With only 11 pages through the play, I can already see some interesting aspects from these characters that are evident to us. One of these aspects in particular that caught my eye was Nora, with her abnormal obsession with money. It’s Christmas time, and Nora is busy decorating the Christmas tree and getting the family ready for the momentous occasion. Of course this time of year can be a difficult one for families, especially those of lower incomes, but Nora seems a little too concerned with the amount of spending money she currently has. She begs to her husband saying, “...surely we can afford to be just a little bit extravagant now, can’t we? Just a teeny-weeny bit. You are getting a good salary now, and you are going to earn lots and lots of money” (Ibsen 2). Here she attempts to convenience Helmer to let her spend more this year by saying he’s going to start to receive a good amount of income, once he begins work at the bank after the new year. But she fails to see the silver lining in her argument. What if she is allowed to spend more money this year assuming that they will receive more than enough once Helmer begins work at the bank, but something happens and he doesn’t get the job? What will happen next? Most people would rather play it safe, and wait until they have a guaranteed income coming in before spending large amounts of money, but she does not come to this conclusion. I believe that this is quite intentional by Ibsen, having Nora be portrayed as the stereotypical wife of that period, being a “spendthrift” that cannot make important decisions by herself, as well as needing her husband Helmer to control her by keeping her on a leash. By doing so she will fail to make decisions that might in up harming the household in the long run.
With only 11 pages that we have read, I noticed the disparity of status within the relationship of Torvald and Nora. This is exhibited through the possessive tone Torvald holds while talking to her. He never once refers to her in second person sweetly, only in anger and annoyance, objectifying and belittling her being. The times she is spoken to, sound endearing in theory but are in reality hurtful and subordinating. Names adopted by Torvald Helmer for Nora are things such as "my little sky-lark", "my little squirrel", "my little spendthrift", "my pretty little pet", "my little sweet-tooth", and others. These are repeated throughout the first few pages. Notably, he begins everything with a possessive and a descriptor. Women in the Victorian Era did not have many rights', only staying at home and taking care of the children, not doing any serious work due to the lack of a rigorous education. This led to the inferiority of one sex, being thought of as useless. This deliberate denigration of woman is represented through the 'little', referring to the subjugation of Nora, and the authority he has. This authority is also represented within the possessive he uses, which reminded me of the scene in Taming of the Shrew, after the wedding, when Petruchio claimed Katherine as a product he owned. This ownership of women, although metaphorical, is present in this society, for women are unable to make a living for themselves without a man, as displayed by Mrs. Linde in the events following this conversation. He also manifests this inadequacy of women by using "Nora, Nora! Just like a woman!" as an insult when she attempts to make a rash decision. This implication of women having inferior brains or thinking skills is present, also due to the oppressive society they lived in, not offering education or proper skill testing or equal employment for women.
I appreciate your thorough connection between Victorian society and the literary devices present in the beginning of the first act, and your clever link to the Taming of the Shrew. :) To add to your comment, not only si the inferiority of women expressed through men's verbal usage, but also by their actions. Nora couldn't even borrow money to save her husband's life without the consent of her father, demonstrating that Krogstad, Helmer, and her father were all directly or indirectly controlling her. Nora is further manipulated by Krogstad when he tries to blackmail her, illustrating the lack of rights and therefore the lack of power of women in the Victorian age.
Hey! As Karim mentioned, Nora is huge spendthrift, we see this in her first interaction with the porter at the door when he says that it is, “fifty öre,” and Nora responds with, “There’s a crown. Keep the change” (Ibsen 1). This simple interaction shows how Nora doesn't really take into account the actual cost of money. An öre is only half of a crown, it was like paying him double for something that was not a necessity of life. As we meet Helmer, I found it incredibly creepy how he calls her by animal names and she starts speaking about herself in third person. When talking about debt is the only time he really sees her as a woman, exclaiming, “Nora, Nora! Just like a woman! Seriously though, Nora” (Ibsen 3). This instance is in a very demeaning manner, essentially pointing out how women don't think about consequences and they need a man to run their financial life. And really, I think Nora does. Ibsen uses Nora’s character as how societal norms essentially put labels on women at these times.When Helmer calls her out by saying that his, “pretty little pet,”runs away with all his money, she responds with that they, “call it a spendthrift” (Ibsen 4). This again shows how she intentionally dehumanizes herself, calling herself an ‘it’ as the spendthrift of this relationship. However, i found it interesting that Torvald doesn’t call her out but does it in a roundabout way, talking about ‘his pet,’ and not directly accusing her. ‘Pet’ could also be seen as him being in control of her and using this as a training for her, like a sort of dog or domesticated animal. In all, Ibsen is setting the scene in these first few pages to talk about the roles of women in this culture and time period. He will be using this, ‘Doll’s House’ view to show how everyone is being manipulated by the spoken and unspoken rules of society.
Going into A Doll’s House of course it was expected that because we took notes on the victorian age and we talked about the patriarchal system that this book would include that but the way Torvald and Nora talk to each other makes me feel really angry like I want to beat Torvalds face in with a shovel to be honest. Although we're only a few pages in their interaction was literally Nora being like can I have money and then Torvald and Nora going back and forth on whether she should get the money or not and Ibsen makes it sound kind of cute and wifey but like the underlying part is just creepy and obsessive. “Oh, please, Torvald dear! Please! I beg you. Then I’d wrap the money up in some pretty gilt paper and hang it on the Christmas tree. Wouldn’t that be fun?” (Ibsen 4). I don’t like how she is begging him for money I mean they are in a marriage right?? Whats mine is yours is that not what a marriage is? Can’t Nora just ask for money and then Torvald can be like sure and even if Nora is a spendthrift tell her straight up don't call her a “squirrel” and a “sky-lark” just be real. This whole interaction to me just felt like they were in public so they have to be nice and sweet but also like all the underlying stuff that is still creeper status. This is a bit of a tangent but when Mrs. Linde comes to Nora's house and they're talking about how Mrs. Lynde's husband died and how sad the whole thing is and then transitioning into Mrs. Linde's brothers and mother where Mrs. Linde responds to Nora about hows shes feeling he says “No Nora just unutterably empty. Nobody to live for anymore.” (Ibsen 11). Oh my God are you serious right now!! Mrs. Linde should be living for herself why does she need to be living for someone else!!
With act one completed, and subsequently one third of the play as well, I have noticed a definite theme of deception and lies in the play. When talking to Mrs. Linde after not seeing her for many years, Nora reveals that she has lied to everyone about where she received the money from, to fund her husband’s needed vacation. Previously it was thought that she received the money from her father, before his passing, but for the first time she admits that she had taken a loan from Krogstad, and that her father had no idea whatsoever about Helmer’s condition. This was considered a big event, because in this time period women usually never take out loans in their names, let alone without their husband’s approval. This points to why she ended up borrowing from Krogstad, instead of a reputable establishment such as a bank. Although she has been managing to pay her dues every month with the allowance Helmer gives her, her selfless act to save her husband’s life is now coming around to bit her, as Krogstad is now blackmailing her to convince her husband to not fire him from his position. One of the most notable quotes from Helmer in this first act is, “A fog of lies like that in a household, and it spreads disease and infection to every part of it. Every breath the children take in that kind of house is reeking with evil germs” (Ibsen 33). Here Torvald is describing the type of household Krogstad must live in, from his lies he has told about the fraudulent crimes he has committed. But what Torvald doesn’t know, is that he is also describing his own household as well, as his wife Nora has lied to him and everyone in the household about where she has got the money for the vacation to the south. From this quote alone, we can infer that this is going to be the main conflict plaguing this household throughout the play.
I really like your analysis! I also did the same idea for my blog, and I completely agree with your comprehension of the Act. The irony of the situation between Krogstad and Nora adds to the conflict. One part you didn't mention was the theme of lie and deceit in the family home, especially in the Victorian Era. However, your whole entire analysis was very good and explained how this could develop into a larger conflict.
Hey guys!! Wow Nora is really annoying, but she is obviously acting like a typical women in this time period. Ibsen really captures her personality in the way she handles situations and how she acts around her husband as opposed to other people in A Doll’s House. This is seen through her sudden outbursts of of laughter at inopportune times. She’s “lost in her own thoughts” (I. 19.) as Mrs. Linde and Rank are discussing the roles of society and how workers should be selected. Rank then asks her if she even, “know[s] in fact what society is?”, which ultimately points out that women that stay at home for the most part are completely out of the conversation if it leaves the four walls(I. 19.). This is also seen when Krogstad comes back to discuss the loan document and the mishaps with the date and forgery of the signature. When Krogstad has finished asking about if she can put in a good word for her and she says she may or may not, he comes back with the statement that she may not, “understand much about business” (I. 26.). This is very demeaning, but she does not seem to notice this fact and continues to listen and absorb what he has to say like it is the very first time she has heard anything like this. She, unlike Mrs. Linde, has no concept of the outside world of jobs. Although she recognizes that her husband is now better off once he was promoted, she does not quite grasp the severity of how her forgery could affect her until Torvald comes home and informs her of Krogstad's miss deads. He states that ‘forgery’ is what Krogstad was convicted of, and how, “a fog of lies like that in a household,” spread through and ultimately affects everyone(I. 33.). Nora is then terrified for the rest of the act and the beginning of act II, not even wanting to be in the same room as her children, with the knowledge that she has also committed this act of forgery.
In the second part of Act 1, what I found most interesting was the contrast in Nora's character and authority when speaking to males and when speaking with her friend, Mrs. Linde. Torvald is a very possessive and prideful man, following the gender roles of a Victorian society. He believes that men are to be the breadwinners, and women are worthless but for trivial crafts, calling her a spendthrift and implying her ignorance. This is why, when Mrs. Linde also alludes to her supposed uselessness, Nora reveals her deepest secret; that she sustained Torvald for an extended amount of time in Italy. When questioned further about her secrecy, Nora responds "Good heavens, how could you eve imagine such a thing! When he's so strict about such matters!... it would be terribly embarrassing fr him if he thought he owed anything to me" (Ibsen 15). This demonstration of insecurity and submission arks the lack of women's rights that were available at this time. The dependence of man upon woman would be frowned upon in this society, since females were not able to obtain jobs that provided a basic living, basing their worth and dependence upon the man they were with. Nora, although seeming discreet with this reveal, also seems to be progressive and prideful, since she boasts about her competence with her friend "...Still think I'm not much good for anything?" (15). This attitude shows the progressive steps being taken toward considering woman as an equal, shown here through Nora's ability to do something as simple as banking and loans, when these things were exclusive to men in her time. When confronted by Krogstad regarding his job and her influence, Nora's cocky attitude once again surfaces: "...Mrs. Linde has got a job. And I'm the one who got it for her, Mr. Krogstad. Now you know" (24). She once again attempts to display the competence she has in matters that were considered above her breadth of knowledge due to gender roles, proving to Mr. Krogstad that she is in fact as useful as she could be. Once he seizes and exploits this opportunity for his own advancement, Nora backs down, defending herself, and reverting to her subversive nature "... Me? What makes you think I have any influence over my husband?" (25). Nora, although seemingly foolish in this situation, is actually quite clever, since she is able to monitor and mandate both sides of her life, according to situational needs; that of the dutiful and obedient wife, and the independent and progressive woman.
NORA. Flesh-coloured! Aren’t they lovely! Oh, it’s so dark here now; but to-morrow....No, no, no, you must only look at the feet. Oh, well. might as well see a bit higher up, too.
In this scene Nora and Rank are talking to each other and Nora is in complete denial over his love for her. The flirting is so evident between them but he actually feels real love her though she loves Helmer and thinks she's being cute and flirty by showing him the stockings. When Nora says “Oh it's so dark here now...”(57 Ibsen). She is alluding to Rank having syphilis and that his coming death is the darkness. In the Victorian Era women would wear stockings but because they didn't have a lot of stretch the shape was already like a leg when taken out of the box. Stockings I think we're basically lingerie at this time so showing Rank her stockings something Nora would wear under her clothing is very risque. Nora in the end of her dialogue is using sexual diction when saying that Rank “might as well see a bit higher up,” (57 Ibsen). Regarding the stocking shaped like a woman's leg and something that she would be wearing.
I agree with your analysis that Nora is flirting with Rank and vice versa. However, I think that Nora is doing this in order to manipulate Rank into either lending her money to pay off Krogstad or getting him to talk to Torvald about letting Krogstad keep his job.
“All right, then we’ll share it, Nora- as man and wife. That’s what we’ll do. Does that make you happy now?” (Ibsen 44).
In this scene Nora is deeply terrified about what is going to happen next, as Torvald did not follow her plea to let Krogstad stay in his position. She is distraught at the thought of failing to fix the situation before it got out of hand, and ironically speeded up Krogstad’s firing by attempting to convince Torvald to let Krogstad keep his job. To try to calm Nora down, Helmer says the quote above, and what really caused me to remember this quote more than any other from this second act, is the way Torvald refers to him and his wife. He refers to himself and Nora as man and wife, instead of husband and wife, and it shows what Helmer’s values are, as well the values of society back then as well. By substituting the word man in this statement, it implies that men in the relationship are the dominant ones, as they do not have a title that binds them to their spouse, but on the contrary their spouse is binded to them with their title (wife). It shows in Torvald and Nora’s relationship, as Helmer has just showed he makes all the decisions in the household by firing Krogstad against his wife’s wishes. It makes it clear that Torvald has all the power in their marriage, and that Nora cannot influence her husband’s actions, no matter what Nora or others may think. This thought of Nora being virtually powerless in this situation makes me want to pity her. She is practically observing the first few steps that will end her relationship with her husband take place, all while helplessly attempting to stop it, but failing horribly. At this point I believe she no longer has the option to stop her secret from being revealed to Torvald and the rest, but can only explain to him why she did the things she did, and hope that he will forgive her.
I completely agree with your analysis of the relationship between Torvald and Nora, how Torvald enjoys all the power in their relationship. Adding to this, I think that this traditional idea of marriage is reflected in smaller events in their life such as the upcoming party in which Torvald is planning the details of how Nora will act at the party according to his ideals. He has a delusional view of how a husband and wife should act which is further enabled by Nora’s behavior in front of Torvald, where she wishes to appear to be the ideal wife that he views her as.
Helmer "If it ever got around that the new manager had been talked over by his wife..." Nora "What of it?" Helmer "Oh nothing!...Do you want me to make myself a laughing stock in the office?...Give people the idea that I am susceptible to any kind of outside pressure?" (Ibsen 42)
In this passage, the power struggle between the two characters is once again shown. The lack of dependence that Nora displays is furthered by this conversation. Like I stated in one of my previous blogs, the contrast between the assertive self she displays and the timid personality she also manifests when situations are not in her control are exhibited here. Although this kind of dynamic would be common in the Victorian era, in present day it would be considered emotionally abusive to an extent. The character of Helmer speaks harshly, seeming to place all the blame on Nora for matters she knows nothing about. His comments of what people at work would say if they knew he had been influenced by her are meant to make her inferior, to belittle her, and they do work. He does not treat Nora as an equal, but rather, sees her as an insolent, ignorant person, and maybe not even that. The thought of having her opinion shared and having it sway the work he does embarrasses him, showing his superior attitude; a kind of aggressively male attitude that is only upheld by contemptuously putting down the woman in his life.
In this section, we also found about the disease that Doctor Rank has. Through euphemisms and epithets, the syphilis he has is alluded to. Starting with calling it 'tuberculosis of the spine', Rank reveals the tragic and ironic nature of his condition. Although he is a doctor, he is not able to cure himself and his own condition. The superior nature of Helmer in society is also shown through some of his comments regarding this, for the greatest concern he has for when he becomes too ill to function, is that Helmer may visit him and deem him 'ugly'. In page 46, Nora and Rank also use euphemisms to discuss the source of his sickness: his father's 'outgoing' life. Foods such as "asparagus", "truffles", "oysters", "port and champagne", and others were mentioned, and these are known as aphrodisiacs. This subtle yet clever way of referring to a scandalous lifestyle was used due to the inappropriateness of mentioning actual diseases in this era, due to the extreme politeness and emotionless state that so many displayed.
Your analysis is very interesting. I agree that there is a huge power struggle between Nora and Torvald. As the man of the house, Torvald has the most power, and is strict with his power. Nora on the other hand can be helpless at times, and does everything Torvald says. Other times she can be a bit defiant, for example when she eats the macaroons against his rules. This passage you chose from the play really highlights the gender roles each character plays. Torvald's diction is offensive, as he says it would be embarrassing for his wife to make a decision for him. This is his way of saying he can't let anyone think his wife has any power, because that would be completely wrong for this time period. This is a very sexist comment, and creates an effect of inequality. We have a very similar analysis on this passage, believing Torvald sees Nora, and other women, as inferior to himself and other males.
Hey you guys!! So in the section I really noticed the way that Nora got kinda tossed around. She is trying to figure out a way to fix her forgery problem, but instead she just seems to be going more and more insane. Ibsen uses Nora's constant ramping to herself to show how she is slowing losing her mind trying to keep everything straight. In this time women were treated as under men, just like in a job how employees are under the employer. This is also paralleled in Krogstad's behavior in talking about Torvald. Torvald claims that Krogstad's ‘treats [him] as an equal,’ (43). Having Krogstad's as an equal he says would make his, ‘position at the Bank absolutely intolerable’ (43). This shows how class standards were upheld very strictly and how each person had a role and it would be very uncommon to step out of these roles. One of the societal roles that Torvald must follow is that of a strong husband, not bending under everything his wife asks if him. He doesn't want to, ‘give people the idea that [he is] susceptible to any kind of outside pressure,’ especially that of his wife (42). Another way this came up in just this small section was Nora’s interaction with Dr. Rank. He said that he didn't want Helmer to come visit him when he was dying because it would be out of place for him, so high up, to be visiting the home of a dying person(45). Throughout the entirety of the play so far, and especially right here, Dr. Rank always calls Torvald by Helmer, talking as though Torvald was his superior. Ibsen uses these fee interactions to show how the societal norms can be impressed on people, even if the person themselves do not notice or do not care for the roles that they have been given.
Nearing the end of the play, both Nora and Rank refer to death and suicide quite often. I thought this was interesting though because neither one of them say any of the words like, ‘death, suicide, killing, or anything that would obviously state they were going to die. I think Ibsen does this because this is how society would see a subject like this. This would be a taboo sort of a subject and would only be mentioned with euphemisms behind closed doors. Things first start not seeming quite right when Dr. Rank comes downstairs and comments on the general layout of the room. He has visited their house at least once a day for a good long while by now. When questioned about his time upstairs, he responds with, “Why not make the most of things in this world? ...for as long as one can” (71). ALthough this is a lighthearted conversation, it really is the last time that this family will see their friend Rank, and Helmer does not even seem to notice the severity of this conversation. Ibsen shows that even when something is pretty severe, by not saying it directly, the impact on others is reduced severely. When Rank goes into it more, saying that he will be, “invisible...at the next masquerade,” Helmer still does not seem to grasp that this is Ranks way of saying he will be dead by then (72). There is also some foreshadowing of Nora killing herself right when Dr. Rank is leaving. Nora wishes Rank to, “sleep well,” and then for him to, “wish [her] the same” (72-730. This foreshadows Nora’s disappearance at the end, of her killing herself with just the total weight of her predicament with Helmer and how she does not approve of the way their marriage is going. Ibsen uses euphemisms to blanket the severity of situations, making them less harsh and more ‘friendly’ to the ear, not wanting to offend. This shows how the culture has changed so much and how Nora is just starting to realize that she doesn't have to die, but she can start a new life on her own. At the beginning her only option was to kill herself, but now she has found her confidence to leave Torvald and embark on her individual life.
I agree with your analysis and I like how you talked about the references to death because I don't think anyone really picked up on that. I think why Helmer does not seem to grasp the idea of death is because throughout the play he has been concerned with appearances and wanting everything to look happy even if that was not actually true. And because, like you said, death was a very dark subject people would try to either ignore it or mask it with words that seemed happier. I think for Helmer he decided to ignore it because it had nothing to do with his personal appearance.
One thing that my group and I discussed about that we thought was interesting, was Helmer’s sudden change of disposition when he receives Krogstad’s first letter about Nora’s debt to him. In only a couple of pages, Torvald goes from delighted about the night out with his wife, to astonished and angry towards Nora’s secret convinced that it will ruin his life, and then back to delighted again after finding Krogstad’s apology letter. We all mentioned how Helmer’s emotions have quickly changed in that conversation in a matter of minutes, and thought of it as rather humorous at first. But looking at it later, I came to realize that it furthermore shows the readers Helmer’s values. After reading Krogstad’s letter Torvald states, “Now you have ruined my entire happiness, jeopardized my whole future. It’s terrible to think of. Here I am, at the mercy of a thoroughly unscrupulous person; he can do whatever he likes with me, demand anything he wants, order me about just as he chooses...and I daren’t even whimper. I’m done for, a miserable failure, and it’s all the fault of a feather-brained woman!” (Ibsen 76). Here Helmer is putting the blame on Nora for ruining his life, without even the slightest sense of mercy for his wife. Doesn’t he care for what Nora is feeling because of this situations as well? All he cares about is his job and reputation, and the thought of someone possibly tarnishing them, including his wife, enrages him greatly. Torvald frankly has little concern for anyone else, no matter how many times he calls Nora “his little songbird”, both of them know it ultimately comes down to him in the end, about who he cares the most about.
My analysis of Torvald's contrasting emotions is very similar to yours. I also noticed that Torvald was first very upset and angry when reading Krogstad's letter. He told Nora they could never be happy together, and used very negative diction when speaking to her. He also told her they must stay together and pretend to be in love in public. This shows that he was very concerned what other people would think if they split up. Once reading Krogstad's next letter and receiving the IOU, Torvald's attitude flipped. He began to be kind again, and used more positive diction towards Nora. The fact that his attitude changed so drastically when receiving the IOU shows that he was more concerned that others would find out rather than what his wife really did. Torvald suddenly forgave Nora. This shows that her actions did not truly upset Torvald, and he really didn't care. What he did care about was how her actions would affect him and his job. All of this supports Torvald's selfish character. I believe his selfishness is what really caused Nora to walk out on him.
We had a similar discussion in our group. We found Helmer's quick change of emotions aggressive and in the moment anger at first, but did eventually realize that he only cares for himself and not his wife. He seems to only care for his wife, when he has some sort of benefit. For example, their high place in society together allowed him to move up in the bank. But now her one mistake, could cost him his own job and his own reputation and he gets angry with her and does not wish to be with her. In a conversation with Dr. Rank, Nora says, " He would never hesitate for a moment to sacrifice his life for my mistake" (48). Do you think Nora truly believed that?
Wow, what a post! I pretty much thought the same thing that you and your group did. I personally saw Helmer's usage of "my" instead of "our" when discussing the future to be quite revealing of his true nature. Did he not consider his and Nora's futures to be together as one? Or was he simply envisioning his work to be the highlight of his future and completely disregarding Nora?
With the play finished and time to go over the work as a whole, there are some things that has gotten my focus now with the story complete. One of those things is the character Dr. Rank. I can’t but help feel sympathetic towards him, as he had to deal with a horrible incurable disease all throughout his life, despite him not being at fault for receiving it in the first place. It is presumed that he has no wife or children to care after, and that might be one of the reasons why he feels inclined to pay a visit at Torvald and Nora’s house everyday, as they are the only ones close enough to a family for him. One of the more notable quotes from Dr. Rank in the play is when he informs Nora that they will know his death has arrived by stating, “...I’ll send you my visiting card with a black cross on it. You’ll know then the final horrible disintegration has begun” (Ibsen 45). This action from Dr. Rank seemed very odd and peculiar to me when reading it for the first time. But now I understand it more. His entire role was practically small compared to others in the play, and was only used to aid viewers and readers in seeing a different perspective of Nora and Torvald when they are talking to someone other than themselves. Because of this, I believe Ibsen thought Dr. Rank should get a small deathscene as well, to fit along with the character that he has developed all throughout the play so far. It still saddens me that although he was very selfless in nature, no one really gave him the attention he deserved. For example, the idea of Dr. Rank not wanting Helmer visiting him because he does not want him to be upset, shows just how overly selfless he is, and the fact that both Nora and Torvald easily came to terms with Dr. Rank locking himself up until he dies, is mind boggling.
I agree with your analysis. This idea of Dr. Rank being selfless truly adds to the characteristics of both Helmer and Nora; meaning that they ignore Dr. Rank's selflessness to the point where the concept characterizes Nora and Helmer are selfish in a sort of way... I'm not sure how to really state this, but this is an idea...
Last time in class, my group participated in a discussion involving the following question: "Compare Nora and Kristine's lives since marriage. Who is better off? Explain." Although my group came to the consensus that Kristine was in fact the superior lifestyle in this situation, I disagreed and my reasoning is as follows; Although Nora has been objectified, she continues to live a life full of diversions and entertainment, while Kristine works hard for her earnings, making sacrifices along the way. Kristine gave up the love she had with Krogstad in order to marry into wealth, so she could take care of her brothers and sickly mother. When she was widowed, she was left with no money, and decided to work in order to earn what living she could. Restrictive laws in the Victorian Era did not allow for women to make as large of a living as men. This can be related to today, for women make $0.75 for every $1.00 a man makes, yet the wage gap was much greater in their era. Nora's life is riddled with trivialities, not major problems. Her biggest secret is that she has a loan from a banker that was used on a trip to Italy. Although she claims that this was done out of pure love for her husband, she also uses this as a benefit to herself, having mentioned her desire to travel. She also knows that she is physically alluring to Torvald, being in a state of denial that this is lust and not pure love until the end, although she also uses this as an advantage when the situation deems it necessary. An example of this would be her dancing of the tarantella, entrancing Torvald so that he would not open the marriage-ruining letter. She has children, and seemingly cares for them, but it is implied that she is not the one to take care of their needs, for it is the maid that provides for them and does the difficult tasks, while Nora plays with them and appeals to their tender and fun-loving side. She doesn't take much responsibility in general, acting aloof. This could be because of the negative stereotyping that women had, regarding their knowledge, during this era, but the advantages that it brings to her are immense. Nora complains about having a difficult life, yet she has all the material needs provided to her. The introduction of Dr. Rank in the story also shows that she lacks no love, although the relationship may not necessarily be with her husband, but has the ideal caring individual that is the standard for a (modern day) marriage.
With only 11 pages through the play, I can already see some interesting aspects from these characters that are evident to us. One of these aspects in particular that caught my eye was Nora, with her abnormal obsession with money. It’s Christmas time, and Nora is busy decorating the Christmas tree and getting the family ready for the momentous occasion. Of course this time of year can be a difficult one for families, especially those of lower incomes, but Nora seems a little too concerned with the amount of spending money she currently has. She begs to her husband saying, “...surely we can afford to be just a little bit extravagant now, can’t we? Just a teeny-weeny bit. You are getting a good salary now, and you are going to earn lots and lots of money” (Ibsen 2). Here she attempts to convenience Helmer to let her spend more this year by saying he’s going to start to receive a good amount of income, once he begins work at the bank after the new year. But she fails to see the silver lining in her argument. What if she is allowed to spend more money this year assuming that they will receive more than enough once Helmer begins work at the bank, but something happens and he doesn’t get the job? What will happen next? Most people would rather play it safe, and wait until they have a guaranteed income coming in before spending large amounts of money, but she does not come to this conclusion. I believe that this is quite intentional by Ibsen, having Nora be portrayed as the stereotypical wife of that period, being a “spendthrift” that cannot make important decisions by herself, as well as needing her husband Helmer to control her by keeping her on a leash. By doing so she will fail to make decisions that might in up harming the household in the long run.
ReplyDeleteWith only 11 pages that we have read, I noticed the disparity of status within the relationship of Torvald and Nora.
ReplyDeleteThis is exhibited through the possessive tone Torvald holds while talking to her. He never once refers to her in second person sweetly, only in anger and annoyance, objectifying and belittling her being. The times she is spoken to, sound endearing in theory but are in reality hurtful and subordinating. Names adopted by Torvald Helmer for Nora are things such as "my little sky-lark", "my little squirrel", "my little spendthrift", "my pretty little pet", "my little sweet-tooth", and others. These are repeated throughout the first few pages. Notably, he begins everything with a possessive and a descriptor.
Women in the Victorian Era did not have many rights', only staying at home and taking care of the children, not doing any serious work due to the lack of a rigorous education. This led to the inferiority of one sex, being thought of as useless. This deliberate denigration of woman is represented through the 'little', referring to the subjugation of Nora, and the authority he has. This authority is also represented within the possessive he uses, which reminded me of the scene in Taming of the Shrew, after the wedding, when Petruchio claimed Katherine as a product he owned. This ownership of women, although metaphorical, is present in this society, for women are unable to make a living for themselves without a man, as displayed by Mrs. Linde in the events following this conversation.
He also manifests this inadequacy of women by using "Nora, Nora! Just like a woman!" as an insult when she attempts to make a rash decision. This implication of women having inferior brains or thinking skills is present, also due to the oppressive society they lived in, not offering education or proper skill testing or equal employment for women.
I appreciate your thorough connection between Victorian society and the literary devices present in the beginning of the first act, and your clever link to the Taming of the Shrew. :) To add to your comment, not only si the inferiority of women expressed through men's verbal usage, but also by their actions. Nora couldn't even borrow money to save her husband's life without the consent of her father, demonstrating that Krogstad, Helmer, and her father were all directly or indirectly controlling her. Nora is further manipulated by Krogstad when he tries to blackmail her, illustrating the lack of rights and therefore the lack of power of women in the Victorian age.
DeleteHey! As Karim mentioned, Nora is huge spendthrift, we see this in her first interaction with the porter at the door when he says that it is, “fifty öre,” and Nora responds with, “There’s a crown. Keep the change” (Ibsen 1). This simple interaction shows how Nora doesn't really take into account the actual cost of money. An öre is only half of a crown, it was like paying him double for something that was not a necessity of life. As we meet Helmer, I found it incredibly creepy how he calls her by animal names and she starts speaking about herself in third person. When talking about debt is the only time he really sees her as a woman, exclaiming, “Nora, Nora! Just like a woman! Seriously though, Nora” (Ibsen 3). This instance is in a very demeaning manner, essentially pointing out how women don't think about consequences and they need a man to run their financial life. And really, I think Nora does. Ibsen uses Nora’s character as how societal norms essentially put labels on women at these times.When Helmer calls her out by saying that his, “pretty little pet,”runs away with all his money, she responds with that they, “call it a spendthrift” (Ibsen 4). This again shows how she intentionally dehumanizes herself, calling herself an ‘it’ as the spendthrift of this relationship. However, i found it interesting that Torvald doesn’t call her out but does it in a roundabout way, talking about ‘his pet,’ and not directly accusing her. ‘Pet’ could also be seen as him being in control of her and using this as a training for her, like a sort of dog or domesticated animal. In all, Ibsen is setting the scene in these first few pages to talk about the roles of women in this culture and time period. He will be using this, ‘Doll’s House’ view to show how everyone is being manipulated by the spoken and unspoken rules of society.
ReplyDeleteGoing into A Doll’s House of course it was expected that because we took notes on the victorian age and we talked about the patriarchal system that this book would include that but the way Torvald and Nora talk to each other makes me feel really angry like I want to beat Torvalds face in with a shovel to be honest. Although we're only a few pages in their interaction was literally Nora being like can I have money and then Torvald and Nora going back and forth on whether she should get the money or not and Ibsen makes it sound kind of cute and wifey but like the underlying part is just creepy and obsessive. “Oh, please, Torvald dear! Please! I beg you. Then I’d wrap the money up in some pretty gilt paper and hang it on the Christmas tree. Wouldn’t that be fun?” (Ibsen 4). I don’t like how she is begging him for money I mean they are in a marriage right?? Whats mine is yours is that not what a marriage is? Can’t Nora just ask for money and then Torvald can be like sure and even if Nora is a spendthrift tell her straight up don't call her a “squirrel” and a “sky-lark” just be real. This whole interaction to me just felt like they were in public so they have to be nice and sweet but also like all the underlying stuff that is still creeper status.
ReplyDeleteThis is a bit of a tangent but when Mrs. Linde comes to Nora's house and they're talking about how Mrs. Lynde's husband died and how sad the whole thing is and then transitioning into Mrs. Linde's brothers and mother where Mrs. Linde responds to Nora about hows shes feeling he says “No Nora just unutterably empty. Nobody to live for anymore.” (Ibsen 11). Oh my God are you serious right now!! Mrs. Linde should be living for herself why does she need to be living for someone else!!
With act one completed, and subsequently one third of the play as well, I have noticed a definite theme of deception and lies in the play. When talking to Mrs. Linde after not seeing her for many years, Nora reveals that she has lied to everyone about where she received the money from, to fund her husband’s needed vacation. Previously it was thought that she received the money from her father, before his passing, but for the first time she admits that she had taken a loan from Krogstad, and that her father had no idea whatsoever about Helmer’s condition. This was considered a big event, because in this time period women usually never take out loans in their names, let alone without their husband’s approval. This points to why she ended up borrowing from Krogstad, instead of a reputable establishment such as a bank. Although she has been managing to pay her dues every month with the allowance Helmer gives her, her selfless act to save her husband’s life is now coming around to bit her, as Krogstad is now blackmailing her to convince her husband to not fire him from his position. One of the most notable quotes from Helmer in this first act is, “A fog of lies like that in a household, and it spreads disease and infection to every part of it. Every breath the children take in that kind of house is reeking with evil germs” (Ibsen 33). Here Torvald is describing the type of household Krogstad must live in, from his lies he has told about the fraudulent crimes he has committed. But what Torvald doesn’t know, is that he is also describing his own household as well, as his wife Nora has lied to him and everyone in the household about where she has got the money for the vacation to the south. From this quote alone, we can infer that this is going to be the main conflict plaguing this household throughout the play.
ReplyDeleteI really like your analysis! I also did the same idea for my blog, and I completely agree with your comprehension of the Act. The irony of the situation between Krogstad and Nora adds to the conflict. One part you didn't mention was the theme of lie and deceit in the family home, especially in the Victorian Era. However, your whole entire analysis was very good and explained how this could develop into a larger conflict.
DeleteHey guys!! Wow Nora is really annoying, but she is obviously acting like a typical women in this time period. Ibsen really captures her personality in the way she handles situations and how she acts around her husband as opposed to other people in A Doll’s House. This is seen through her sudden outbursts of of laughter at inopportune times. She’s “lost in her own thoughts” (I. 19.) as Mrs. Linde and Rank are discussing the roles of society and how workers should be selected. Rank then asks her if she even, “know[s] in fact what society is?”, which ultimately points out that women that stay at home for the most part are completely out of the conversation if it leaves the four walls(I. 19.). This is also seen when Krogstad comes back to discuss the loan document and the mishaps with the date and forgery of the signature. When Krogstad has finished asking about if she can put in a good word for her and she says she may or may not, he comes back with the statement that she may not, “understand much about business” (I. 26.). This is very demeaning, but she does not seem to notice this fact and continues to listen and absorb what he has to say like it is the very first time she has heard anything like this. She, unlike Mrs. Linde, has no concept of the outside world of jobs. Although she recognizes that her husband is now better off once he was promoted, she does not quite grasp the severity of how her forgery could affect her until Torvald comes home and informs her of Krogstad's miss deads. He states that ‘forgery’ is what Krogstad was convicted of, and how, “a fog of lies like that in a household,” spread through and ultimately affects everyone(I. 33.). Nora is then terrified for the rest of the act and the beginning of act II, not even wanting to be in the same room as her children, with the knowledge that she has also committed this act of forgery.
ReplyDeleteIn the second part of Act 1, what I found most interesting was the contrast in Nora's character and authority when speaking to males and when speaking with her friend, Mrs. Linde.
ReplyDeleteTorvald is a very possessive and prideful man, following the gender roles of a Victorian society. He believes that men are to be the breadwinners, and women are worthless but for trivial crafts, calling her a spendthrift and implying her ignorance. This is why, when Mrs. Linde also alludes to her supposed uselessness, Nora reveals her deepest secret; that she sustained Torvald for an extended amount of time in Italy. When questioned further about her secrecy, Nora responds "Good heavens, how could you eve imagine such a thing! When he's so strict about such matters!... it would be terribly embarrassing fr him if he thought he owed anything to me" (Ibsen 15). This demonstration of insecurity and submission arks the lack of women's rights that were available at this time. The dependence of man upon woman would be frowned upon in this society, since females were not able to
obtain jobs that provided a basic living, basing their worth and dependence upon the man they were with.
Nora, although seeming discreet with this reveal, also seems to be progressive and prideful, since she boasts about her competence with her friend "...Still think I'm not much good for anything?" (15). This attitude shows the progressive steps being taken toward considering woman as an equal, shown here through Nora's ability to do something as simple as banking and loans, when these things were exclusive to men in her time.
When confronted by Krogstad regarding his job and her influence, Nora's cocky attitude once again surfaces: "...Mrs. Linde has got a job. And I'm the one who got it for her, Mr. Krogstad. Now you know" (24). She once again attempts to display the competence she has in matters that were considered above her breadth of knowledge due to gender roles, proving to Mr. Krogstad that she is in fact as useful as she could be. Once he seizes and exploits this opportunity for his own advancement, Nora backs down, defending herself, and reverting to her subversive nature "... Me? What makes you think I have any influence over my husband?" (25). Nora, although seemingly foolish in this situation, is actually quite clever, since she is able to monitor and mandate both sides of her life, according to situational needs; that of the dutiful and obedient wife, and the independent and progressive woman.
NORA. Flesh-coloured! Aren’t they lovely! Oh, it’s so dark here now; but to-morrow....No, no, no, you must only look at the feet. Oh, well. might as well see a bit higher up, too.
ReplyDeleteIn this scene Nora and Rank are talking to each other and Nora is in complete denial over his love for her. The flirting is so evident between them but he actually feels real love her though she loves Helmer and thinks she's being cute and flirty by showing him the stockings. When Nora says “Oh it's so dark here now...”(57 Ibsen). She is alluding to Rank having syphilis and that his coming death is the darkness. In the Victorian Era women would wear stockings but because they didn't have a lot of stretch the shape was already like a leg when taken out of the box. Stockings I think we're basically lingerie at this time so showing Rank her stockings something Nora would wear under her clothing is very risque. Nora in the end of her dialogue is using sexual diction when saying that Rank “might as well see a bit higher up,” (57 Ibsen). Regarding the stocking shaped like a woman's leg and something that she would be wearing.
I agree with your analysis that Nora is flirting with Rank and vice versa. However, I think that Nora is doing this in order to manipulate Rank into either lending her money to pay off Krogstad or getting him to talk to Torvald about letting Krogstad keep his job.
ReplyDelete“All right, then we’ll share it, Nora- as man and wife. That’s what we’ll do. Does that make you happy now?” (Ibsen 44).
ReplyDeleteIn this scene Nora is deeply terrified about what is going to happen next, as Torvald did not follow her plea to let Krogstad stay in his position. She is distraught at the thought of failing to fix the situation before it got out of hand, and ironically speeded up Krogstad’s firing by attempting to convince Torvald to let Krogstad keep his job. To try to calm Nora down, Helmer says the quote above, and what really caused me to remember this quote more than any other from this second act, is the way Torvald refers to him and his wife. He refers to himself and Nora as man and wife, instead of husband and wife, and it shows what Helmer’s values are, as well the values of society back then as well. By substituting the word man in this statement, it implies that men in the relationship are the dominant ones, as they do not have a title that binds them to their spouse, but on the contrary their spouse is binded to them with their title (wife). It shows in Torvald and Nora’s relationship, as Helmer has just showed he makes all the decisions in the household by firing Krogstad against his wife’s wishes. It makes it clear that Torvald has all the power in their marriage, and that Nora cannot influence her husband’s actions, no matter what Nora or others may think. This thought of Nora being virtually powerless in this situation makes me want to pity her. She is practically observing the first few steps that will end her relationship with her husband take place, all while helplessly attempting to stop it, but failing horribly. At this point I believe she no longer has the option to stop her secret from being revealed to Torvald and the rest, but can only explain to him why she did the things she did, and hope that he will forgive her.
I completely agree with your analysis of the relationship between Torvald and Nora, how Torvald enjoys all the power in their relationship. Adding to this, I think that this traditional idea of marriage is reflected in smaller events in their life such as the upcoming party in which Torvald is planning the details of how Nora will act at the party according to his ideals. He has a delusional view of how a husband and wife should act which is further enabled by Nora’s behavior in front of Torvald, where she wishes to appear to be the ideal wife that he views her as.
DeleteHelmer "If it ever got around that the new manager had been talked over by his wife..."
ReplyDeleteNora "What of it?"
Helmer "Oh nothing!...Do you want me to make myself a laughing stock in the office?...Give people the idea that I am susceptible to any kind of outside pressure?" (Ibsen 42)
In this passage, the power struggle between the two characters is once again shown. The lack of dependence that Nora displays is furthered by this conversation. Like I stated in one of my previous blogs, the contrast between the assertive self she displays and the timid personality she also manifests when situations are not in her control are exhibited here.
Although this kind of dynamic would be common in the Victorian era, in present day it would be considered emotionally abusive to an extent. The character of Helmer speaks harshly, seeming to place all the blame on Nora for matters she knows nothing about. His comments of what people at work would say if they knew he had been influenced by her are meant to make her inferior, to belittle her, and they do work. He does not treat Nora as an equal, but rather, sees her as an insolent, ignorant person, and maybe not even that. The thought of having her opinion shared and having it sway the work he does embarrasses him, showing his superior attitude; a kind of aggressively male attitude that is only upheld by contemptuously putting down the woman in his life.
In this section, we also found about the disease that Doctor Rank has. Through euphemisms and epithets, the syphilis he has is alluded to. Starting with calling it 'tuberculosis of the spine', Rank reveals the tragic and ironic nature of his condition. Although he is a doctor, he is not able to cure himself and his own condition. The superior nature of Helmer in society is also shown through some of his comments regarding this, for the greatest concern he has for when he becomes too ill to function, is that Helmer may visit him and deem him 'ugly'. In page 46, Nora and Rank also use euphemisms to discuss the source of his sickness: his father's 'outgoing' life. Foods such as "asparagus", "truffles", "oysters", "port and champagne", and others were mentioned, and these are known as aphrodisiacs. This subtle yet clever way of referring to a scandalous lifestyle was used due to the inappropriateness of mentioning actual diseases in this era, due to the extreme politeness and emotionless state that so many displayed.
Your analysis is very interesting. I agree that there is a huge power struggle between Nora and Torvald. As the man of the house, Torvald has the most power, and is strict with his power. Nora on the other hand can be helpless at times, and does everything Torvald says. Other times she can be a bit defiant, for example when she eats the macaroons against his rules. This passage you chose from the play really highlights the gender roles each character plays. Torvald's diction is offensive, as he says it would be embarrassing for his wife to make a decision for him. This is his way of saying he can't let anyone think his wife has any power, because that would be completely wrong for this time period. This is a very sexist comment, and creates an effect of inequality. We have a very similar analysis on this passage, believing Torvald sees Nora, and other women, as inferior to himself and other males.
DeleteHey you guys!! So in the section I really noticed the way that Nora got kinda tossed around. She is trying to figure out a way to fix her forgery problem, but instead she just seems to be going more and more insane. Ibsen uses Nora's constant ramping to herself to show how she is slowing losing her mind trying to keep everything straight. In this time women were treated as under men, just like in a job how employees are under the employer. This is also paralleled in Krogstad's behavior in talking about Torvald. Torvald claims that Krogstad's ‘treats [him] as an equal,’ (43). Having Krogstad's as an equal he says would make his, ‘position at the Bank absolutely intolerable’ (43). This shows how class standards were upheld very strictly and how each person had a role and it would be very uncommon to step out of these roles. One of the societal roles that Torvald must follow is that of a strong husband, not bending under everything his wife asks if him. He doesn't want to, ‘give people the idea that [he is] susceptible to any kind of outside pressure,’ especially that of his wife (42). Another way this came up in just this small section was Nora’s interaction with Dr. Rank. He said that he didn't want Helmer to come visit him when he was dying because it would be out of place for him, so high up, to be visiting the home of a dying person(45). Throughout the entirety of the play so far, and especially right here, Dr. Rank always calls Torvald by Helmer, talking as though Torvald was his superior. Ibsen uses these fee interactions to show how the societal norms can be impressed on people, even if the person themselves do not notice or do not care for the roles that they have been given.
ReplyDeleteNearing the end of the play, both Nora and Rank refer to death and suicide quite often. I thought this was interesting though because neither one of them say any of the words like, ‘death, suicide, killing, or anything that would obviously state they were going to die. I think Ibsen does this because this is how society would see a subject like this. This would be a taboo sort of a subject and would only be mentioned with euphemisms behind closed doors. Things first start not seeming quite right when Dr. Rank comes downstairs and comments on the general layout of the room. He has visited their house at least once a day for a good long while by now. When questioned about his time upstairs, he responds with, “Why not make the most of things in this world? ...for as long as one can” (71). ALthough this is a lighthearted conversation, it really is the last time that this family will see their friend Rank, and Helmer does not even seem to notice the severity of this conversation. Ibsen shows that even when something is pretty severe, by not saying it directly, the impact on others is reduced severely. When Rank goes into it more, saying that he will be, “invisible...at the next masquerade,” Helmer still does not seem to grasp that this is Ranks way of saying he will be dead by then (72). There is also some foreshadowing of Nora killing herself right when Dr. Rank is leaving. Nora wishes Rank to, “sleep well,” and then for him to, “wish [her] the same” (72-730. This foreshadows Nora’s disappearance at the end, of her killing herself with just the total weight of her predicament with Helmer and how she does not approve of the way their marriage is going. Ibsen uses euphemisms to blanket the severity of situations, making them less harsh and more ‘friendly’ to the ear, not wanting to offend. This shows how the culture has changed so much and how Nora is just starting to realize that she doesn't have to die, but she can start a new life on her own. At the beginning her only option was to kill herself, but now she has found her confidence to leave Torvald and embark on her individual life.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your analysis and I like how you talked about the references to death because I don't think anyone really picked up on that. I think why Helmer does not seem to grasp the idea of death is because throughout the play he has been concerned with appearances and wanting everything to look happy even if that was not actually true. And because, like you said, death was a very dark subject people would try to either ignore it or mask it with words that seemed happier. I think for Helmer he decided to ignore it because it had nothing to do with his personal appearance.
DeleteOne thing that my group and I discussed about that we thought was interesting, was Helmer’s sudden change of disposition when he receives Krogstad’s first letter about Nora’s debt to him. In only a couple of pages, Torvald goes from delighted about the night out with his wife, to astonished and angry towards Nora’s secret convinced that it will ruin his life, and then back to delighted again after finding Krogstad’s apology letter. We all mentioned how Helmer’s emotions have quickly changed in that conversation in a matter of minutes, and thought of it as rather humorous at first. But looking at it later, I came to realize that it furthermore shows the readers Helmer’s values. After reading Krogstad’s letter Torvald states, “Now you have ruined my entire happiness, jeopardized my whole future. It’s terrible to think of. Here I am, at the mercy of a thoroughly unscrupulous person; he can do whatever he likes with me, demand anything he wants, order me about just as he chooses...and I daren’t even whimper. I’m done for, a miserable failure, and it’s all the fault of a feather-brained woman!” (Ibsen 76). Here Helmer is putting the blame on Nora for ruining his life, without even the slightest sense of mercy for his wife. Doesn’t he care for what Nora is feeling because of this situations as well? All he cares about is his job and reputation, and the thought of someone possibly tarnishing them, including his wife, enrages him greatly. Torvald frankly has little concern for anyone else, no matter how many times he calls Nora “his little songbird”, both of them know it ultimately comes down to him in the end, about who he cares the most about.
ReplyDeleteMy analysis of Torvald's contrasting emotions is very similar to yours. I also noticed that Torvald was first very upset and angry when reading Krogstad's letter. He told Nora they could never be happy together, and used very negative diction when speaking to her. He also told her they must stay together and pretend to be in love in public. This shows that he was very concerned what other people would think if they split up. Once reading Krogstad's next letter and receiving the IOU, Torvald's attitude flipped. He began to be kind again, and used more positive diction towards Nora. The fact that his attitude changed so drastically when receiving the IOU shows that he was more concerned that others would find out rather than what his wife really did. Torvald suddenly forgave Nora. This shows that her actions did not truly upset Torvald, and he really didn't care. What he did care about was how her actions would affect him and his job. All of this supports Torvald's selfish character. I believe his selfishness is what really caused Nora to walk out on him.
DeleteWe had a similar discussion in our group. We found Helmer's quick change of emotions aggressive and in the moment anger at first, but did eventually realize that he only cares for himself and not his wife. He seems to only care for his wife, when he has some sort of benefit. For example, their high place in society together allowed him to move up in the bank. But now her one mistake, could cost him his own job and his own reputation and he gets angry with her and does not wish to be with her. In a conversation with Dr. Rank, Nora says, " He would never hesitate for a moment to sacrifice his life for my mistake" (48). Do you think Nora truly believed that?
DeleteWow, what a post! I pretty much thought the same thing that you and your group did. I personally saw Helmer's usage of "my" instead of "our" when discussing the future to be quite revealing of his true nature. Did he not consider his and Nora's futures to be together as one? Or was he simply envisioning his work to be the highlight of his future and completely disregarding Nora?
DeleteWith the play finished and time to go over the work as a whole, there are some things that has gotten my focus now with the story complete. One of those things is the character Dr. Rank. I can’t but help feel sympathetic towards him, as he had to deal with a horrible incurable disease all throughout his life, despite him not being at fault for receiving it in the first place. It is presumed that he has no wife or children to care after, and that might be one of the reasons why he feels inclined to pay a visit at Torvald and Nora’s house everyday, as they are the only ones close enough to a family for him. One of the more notable quotes from Dr. Rank in the play is when he informs Nora that they will know his death has arrived by stating, “...I’ll send you my visiting card with a black cross on it. You’ll know then the final horrible disintegration has begun” (Ibsen 45). This action from Dr. Rank seemed very odd and peculiar to me when reading it for the first time. But now I understand it more. His entire role was practically small compared to others in the play, and was only used to aid viewers and readers in seeing a different perspective of Nora and Torvald when they are talking to someone other than themselves. Because of this, I believe Ibsen thought Dr. Rank should get a small deathscene as well, to fit along with the character that he has developed all throughout the play so far. It still saddens me that although he was very selfless in nature, no one really gave him the attention he deserved. For example, the idea of Dr. Rank not wanting Helmer visiting him because he does not want him to be upset, shows just how overly selfless he is, and the fact that both Nora and Torvald easily came to terms with Dr. Rank locking himself up until he dies, is mind boggling.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your analysis. This idea of Dr. Rank being selfless truly adds to the characteristics of both Helmer and Nora; meaning that they ignore Dr. Rank's selflessness to the point where the concept characterizes Nora and Helmer are selfish in a sort of way... I'm not sure how to really state this, but this is an idea...
DeleteLast time in class, my group participated in a discussion involving the following question: "Compare Nora and Kristine's lives since marriage. Who is better off? Explain."
ReplyDeleteAlthough my group came to the consensus that Kristine was in fact the superior lifestyle in this situation, I disagreed and my reasoning is as follows;
Although Nora has been objectified, she continues to live a life full of diversions and entertainment, while Kristine works hard for her earnings, making sacrifices along the way. Kristine gave up the love she had with Krogstad in order to marry into wealth, so she could take care of her brothers and sickly mother. When she was widowed, she was left with no money, and decided to work in order to earn what living she could. Restrictive laws in the Victorian Era did not allow for women to make as large of a living as men. This can be related to today, for women make $0.75 for every $1.00 a man makes, yet the wage gap was much greater in their era.
Nora's life is riddled with trivialities, not major problems. Her biggest secret is that she has a loan from a banker that was used on a trip to Italy. Although she claims that this was done out of pure love for her husband, she also uses this as a benefit to herself, having mentioned her desire to travel. She also knows that she is physically alluring to Torvald, being in a state of denial that this is lust and not pure love until the end, although she also uses this as an advantage when the situation deems it necessary. An example of this would be her dancing of the tarantella, entrancing Torvald so that he would not open the marriage-ruining letter. She has children, and seemingly cares for them, but it is implied that she is not the one to take care of their needs, for it is the maid that provides for them and does the difficult tasks, while Nora plays with them and appeals to their tender and fun-loving side. She doesn't take much responsibility in general, acting aloof. This could be because of the negative stereotyping that women had, regarding their knowledge, during this era, but the advantages that it brings to her are immense.
Nora complains about having a difficult life, yet she has all the material needs provided to her. The introduction of Dr. Rank in the story also shows that she lacks no love, although the relationship may not necessarily be with her husband, but has the ideal caring individual that is the standard for a (modern day) marriage.