ok, with many apologies for the delay, finally I am chipping in, too. I have to thank Sun Surfer for his insight, because I very much share Issybird and Hamlet's views. I was hopping between the Adelaide University version and an annotated Penguin paperback edition, which though not exhaustive has enough notes to indicate clearly that Ibsen was using satire against the conservative Norvegian and Swedish societies, and Norvegian nationalism in particular, with several references to the (damming) non intervention when Denmark was invaded - of course I woulnd't have been able to tell, and even with the notes I remained pretty much in the dark "thanks" to my total and utter ignorance of Norwegian history.
In addition, there were various references to changes in the structure of the verse for dramatic effect, but of course that is completely lost in the (non rhyming) translation. As far as translation goes, I found the Adelaide one perhpas more poetic though more criptic for me as a non-native speaker tan the Penguin version (transalted by Peter Watts). As prose, I found it very flat, and at various points it felt very much like reading the Arabian nights.
In short, I cannot say I liked it, and in hindsight I wouldn't have proposed it.
To be more constructive, one of the "verses" that struck me most is the answer of the Button Moulder to Peer's question on what it means to be oneself, to which the Button Moulder replies "Being one's self means slaying one's self ... Above everything else it's observing the Master's intentions in all things"; and beside this, there is a running theme on Christianity to which Peer pays only lipservice until (maybe) the very last moment. I am still mulliying on this one, and looking forward to more insights from you all!