the public is best served by the good, old-established ideas it already has.”
It’s interesting that Peter uses the word “independent” as an insult and reprimand. To him, any kind of individual thought is inherently transgressive. In considering the relative importance of individualism and authority, the two brothers stand at opposite ends of the spectrum. In this passage he’s also the first to draw a line between political activism and the domestic sphere—a distinction which, the play will argue, is fallacious.
Themes
Peter continues that his brother is wrong to constantly complain about the authorities, when it’s he himself who is recalcitrant and hard to work with. After all, it’s Peter who is responsible for championing the baths project and securing his brother’s position on the committee. Even though it was Dr. Stockmann’s idea, he could never have accomplished it without Peter’s political acumen. Peter considers the new report to be a new effort by Dr. Stockmann to “pick a quarrel with your superiors.”
It’s hard to sympathize with Peter’s bullying demeanor right now, but he does make the valid point that it’s hard to bring even good ideas to fruition without some kind of political acumen. Dr. Stockmann treasures the idea that brilliant men (like him) can influence society purely on the basis of their ideals, but this is simply unrealistic.
Themes
Peter demands that Dr. Stockmann publicly refute his findings and say that he was wrong to question the water quality. Dr. Stockmann pleads with his brother to understand that any course of action except major repairs to the baths is dangerous and inadequate, but Peter simply responds that “as an officer under the Committee, you have no right to any individual opinion.” Dr. Stockmann becomes completely outraged, insisting that, as an individual, he can take whatever course of action he feels is best.
Although Peter has pointed out the necessity of working together and respecting some forms of authority, here his disdain for individual thought emerges as definitively absurd. Conversely, Dr. Stockmann’s preoccupation with individual thought can make him willfully obstinate, but here it allows him to unhesitatingly stand up to a powerful figure.
Themes
Petra and Katherine, who have been eavesdropping, burst in as Dr. Stockmann again refuses to retract his findings. Peter says that he will be dismissed as punishment. When Petra tells her uncle that he’s behaving in a “shameful” manner, he sneers at her for volunteering her own opinions. Turning to Katherine, he enjoins her to talk her husband out of his foolishness, if only so that he can continue to provide for his family.
Peter’s put-down and its sexist implications (that a young woman is not entitled to air her opinions) shows that his embrace of authority doesn’t just spring from a desire for order. Rather, it’s a mechanism to delegitimize and ignore other voices, especially those of disenfranchised populations like women.
Themes
Dr. Stockmann retorts that he’s acting in the interests of his family and his beloved town, but Peter replies that someone who jeopardizes the people’s economic interests must actually be “an enemy of the community.” The two men almost come to blows, but the women separate them and Peter stalks out.
If someone can become an “enemy” simply for causing economic harm, then the community must necessarily be predicated on economic relations. Compared to Dr. Stockmann’s vision of people relating on a moral and ideological level, this is a chilly and transactional view of society.
Themes
Katherine placates her husband by agreeing that Peter has behaved badly, but she reminds him that the mayor “has power on his side” and can indeed harm the family. Dr. Stockmann dismisses her as “absurd,” saying that he has the support of the compact majority and that, “in a free country,” the right ideas always win. Petra takes her father’s side, arguing that they have to do the right thing and not think of themselves, but Katherine reminds Dr. Stockmann that she and the boys are completely unable to provide for themselves.
Dr. Stockmann treats his wife dismissively, but later events will show that she has a better sense of political necessity and the economy of power than he does. His strong belief in the power and validity of his individual thoughts makes him naively sure that others will honor them, while Katherine—who as a woman has been conditioned to accept dependence, rather than uphold individuality—understands the extent to which individuals are dependent on those around them.
Themes
At this point the boys arrive home from school and peek in at their parents arguing. Dr. Stockmann surveys them for a minute, but then shakes his head and says that, no matter what, “I will never bow my head to this yoke.” He says that he wants “the right to look my sons in the face when they are grown men.” Katherine starts crying, but Petra applauds her father’s courage.
Here Dr. Stockmann considers his sons’ material needs (represented by the confused boys themselves) but, shaking his head, dismisses them in favor of his ideological concerns. Dr. Stockmann claims to be acting for his family and his ideals, but he’s actually ignoring one over the other.
Themes
