Problems do not enter into the novels of Hamsun in the same manner as they did Into the plays of Ibsen. Hamsun would seem to take life
as it is not with any pretense at its complete acceptability, but without hope or avowed intention of making it over. If his tolerance be never free
from satire, his satire is on the other hand always easily tolerant. One might almost suspect him of viewing life as something static against which all
fight would be futile. Even life's worst brutalities are related with an offhandedness of manner that makes you look for the joke that must be at the
bottom of them. The word reform would seem to be strangely eliminated from his dictionary, or, if present, it might be found defined as a
humorous conception of something intrinsically unachlevable.
(from Edwin Björkman's introduction to Pan, by Knut Hamsun)
Based on the distinction drawn between Hamsun and Ibsen, which inference seems most reasonable?
1. Ibsen's work references an ideal, utopian world.
2. Ibsen is a writer concerned with how problems can be fixed or mitigated.
03. Ibsen's work avolds issues and problems and focuses on eternal themes, like love and herolsm.
4. Ibsen is a writer obsessed with the horror and tragedy of human existence.

The work of Norwegian writer Henrik Ibsen focused on social issues considered taboo during the 19th century, such as sexually-transmitted diseases and sexism. It is not that Ibsen was fascinated with horror or tragedy. Rather, he was brave and bold enough to approach such themes and even present a controversial way of dealing with them. In the play "A Doll's House", for instance, Nora ends up leaving her abusive husband.

Having that in mind and taking the passage into consideration, we can see that Ibsen is a writer concerned with how problems can be fixed or mitigated. While Hamsun seems to view social problems as tolerable and humorous, as something not worth fighting against, Ibsen sees them as central, important, and changeable.