In the 19th Century, people were defined by their ability to control their money. Like Torvald, he was a banker and a lawyer who determined how money was spent at that time. Morals by a person’s ability to manage money. In “Doll House by Henrik Ibsen”, Torvald gets a good position at the bank and he is the one who could decide who would get the job between Mrs. Linde and Krogstad.
In the relationship between Nora and Torvald, Money came first and was the main topic in the story. Nora knows that if she acts in a certain way; she will get more money from Torvald. Nora “puts a bag of macaroons into her pocket and wipes her mouth” (828) come here Torvald. Later, Nora uses the same method on Dr. Rank and her behavior shows how women in today’s society offer this behavior favor in return for money, but he thought that “I cannot imagine for a moment what would have become of me if I had never come into this house” (860) Torvald shows that whoever will control money he will be in charge of the relationship and show how he dominates around her. He was teasing her about being a spendthrift when he says “All these things? Has my little spendthrift been wasting money again” (828)?
Additionally, from the theme of money and reputation, the message that comes out is that the freedom of women has been suppressed by the expectations set by society because women were expected to take care of the house, cook, clean, raise children, and look after their husbands. Nora adhered to these expectations by taking good care of her husband, as seen when she danced the tarantella for him. There was a belief that going in with her as long as there was enough money and a good reputation marriage life would be happy and prosperous. But this is not true Because there is an evident dissatisfaction when she has an affair with Dr. Rank. Doll’s House is a house of false values, behind which are hidden egoism, spiritual emptiness, and disunity of human souls.
People do not live in this house but only play in love, marriage, family consent, and even in human dignity and honor. Ibsen masterfully shows conflicts that only occur in the soul of the characters. For Example, Nora lives in an imaginary world, then an accommodating, perception of herself as a human being, striving for inner changes. Krogstad; moral decline love awakening of conscience- the desire to become human again. Helmer; ‘s thoughts and actions are a moral test of betrayal of love and family. With the help of the motive of money, the difficult-to-tense collision between the actors is revealed, which reveals different moral positions about family, life, and other people. The family conflict between Nora and Torvalds reveals the shortcomings of people and society.
Dignity is measured not only by social laws but above all by moral laws. Ibsen uses the forms of monologue and dialogue, and successfully builds a composition, which makes it possible to brighten and reveal the dramatic conflict. The language of the plays is a conversational style, lively, accessible, but not simplified, saturated with bright artistic means that help the author convey the diversity and affectation of human experiences. The denouement is not the unleashing of problems, but only their statement, the conflict is not exhausted after the completion of the action but is becoming more and more acute.
White lies are often justified morally by the logic that the recipient is being protected by the lie. In the case of an obedient housewife, it was the unveiling of her white lie that created a turning point in all aspects of her life. In Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, Nora’s deception is crucial to saving Helmer’s life. Although her intentions are pure, the risks of this deception are detrimental. Her deceit leads to the unraveling of her family and her decision to become independent. It is important to understand why Nora lied to her husband in the first place and the risk she bestowed upon herself in doing so.
The lies began when Helmer was sick and ‘He needed to have no idea what a dangerous condition he was in” when the doctors informed Nora that Helmer’s life was in danger (pg. 11). Her selfless act of taking out money to save his life was still to be kept secret. A woman lying to her husband in 1879 was wildly unheard of and discouraged. Helmer built a marriage around the subservience of his wife, “a clean beak to chirp with—no false notes,’ (pg. 29), and his ability to solely provide for her and the children. His stubborn, sexist view of women handling money, “no debt, no borrowing’ (pg. 32) forced Nora to keep this secret from him. This deceit was an act of bravery on the part of Nora and is made to be disobedient in the eyes of Helmer.
Although her intentions were pure and selfless, the unraveling of these secrets saw no better outcome than if she hadn’t taken out the loan. Nora’s newfound freedom of having this secret started with some mild concerns about “all this concealment and falsehood going on.’ (pg. 66) However, as Helmer discovers that Nora has lied, he acts as if he is hurt and betrayed by her deceit when in reality he is concerned with himself and his reputation. In a fit of rage, Helmer scolds Nora, ‘What a horrible awakening! All these eight years—she who was my joy and pride—a hypocrite, a liar—worse, worse—a criminal!’ (pg. 75) He treats her as if she had intentionally ruined him for her benefit. His fit of rage is fueled by his new job position being affected by this loan being owed to a fired employee. This anger perpetuates into her fitness to be a mother, ‘I shall not allow you to bring up the children; I dare not trust them to you.’ (pg. 76) However, when he is relieved of his distress by the good news that his reputation will not be affected, he does a full 360°, changing his perspective based on his well-being. He cherishes Nora for her decisions and “forgives” her all of a sudden.
This complete shift in his emotion solidifies his characterization as selfish and self-centered. Nora’s dishonesty is much better accepted when Helmer’s true priorities are revealed. Finally, Nora’s story blossoms as a result of her lie. As she uncovered Helmer’s true colors, she was able to see that she is capable of being independent and making decisions for herself, even tho she has always been discouraged from doing so. She no longer has to keep things from others just because they don’t value her ability to be independent. She decides to leave her family and explore herself as an individual, not to be controlled by anyone, especially those who are not accepting of her instincts, forcing her to be dishonest. As she is reminded of her duties to her family, she tells Helmer, ‘I have other duties just as sacred. […] Duties to myself.’ (pg. 81) This concludes the consequences of her lie, a positive awakening of her self-worth. Although this deception was morally controversial, her life needed to have a new meaning.
Feminism appears throughout Ibsen’s major plays in several forms, including the double norm, matrimony, the independent woman, and parenthood. It means that hypocritical characters have strong views about the distinctions between men and women. Feminism’s theory in society has had a variety of effects on people’s lives. The self-righteous, practical schoolmaster variety Rorlund reads to a group of town ladies on the culture for virtuous hoodlums to keep their loyalty to the purity of the family and community; a completely absurd ideal given the untruths, deception, and self-centeredness on which this society is founded (Benhabib 162). Karsten Bernick noticed that the women are willing to claim assembly, albeit in a minor capacity.
Feminism in the play
Torvald Helmer, who is obsessed with maintaining his image at all costs, enjoys juxtaposing feminine frailty and childishness with manly force and cunning. Mrs. Alving presents her deceased husband as an immoral man in Ghosts, while Mrs. Alving paints her servant Johanna as a shattered lady, according to Pastor Manders. Nora Helmer is an example of a delusional lady living in a culture where men mistreat women and reduce them to dolls or playthings.
Norma Helmer is a doll who resides in her toy palace, sustaining the fragile image of material prosperity in hierarchical and indigenous traditions. Nora Helmer is oppressed, as are the other female characters in the story. According to the French revolutionary writer, the feminine is a female by a certain absence of qualities. We must consider the female personality to have a flaw. Men have a habit of portraying women as second-class citizens. She does not exist as a separate person; rather, she exists as the Other (Benhabib 162). Nora is not seen as an independent woman, and she is a product of her father’s upbringing.
Nora is a dumb squirrel, a small skylark, a songbird, or an acute dispersed brain, according to her husband, whose beliefs are nonsensical and identical to any other woman’s. Since Nora was a child, her father has referred to her as the other. Her father subsequently handed her over to her husband, who treated her as if she were a treasured possession. Nora’s demeanor and awakening at the end of the play properly represent her upbringing.
When Nora lived at home with dad, he fed her all his opinions until they became her opinions. If they didn’t, she didn’t say anything since she knew he wouldn’t like it. Her father used to refer to her as his doll-child, and he used to play with her in the same way she used to play with him. And when it happened, he received dad’s message. Everything is set up to her husband’s liking and altered to match. In retrospect, Nora felt like she lived all the days of her life like a beggar. Nora regrets being attached to her husband and decides to move out.
Mary Wollstonecraft’s essay, The Weak and Meek Lady, evocates Ibsen’s portrayal of the weak and meek lady. An illusion of their rights, where women are said to possess the qualities of the softness of temper, outward submission, and scrupulous attention from a young age. When paired with the gift of beauty, these qualities will ensure that man protects them. Torvald assures Nora that “ you can feel assured that my wings are big enough to keep you safe. What a lovely and welcoming environment they built at our house”(Charan 192). Realizing that he has reconciled his wife—and that he has pardoned her entirely and honestly—is incredibly soothing and gratifying for a man. He gave her a second chance at life as if he’s given the ability to be reborn and be both his wife and his child.
This can be seen in Torvald’s treatment of Nora when she was a child. He forbids her from eating macarons and orders her to dress up and do a recitation for him. Nora, on the other hand, was treated like a spoiled brat and a sex object for the entertainment of her husband. As a result, near the end of the play, Nora understands that it is past time to reclaim her status. As the One after a lengthy period of submission that cemented her role as the Other. Nora learned that it is better to give than to take, and her father and spouse were only willing to give her what they had (Nasrin 5). In such a hierarchical context, Nora’s day-to-day household life is typical of intermediate women. They are more securely dependent on some men, dads, or spouses than other women due to location, housework, economic status, and social position. If they are bourgeois, they have sympathy for bourgeois guys but not for proletariat women.
Nora’s famous tirade in the last scene encapsulates everything that early feminism despised. Nora depicts how women are taught to be nice at the expense of any serious principles as if they were soft domestic brutes when she accuses her father and husband of committing a grave sin against her by treating her like a doll (Charan 193). When she advertises herself as a doll wife who makes a fortune doing tricks, she demonstrates Margaret Fuller’s theory that a man wants no lady but a girl to play ball. When she is unfit to do anything in life, she discloses her remedy: “I must try to educate myself”(Nasrin 4). She epitomizes nineteenth-century feminism’s universally agreed-upon concept for women’s emancipation. When she tells Torvald, that she doesn’t understand how to be his wife, she reflects nineteenth-century feminism’s generally accepted foundation for women’s freedom.
Nora highlights the crucial feminist principle that women, like men, have a moral and intellectual nature that must be developed: the fundamental purpose of their efforts should be to excavate their capacities. Nora’s most significant concern is that her spouse will find out that she used her dad’s security credentials to get the money she required to go abroad. Her motivation was unselfish, as the trek saved the life of her terminally ill husband. Nora understood her partner’s image would suffer due to the disclosure; however, she got the strange sense that if he knew she had done it to save his life, he would defend her.
Nora is in a situation where she must hide the shame if her husband knows about the loan. Nora did this to save her husband, not knowing things were to change on the way. The freedom she yearns for is affecting her relationship with her husband. Ibsen argues that women want to be independent and stay away from their husbands. Nora’s illusion, like the doll home, is shattered, as shown by Nasrin (5). The doll eventually understands that the Other has been her sole purpose. She recognizes that she is the one who agreed with the definitions of One and Other. Nora had a significant epiphany when she discovered that her spouse values his work and reputation over his love for her.
Torvald’s fury and accusations, which he feels after learning what she’s done, end up being a blessing in disguise. Torvald shouts, Nora has been her pride and delight for eight years, and now he has discovered her to be a hypocrite and a liar, and worse, worse than a criminal. In every direction, there’s a chasm of terror; she should be embarrassed. She makes the brave decision to leave her family to break free from the shackles of her patriarchal culture (Nasrin 5). She is determined to venture out into the world and gather experience. She is adamant about being able to reason things out for herself and make her own choices.
In the play, the woman nature is seen as a text of culture that celebrates all cultural features between men and women. Feminist ideology is supported and reinforced in a societal context where women have little cultural, governmental, or economic influence (Siagian 7). Ibsen portrays the drama depicts the sacrificial female roles of all socioeconomic groups in his culture as dismal. The women characters in the play demonstrate Nora’s assertion that hundreds of thousands of women have lost their integrity. Despite men’s refusal to do so. In the institutions of marriage and parenthood, Women are portrayed as socially and mentally dependent on males in A Doll’s House. Mrs. Linde, like Nora, had to divorce her fiancé to marry a man who could support her, her mom, and her brothers (Charan 193). We also have the physician who, to keep her career, had to give up her child from a prior relationship.
Nora has a difficult existence despite having a better financial condition than the other female characters since society expects Torvald to be the dominant spouse in the marriage. Nora must keep her loan a secret from Torvald since he will never believe that his wife (or any other woman) saved his life. She must also work in secret to repay her loan, as borrowing money without her husband’s approval is unlawful. Nora’s deception is driven by Torvald and society’s morals, leaving her open to strangers.
It’s possible that Nora’s decision to abandon her children was unselfish. Nora chooses to abandon her children despite her intense love for them, as seen by her interactions with them and her dread of corrupting them. Nora is confident that the nanny will be a better mother than she is and that surrendering her children to her will benefit them. Nora’s marriage, like her relationship with her husband, is a ruse. As she approaches Torvald, she remarks, that their house has never been anything but a playhouse (Charan 193). When she was at home, she was her doll just as she was the father’s baby child. They’ve also served as her dolls and children. When they played games with her, she used to appreciate it just as much as they did when she played games with them. Torvald, that’s all about their marriage.
As a result, her miniature life resembled that of the cave people strangely. She saw a warped representation of reality rather than the proper thing. She was satisfied in her role as a submissive wife whose fate was in the hands of her husband. She never inquired as to why her link appeared at the bottom of the page. Her complete trust demonstrates this in her capacity to keep the truth about Torvald’s life-saving loan hidden. Nora has an undying love for her husband. She decides to do everything to save her husband.
Throughout the play, Nora’s idea of what it means to be free evolves. In the first act, she feels that after paying off her debt, she would be genuinely free, able to concentrate only on her home responsibilities. She reconsiders her sense of independence after being blackmailed by Krogstad, and she wonders if she is happy at Torvald’s house, where she is subject to his dictates and edicts. Nora is yearning for a new type of freedom by the end of the play. She wants to free her families and communities to follow her objectives, perspectives, and identity.
Conclusion
The play is a groundbreaking drama that highlights the shortcomings of civilized society. Ibsen writes that women cannot be independent in today’s world since it is a fully male civilization with rules established by men and district attorneys and courts who judge female behavior from a male perspective. Gender feminism is a central theme portrayed in the play, and it is reflected in modern society. Women want to stay independent regardless of their status. In a civilized society, feminism has reduced by a small percentage since men’s dominance has reduced. It will be a greater achievement to reduce such practice in our society to promote social cohesiveness.
Works cited
Benhabib, Seyla. “Feminism and the Question of Postmodernism.” The New Social Theory Reader. Routledge, 2020. 156-162.
Charan, Dr. Swati. “Shift In the Role of Women In The Society: Through The Lens Of A Doll’s House By Henrik Ibsen.” International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, vol 5, no. 4, 2020, pp. 191-193. AI Publications.
Nasrin, Sohana. “New ways of activism: design justice and data feminism.” Social Movement Studies (2021): 1-5.
Siagian, Farida Hannum, I. Wy Dirgeyasa, and Indra Hartoyo. “Feminism in patriarchal society reflected in the main character of Perempuan Berkalung Sorbian movie.” LINGUISTICA 7.3.
Literature work mostly revolves around specific themes such as violence, love, poverty, revolution and issues that practically affect the characters. The latter are often members of the society, who the authors choose to relay certain social and other messages in the society. The works are often a depiction of the way of life of the people in the society at that particular period of time
In this essay, the author uses the works of chosen authors to analyze the benefits and costs of conforming to the norms of the society or rebelling against them by choosing to follow personal principles by individual characters or communities.
A Dolls House by Henrik Ibsen
This work by Henrik Ibsen is seen as a depiction of rebellion against societal norms that do not conform to the humane aspects of life. These are aspects such as autocracy and dictatorship. The author illustrates rebellion using a female protagonist in the writing. The character is searching for her individuality via realizations and hurdles she encounters. This society had created a niche for the woman as a housewife and social partner to her husband (Ibsen 184).
Ibsen’s story is controversial. The female protagonist represents the entire women folk who feel that the norms dictating that the woman should be the comforter, helper, and supporter of man are oppressive to the woman. The title of the book is symbolic because the protagonist, Nora, “refuses to be A Doll” to be played with by her husband and other male folk in the society (Ibsen 185).
The play introduces the woman as having her defined purpose and goal, contrary to the social norms in which her subscribed subordinate role in a relationship is to be loving and respectful to her husband, as well as been submissive to him.
The aspect of rebellion in the story helps the reader to realize the importance of deviance from the norms of society. The costs of the same appear to be elusive. This is evidenced through the comparison of the characters of Nora and Mrs. Linden. They were both friends since their childhood, but there was a great difference in how each character handled their life (Ibsen 183).
Mrs. Linden chose to marry a rich man to support her family and helpless mother. On the contrary, Nora, who was treated as a doll all her life, never had the chance to express herself. This is obviated in this quote,” look, Nora, in lots of things, you are still a child. I am older than you in many ways and I have had a little more experience” (Ibsen 184).
This treatment, which she was subjected to during her childhood and through eight years of marriage, disabled her to enjoy any kind of experience. She was neither exposed to life nor to the outer society. She found herself married to a selfish husband who loves her because she is amusing to him and makes him happy. This results in Nora rebelling at the end of the play, and she develops a different character from the one she was at the beginning (Cummings par. 15).
Mrs. Linden is portrayed to be a practical woman since after her husband passes on, she embarks on some projects. One of them was a school and another was opening a small shop. At the same time, she knew that Helmer, Nora’s husband, became a bank manager and can help her find a suitable job. She never gives up on searching for a job. These are the results of conforming to the societal norms, which resulted to Nora being a Doll and never having the chance to express herself.
As earlier stated, she did not have any substantial external interactions (Cummings par. 13). The effects of this are well captured when Henrik writes, “Because an atmosphere of lies infects and poisons the whole life of a home…… In a house like that, every breath that the children take is filled with the germs of evil” (Ibsen 179).
The benefit of rebellion is portrayed when Nora decides to leave the house, desert her family and start a new life. Conformity had served to her disadvantage because she was merely a Doll which made her live a lie (Cummings par. 11).
The Lottery by Shirley Jackson
In another exciting work of Shirley Jackson, “The Lottery“, a story is told of a community that has roots in a culture that they cannot tell when and how it started, but blindly follows it. The society has not changed as it still embraces the culture which segregates women from men. Women are inferior to men. This particular story is about conforming to traditions that appease the gods so they could bless them with enough rain (Jackson 268).
Unfortunately in the story, it is Tessie who is stoned as a sacrifice. In the process of the sacrifice rebellion is displayed by Tessie in different instances. The lottery is run by Mr. Summers. Women are supposed to act as mere spectators. The author tries to portray women’s inferiority by describing their clothes. This is portrayed in this quotation, “wearing faded house dresses and sweaters and walking shortly after their men folk” (Jackson 268).
Tessie arrives late, and it is presumed this is an act of rebellion to the values of the lottery. Her explanation to Mr. Summers is viewed as indecent. “Wouldn’t have me leave m’dishes in the sink, now would you Joe?” (Jackson 295).
Women are mere housewives and do not contribute to income generating activities. Tessie inverts responsibility on her husband when their family name is mentioned by Mr. Summers. “Get up there, Bill” she tells her man (Jackson 297). This is an example of Tessie attempts to overturn the roles of men and women, which is rebellion (Kosenko par. 20).
She raises doubt about the rules of the game, claiming that Mr. Summers is not fair. This is a taboo, and she emerges as the one who is trying to fight for the women’s cause from being repressed by culture. Tessie faces death for the rebellion, which is a clear indication that conforming to the societal norms has no escape; the cost of rebellion is death (Kosenko par. 22).
Two Kinds by Amy Tan
The story “Two Kinds” by Amy Tan is a story of the conflicting relationships between a mother and a daughter. The plot of the story shows how a Chinese mother tries to make her daughter an ‘All-American’ girl. But the daughter, Jing-mei, does not want to be anything that her mother tries to force her to be. The daughter refuses to conform to her mother’s wishes of becoming a prodigy. “‘Of course you can be prodigy, too,’ my mother told me when I was nine,”(Amy 95).
Jing-mei, in her mind, wants to be herself, more than anything. She is strong-willed and eventually shows her mother that she does not want to try to be anything that she is not. A good example of this is found on page 97: “I will not let her change me, I promised myself. I will not be what I am not” (Amy 97). This strains the mother-daughter relationship, and because of this, the daughter is termed rebellious (Elton 198).
In this book, Amy Tan explores the clash of cultures between a first-generation Chinese-American daughter, Jing-mei, and her mother, Suyan, a Chinese immigrant.
“And after I played them both a few times, I realized they were two halves of the same song” (Amy 42). It is obvious that by conforming to her mother’s wishes, the daughter would have had a nice relationship with the mother. But she would not have achieved her dream. She struggled to pursue what she believed in, and it brought conflict (Caravaggio par. 7)
What is Work? By Philip Levinne
In the poem “What is work?” Philip Levinne simply portrays the need to work. One needs to conform to the hard conditions of work so that they can benefit. Any attempt to rebel will definitely make one lose their job. Thus, the benefits of conforming in the poem are various. One is the status the job gives the person. This is despite the fact that one has to do with adverse conditions like rain.
In the poem The Secretary Chant by Piercy, the author displays the dehumanization of a woman by her work. Despite this, she still has to conform. She does not rebel. She takes it humbly as her job and delivers. This helps her to perform her duties diligently. But rebellion would mean her work is jeopardized. Rebellion has no room if one is in need of the position (Anonymous par. 1 and 2).
The above works have explored the theme of conformity and rebellion to the societal norms effectively by the use of female characters. They portray the results of conforming as unwinding loss of reputation and lack of experience in facing the realities of life. This deprives the characters status and a position in the society. As a result, they tend to rebel so as to find their purpose and claim their position in the society. The consequences are harsh but they do not give up.
Conclusion
Authors have successfully given an account of life in the old days and the social problems and events which were evident in that period of time. This is together with the effects they had on the society and what was done to the consequences or the merits of any actions undertaken in order to make it possible to exist in that society. Many of these actions were either conforming to the laid down protocols of the society or rebelling against them.
Works Cited
Amy, Tan. Two Kind. New York: Free Press, 2003.
Anonymous. “What a girl wants; What a girl needs. An analysis of 3 Feminist Poems.” 2010. Web.
Caravaggio, Charity. Beyond the differences and conflicts – Beyond the differences and conflicts. London: Goodreads Inc, 2010.
Cummings, Michael. “A study guide to a doll’s house: Plot summary”. 2003. Web.
Elton, Mathew. “A Literary Analysis of Two Kinds by Amy Tan.” 2008. Web.
Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll’s House. Great Britain: Nick Hern Books Ltd, 1994.
Jackson, Shirley. The Lottery and Other Stories. New York: Free Press, 1991.
Kosenko, Peter. “A Reading of Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery”. 1984. Web.
So you want to know more about how and why I wrote “A Doll’s House”. Many people have asked me about this play and about my ideas, why I made this play the way I did. They said I was too bold, I was immoral and I was contributing to the breakdown of my society. I tell you, though, my society was already broken before I ever arrived and my play did not serve to break it, but to bring ideas that needed to be discussed out into the open. They also applauded me and welcomed me at their meetings, saying I was their hero, one of the champions of the woman problem, but I was not that either. I admit I had some influence in the development of the theater. I did not choose to follow the same lines as my predecessors and present a hero character who would champion the accepted ideas of what was right and good. But again, this was not necessarily my intention. And so, I will tell you what I was thinking, as well as I might recall, what things were like in my time and society that helped me determine the direction I would take and why I took this direction dramatically-speaking, which helped to change the course of future theatrical productions.
In writing “A Doll’s House,” I, of course, knew about the woman problem, the question of whether women should be given more rights, perhaps even rights equal to the rights of men. I knew how they felt. I saw the problems in the streets. My primary concern, though, was in describing the human condition as well as I might. The issues of women really were not much concern of mine, but they could heighten the dramatic effect of the primary questions that were then weighing on my mind. I believe it was Joan Templeton (1989) who said “Nora’s conflict represents something other than, or something more than, woman’s” (28). I like this way of putting it. I wrote the play considering the problem of becoming an individual. Everyone grows older, takes on professions, struggles through life as best they may and often find themselves disappointed with what they have. But what did it mean to be truly alive, actually fulfilling the ideas of self that one harbored – courageous, brave, steadfast, loyal, clever, etc.? This kind of questioning was not unique to me alone. In my time, life was changing rapidly in every possible way. It seemed all of Europe was engaged in busy activity, there was a sense of a perfect way of living and of life and a realization that this form of life was not realized by most, if any. It seemed we were constantly greeted with new and more amazing advances in technology and scientific thought. Philosophy advanced tremendously as we became more informed thanks to the wonders of the discoveries made.
At the same time, the society of my youth was not the society I knew as an old man. By the time I reached my advanced age, life for myself and my countrymen, regardless of which country I lived in, had become focused more upon the active life of the city than it had been in my youth, and the problems of the city had become much more defined. Our cities continued to grow, but they were ill-equipped to handle such growth. They were often dirty and grimy, full of poor people seeking aid of some sort and urchins in the streets running about. There were also plenty of respectable people as well, of all classes and education levels. But the cities also offered many more opportunities for people to work together in new and unique ways. Although Nora was seen by my critics as an unusual woman because she found a means of earning money of her own and used this money to pay back a loan she’d kept hidden from her husband for several years, she was not. This was what my audiences recognized in her. It was scandalous to bring this conversation into the open, but it was known to have occurred in at least one household within a given circle. Between everyone questioning the strictures of society I had grown to know as a child and my own questions regarding what it meant to truly become what one was meant to be, it should not be surprising that a character such as Nora should come to be.
While my primary aim was to investigate the question of what it meant to exercise one’s choice, it cannot be denied that I was probably influenced by the woman problem. It would have been hard to avoid as it was talked of loudly. Viewing the streets as I made my way through each day, it was impossible not to see the hopeless condition of some of these women or to realize that they were in such a condition not as the result of their own lack of effort or moral adherence, but instead because of strict rules of society that prevented them from gaining appropriate education, adequate employment or sufficient familial support and protection. While I desired Nora to become a type of Everyman in the exploration of the development of the individual as a real and valid human being, this type of exploration was only possible within this sort of framework. Let me try to explain in another way. Had I placed the questions I was asking within the framework of a male character, shaped and molded to a small frame by the workings of society and then constrained within this form as a caged bird, my story would not have been believed. Nor would it have served a double benefit of bringing these questions into the open while suggesting further social investigation. It was denied in my day that men of any kind were limited in what they could do, particularly as our economic base was so quickly shifting that poor men became rich and rich men became poor seemingly overnight in a variety of new fields that also seemed to spring up suddenly (Greenblatt, 2005). However, it could not be denied that women were very rigidly constrained within a certain ideal.
In deliberating these questions within my own mind and with my friends and colleagues, I determined that at least some portion of who we became, or perhaps didn’t become, was due to the effect of the various constraints our society places on us. What if we didn’t wish to become a lawyer, a doctor or a pharmacist? What if what one wanted to do with his or her life was to become a writer? More than a selfish wish or a hedonistic dream, what I propose here is that perhaps we have been given by God certain talents that we must utilize in order to bring about the changes and discussions that must take place to further society in the direction God intends. If this one, with a talent for bringing together ideas and words in some format, were intended to write about social issues and were prevented, through the constraints of society, from doing so by becoming a chemist instead, these ideas and words would never be placed before the public and God’s plan would thus be thwarted. These were the thoughts that helped to inform the production of “A Doll’s House.” It was not the question of providing equal rights for women per se, but was rather a question of what it meant for a person to find the strength within themselves to become the person they wanted to be and the opportunity to be recognized for this effort, to be permitted to exercise their abilities to explore their talents and abilities, that brought me to write this play.
Perhaps you will notice some similarities between my thoughts, above, and my life. Anyone who has read even the smallest amount of detail about me will know that I was born to a well-respected and ancient family, but that I grew up in a household without a great deal of money (Merriman, 2006). I left home early as an apprentice to a chemist despite the fact that this was not where my heart lie. I enjoyed using my brain, but only to the pursuit of the lives I saw around me rather than the mixing of chemicals to produce what we might hope were healing effects. However, I must admit, my experiences here might have had some bearing upon the way in which I approached the world, with a more analytic, somewhat objective eye toward presenting things as they really were rather than how we might like them to be. This, too, was a sign of the times. It is a set of ideas and concepts that is today referred to as Modernity. “Modernity is a project, and not only a period, and it is, or was, a project of control, the rational mastery over nature, the planning, designing and plotting which led to planomania and technocracy” (Beilharg, 2001: 6). The basic concepts of modernism were to take a hard and fast look at various social processes to determine the universal truths of existence. These could then be canonized and applied across all cultures, individuals and time periods as a means of progressing toward a more ideal civilization. We were attempting, through such approaches, to expose the real essence of the truth, which required intense and detailed investigation of what was in front of us rather than what we would choose to see.
In terms of dramatic approach, I find I usually prefer to work with the point of the story that traditionally contains the most impact. This is usually considered the climax and occurs, in most plays, much later in the story. Anyone who studies Shakespeare is familiar with the approach in which the character slowly builds up his mistakes until he is finally brought to an appropriate final moment of reckoning and then the playwright ties up any loose ends in a resolution (Lee, 1910). In presenting my story, I prefer opening the curtain upon approximately the last moment possible before the climax hits and closing it as soon as possible afterward. My plays, including “A Doll’s House”, are concerned, as I have previously discussed, with the psychological elements of the human mind and what it means to ‘become’. As a result, I place the entire structure within a limited space that also helps to illustrate the limited space allowed the main character. Nora is constrained in mind, body and soul and this is depicted explicitly within the frame of the stage as everything occurs in the one room. At the same time, by concentrating on presenting the climax and conclusion only of the story within the frame of the play, the ‘action’ can only occur within a constrained time – here the course of two days. At the same time, there is the tension of knowing that there is a tremendous story leading up to the opening of the play that is never told, nor is the intriguing story of what occurs immediately after the play and therefore, time also is not constrained. This underscores the idea that Nora also may seem constrained at first glance but is at heart, constrained only as much as she allows herself to be.
What thrilled me so much about this condensed approach to the story was the way in which it changed the focus of attention. Rather than focusing on the broad view of what brought the character to a particular end, this condensing of the time and space available within the play forces attention to shift to understanding just how the individual’s mind exerts itself in a moment of crisis. Just how a person responds to a moment of truth reveals much about the true nature of that character. Some have suggested that perhaps Nora, having had her fit of anger at Torvald and stormed out of the house in childish indignation, might have then turned around and slunk back home again, begging his forgiveness and again adopting the role of housewife and mother. And well she might. That is not how I envisioned her, though. For a person to realize their own internal value, to have established a sense of worth within themselves such as Nora has, to then be told these efforts meant nothing, to lose that value, is a difficult thing. I provided Nora with the opportunity to make the decision for herself. She could have kept Torvald from opening the envelope that revealed her secret, but she did not. She could have accepted Torvald’s reaction and resumed her ‘proper’ position, but again she did not.
I did attempt to provide hints within the play that Nora was not intended to be the kind of character that simply threw a childish tantrum and will soon repent after the curtain falls. For example, the name of the play and numerous hints within it suggested that what was contained within was a passing trifle, a child’s plaything that couldn’t possibly last. The title makes direct reference to the doll’s house and the way Torvald speaks to his wife is also very much like a child speaking to a favorite toy. Nora brings home with her in the first act a small doll and her bedstead. In itself, the presence of this toy should remind the audience of the nature of the room they are viewing and the people who act within it. Nora then provides the key link when she tells Torvald, “they [the doll and bed] are very plain, but anyway she will soon break them in pieces” (Act 1). Nora herself breaks the house in pieces when she leaves, something that cannot be undone or repaired and is, perhaps, not something worth repairing as it prevents each of the characters within it from becoming fully as human as they might.
They say that this approach has founded a new approach to theater, bringing the traditional art form into the modern age. I will admit that I consciously stripped the play down to its constituent elements, focusing on what was real and relevant and focusing upon the development of the soul as it is defined in a moment of crisis. It must also be acknowledged that prior to my plays, there were not many within the theater world that were directly challenging the issues of the day, at least not in such a direct way. From what I understand, this has been a tradition in theater since my time. I must say it is gratifying to realize that I was able to have some effect, presumably to the good, in bringing about necessary discussion and investigation into long-standing assumptions and beliefs and present day social issues.
Works Cited
Beilharz, Peter. The Bauman Reader. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2001.
Greenblatt, Stephen (Ed.). “Introduction: The Victorian Age.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Vol. 8. New York: W.W. Norton, 2005.
Ibsen, Henrik. “A Doll’s House.” Four Major Plays: A Doll’s House, Ghosts, Hedda Gabler, The Master Builder. James McFarlane (Trans.). Oxford University Press, 1998.
Lee, Jennette. “Relation of Symbol to Plot in Ibsen’s Plays.” The Ibsen Secret: A Key to the Prose of Drama of Henrik Ibsen. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1910: 86-113.
The relationship of Nora and Torvald develops significantly throughout the play and eventually shows a completely different side of each of these characters. At the beginning, they seem to be a perfect couple, both content with their roles in the family. However, as the play develops, they are revealing their unhealthy relationship and dissatisfaction. Torvald treats his wife like a child incapable of making her own decisions. He cares mostly about his money and reputation, and through his pressure and arrogance, he makes Nora believe that her life has to only be devoted to her husband and children. Nora sees her purpose in the same way: all she does is try to make her husband happy. Nora and Torvald’s relationship shows that women’s role as an individual was not always recognized, and that for many men, women were and still are simply “dolls” (Gardner et al., 2020). Nevertheless, after Nora reveals her husband’s true self, she realizes that he is a self-centered person who does not really care about her. She becomes stronger and decides to leave her family to educate herself and find her own purpose.
The relationship between Kristine and Krogstad have also evolved through different stages. In contrast to Nora and Torvald, Kristine was the one who cared about money more and eventually left Krogstad, even though she actually loved him. This caused Krogstad to become a bitter, devastated, and unhappy man, which shows that he truly loved her as well. What saves him in the end is Kristine, who offers a second chance for them to be together. It appears that his motivation is not gaining money or respect form society; instead, all he needed was love, understanding, and honesty. The fundamental difference between these two couples is that Kristine and Krogstad love each other, which makes it possible for them to talk and solve their problems to reunite after many years of separation.
Work Cited
Gardner, J. E., Lawn, B., Ridl, J., & Schakel, P. (2020). Literature: A portable anthology (5th ed.). Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Semiotic analysis allows people to consider literature works through the prism of symbols. What the average reader might overlook is crucial to the semiotician. In the work of Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, there are a lot of such symbols: some are more noticeable, and some are less. These symbols reflect the relationship between Nora and Torvald, social mores and roles. The most interesting symbols are Nora’s clothes, in particular, her party costume, Nora’s dance, and the Christmas tree; Mr. Rank’s back pain and macarons are significant symbols in the narrative.
The Helmer family consists of three children and spouses, Nora and Torvald. Henrik Ibsen focuses on the relationship between the spouses and Nora’s subordinate position. Torvald is a rigid patriarchal husband who often behaves arrogantly, worrying about his reputation. Nora protects his reputation by being a devoted wife, fulfilling his whims. Secretly from her husband, Nora works part-time to cover the debt taken for his treatment. She forged her father’s signature, and now the Krogstad borrower is asking her to return the money with interest. Nora’s friend, Frau Linde, helps her; she agrees to marry Krogstad, who has feelings for her. Mr. Rank, her friend, is also willing to help her with the money she needs. However, Krogstad is unable to stop the already-sent letter for Thorvald, and Thorvald is furious when he sees the truth. After talking with Krogstad, having learned that there are no complaints, he is happy again, but Nora is disappointed since Torvald accused her. Nora makes the decision to leave her family in an unknown direction.
Nora’s Costume and Dance
An elegant costume symbolizes a mask; it signifies the triumph of pretense. It is noteworthy that Torvald chooses a costume for Nora: “I must think about your costume” (Ibsen 39). Torvald decides for her what role to play; even in the space of fantasy, Nora cannot be independent, and Torvald’s paternalistic influence reaches this sphere. Torvald chooses a bright Italian costume for his wife and continues to treat her like a doll: “Helmer brings Nora almost by force into the hall” (Ibsen 57). He comes with Nora to a party where she will have to dance for him.
Nora dances the Tarantella, and semiotic analysis should be applied both to the Tarantella and to the dance as a whole. Before the party, she tells Mr. Rank that she is going to dance for Torvald. In general, the semiotics of dance usually refers to ritual: hence the paternalistic attitude, completely dependent on traditions. Sometimes, dance can be interpreted as elusiveness and transience, and it will also make sense in the work’s context (Gardner). Soon, Nora will leave her husband, slip away from him, and he will not be able to keep her. Meanwhile, her husband fantasizes about her as a Capri girl, which echoes psychoanalytic ideas that a woman, in the simplest male mythology, looks like a male fantasy. Nora speaks directly about her husband’s fantasies, which she is about to reflect: “Torvald wants me to go as a Neapolitan fisher-girl and dance the Tarantella that I learned at Capri” (Ibsen 35). A man needs a fantasy about a woman, not a woman as an alive person.
Each dance has specific symbolism, and Tarantella is no exception. Tarantella is based on light and teasing movements, depicting seduction; quick steps and flips depict playfulness and gaiety. As the Capri girl, Nora portrays a child, a naive teenage girl who flirts with her husband while he stands imposingly. As in the rhythms of Tarantella, Nora later slips away from her husband quickly and unexpectedly.
Christmas Tree
A beautiful Christmas tree has symbols of the family hearth and, at the same time, Nora’s position as a beautiful accessory for her husband. The husband dresses Nora up like a Christmas tree; he puts the tree anywhere he wants. Nora is in an intermediate position between a man and a tree, decorating the tree and allowing her husband to such behavior. She is busy: “A candle here and flowers here”, it is her household (Ibsen 33). Nora is an object in men’s hands like a Christmas tree is an object in her hands.
Mr. Rank’s Illness
Mr. Rank suffers from a serious illness, tuberculosis of the spine. He is a gentle person; Mr. Rank can sacrifice himself for other people: “My poor innocent spine has to suffer for my father’s youthful amusements” (Ibsen 46). His illness symbolically reflects the weakness of public mores; the spine is the basis of the human supporting apparatus. Back injury always affects the quality of life, and here, the spine is the backbone of society, its foundation.
Food
Another symbol, rarely considered by other analysts, is food, in particular macarons, on which Torvald imposed a prohibition on his wife. He checks the spouse’s food habits and imposes bans on what he considers important: “Not even taken a bite at a macaroon or two?” (Ibsen 29). He hides behind concern for her health; macarons are only a trifle compared to what the wife disguises from Torvald (she secretly eats them). The macarons symbolize Torvald’s all-encompassing and totalitarian control and, at the same time, Nora’s secret.
Conclusion
The considered symbols reflect social mores and the positions of family members. Nora’s costume and dance reflect her life for the sake of her husband, her objectification. The Christmas tree symbolizes the family heart and the subordinate position of the spouse. Mr. Rank’s illness symbolizes social decline and doubts about the foundations. An insignificant symbol, it would seem, macarons mean the total control of Torvald, which has no boundaries and at the same time, the secrets of Nora.
Works Cited
Gardner, Janet, et al. Literature: A Portable Anthology. Fifth, Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2021.
Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll’s House. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2020.
What is the “main action” or “super objective” of the play?
The main objective of the play “A Doll’s House” is to advocate for the ability of each individual in making decisions that are not based on the influences of other persons around him or her. This is specifically targeted on the womenfolk not only of the nineteenth century that the play is set but also all the womenfolk who have not been able to make personal decisions. This theme is evident all the all three acts.
What is Mrs. Linde’s connection to Mrs. Helmer?
Mrs. Linde is Helmer’s old acquaintance who has come from the city in search of an employment opportunity which is not as strenuous as the jobs that she had been doing in the city (11).
What is the significance of Mrs. Helmer’s nicknames?
Symbolism is used in different ways in the play, one of them being the numerous nicknames by which Mr. Helmer refers to his wife. First, he refers to her as my little lark in the first act. This is an explanation of what he sees her as which is also the title a doll (Act 1).In another instant, he refers to her as a squirrel which is a reference to her little size. To show how much he treasures her he calls her “my richest treasure” (63).
What is Mrs. Helmer’s “crime”?
As Mrs. Helmer discloses to her friend Linde, she had once borrowed a loan from Mr. Krogstad to save her dying husband and also to sustain the family during a time when her husband was financially disadvantaged. In the process of borrowing the loan, Mrs. Helmer forged her father’s signature. The act of forgery is a crime.
How did Mr. Krogstad reveal Mrs. Helmer’s “crime”?
Mr. Krogstad discovers Mrs. Helmer’s crime after going through the documents clearly and finding out that the date that Mrs. Helmer’s father purportedly signed the document is actually three days after her father’s death and thus could not have signed the bond (40).
Why does Helmer reject any suggestion that he change his mind about firing Krogstad?
Mr. Helmer has just been promoted to the position of bank manager. Being fresh in this position he has to secure his reputation in the company which Mr. Krogstad threatens to destroy if not reinstated to his previous position. Thus he opts for reinstating him rather than having a destroyed reputation (67).
After Krogstad sends his letter to Helmer, how does Nora prevent her husband from reading it?
After discovering that Krogstad had sent her husband the letter informing him of her crime, Mrs. Helmer prevents her husband from reading the mail at least for a time by convincing him to help her in practicing for a dance. Mr. Helmer accepts to spend the whole evening coaching her after she dances so badly.
What is the symbolic significance of the dance that Nora has does at the Christmas party?
The Tarantella Dance in act two has a lot of symbolism. One, the dance involves exaggerated movement of the petticoat. In this act, Mrs. Helmer is exaggerating her incompetence in the act. Secondly, the dance is as uncertain as to the character of Mrs. Helmer in the whole prose (50).
Why does Mrs. Linde dissuade Krogstad from trying to recover his letter before Helmer reads it?
Mrs. Linde was initially for the option that Mr. Krogstad withdraws the letter before Mr. Helmer reads it. She later tries to dissuade him from retrieving the letter. In her view, it was important for Mr. Helmer to know the truth for the sake of the stability of their marriage.
Why does Nora decide that she must leave her husband and family?
Nora realizes that she had not lived her life normally. She had lived a puppet life to her father and now to her husband, Mr. Helmer. This propagates her to live her marital home and start her life anew, for instance, to practice her personality (79).
Works Cited
Madden, David. “A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen in A Pockettful of Plays Vintage Drama Volume One. n.d. pp. 207 – 287.
The thesis statement of the planned essay, for which this annotated bibliography is prepared, is as follows. As exemplified in Ibsen’s A Doll House, feminism has contributed to a shift in gender roles in literature by emphasizing female individual everyday life concerns manifested through strong character development.
Hossain, Amir. “Re-interpreting A Doll’s House through Post-modernist Feminist Projections.” IRWLE, vol. 11, no. 1, 2015, pp. 1-14.
The source is a scholarly journal article devoted to the research of feminist themes in Ibsen’s A Doll House. Hossain’s article explores the manifestations of the ideas of post-modernist feminism in the play through the analysis of the main character’s development and the overall social order where women were subordinate to men (2-3). The author of the article argues that Nora’s character and her central role in the play have ignited a strong feminist agenda in literature by revolutionizing the discriminatory state of affairs around women’s rights. The relevance of this source to the topic is based on the precise and direct investigation of feminist ideas in Ibsen’s play. The accuracy of the evidence presented in the article is validated by the frequent references to the primary text. A high-quality literary analysis of A Doll House illustrates the multiple dimensions of the transformational influence it has had on literature in general. Thus, the source will be a reliable contribution to the essay due to its direct support of the claims presented in the thesis statement.
Stetz, Margaret D. “Mrs. Linde, Feminism, and Women’s Work, Then and Now.” Ibsen Studies, vol. 7, no. 2, 2007, pp. 150-168.
This article has been published in a literary, scholarly journal, which validates its credibility and reliability. The author of the article claims that although Ibsen’s feminism might have lacked conventional connotations, the problems of women’s identification as independent individuals addressed in his play are still relevant (Stetz 151). The source presents a narrow discussion of the works by Ibsen with a focus on the feminist theme and the particularities of its manifestations through his characters. Such precise attention to the uniqueness of Ibsen’s feminism is a particularity of the source that differentiates it from other literature used for the paper. The primary text-based analyses and academic accuracy of the presented evidence make this source an invaluable contribution to supporting the argument of the future essay.
Uddin, Md Abu Saleh Nizam. “Feminism and Its Impact on the Literature of Love.” Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature, vol. 16, no. 2, 2022, pp. 364-376.
This source is a scholarly journal article reporting a research study on the role of feminism in the development of literature thematically focusing on love and family values. The author of the article argues that due to the significant emphasis of feminism on the identity appreciation of women, their concerns and needs have become central to the literature on love (Uddin 364-365). The study is a reliable source of information on the topic since it has been published in a reputable periodical of a literature-related direction.
Moreover, the benefit of this source in comparison to other literature selected for the planned essay is that it provides a detailed historical account of feminism as a movement. In addition, the results of the study vividly demonstrate the implications of feminism for the literary process. On the other hand, the source proposes some insights into the negative implications of feminism in literature, which might be a good basis for constructing a compelling argument for a future essay. Thus, the source’s relevance to the topic is validated by the scope of research and the issues of real-life women’s experiences intertwined with the problem of identity seeking in literature. The article will be a valuable contribution to the paper allowing the investigation of the topic from a historical perspective.
Works Cited
Hossain, Amir. “Re-interpreting A Doll’s House through Post-modernist Feminist Projections.” IRWLE, vol. 11, no. 1, 2015, pp. 1-14.
Stetz, Margaret D. “Mrs. Linde, Feminism, and Women’s Work, Then and Now.” Ibsen Studies, vol. 7, no. 2, 2007, pp. 150-168.
Uddin, Md Abu Saleh Nizam. “Feminism and Its Impact on the Literature of Love.” Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature, vol. 16, no. 2, 2022, pp. 364-376.
It is important to note that the topic of deception and self-deception in Henrik Ibsen’s “A Doll’s House” is of paramount criticality in order to understand the underlying message and characters’ actions. The emphasis of the given analysis will be put on engagement in deceptive behaviors and thoughts by Nora Helmer, Christine Linde, and Anne Marie. The deceit is the centerpiece of the story, which is used to explore the relationship dynamics between the characters under stressful conditions.
Nora Helmer is a prime deceiver in the story, and many actions revolve around the secret loan she took behind her husband’s back. This deception is used to put a strain on the marriage between Torvald and Nora Helmer because it provides leverage for other characters to exploit. Christine Linde engages in deception by trying to help Nora because she wants to convince Krogstad to recall the letter he sent to Torvald. In return, Christine offers to start a new relationship, which further enhances the dynamic between the main characters. Nora’s former nanny, Anne Marie, is a minor character, and the story uses self-deception to imply that she lied about her giving up her own children in favor of Nora.
In conclusion, Nora’s deception about her loan against her husband is the prime driver of the events in the story. Christine is involved in this lie by helping Nora since she attempts to influence Krogstad’s decision in his letter. Anne Marie’s deception is less significant to the story, but it illuminates that continuous deception can transform into self-deception. The loan taken by Nora showcases that deception can not only make someone vulnerable to blackmail but additionally hide the core problems in marriage.