Ibsen’s use and rejection of the monologue in his modern, realistic dramas is an old and bewildering narrative. Maybe Ibsen himself is partly responsible for this bewildering. Already in 1869, he wrote to Georg Brandes that he had finished a play (De unges forbund/League of Youth) in which he had worked hard with the form, and proudly proclaimed that he had “gjort det Kunststykke at hjaelpe mig uden en eneste Monolog, ja, uden en eneste ‘afsides’ Replik/done that piece of an art to make it without a single monologue, yes, without a single aside” (Fulsås 2005, 352; our italics). This statement has later been quoted and commented on, and several scholars see this removal of the monologues as an important part of Ibsen’s modernizing of the drama genre (Northam 1953, 15; Geis 1993, 18). R. Farquharson Sharp claims that A Doll’s House marks a turning point in the history of European drama: “Naturalness of dialogue and situation [... ] and the disappearance of such artificialities as the soliloquy” (Sharp 1949, x; our italics). Alisa Solomon draws this somewhat ironic picture of this topic:

中文翻译：

---

百灵鸟孤独的推特：玩偶之家独白分析

易卜生在他的现代现实主义戏剧中对独白的使用和拒绝是一种古老而令人困惑的叙述。也许易卜生本人对这种困惑负有部分责任。早在 1869 年，他就写信给乔治·布兰德斯，说他已经完成了一部戏剧（De unges forbund/League of Youth），在这部戏中他努力训练了这种形式，并自豪地宣称他在 hjaelpe mig uden en eneste 有“gjort det Kunststykke”。 Monolog, ja, uden en eneste 'afsides' Replik/完成了一件艺术作品，让它没有一个独白，是的，没有一个旁白”（Fulsås 2005, 352；我们的斜体）。这一说法后来被引用和评论，一些学者认为去除独白是易卜生戏剧类型现代化的重要组成部分（诺瑟姆 1953, 15; Geis 1993, 18）。R。Farquharson Sharp 声称《玩偶之家》标志着欧洲戏剧史上的一个转折点：“对话和情境的自然性 [...] 以及独白等人为因素的消失”（Sharp 1949，x；我们的斜体）。艾丽莎·所罗门（Alisa Solomon）对这个话题画了一幅有点讽刺的图画：