Ibsen 'stolen'?

Tore Rem has written a book (sorry, no link in English), in which he points out that the Ibsen the world outside of Norway knows is different from the one we know in Norwegian. Aftenposten's reporter seems to think that Norwegians will dislike this assertion. I'm just wondering if that's fair. Are Norwegians really unaware that this is a possibility, or is it that they think it's wrong, or don't they care one way or the other?

People I know here in the UK (the few who care about these things) assure me that it's (or at least used to be) quite common to think that Ibsen was British; as Rem points out, 'A Doll's House' is used as part of the curriculum for English literature in British schools. And when i write 'A Doll's House', that's what I mean; the text used is not 'Et dukkehjem', but an English language text. And that brings up interesting issues to do with choice of translation (there are many to choose from), which translation is 'correct', whether the translation is a version of the original text or a completely different text, leading an independent life, etc.

But to me it seems that Aftenposten's reporter views this as somewhat controversial. Is it? As somebody living in the UK might not be the right person to answer that question, but I think the book may be somewhat less shocking than is portrayed in the article. And when i had a closer look at what the publisher (Cappelen) has to say about it, it starts to look like a 'storm' in a teacup. Oh well. I'd quite like to read this book, just to see if it has anything interesting to say about translation, or about Ibsen. That isn't very clear from the article in Aftenposten.

Tags: Henrik Ibsen, Tore Rem, translation, Norway, Norwegian