An Enemy of the People by Arthur Miller

An Enemy of the People is a play that speaks to any age and any generation. I just read the adaptation by Arthur Miller written in 1950. The Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen wrote the original version in 1882.

The premise of the play is quite simple - does the majority rule even when it is proven that they are wrong? For example, if the majority of citizens of a town vote to change the zoning laws to prevent the building of an Islamic school, are they right?

An Enemy of the People takes place in a Norwegian town but in reality it could easily be an American town. Peter Stockman, the mayor, is excited about the new spa built at Kirsten Springs. The spring is the future of the town. People from all over the country will visit the springs to take advantage of its healing powers.

As the mayor says - "The springs, Dr. Hovstad, our wonderful new springs. They've changed the soul of the town. Mark my words, there is no question about it." - Page 21, Penguin Plays.

Peter's brother is the town's prominent and respected doctor. He also is quite excited about the springs. He sends a sample of the water to a lab to test its purity. He has some suspicions because last year some visitor's got sick after visiting the springs. The results are disastrous; the water is both polluted and poisonous.

The doctor as both a health professional and citizen believes he must inform the townspeople. It is his responsibility. He presents his findings to the town's liberal newspaper, the People's Daily Messenger.

Initially the paper is excited and tells the Doctor they will publish his report. It is the job of the newspaper to print the truth.

Now the conflict!

The mayor wants to hide the truth. The doctor's report will ruin the town. It will cost the business consortium that owns the springs money to clean the water. The delay will hurt the town; it might take years before visitors believe the water is safe.

The newspaper originally wanted to print the report but is swayed by the Mayor. He tells them that once the truth is known, he'll have to tax the people to get the funds to clean the water. The townsfolk will be angry at the newspaper for being the harbinger of bad news. There will be a drop in the newspaper's circulation.

The doctor believes it is his responsibility to tell the truth.

The town eventually hears the truth but the mayor and the newspaper convince the town that the doctor is crazy. They vote as a majority to brand the doctor as an enemy of the people.

Who is correct? Does the majority always rule?

The doctor doesn't believe so. As he says (pg. 94) - ". . . I am in revolt against the age-old lie that the majority is always right."

This play's characterization of politics and self-interest are well portrayed. Whether it is the original 1882 version or the 1950 version, the words still ring true. I love the description of political parties on page 105 - "A party is like a sausage grinder: it mashes up clearheads, longheads, fatheads, blockheads - and what comes out? Meatheads!"

This play has special meaning for me. The town I live in, North Attleborough, is experiencing this drama for real. A few years back the majority of the residents voted to treat our water with fluoride. The town that shares our water supply (Plainville) voted against this fluoride treatment. Since the water is in our town, it now contains fluoride.

Two of our three members of my town's Board of Health want to stop the fluoride treatment. There is evidence that fluoride causes bone cancer in young adults. Our town council says they have no right to order the Department of Public Works to stop the treatment. The majority, the will of the people must prevail!

Does the majority rule? Is the majority always right?