Wild Duck Journal 1:

I misplaced my journal sheet for this night, so I will just compare the expositions of Wild Duck by Ibsen and Oedipus the King by Sophocles, mainly focusing on the characters.

In Oedipus the King, Oedipus is presented as an outstanding man, rescuing Thebes from the Sphynx. However, beneath the facade of a proud king lies a confused man finding his roots. This comes out and finally his parents are no longer his parents. Just as in Sophocles' novel, Greger in Wild Duck doesn't view his father as being a father figure. He accuses him of having an affair with the maid and having ulterior motives in helping the Hjalmars. Greger Werle is like Oedipus he too loses trust in his roots, as Oedipus did when the messenger arrived. But, I feel that Greger will continue to be an impressive force throughout the play, while Oedipus fades into a pathetic creature, fated by the gods to suffer. Irony in the two plays also connects the characters. In Oedipus the King, Sophocles used dramatic irony with Oedipus' origins. In The Wild Duck, Werle says to his son "Listen, Gregers, there are so very many things that keep us apart, and yet, you know - we're father and son still. I think we should be able to reach some kind of understanding" (133). This is ironic because, from the readers perspective, the only reason that there would be a separation of significance between them is from the fathers actions. He hold grand parties, ignores a dear friend, and possibly even sleeps with the house maid. Werle then goes on to say that they need to reach an understanding. This is ironic because Greger is beginning to understand that his father had other reasons to do these things besides just pleasure.