Questions for Exploration
- What are your initial impressions of the characters? How does it change in Act II?
- How are the characters used as symbolic representations of society?
- How does Ibsen set us up for Act II?
- In Act II, what happens between Nora and Torvald when the subject of Krogstad is re-introduced?
- What do you notice about the interactions between Nora and Dr. Rank? Why does Nora get thrown off? How does it differ from the conversation with Torvald moments before?
- What about Krogstad? How do their conversations develop? How does Krogstad's role as "villain" become complicated? They both hint at thoughts of suicide. Why? How does that create a sense of suspense and foreshadowing?
- What is "the most wonderful thing?"
- What questions do you have for me or our class discussion?
Major Quotations
Act I- That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. We two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle.
- No, indeed; I only feel my life unspeakably empty. No one to live for any more. (Gets up restlessly.) That is why I could not stand the life in my little backwater any longer. I hope it may be easier here to find something which will busy me and occupy my thoughts. If only I could have the good luck to get some regular work--office work of some kind—
- Do you still think I am of no use? I can tell you, too, that this affair has caused me a lot of worry. It has been by no means easy for me to meet my engagements punctually….. Well, then I have found other ways of earning money. Last winter I was lucky enough to get a lot of copying to do; so I locked myself up and sat writing every evening until quite late at night. Many a time I was desperately tired; but all the same it was a tremendous pleasure to sit there working and earning money. It was like being a man.
- However wretched I may feel, I want to prolong the agony as long as possible. All my patients are like that. And so are those who are morally diseased; one of them, and a bad case, too, is at this very moment with Helmer—
- The matter never came into court; but every way seemed to be closed to me after that. So I took to the business that you know of. I had to do something; and, honestly, don't think I've been one of the worst. But now I must cut myself free from all that. My sons are growing up; for their sake I must try and win back as much respect as I can in the town. This post in the Bank was like the first step up for me--and now your husband is going to kick me downstairs again into the mud.
- Just think how a guilty man like that has to lie and play the hypocrite with everyone, how he has to wear a mask in the presence of those near and dear to him, even before his own wife and children. And about the children--that is the most terrible part of it all.
- Do you think so? Do you think they would forget their mother if she went away altogether?
- Come what will, you may be sure I shall have both courage and strength if they be needed. You will see I am man enough to take everything upon myself.
- Do you think he is the only one - who would gladly give his life for your sake?
- When I was at home….I always thought it tremendous fun if I could steal down into the maids' room, because they never moralized at all, and talked to each other about such entertaining things.
- Most of us think of (suicide) at first. I did, too - but I hadn't the courage.
- You should have let it alone; you must prevent nothing. After all, it is splendid to be waiting for a wonderful thing to happen.
Setting plays an important role in the creation of a mood. There is certainly no better description than “A room furnished comfortably and tastefully, but not extravagantly,” to describe middle class life, where its members have wealth, but nothing spectacular. In addition, this quote sets the stage for conversations based solely upon money. Wealth is very important in middle class life, for it clearly sets people above the poor, but the middle class doesn’t have enough money so that it becomes meaningless, worthless. It is obvious that the Helmer family is well off, but still the increase of Torvald’s salary means a lot to his wife, Nora.
ReplyDeleteNora is the epitome of a charming spouse, embracing the traditional societal requirements of wifehood. However, her life spattered with contradiction, transpiring below a packaging of prosperity. When Torvald inquires of her, wondering whether “‘Miss Sweet Tooth been breaking rules in town today?’” shows how controlling he is over trivial concerns and how Nora is very willing to break rules that according to her contemporaries, she mustn’t have. The role of her friend Christine is dubious as well. Christine is not well off, for her husband died and left her cash strapped, three years ago. It is very convenient of her to arrive asking for money when she learned that Nora’s husband was being promoted. The theme of greed and of individuals working by themselves to achieve their own ends seems to be present. This is exemplified by Nora, as when Torvald has been sick its was her “ who procured the money” to cover the cost of the trip to Italy. Despite this, the fact that Nora took it upon herself to help her husband speaks to her soul, and her general goodness. In addition, this displays how Ibsen was a proponent of women’s rights, for Nora wondered if she “could have the good luck to get some regular work--office work of some kind.” Also, Nora felt that when she did work, “it was a tremendous pleasure to sit there working and earning money. It was like being a man.” Nora felt that she had an inner belief telling her that she had the right to work, and she tried to capitalize upon it. She took initiatives, she took things upon herself that would force her to work, and thus she gained power over her household. The fact that Nora asks to the nurse that “Do you think [the children] would forget their mother if she went away altogether?” demonstrates Nora’s belief in freedom, and perhaps choosing her own destiny over remaining in the shackles of married life. Nevertheless, Doctor Rank represents society, holding her back, as he says that he senses “a morally deceased” person in the house of Helmer, which would be Nora, Torvald Helmer’s wife. The mistake/fraud written perpetrated by Nora and the subsequent issues that came about because of the loan shows how Nora is over her head, the secrecy poisoning her and her marriage. Even with all the pressure, Nora frantically tries to maintain the household, withholding the truth and shunning the children.
The play’s title says a lot about the role of women in Victorian era Europe. They were given “command” over their household but in truth their responsibilities were all imaginary, not really being in control of anything. They were treated like children and never allowed to make decisions for themselves. Nora personifies this idea tremendously as a character, feeling as though she can’t do anything for herself because it will compromise her marriage with her husband and cause society to judge her. Since she never does anything for herself, other people like Mrs. Linde assume that she has it very easy. Mrs. Linde is another example of women feeling powerless because her family has all grown up, leaving her with nothing to be in charge of. She is trying to find work but is unable to because of her sex, saying to Nora, “It is you that must not be angry with me, dear. The worst of a position like mine is that it makes one so bitter. No one to work for, and yet obliged to be always on the lookout for chances. One must live, and so one becomes selfish. When you told me of the happy turn your fortunes have taken--you will hardly believe it--I was delighted not so much on your account as on my own.” She thinks she can rely on Nora to get her work but Nora, being a woman, cannot do anything to influence her husband’s decisions. She also feels as though she can’t discuss with Torvald her decision to use their money for his own mental health as to not “humiliate” him. She says to Mrs. Linde, “how painful and humiliating it would be for Torvald, with his manly independence, to know that he owed me anything! It would upset our mutual relations altogether; our beautiful happy home would no longer be what it is now.” This reminded me a lot of heteronormative ideas we see in today’s society. Men, for some reason, feel like they can tell women what to wear, and that if women wear “scandalous” or revealing clothing it becomes their fault if someone is aroused by that clothing. This is a very sexist, stupid thing that happens all of the time. A man’s arousal is his personal responsibility, because no matter what a woman decides to wear that is her decision and not his. It is not her problem if he feels aroused or uncomfortable because of her clothing, and she isn’t “asking for it” by wearing something she likes to wear. Nora made a decision that would ultimately benefit her husband, but she is clearly oppressed in their relationship because she doesn’t feel like she can do anything for herself and therefore her actions were disgraceful.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the relationship between Dr. Rank, Nora, and Torvald has become a trope used in more modern writing as well. Dr. Rank is a good person through and through, and thinks almost exclusively of others. He is devoted to Nora in what can only be described as love. Nora, on the other hand, has “friendzoned” the doctor. She likes to flirt with him, even calling him her best friend, but she feels she cannot love him because it is too safe. She wants to lead an exciting life, and Dr. Rank cannot provide that for her. Torvald, on the other hand, is exciting to be married to. Nora can keep secrets from him and attempt to influence him. He also lets her buy clothes for herself. However, he does not love her as a person, but rather as a trophy. He loves the image that she reflects upon him. The reason that Nora does not see this is because of the ‘high of excitement’ that Torvald provides for her. We know that Nora is a bit of a rebel, and she says, “When I was at home... I always thought it tremendous fun if I could steal down into the maids' room, because they never moralized at all, and talked to each other about such entertaining things.” The excitement blinds her to the true happiness she could have with Dr. Rank. In addition, we further know that Dr. Rank is only friends with Torvald because of Nora. I know this because of his lack of desire to inform Torvald of his approaching death, while he welcomes Nora into the last stages of his life. This describes the trope of the ‘good’ guy liking the girl that likes the ‘bad’ guy. The ‘good’ guy loves the girl for who she is, while the ‘bad’ guy loves the girl for what he has made of her. Almost all of the stress in the girl’s life is caused by the ‘bad’ guy, but she doesn’t realize it. She has been tricked by the drug that is entertainment and excitement, and become addicted to it. She needs the high of excitement, and only Torvald can provide that for her. This is why Nora stays with Torvald instead of being with Dr. Rank. Torvald is a drug, while Dr. Rank seems to be a path to purity. However, as Dr. Rank’s death approaches, so does Nora’s window for leaving Torvald. After Dr. Rank dies, Nora will be unable to leave Torvald and free herself from the addiction.
ReplyDeleteI think that “A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen is one that covers numerous social issues that overlap and change in meaning throughout acts I and II. Some of the most prominent social issues that I have noticed in these two acts are definitely social class, gender inequality, and relationships and marriage. These can all be seen in Nora’s character as an upper class, beautiful housewife with a manipulative husband. Even though Nora has these many struggles to deal with I was kind of annoyed with her at the beginning of the play in the way that she acted. She seemed like such a child to me and so uneducated and naive. I did have such a pity because it was due in part of the fact that her husband treated her like a small child but what really bugged me was when she said things like, “But, Christine, that is so frightfully tiring, and you look tired out now. You had far better go away to some watering-place”. She was talking to Mrs. Linde who had gone through the great struggle as surviving a widowed life and working in a male dominated workforce where there was no room for women. She was explaining all of her hardships to Nora and she just blurts out that she should go on vacation. That was so incredibly rude and insensitive of her. It sounds like something an eight year old would say to someone and she just sounded like a pompous sheltered aristocrat.
ReplyDeleteYet as the play went on and I began to learn more about all of the financial struggles that Nora had gotten herself into and all of the burdens that she must carry in trying to keep Torvald happy was when I truly started to understand her character better. She has the ever so burdensome task of keeping her husbands ego proud and she believes that she must cherish, please and let him believe that he is an almighty god of some sort. In other words, she has to keep her husband happy and make him believe that he’s really great manly man, protector and provider all the time. Her struggles became so great that she began to contemplate suicide and would mention, “Do you think they would forget their mother if she went away altogether?”. Which is such a serious statement and it is said that she believes that she must go to this length all to keep her husband happy and her family’s position in aristocrat society clean and respectable. I began to realize that Nora endured all sorts of adult matters and the only reason why she acts so childish sometimes is because she was never given the opportunity to act as her own independent person and she never had the type of freedom and education that others around her had. Therefore she is left to deal with these difficult situations with only the knowledge of how to be a good and obedient housewife. Her ability to act as her own mature person has been stifled and suppressed by the social and gender stereotypes and expectations of the Victorian era.
In Act I, my first impression of Nora was that she is a childlike wife who is obsessed with money and macarons. I got the impression that she is childlike first by the names that Torvald calls her, including “my little squirrel,” “my little skylark,” and “my little Nora.” Instead of a husband-wife relationship, it sounds more like a father-daughter relationship. The fact that she sneaks macarons and then lies about eating them again makes her seem childlike. Nora also seems to have no care in the world except for getting money from Torvald. In the beginning, Ibsen portrays women as unintelligent and thieves of their husbands’ money just to go purchase unnecessary items. However, in Act II, we find out that Nora is not as naive as she is initially described. In fact, she knows that Torvald sees her as innocent and oblivious to reality, and she uses that to her advantage by disguising her big secret. This secret is that in order to save Torvald, she borrowed a sum of money from Krogstad, and is now working hard to pay it back. Every time she asks Torvald for money, it is actually so that she can use it to repay her debt. She even finds a copying job for which she “locked [herself] up and sat writing every evening until quite late at night.” Several times we see Nora rebel against the written law as well as the unwritten social laws of the time. She breaks a written law when she forges her father’s signature on the bond and she breaks the social laws that a woman should not work nor should she borrow money without her husband’s consent. So although she definitely is spoiled and naive, she does have quite a lot running through her mind.
ReplyDeleteThe interaction between Nora and Dr. Rank in Act II is slightly unexpected and unsettling because in Act I, Dr. Rank is portrayed as only a family friend and Torvald’s doctor, but here Nora is flirting with this old man and he confesses his love for her. Their conversation is very different than that of Torvald and Nora’s in that Dr. Rank is sympathetic, genuine and eager to help Nora in any way he can. Torvald, on the other hand, makes light of Nora’s words and gets angry very easily. Nora feels that being around Torvald is like being around her dad because she feels like she has to do everything they tell her to do, but being around Dr. Rank is like going “down into the maids' room . . . and talk[ing] to each other about such entertaining things.” This makes her confused because she is supposed to be having this kind of relationship with her husband, but instead she is having it with her husband’s doctor.
Throughout the two acts, I kept getting pulled back to one quote. It’s in Act II, when Nora says to the Nurse, “Do you think they would forget their mother if she went away altogether?” Without context, it’s simply a mother asking her babysitter whether or not her kids will remember her, considering they are young and don’t interact with their mother that often. Viewed in the context of a quote from Act I, where Torvald says, “That is like a woman!”, he believes that a woman’s only want is of money, which will be spent on things like housekeeping and on the children. He treats her like a pet, something that can’t necessarily take care of itself, but serves more for others. A skylark sings a beautiful song, which raises the spirits of those that hear it, but no one ever sings to the skylark. Later on, Torvald says that a lying parent “infects and poisons the whole life of a home.” Nora, at this point, had given no hint to have lied to Torvald. By going “away altogether”, it would make the household more safe for her children to grow in. They wouldn’t have to live under the toxic environment Nora would create. She suggests leaving in order to spare them. She also considers leaving in other ways; after her conversation with Krogstad, she contemplates suicide. Her defining moment is of how she tricked him and Torvald by disguising the loan under her father’s name. She felt so smart, so powerful, and Krogstad holds it over her head as blackmail. During that conversation, her confidence waivers. She realizes that she’s not quite the smart woman she understood herself to be, and can’t handle the consequences. In the best-case scenario, Torvald praises her for her work and everyone gets what they deserve. In the worst case, though, and also most likely, Torvald will despise her for lying. He already belittles her and holds her as if she is under an authoritarian regime, so he’s bound to interpret her actions as back-stabbing, toxic, and unmotherly. Nora’s easiest, quickest solution would be to leave her children in the hands of her nurse entirely. She wouldn’t have to worry about the aftermath once Krogstad discovers that Nora couldn’t convince Torvald. This wouldn’t necessarily be a hard switch for the nurse, either. The nurse raised Nora instead of her actual mother, and Nora trusts the nurse the most. Asking her if they would forget their mother is Nora reflecting in on herself. She hasn’t forgotten her mother, but she certainly views her with no familiarity. The nurse is her real mother. Answering her own question, she knows that her children might well forget her. This answer can’t come from the nurse’s point of view, though, since the nurse takes care of other mother’s children. Nora’s mother ultimately left, leaving Nora with only the nurse to look to, similarly as to how Nora would leave her children, by force or by choice.
ReplyDeleteMy first impressions of the characters changed a lot from act one to act two. At first, I thought that Nora was quite annoying. At the start of the play, she radiated ignorance and a self-centered attitude. Her remarks she made to her husband about him calling people by their first names made me think that she was going to quickly become a problem character. However, as the play continued I thought that the problems she was being faced with were a lot for one person to take in and that maybe she’s not so bad. My first impressions of Torvald were not positive either. However, they never seemed to improve. When the play opens Torvald is teasing his wife for spending so much of his money on Christmas presents. Torvald continues to tease her for her past endeavors in ornament making and then goes on to criticize her for her spending habits. Torvald explains his hatred for debts, “That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. We two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle”(Ibsen), this line shows Torvald’s initial lack of remorse for his wife's feelings, she was excited to be purchasing gifts for the family and all he cared about was the money she had spent. As I continued reading I thought Torvald might start to seem better, as Nora had, but he only got worse in act 2. He continues to tease his wife and belittle her, while only caring about his financial problems and success.
ReplyDeleteThe power structure exhibited by the characters of this play seems to be a symbolic representation of society as a whole. Torvald’s character represents the wealthy upper class, greedy and obsessive about money. Torvald’s most important value in life is to remain debt-free, so that he can have the most amount of money possible, to feel “free”. On the other end of the spectrum, Nora represents those that are oppressed by society, the ones that the rich constantly take advantage of. Nora loves Torvald very much, everything she does seems to have the purpose of making Torvald happy, yet he does not care about her at all. He constantly berates her for doing things that may cause him to lose money. He wants her to be with him but waste as little of his money as possible. Nora (the lower class) is bullied mercilessly by Torvald (the upper class) to the point where she doesn’t know what to do with herself anymore and considers suicide, “Most of us think of (suicide) at first. I did, too - but I hadn't the courage”(Ibsen). I believe that Ibsen intended for Torvald and Nora’s situation to harshly resemble the relationship between the wealthy and the poorer classes in society.
The main character in "A Doll's House," Nora has a very childish personality. I can see why her husband, Torvald, treats her like a child. In a way, he is letting her get her way because he wants to cherish his wife, but it seems as though he treats her more like a child than his wife. He also calls her "squirrel" and "skylark," which is something you would call a kid to please them. And she feeds into the childish act as well; by acting up, asking for money, etc. And honestly, my opinion does not change after she reveals that she saved Torvald's life. It is not the fact that she has a contract with Krogstad or that she forged her father's name, but of the way she reveals the secret. When she is talking to Christine, Christine sees her as a child. To prove her wrong, Nora tells her about the money. She also says, "I never said I had borrowed the money. I may have gotten it some other way. Perhaps I got it from some other admirer. When anyone is as attractive as I am-" I understand she does not want to reveal the person who gave her the money, but she does not need to imply that she only got the money because she is attractive. It seems very self-absorbed and childish.
ReplyDeleteNora also believes in this "most wonderful thing" that somehow, when the secret is out, her husband will make a romantic gesture and take the blame for her. But what he says about Krogstad forging a signature. "Just think how a guilty man like that has to lie and play the hypocrite with everyone, how he has to wear a mask in the presence of those near and dear to him, even before his own wife and children. And about the children--that is the most terrible part of it all, Nora.", this implies he would not react the way she wants him to. She is refusing to believe he would not be pleased to hear what she did, so she is doing everything in her will to stop him from finding out. But at the same time, she is eager for him to find out because a bit of her thinks he will take the blame. At this point, I do not know what he is going to do when he finds out.
Also, Nora is overreacting a bit with the "threat" from Krogstad. He is only threatening to tell Torvald, so he can get his job back. She acts as if he is a horrible villain, but in fact, he is just looking for leverage to get his position back. And upon their second conversation, Krogstad even says, "the whole thing can be arranged amicably; there is no reason why anyone should know anything about it. It will remain a secret between us three." He has no intention of hurting Torvald's reputation, so Nora does not need to overreact. However, keeping it a secret between them three would not allow Torvald to "take the blame" as she imagines. So maybe that is why she is villainizing Krogstad.
ReplyDeleteSome of the characters represent exaggerated literary cliches like Torvald. The two main characters in the play are him and Nora. Even though all of Nora's actions and interactions pertain to Torvald, he is more a blank canvas that lets us explore the deep intricacies of the other characters, like Mrs. Linde's fickle sense of morality and love as well as Dr. Rank's mysterious past with Nora. Torvald represents privilege that blinds him of the other middle and lower classes' concerns, results in prejudiced views especially on gender, and trying to be the leader in his relationship rather than an equal. After revealing character intentions and conflicts, Ibsen opens up with Act Two. In this Act, Nora says that those whose company she prefers are often different than those she loves—when she was young, "Yes--you see there are some people one loves best, and others whom one would almost always rather have as companions." She makes this distinction right after Dr. Rank's love confession, her flirtatious behavior, and her fight with Torvald who is the one she apparently "loves." This a contrast between the expected role of marriage versus what is desired from a partner. When Torvald says, "Just think how a guilty man like that has to lie and play the hypocrite with everyone, how he has to wear a mask in the presence of those near and dear to him, even before his own wife and children. And about the children--that is the most terrible part of it all." about Krogstad, there is sheer dramatic irony in the fact and some foreshadowing of his forgery confrontation with Nora. She did think about her family when she took the loan and now her forgery is held over her which could be the thing that destroys her family life. I realize this play takes place near and on Christmas. Are there connections or references to Christmas and religious symbols in the play? Also, why are some of Nora's actions inconsistent, like her eagerness to flirt and dancer with Mr. Rank despite trying to maintain a happy family life with him by trying to make the debt disappear, or her asking Torvald to read the very letter that she attempts to him from him while he is embracing her? Can the theme of mental illness be connected to this?
My initial impression of Torvald is that he is a perfect example of many of the men who lived in this time period. It seems to me that Torvald treats his wife, Nora, more like a child or a pet than his wife. He expects very little from her, except for her to keep quiet and not meddle with any of his property or wealth. When Nora actually makes a financial decision herself, Torvald is astounded and calls her out for “wasting” money: “That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. We two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle.”Nora grows quiet after Torvald says this, and finally responds:“I would never dream of doing anything you didn’t want me to.” This is a prime example of women in society at the time. They were, more often than not, told to stay out of the way, out of trouble, and to rely on the men of the household to make decisions for the family or for herself. Later on in the act, Nora does become slightly frustrated with Torvald’s accusatory tone over her frivolously spending money (even though it is Christmas Eve and is an appropriate time to be spending some money! nevermind the fact that they are married and the money belongs to the both of them) : “Do you still think I am of no use? I can tell you, too, that this affair has caused me a lot of worry. It has been by no means easy for me to meet my engagements punctually….. Well, then I have found other ways of earning money. Last winter I was lucky enough to get a lot of copying to do; so I locked myself up and sat writing every evening until quite late at night. Many a time I was desperately tired; but all the same it was a tremendous pleasure to sit there working and earning money. It was like being a man.” This last sentence is reflective, forlorn. This experience of earning money brought Nora purpose, even if only for a few weeks. I wonder if this taste of freedom will impact any of the decisions she makes further on in the play.
ReplyDeleteAs I watched the play it became clear to me why Ibsen included so much of his personal life in his plays–It makes them so real. You get the impression that the play is not just a play, not part of Ibsen’s argument but a look into the lives of real people living their lives. I personally found a few of the characters very relatable. I absolutely love the way Ibsen crafts Nora’s character she is so believable. Her naivety is clear but it is also reasonable. In my mind, she adopts this whimsical world view to shield herself from reality. She is obviously a smart individual, capable of complex dialogue and effective manipulation yet she still erects this childlike wall and I believe this to be a product of the fact that she knows that she does not love her husband. She views her those around her not as dynamic individuals, this is why she is so surprised when Dr. Rank exposes his true feelings to her, but as potential sources of happiness. She obviously loves spending time with her kids this makes it all the more tragic when she feels it necessary to isolate herself from them “because an atmosphere of lies like that 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.” I can’t help but feel bad for Nora, even though she goes through life with this facade she still feels that she and Torvald are connected. It is a terrible moment when she realizes that Torvald doesn't see through the image that she has built up, specifically when he accuses her of “playacting.” She believes that he will see that she is distressed and subsequently take on her burden. However, when this does not occur, she becomes disillusioned, realizing that her life has been in service to her family and not to herself.
ReplyDeleteAt first, I was skeptical of Ibsen. How could this old Norwegian guy mold his life into a story of any import? I think oftentimes we, as humans are liable to falling into these systems in which we further an image of ourselves that is somehow ingenuine. That’s why I think it’s a poignant juxtaposition that Ibsen makes between the facades that we build-up, the idea of ourselves that we have in our head, and who we actually are.
My first impression of Nora and Torvald is that they don’t seem to have the greatest relationship. He straight-up calls her a featherhead and doesn’t really treat her as an equal as much as a little kid. Krogstad seems like a pretty nasty guy, as he’s into blackmail and can be seen making threats, in one of which he claims he will be taking over Torvald’s job.
ReplyDeleteIn a way, Nora and Torvald perfectly represent their Victorian society. Torvald, as the male of the household, treats Nora like more of an object than anything else. And Nora barely does anything to try and fight this. They are an unfortunate product of the society they live in.
In Act II, Nora and Torvald can be seen having an argument because Torvald wants to fire Krogstad. Nora is actually defending Krogstad, saying that he might get his revenge by writing something bad about Torvald in the newspaper, but Torvald doesn’t want to change his mind in the event that someone would find out his wife overruled him, as he already told everyone at the bank he would fire him This futhers shows the gender inequality of the society they live in.
Krogstad is a complicated character because while he may be a blackmailing, intimidating guy, he claims that he is trying to rehabilitate himself, and even has some intimate conversations with Nora about suicide. I think anytime a character in a book/movie or a person in real life talks about suicide it can be considered foreshadowing. It’s a very serious topic and any signs that someone might commit are seriously concerning and need to be addressed. In my experience with literature, it seems that more often than not, those that talk about suicide end up dead by the end of the book.
A quote I thought might be important was “That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. We two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle.” In this quote, Torvald further shows his sexist side by saying that women are spendthrifts. This further ties into how the two are representative of the society they live in.
Another societal quote is “No, indeed; I only feel my life unspeakably empty. No one to live for any more. (Gets up restlessly.) That is why I could not stand the life in my little backwater any longer. I hope it may be easier here to find something which will busy me and occupy my thoughts. If only I could have the good luck to get some regular work--office work of some kind—” Here , Christine laments the fact that she doesn’t work for anyone any longer, showing that a typical women’s role in their society was to serve others.
Nora, the main character impresses me for her intense love to her husband and self-sacrifice for her family. Her love is enthusiastic but hidden under her child look appearance.
ReplyDeleteOn Christmas Eve, she is so happy that she can buy many things for her family for Christmas. She responds affectionately to Torvald’s teasing and joking. Torvald treats his wife like a little girl, calling her “squirrel” and “skylark” and loves his “lovely little singing bird” just the way she is and never changes. Both of them are so happy about Torvald’s new high-salary job at the bank which is going to bring them financial free in the coming new year. It is such a warm and happy family which is filled with a atmosphere of love and hope.
On the surface, Nora is a enthusiastic hostess or little girl who has known no hardship in her life, enjoying playing as a “sweet heart” and being cherished by her husband. Torvald, like a kind father, accuses Nora of being wasteful but offers her money when witnessing her pouty appointment.
Deep down, Torvald is a superior and controlling husband and he believes that a man’s role in marriage is to protect and guide his wife. Torval control and guide every aspect of the family and Nora. He tells Nora what is right and wrong, what could do or not. He has “outlawed” macaroons because he thinks they are bad for Nora’s teeth. When Nora argues that they can spend on credit. Torvald remind her that hates debts because “[a] home that depends on loans and debts is not beautiful because it is not free.” Actually, he keeps on draw boundary that Nora could not cross. As the play progresses, Nora reveals that Nora is not a simple girl but a courage,brave and determined lady. She is proud and happy that she saved her husband’s life when he was sick. She break the law in order to ensure Torvald’s health and took on labor to pay off her debt. However, she keeps her husband’s sick and the debt as her secret because she doesn’t want his “man’s pride” to be hurt. After the new year she will have paid off her debt completely and then will be “free” to fulfill her responsibilities as a wife and mother without impediment. This is actually the true happiness and relief deep in her mind. Just like she plays as a “sweet heart,” she would like to do “everything as you wish, Torvald.” Her intense love and obedience to the social morals make her pander her husband and loses herself. In face, she is the one who actually protect her husband and family.
As the story progresses, a potential crisis emerges. On Christmas Eve and Christmas Day, Krogstad come to threaten Nora with her forgery of her father’s signature on the promissory note in trade for his opportunity and promotion. Nora doesn’t want to sully her husband’s reputation by her vice and appeals Torvald to keep Krogstad’s job. However, Torvald rejects her because his real objection to working with Krogstad stems not only from -deficiencies in Krogstad’s moral character, but Krogstad’s overly friendly and familiar behavior that fails to pay him the proper respect. Torvald’s selfish still doesn’t wake her up and she implies to Krogstad that she has the courage to kill herself cover her husband’s reputation.
Nora is a courage and determined lady that I respect, but she loses herself in love.
Nora’s personality stuck out to me immediately as I started reading A Doll’s House. As I first started reading, I believed she was going to be a strong female role, buying Christmas gifts for her family to guarantee they all have a nice holiday together and paying more than necessary, but my perspective of her changed completely when Torvald was introduced. Rather than seeing her as this strong female role, I saw her as less than because of how her husband spoke to her. Although I do understand his worries about money and her spending habits, I feel as though he overstepped his boundaries when it comes asking her not to snack on macaroons. He even tries to talk her into her place when stating, “That is like a women!” Nora is treated much like a doll throughout A Doll’s House. She is taught to follow her husband’s orders and rules, and to obey men like Krogstad so he will not blackmail her. However, when coming to analyze each character, I do not believe any character takes on a true villain role. When it comes to how all the men treat Nora, it is simply to blame on the time period. Although the play did not age well for women in our societal standpoint, it is a piece of history of how women were treated throughout the 1800s. I don’t see Torvald as a villainous character because despite his rules and charge over his money, it is clear that he cares deeply for Nora. I can’t agree that Krogstad is a villian either. Although he did blackmail Nora with the loan she had with him, he did it in fear of his own expense. He was fearful of losing his job, so he did what he had to do.
ReplyDeleteI feel like A Doll’s House also speaks true to the name because of how perfect everyone looks from the outside perspective. Nora looks like the perfect house-mother to her wealthy bank husband who is soon earning a promotion to his position. Krogstad looks like a wealthy bank worker who has everything in line for him. Despite how they look on the outside, each character has their own anxieties about their life. Torvald speaks about his anxiety about losing the money he worked hard for, Nora fears her secrets being revealed and her marriage being ruined, and Krogstad fears losing his hard earned job. With this anxiety comes suicidal thoughts, like the ones Krogstad discusses with Nora and says, "Most of us think of that at first. I did, too--but I hadn't the courage.”
Initially I was not the biggest fan of Nora because it seemed as if all she wanted from her husband was money. Continuously asking Torvald for more money so that she can purchase new things as a way to reward herself for his new job. It was a little frustrating because Nora was throwing caution to the wind by asking her husband for more and more money despite him not officially holding his new position at the bank just yet. Torvald is however acting more realistic by telling his wife that he would like to be a little bit more cautious because he knows how unexpected life can be, believing that “there can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt”. The realistic perspective of Torvald is understandable but as Act I goes on, more sides of him and Nora are displayed. I started to empathize with Nora because all she wants to do is support her family and help them in any way possible which is why she acts the way she does with Torvald because she is trying to help him in any way possible. Torvald turns out to represent the stereotypical man in which he patronizes his wife by speaking to her as if she is a child calling her “squirrel”. Instead of treating her as his equal or partner, he treats her like a second class citizen just as men often did to their wives. Criticizing his wife as well as all women in general, Torvald continues to act arrogantly towards them referring to everything his wife does as something that is just “like a woman!”. Reading this today is a little bit infuriating as a girl growing up in today’s society because statements such as ‘like a girl’ is often used as an insult towards women instead of a compliment. The way Torvald speaks to his wife makes me thankful that I am growing up in a society in which people are actively working towards changing the narrative, and giving women just as much respect as men. Despite today’s society still not being perfect, it has come a long way, no longer are women seen as second class citizens to their husbands but rather as equals. When the topic of Krogstad is reintroduced between Nora and Torvald, Torvald immediately dismisses Nora’s ideas and does not even take into consideration as to why his wife is begging him to do something. With that, Torvald out of spite, deliberately writes the letter for Krogstrad regarding his dismissal from the bank because his wife attempted to undermine him. Torvald wanted to show his wife as well as everyone else that he is the one in charge in their relationship and no one can sway him in any way.
ReplyDeleteMy first impression of Nora and Torvald is that they don’t seem to have the greatest relationship. He straight-up calls her a featherhead and doesn’t really treat her as an equal as much as a little kid. Krogstad seems like a pretty nasty guy, as he’s into blackmail and can be seen making threats, in one of which he claims he will be taking over Torvald’s job. In a way, Nora and Torvald perfectly represent their Victorian society. Torvald, as the male of the household, treats Nora like more of an object than anything else. And Nora barely does anything to try and fight this. They are an unfortunate product of the society they live in. In Act II, Nora and Torvald can be seen having an argument because Torvald wants to fire Krogstad. Nora is actually defending Krogstad, saying that he might get his revenge by writing something bad about Torvald in the newspaper, but Torvald doesn’t want to change his mind in the event that someone would find out his wife overruled him, as he already told everyone at the bank he would fire him This futhers shows the gender inequality of the society they live in. Krogstad is a complicated character because while he may be a blackmailing, intimidating guy, he claims that he is trying to rehabilitate himself, and even has some intimate conversations with Nora about suicide. I think anytime a character in a book/movie or a person in real life talks about suicide it can be considered foreshadowing. It’s a very serious topic and any signs that someone might commit are seriously concerning and need to be addressed. In my experience with literature, it seems that more often than not, those that talk about suicide end up dead by the end of the book. A quote I thought might be important was “That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. We two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle.” In this quote, Torvald further shows his sexist side by saying that women are spendthrifts. This further ties into how the two are representative of the society they live in. Another societal quote is “No, indeed; I only feel my life unspeakably empty. No one to live for any more. (Gets up restlessly.) That is why I could not stand the life in my little backwater any longer. I hope it may be easier here to find something which will busy me and occupy my thoughts. If only I could have the good luck to get some regular work--office work of some kind—” Here , Christine laments the fact that she doesn’t work for anyone any longer, showing that a typical women’s role in their society was to serve others.
ReplyDeleteI am personally a huge fan of the quote “Just think how a guilty man like that has to lie and play the hypocrite with everyone, how he has to wear a mask in the presence of those near and dear to him, even before his own wife and children. And about the children--that is the most terrible part of it all.” This quote truly has such a rich irony to it that somehow paints Torvald in the evil light more than it does the perpetrator. Torvald is talking about how terrible, selfish and evil one must be to lie about things like forging signatures, whilst his poor wife must figure out how to break the news that she did that same thing and kept it under nose all these years. My gut says his toxic masculine traits might be what throws him over the edge because it has so far declared most of his personage thus far in this play. I think that Ms Linde is a great contrast to Torvald because she is proud (justly) and hard working, yet she keeps her ego in check. She is humble about her experiences and knowledge, yet she has no problem expressing herself. Torvald, on the other hand, does not have many different experiences from anyone else, and besides working in a different environment, he and Nora draw from the same vein. The only difference is that Torvald chooses to put Nora below him in his head, saying very nasty things like, “Aha! so my obstinate little woman is obliged to get someone to come to her rescue?” In a total sidebar, I would like to really just toss in how bad I feel for Dr. Rank. The crushing atmosphere of his situation is only made worse by his explanation and the vulnerability he exposes to Nora. To be lead on continuously for years is not only heart wrenching but it also makes one anxious, especially when the other person has a significant other to add onto the danger and caution of it all. It will always get too real for the person who has other obligations, and the whole thing will exist in plain sight, but somehow it will always be overlooked. Once it is seen and made obvious, it is over, and maybe that’s why people try so hard to not talk about it, to delay the end of it all. Poor Rank.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteInitially reading the play Isben makes his audience believe Nora is shallow, immature and selfish, while Torvald is smarter and responsible. We see that Nora does not feel responsible for any of her actions and feels she should not be punished for trying to help her family. While she believes she is above consequences and forged her name on a document, she did it because the strict gender roles left her with no other options. As a Woman, Nora has no opportunities to take charge and handle finances even when the men in her life are both sick. Nora is constantly being talked down to by her husband, “That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. We two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle.” (Isben) While Nora is portrayed as childlike in the beginning of the play, we later this behavior is a result of being talked down to by the men in her life and not having serious responsibilities. As the play goes on we see Nora wants to be independent and create a life for herself, but she also does not want to be held accountable for her actions. In order to have any kind of power in their society, they had to be a man or marry a man and the success in a woman's life was determined by what their husband accomplished.
In Act ll Ibsen displays Torvald as more childlike and it is uncovered that Nora is more thoughtful and has a greater understanding of other people and their motives. We see Torvald’s immature, shallow qualities as he refuses to rehire Krogstad, because he calls him by his first name. Isben wants the reader to see that we often judge a woman to be less informed and more immature than the male figure, but taking a closer look will reveal this is not true.
Krogstad is Nora’s enemy and is initially seen as the villian for using blackmail to get ahead in his career, “The matter never came into court; but every way seemed to be closed to me after that. So I took to the business that you know of. I had to do something; and, honestly, don't think I've been one of the worst. But now I must cut myself free from all that. My sons are growing up; for their sake I must try and win back as much respect as I can in the town. This post in the Bank was like the first step up for me--and now your husband is going to kick me downstairs again into the mud.” (Isben) However, all he wants is to get his job back in order to support his family and he only lost it, because Nora’s friend wanted a job and he calls Torvald by his first name.
“That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. We two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle.”
ReplyDeleteThis is the line that sets up the conflict. It introduces the gender roles upon which the conflict in centred, as well as making sure that we know Torvald will not take news or Nora’s debt lightly. Torvald asserts himself as the head of the household, the person that controls finances. Throughout the play Nora has to be incredibly secretive in her acquisition of funds, because any work she would do would make it seem as if she is usurping the role of her husband. Not only is it not her role to work, it would damage her husbands position if people thought he had to put his wife to work. The damage this does is not only restricted to reducing the potential of women in society, but also to the mental health of women who feel not only that they are restricted, but also that they lack purpose.
“Well, then I have found other ways of earning money. Last winter I was lucky enough to get a lot of copying to do; so I locked myself up and sat writing every evening until quite late at night. Many a time I was desperately tired; but all the same it was a tremendous pleasure to sit there working and earning money. It was like being a man.”
On the topic of morals and mentality, there is also Krogstad, a villain who knows he is one. He seeks to reform himself, and yet chooses the most unsavory of means that really on furthers his poor reputation. He has this childlike quality that Ibsen apparently likes, in that he recognizes he has a problem but works backwards instead of forwards. Rather than trying to start new and change himself for the future, he tries to change what’s already happened. He focuses on the end instead of the process. If he’s being fired for his morals, somehow being un fired will make him a better person.
The quote that struck me most in Act 1 is when Nora asks Linde, “Do you still think I am of no use? I can tell you, too, that this affair has caused me a lot of worry. It has been by no means easy for me to meet my engagements punctually….. Well, then I have found other ways of earning money. Last winter I was lucky enough to get a lot of copying to do; so I locked myself up and sat writing every evening until quite late at night. Many a time I was desperately tired; but all the same it was a tremendous pleasure to sit there working and earning money. It was like being a man.” It is truly heartbreaking. She is crying out, for all she wants to do is contribute to society in her own way. However, no matter how much she tries, her options are limited from the start. Even though she scrambled all she could to find a job, all she was able to attain was the rank of a copier. While the position was grueling and absolutely unforgiving, it is truly tragic because these horrid conditions make her feel elated. All she got was a small taste of “manly” freedom, yet she was so deprived of equality that even this morsel made her feel more whole than she ever had before.
ReplyDeleteMrs. Linde suffers from a sadly similar plight. While speaking to Nora, she laments that, “I only feel my life unspeakably empty. No one to live for any more. (Gets up restlessly.) That is why I could not stand the life in my little backwater any longer. I hope it may be easier here to find something which will busy me and occupy my thoughts. If only I could have the good luck to get some regular work--office work of some kind-” With her sons grown up, her society-appointed job as “woman of the house” is not as in demand as it used to be. As a result daily life for her has become almost meaningless, for she does not have the equal opportunities of a man. Regardless of age or stage of life, these societal chains cling to her incessantly. Due to her gender, the key to her freedom lies just out of her reach. Both characters want merely to work hard and provide for their families, yet they are forbidden. This aristocracy lays its burden upon all, leading to truly awful events throughout the piece and shedding light on the daily realities women faced every day in Ibsen’s time.
At the beginning of the play, Nora seemed like such a naive and immature person who fell at her husband's side. Although after discovering the great role Nora’s father and husband had on her mental and self identity, I began to sympathize with her. As Act I progressed, we see Nora explore the greater concepts in life, such as the predetermined roles of men and women in society as she states “Do you still think I am of no use? I can tell you, too, that this affair has caused me a lot of worry...Well, then I have found other ways of earning money. Last winter I was lucky enough to get a lot of copying to do; so I locked myself up and sat writing every evening until quite late at night. Many a time I was desperately tired; but all the same it was a tremendous pleasure to sit there working and earning money. It was like being a man”. Here, Nora conveys her desire to attain this level of freedom that she once experienced, one of which could only be attained, by being a man. This lack of equality became a major factor to her undeveloped passions as she was constrained to the role of a doll, a role that required no self thinking, expressionless actions, and to become the embodiment of societies materialistic mindset. Not only does she begin to think about gender roles, but she steps away from her childlike mentality and starts to dissect her superficial marriage. She states how “ Many years from now, when [she’s] lost [her] looks a little… time will come when Torvald is not as devoted to [her]” as he will not be so happy when she dances, dresses, and plays with him. Nora’s fear of Torvald's reaction of her taking out a loan for his sake has allowed her to really think about the basis of their marriage. She begins to acknowledge that Torvald’s affection is based on her looks rather than her persona. This aspect of her marriage is one that she knows could destroy their relationship as it is not enough to sustain an actual relationship.
ReplyDeleteWow, everybody in this play is messed up. I found that as the play went on, I spent much of my time looking for one normal, moral, conflictless character, but that would be boring wouldn’t it. Nora herself is oppressed under the word of her husband and as the plot progresses it is revealed she conforms to gender norms as well. In fact, she uses and abuses gender norms to help manipulate Torvald. When he becomes tells her to reveal the topic of her conversation with Krogstad, she changes the topic by mentioning how beautiful she will look at the party in her pretty pretty dress. She is also manipulative to the other characters. She blackmails and threatens Krogstad with suicide, and flirts for Dr. Rank’s support. When it comes to Dr. Rank, Nora at least stopped manipulating him when she recognizing his innocence after he declared his love for her. Nora also tricks her husband to go to South Italy to save his life. At least she has some form of a moral compass. Back to her negatives. When Nora is talking to Ms. Linde, she is completely insensitive. Not only does she make the conversation all about herself, but when Ms. Linde mentions being in need of a job Nora flexes Torvalds new promotion, and when she mentions her having no children Nora, in her supreme social elegance, begins talking about her own kids.
ReplyDeleteBesides Nora the other character’s also have their own problems. Let this paragraph be a speed rant. Torvald is an immature power hungry sexist husband. He subversively degrades Nora under the veil of being the loving husband by calling her names such as “squirrel”. This reflects his mindset that Nora and women’s role in general is to just to be a doll; that women should just be pretty and care for the homestead. This point is further emphasized by Torvald saying “nearly all young criminals have had lying mothers”, not lying fathers because of course! raising kids is uniquely a woman’s job. In full husband like wife fashion, Torvald also likes manipulating Nora by throwing money at her. After scolding her for spending carelessly, he cheers her up by giving her money and relishes in her glee. He us also immature which is revealed through his reasoning for not giving Krogstad a position at the bank.
Dr. Rank is just a sad man, and I feel bad for him. Although he is moral his storyline is diseased with, well, disease. So far in the story he is only portrayed as terminally diagnosed, naive, and gullible. Thankfully, I enjoyed how Ibsen has Dr. Rank’s kindness be a shield of sorts against Nora’s manipulations. As soon as he confesses his love for her, Nora almost does a double take and cannot bring herself to take advantage of such genuine kindness. Furthermore, the authenticity of his feelings are emphasized by the fact that he does not confess in lust, but in love. Ms. Linde is similar in the sense that while she is a minor character with few character flaws, her conflict stems from her situation and environment.
Krogstad is a selfish and greedy punk. However, he is also not a fully evil character as his problems also stem from societal pressures. Both him and Nora are similar in their crimes of forging signatures, but Krogstad is caught as criminal while Nora escapes conviction. In a sense he has been treated unfairly. So while he hopes to restore his reputation by getting a job at the bank again, he’s still doing it illegally through blackmail.