In Act 1 of Henrik Ibsen’s “A Doll's House”, animal diction is utilized to classify societal roles. This can be seen through the relationship between characters Torvald Helmer and his wife Nora. The scene begins with the two discussing money and the issues that accompany the holiday of Christmas. Helmer then states, “Is that my little sky-lark chirruping out there?” (Ibsen 1). No longer is his wife her own person but classified as his property. This implies that women of the time period were given few rights and little freedom. Instead of doing their own thing they were forced to adhere to their husbands orders. Ibsen writes, “What do we call my pretty little pet when it runs away with all the money?” (4). Helmer states that Nora is his “pet” rather than wife and human. Pets are defined as “a domestic or tamed animal or bird kept for companionship or pleasure and treated with care and affection” (dictionary.com). By referring to her as a pet it demonstrates how highly and powerful men viewed themselves in relation to women. While juxtaposing Nora to her father Helmer says, “...I wouldn't want my pretty little songbird to be the least bit different from what she is now” (Ibsen 5). Rather than referring to his wife by her name, Helmer compares her to a bird and makes it clear that he does not want her to change anything about herself as he is in control. Throughout Act 1 Helmer makes a significant amount of bird and animal references while speaking to his wife to portray both gender norms and the growing inequality between men and women during the time.
I completely agree with your analysis. My first blog is very similar to yours. I also talked about animal diction/allusions but in addition, I discussed Nora’s diction specifically to help further reveal the theme of gender inequality. I used the quote, “Oh, please, Torvald dear! Please! I beg you” (Ibsen 4). Nora says this at the beginning of Act I and is begging Torvald for money. This reflects how men were much more powerful than women in this era because men were in charge of the money. Women often did not work and if they did, they got paid much lower than men, so women had to rely on men for an income. A lot of households were run like this during the Victorian Era: the men worked and made the money while the women stayed home and took care of the children.
In “A Doll’s House”, Henrik Ibsen utilizes animal diction to emphasize the minuscule role of women during the Victorian Era. Torvald Helmer refers to his wife, Nora, as an animal multiple times in act one. Helmer hears Nora’s chirping and tries to gather her attention, “is that my little sky-lark chirruping up there? (Ibsen 1). A skylark is a small bird, known for their song. Helmer’s comparison emphasizes her small role, as the bird is physically strong,b but also only known for a nearly irrelevant factor. Similar to how women during this era, didn’t have many skills to offer due to their lack of education. Also, Helmer describes his wife as his property by calling her his skylark, demonstrating the power men had over women during this era. Helmer disagrees with Nora about her ability to control money and refers to her as his little pet, “My little pet is very sweet, but it runs away with an awful lot of money. It’s incredible how expensive it is for a man to keep such a pet” (4). He refers to his wife as his own property, his pet. Pets have owners who control almost every aspect of their life, which is similar to women during this era, who had to watch men have all the political and social power. Helmer also does not refer to Nora by her name here, but instead fills her name in with his animal characteristic of her. That emphasizes the small power women had, as they weren’t even referred to as a person. Nora is described briefly described positively as being sweet, then quickly referred to as just an expense in Helmer’s life. Due to her lack of income, which was usually consistent for all women at this time, she was described as an expense. This treatment has become so normal to Nora, that even she refers to herself as animals, “Ah, if only you knew how many expenses the likes of us skylarks and squirrels have, Torvald!” (4). Nora even refuses to refer to herself as her own independent person, but instead also describes herself using the same animals her husband attached to her.
I heartily agree with your analysis, and believe it to be well thought out. Hellmer has quite the condescending tone when it comes to his wife, and this same tone is mimicked, in lesser degrees, to Nora by other men of the story. However, I feel as though Nora's use of the same pet names stems from her attempts to manipulate the situation to her advantage, rather than the relinquishing of her independance. After all, Nora tells Mrs. Linde that she enjoyed working on the memos, as she felt just like a man.
In A Doll’s House, Henrik Ibsen clearly distinguishes the different gender roles of men and women living in this time period. This play takes place during the Victorian era, a time where women had little to no rights. At this time, men were considered above women, and they were in charge. The men worked, while the women stayed at home. Along with this, the men were in charge of the household’s money. There was a great amount of inequality between men and women during this time. This shows why Act 1 of A Doll’s House is full of gender inequality, specifically between Nora and her husband, Torvald. To start, Torvald never addresses Nora as Nora, or as his wife. She is always called the name of an animal, Helmer: “Is that my little sky-lark chirruping out there?” (Ibsen 1). Here Torvald Helmer is referring to Nora as a type of bird. This is degrading, and shows the little respect men had towards women, and their little value. Another example of the gender inequality is when Nora has to beg Torvald for money. After being asked what she wants for Christmas, Nora “Oh, please, Torvald dear! Please! I beg you” (Ibsen 4). Nora asks her husband to give her money for Christmas so she can buy what she wants. The gender inequality of the time period is shown through this because Nora, the woman of the household, has no access to money other than through her husband. Women did not work at this time, so she has to beg for money. Torvald keeps refusing to give her money because she “wastes” it in his opinion. Because he is the man of the household he has the right to all their money, and gets to decide how it is spent. This means he does not have to get Nora any money. Due to the fact women don’t typically work, Nora would struggle being able to find her own job because of her lack of skills. Overall, there is a big differences in the roles of men and women throughout the first act of this play.
The play begins with Norma and her husband Helmer talking about how he recently just got a promotion at his job at the bank. The couple was extremely excited, because this promotion comes with a huge pay bump. Nora seems even more excited than Helmer is, and it seems a bit odd how excited she is. Helmer starts off from the very beginning demeaning his wife by accusing her of wasting money and calling her a spendthrift. "Has my little spendthrift been out squandering money again?" Helmer uses the word "again" giving his accusations a little bit of validity because she might have been a spendthrift in the past. She also seems a little too excited about getting more money, but this might be because she won't have to work her "odd jobs" anymore. It was very uncommon for a wife to work during the Victorian era, so they must have been very poor for her to have to work. "Helmer: and you don't have to strain your dear little eyes, and work those dainty fingers to the bone.... Nora: ...now I want to tell you how I've been thinking we might arrange things..." Pg 6 This shows two different themes that will most likely be evident throughout the play. It shows the belief that all women are dainty little creatures that can hardly work, and it also shows that Nora may actually be a spendthrift. She immediately asks him how they will rearrange things, because they have new money. It is very troubling to see this behavior so evident in the early stages of the play. I think Nora will probably go on a shopping spree and cause some major turmoil in her house.
In Act 1 of “A Doll’s House,” Henrik Ibsen clearly establishes an ongoing theme of secrecy through the characterization of Nora. To begin, Nora has been keeping a secret from her husband for several years, just now revealing it to a good friend. She visits with Mrs.Linde, Nora: “But the whole point was that he musn’t know anything” (16). Years ago, Torvald became very sick, and the only way to save him was to take at trip south. Nora lied to Torvald and told him her dying father gave them the money, but recently told her good friend Mrs.Linde this was not true. She secretly got a loan from Mr.Krogstad, which was unheard of a woman to do in this time period. When Mrs.Linde urges Nora to tell her husband this secret, Nora refuses, and says she does not want him to know because it will ruin their relationship. Another instance where Nora is secretive is when Mrs.Linde brings Nora macaroons. When Nora pulls out a bag of macaroons, Rank: “Look at this, eh? Macaroons. I thought they were forbidden here” (19). Mrs.Linde brings Nora a bag of macaroons as a gift, without knowing Torvald’s rule. He is limiting Nora’s sugar intake because he does not want her to ruin her own teeth. Despite this rule, Nora goes behind her husband’s back and eats the macaroons, without telling him. When Torvald returns to the room, she hides them under her coat so that he will never know. She keeps the macaroons a secret. Lastly, the theme of secrecy is evident when Torvald asks if anyone visited Nora while he was gone. Once returning home, Torvald: “Anybody been?” Nora: “Here? No” (30). Mr.Krogstad did in fact stop by the Helmer household when Torvald was gone, but Nora wanted to keep that a secret. He threatened to reveal her secret about the loan if she did not help him keep his job. Feeling scared, as well as nervous, Nora did not tell her husband about his surprise appearance. This lie was not successful, because Torvald saw Mr.Krogstad leaving their house. Although her secret was not completely kept secret this time, Nora still tried to be as secretive as she could. These examples show Nora’s dishonesty in Torvald and her relationship.
The secrecy can also be seen by Torvald’s many conversations behind the doors of his study. Nora does not ask what happened and he does not tell her anything. This shows it is normal for a man’s business to be kept his business. Henrik Ibsen shows all of Nora’s secrecy, but fails to show Torvald’s conversations behind the door. This could be hinting that women keeping secrets from their husbands is looked down upon more that husbands secrets. Nora’s secrecy is done so her family can be happy and conform to the Victorian society behaviors. She tells Torvald she use to work hard making everything appear nice and good when they were struggling financially. They were not suppose to show any problems they were dealing with when in society. I also noticed that Nora’s relationship with Torvald is based on lies from both of them. Their relationship appears stable and strong, but once all the secrecy is revealed their relationship will face major issues.
In Act one of “A Doll’s House”, Henrik Ibsen displays the importance of money, and it’s ability to define gender roles. A common motif throughout act one is the idea of wealth and money, which would foreshadow its importance throughout the rest of the play. During this time, more wealth meant a higher social class. Helmer was recently promoted in his position at the bank, which increased his popularity and visitors. Nora, the wife who has no salary, asks the husband for money in order to make Christmas extravagant, but he replies, “Has my little spendthrift been out squandering money again? “ (Ibsen 2). Helmer refers to his wife as a spendthrift, which is someone who is an extravagant spender and irresponsible with money. This name given to the wife by the husband demonstrates his financial power over her due to his control over her and the income. Also, Helmer refers to Nora as “my spendthrift”, displaying his ownership of his wife in all aspects of life, but primarily when it comes to financials. Men’s superior powers over women was very common during this era, as it was rare for a women to even hold a job. The importance of a steady income and societal power was very important to most even Krogstad, “ I shall fight for my little job in the bank as if I were fighting for my life” (25). In this dialogue, Krogstad reveals that he finds money as important as his own life. Krogstad’s line literally means that he would die just to keep his job at the bank, however he is just displaying the importance of money in the hierarchy of society. With his past he understand this is one of his few job opportunities and wants to take full advantage and not lose it, thus losing his income and money.
In his play “A Doll’s House”, Ibsen uses the symbol of the doll to characterize Nora.The doll represents what men viewed a woman's place in society should be. Women at the time were viewed as submissive, childlike, and inferior towards their husbands rather than equals. In the first act Ibsen characterizes Nora as an inferior, childish, and obedient wife to her husband Torvalt. She is portrayed as a doll, with little power and little control over situations occurring around her. While speaking to Nora, old friend Mrs. Linde states, “What a child you are Nora!” (Ibsen 12). Unlike the other adults in the play she is portrayed as a careless little girl with no power in comparison to her husband and friends. Nora isn't given the opportunity to be completely in control of a situation until she begins to play with her children. While referring to her daughter she states, “There’s my sweet baby-doll!” (22). This is one of the few instances where Nora herself is looked up to. Rather than referring to her daughter by her name she calls her a “baby-doll” as if she were a toy she could control. When Nora is with her children she transforms herself from a submissive “doll” to an empowered women that has influence over individuals lives.
I also did one of my blog entries on the symbolism of a doll and a doll’s house! I like how you connected the diction of Torvald with the symbol and now I understand how the animal allusions/diction that Torvald uses connects to the symbol of a doll. To better your analysis you could discuss when Nora says, “He used to call me his baby doll, and he played with me as I used to play with my dolls” (Ibsen 80). This quote is at the end of the play, so you hadn’t read it yet, but I think it would add some depth to your blog entry. This quote is really interesting because it is Nora explaining how she feels: like a doll that is controlled by the men in her life. It mirrors the gender roles present during the Victorian Era.
Throughout his play “A Doll’s House”, Ibsen uses stage directions to portray how deceiving appearances can be. The title, “A Doll’s House”, is symbolic of an ideal, successful, and loving family. The play begins by discussing a family with an average sized home, steady income, and open living space. Few things are said about the family through the stage directions, instead, their actions and wealthier qualities are shown. The stage directions in the play constantly refer to the luxury items and comfy interior of the family’s home rather than the interior conflicts characters hide. Ibsen writes, “She sits down on the sofa… she takes off various things out of the box” (47). Prior to these stage directions Dr. Rank had confessed his long love for Nora. However, they do not relate at all to this situation in the stage directions. Instead, the idea of comfort and wealth is evidenced by the objects inside of the room. Rather than listing specific items Nora removes from the box Ibsen uses the word various to suggest a large amount. In addition to this Ibsen writes, “[Rank sits down at the piano and plays. Nora dances more and more wildly. Torvald stands by the stove giving her repeated directions as she dances; she does not seem to hear them. Her hair comes undone and falls about her shoulders; she pays no attention and goes on dancing]” (59). While the directions portray the Helmer’s lives as jocund, analyzing the actions more in depth foreshadows the problematic situations that have risen. This is also an example of how dramatic irony is utilized as Torvald is unaware of the secret Nora has kept behind his back for years. What had happened when he was diagnosed with tuberculosis of the spine, the actions she had completed, the forgery that took place. Throughout the first two acts the “ideal” family that had once appeared to live such a perfect life in their “doll house” is undermined by the dark secrets that Nora, Dr. Rank, Krogstad, and Mrs. Linde hold onto.
In the play “A Doll's House” Ibsen uses euphemisms and jargon in order to accurately portray elizabethan era social classes and the time period itself. Anything pleasurable in the elizabethan era was considered taboo, and was absolutely forbidden to talk about. This includes: gambling, dressing in a provocative way, cursing, especially sex and anything to do with sex. Talking about any of these subjects was out of the question, and everyone had to be so prim and proper outside of their homes, even though people were just as bad if not worse back then. This means everyone had to avoid most subjects and were probably pretty bored, because all of the fun topics are taboo. The most taboo of all was sex. Which is ironic, because we still are here so they obviously had sex. Anything to do with sex was forbidden. Especially STD’s. The most common and the most dangerous STD of the time was syphilis. In the play “A Doll’s House” Ibsen addresses this taboo very subtly by using a euphemism, “He’s got something seriously wrong with him, you know. Tuberculosis of the spine, poor fellow. His father was a horrible man, who used to have mistresses and things like that. That's why the son was always ailing right from being a child” (pg37). They called syphilis “tuberculosis of the spine” that shows just how backwards this time was from our own. They all know what caused the disease, and they all know what it is called, but they are so afraid to talk about sex that they have to give the disease some dumb euphemism like TB of the spine.
Wow, what a post! I thought that your points on how many of the statements that Ibsen made were conveyed through euphemism were spot on. In the time period of the story, taboo topics were often skated around by society, so this method of writing was crucial in making the setting feel authentic and genuine. In a way, I think that even current society reflects this unwillingness to discuss the elephant(s) in the room, as we still tend to lean away from tough topics. Elizabethan Era definitely seems boring, by the way.
Nora: “Five. Seven hours to midnight. Then twenty-four hours till the next midnight. Then he tarantella will be over. Twenty-four and seven? Thirty-one hours to live.”
Helmer: “ What’s happened to our little sky-lark?”
Nora: [running towards him with open arms] “Here she is!” (61)
Henrik Ibsen utilizes symbolism to characterize Nora and her relationship with her husband, Helmer. Throughout the play you are able to see the weak marriage between Nora and Helmer due to the constant secrecy between the two. Helmer continually has conversations behind closed doors and Nora has yet to tell him about her forgery. However, she knows that when Helmer finds out about her mistake the marriage will end as she will lower down in society similar to Krogstad. She counts down and is preparing for the end knowing the marriage will immediately end and she will be sent to the bottom of the social hierarchy. The marriage is revolved around money and the position in society they have as a couple. Helmer’s reference to his wife as a sky-lark displays his control over his wife. The skylark symbolizes Nora and her submissive behavior towards her husband. A sky-lark is a bird typically found in the open country, however rather than being free, Nora is locked in a specific area. This is typical of women during this era, due to their lack of independence at the time. Husbands had the power and women were directed to listen to them and unable to attain jobs. Nora is displayed as an obedient wife to Helmer, however dramatic irony is used to allow the readers to know Nora’s true behavior. The tarantella is used to symbolize the end of the marriage, because once it ends, Nora knows the marriage will as well. That is why she counts out how much time she has left to enjoy herself. She continues to act normal to her husband, by running into his arms, in order to make him believe nothing is wrong.
Nora: “I shan’t be able to dance tomorrow if I don’t rehearse it with you.” Helmer: “Are you really so nervous, Nora dear? Nora: “Terribly nervous. Let me run through it now. There’s still time before supper. Come and sit here and play for me” (Ibsen 58).
After Krogstad leaves a letter in the letter box, revealing Nora’s secret, Nora becomes incredibly nervous. She does everything she can to distract Torvald from going to the letter box, and reading the letter. In order to keep Torvald from opening the letter, she purposely forgets the dance she is supposed to perform the next night, in order to get Torvald’s full attention. He must now teach her the dance again, which wastes time. In this conversation between Torvald and Nora, Nora’s short sentences show her nervousness, and anxiety. She is speaking very quick, with lots of short sentences that give the impression that she is trying to hide something. She is speaking quick enough that no one can interrupt her while she continues rambling. Ibsen purposely structures Nora’s lines like this to show how frantic she was. As their conversation continues, this pattern does too. Torvald begins to catch on to Nora’s strange attitude, and is persistent on checking the letter box. Along with this, the letter itself is a symbol that secrets and lies do not always stay secret, and this can be uncontrollable at times. Nora thought Torvald would never find out about her loan. This letter shows that she was wrong, and that she has no control over this secret. This theme goes along with the rest of the play, because there are numerous lies and secrets throughout the play. Having no control over the letter makes Nora feel hopeless, and wishing she had never lied in the first place. This incident serves as a lesson that lying is not the best option, and that it may come back and hurt you later on.
In his play “A Doll's House”, Henrik Ibsen uses doll diction to symbolize manipulation and control. During the Victorian Era, a “woman's” place was considered to be working in the home while also caring for and respecting their husbands. The play opens with Nora doing everything in her power to keep her husband Torvald content and happy. However, as the play progresses the couple's marriage slowly begins to disintegrate and unravel as long kept secrets are released. Throughout the play Nora, Torvald’s pretty, submissive, and secretive wife is viewed as his “Doll”. For the eight years they were married Nora was powerless in comparison to her husband. Nora’s statement is symbolic of women's suffrage and the increase in pride and dignity that became distilled in women. Thus beginning the drive for women's rights in society. During the argument between Torvald and Nora she states, “I have been your doll wife, just as at home I was Daddy’s doll child. And the children in turn have been my dolls. I thought it was fun when you played with me, just as they thought it was fun when I went and played with them” (Ibsen 80-81). This reveals the parallels between the relationship between Nora and her father and Nora and Torvald. Her relationships show the ways she feels she is trapped in a society where women are unable to become independent individuals because of the prominent male figures. Prior to leaving her husband and children, Nora states, “Perhaps… if you have taken your doll away” (85). This act is symbolic of women realizing their true potentials. Rather than being trapped in a “dolls house” constantly being manipulated and pushed around, women of the late 1800s wanted to attain their own independence and freedom.
I completely agree with your analysis; as typical as that sounds. I also talked about the same topic in the fact that Nora, along with many other women during the Victorian Era, were the “dolls” of the house and they were constantly thought of as nothing more. Their only real job was to make sure their husbands were happy and satisfied, and although important, not the job that would bring them great honor in pride. I think by Ibsen starting the play off with her constantly being in the house, it quickly shows the symbolism of the word usage of “doll” in the title and sets the mood for the rest of the play as well.
In Act 3 of, “A Doll’s House,” Henrik Ibsen uses contrasting diction to display the effects Krogstad’s letters had on Torvald. After first reading the letter, Torvald: “Oh, what a terrible awakening this is. All these eight years...this woman who was my pride and joy...a hypocrite, a liar, worse than that, a criminal!” (Ibsen 75). When first finding out about Nora’s loan from Krogstad, Torvald is befuddled. He cannot believe his own wife could go behind his back and do something illegal. Torvald’s diction is harsh and negative. This shows how upset he truly is, and how big of a deal Nora’s loan is. Torvald later says that they will have to pretend they are happy when out in public, but at home there will be no happiness. They have to keep on acting like they are in love to preserve their names, and images. During this time period, reputation was everything, and if Nora’s secret was found out by the public, their whole family’s reputation would be completely destroyed. This is what Torvald fears more than anything. Once the IOU is returned, Torvald: “You can’t bring yourself to believe I’ve forgiven you. But I have, Nora, I swear it. I forgive you everything. I know you did what you did because you love me” (Ibsen 77). Torvald’s diction dramatically changes from negative and harsh, to positive, forgiving, and kind. He speaks at a rapid pace, which shows how at ease Torvald has become now that the stress of his reputation has been lifted. Torvald at one point said him and Nora could no longer be happy together, and he was disgusted with her actions. Now he has forgotten all about that, and tells Nora they can live happily ever after again. Ibsen uses this contrasting diction to characterize Torvald, and reveal his true intentions, and what he really cares about. Because the IOU did so much to change Torvald’s attitude towards the situation, it is obvious Torvald did not care about his wife as much as he cared about his own reputation. Torvald is expressed as an even more selfish character because of this. He does nothing to stand up for his own wife, nor acknowledge that what she did was all for him. Torvald’s selfish behaviors are what eventually lead Nora to leave him. Before she decides to leave, Torvald forgives her and says they can forget about what happened. Nora does not let this stop her, and she leaves. She has realized Torvald never really cared for her, but used her as a way to boost his own reputation.
I highly agree with your post and all the points you made because, similar to my post, you expressed the themes of reputation over relationship. However, in my post, I talked about the progress within their relationship throughout the play and how in the beginning Torvald was acting normal and just going with the norms of how a husband is supposed to act, while during the end of the play, he completely changed. I thought your analysis about his pacing in words and sentences and how Ibsen structured the sentences was a really in-depth and good point. It made me notice something I didn't take in consideration of before. Thanks!
In Act III of “A Doll’s House”, Dr. Rank’s sarcastic and metaphorical dialogue, based off of their last conversation, allows Nora to learn about his imminent death. Nora and Rank’s deep friendship and love for the companionship is revealed in act three. Rank reveals his bad health to Nora, “These last few days I’ve made a careful analysis on my internal economy. Bankrupt! Within a month I shall probably by lying rotting up there in the churchyard” (Ibsen 45). Nora is now aware of Dr. Rank’s death in the future. The reader is able to see the friendship between the two. They both trust each other, and crave companionship. That’s why the reader is able to conclude that Helmer is unaware of the death, because neither Dr. Rank nor Nora tell him secrets in hope that he will keep them, so they decided to keep one more from him. Rank also tells Nora that she will be unable to visit him and he will send her a goodbye, “As soon as I’m absolutely certain of the worst, I’ll send you my visiting card with a black cross on it” (45). Later, Dr. Rank visits with Nora and Helmer and tells her about his medical test, “Rank: The best possible, for both doctor and patient-certainty! Nora: Certainty? Rank: Absolute certainty.” (71). The term certainty allows Nora to understand that the test did in fact not go well, but rather that Dr. Rank now has certainty of his near death. This leaves Helmer with the believe that Dr. Rank is perfectly healthy, since we was uninvolved in the previous conversation. Immediately prior to leaving, Nora says goodbye, “Sleep well, Dr. Rank” (72). He wishes for her the same thing. Sleep symbolizes death as Nora says goodbye to Rank. However, Rank returns the favor when being asked to, so it becomes evident that he is wishing her luck on staying alive during her future endeavors, whether it involves Helmer finding out her secret, or her life on her own. After leaving, Dr. Rank leaves a letter with a simple black cross on it. Nora understands its meaning, thus ending their friendship as she is no longer allowed to see him and must tell Helmer about his death.
Through Ibsen's uses of transforming diction and jargon the characters are elusive and vague in act 1, but by act 3 every character has fully developed and relationships become more distinct. All of the characters in the play use all sorts of phrases and jargon consistent through the era, and as a result they never seem to talk about anything that reveals them as a character. Part of this is due to that the play is set in the victorian era, so most things that reveal oneself were taboo to show to other people for example emotions. This rejection of what people truly want and the rejection of any sort of emotional or rational conversation is shown when nora asks for a more extravagant christmas. “Nora: But Torvald, surely this year we can spread ourselves just a little.. This is the first Christmas we haven't had to go carefully. Helmer: Ah, but that doesn't mean we can afford to be extravagant you know” When Nora asks for a simple thing, not even that much to ask, and she gets completely shot down with Helmer talking to her like a child. Helmer talking to her like a child never stopped, but the way Nora reacted to this demeaning behavior did change. We watched her evolve massively as a character when she talked with Rank and Krogstad, as she was no longer the victim in this relationship. She slowly started to take control of her relationships and her life. As a result we get to see Nora evolve from this week little subservient wife, to a grown and strong women that is willing to stand up for herself and free herself from her “doll like” life.
In “A Dolls House”, Henrik Ibsen uses the motif of freedom to characterize Nora. Nora’s understandings and views on freedom drastically change throughout the play. In the first act, Nora believes that once she pays off her debt she will be free from her troubles. Without debt, she would be given the chance to completely fulfill her domestic role as an obedient housewife. While conversing with Krogstad about the loan she took from him Nora states, “Why? You'll soon have all your money back… This was the thing to save my husbands life” (Ibsen 28). Even though it's against the law, Nora uses forgery and risks her marriage in order to save her husband's life. Although she had good motives, the law has no By the end of the play, Nora learns that money won't solve all problems. In order to save her marriage from turmoil she must do what's best for her family. Nora risks her marriage for the love of her family. She states, “you must not feel in any way bound, any more than I shall. There must be full freedom in any way bound, any more than I shall. There must be full freedom on both sides. Look, here's your ring back. Give me mine” (85). Once Torvald reads over Krogstad’s letter about the secret him and Nora had been hiding Nora realizes that the only way for both of them to be content and free is by permanent separation. Prior to this she had believed that simply paying off her debt would solve all problems. However, she must find her self identity before she can share her life and love with another individual.
In Act III, the motif of control and manipulation along with the on-going doll metaphor to characterize Nora and demonstrate the gender roles during this era. On the outside, Nora looks like a normal wife during this era. By the end of the play, Nora has broken away from the normal standards and declares that she wishes to be independent. She tells Helmer, “I believe first and foremost I am an individual, just as much as you are” (Ibsen 82). By telling Helmer that she views them as equals she is decreasing his control over her which she has put up with for many years. She also ends her submissive behavior and stands up for herself and the things which she wishes to do in her own life, which was very rare during this time. In fact, most wives did not leave their husband and generally they weren't supposed to, which emphasizes Nora’s bravery and individual fight for independence. She ends the manipulation by Helmer, which she commonly relates to a doll in a doll house. She argues with Helmer claiming that it all began with her father, “He used to call me his baby doll, and he played with me as I used to play with my dolls. Then I came to live in your house…” (80). Nora’s bravery is displayed here as she is not only arguing her husband’s control over her, but also generalizing the harsh control of men over women, by declaring that the mistreatment began with her father. After being controlled her whole life, Nora ends it and leaves it behind her hoping to start anew. She also describes how she adapted to minimal rights and opinions, “I passed out of Daddy’s hands into yours. You arranged everything to your tastes, and I acquired the same tastes” (80). Nora is now referring to all treatment of women during this time. And explaining how women never have freedom since they are controlled since birth. In Act III, Nora uses her bravery to display the gender roles during this time period.
Hello Everybody, My name is Mrs Sharon Sim. I live in Singapore and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave me happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of S$250,000.00 to start my life all over as i am a single mother with 3 kids I met this honest and GOD fearing man loan lender that help me with a loan of S$250,000.00 SG. Dollar, he is a GOD fearing man, if you are in need of loan and you will pay back the loan please contact him tell him that is Mrs Sharon, that refer you to him. contact Dr Purva Pius,via email:(urgentloan22@gmail.com) Thank you.
BORROWERS APPLICATION DETAILS
1. Name Of Applicant in Full:…….. 2. Telephone Numbers:………. 3. Address and Location:……. 4. Amount in request……….. 5. Repayment Period:……….. 6. Purpose Of Loan…………. 7. country………………… 8. phone………………….. 9. occupation……………… 10.age/sex………………… 11.Monthly Income………….. 12.Email……………..
In Act 1 of Henrik Ibsen’s “A Doll's House”, animal diction is utilized to classify societal roles. This can be seen through the relationship between characters Torvald Helmer and his wife Nora. The scene begins with the two discussing money and the issues that accompany the holiday of Christmas. Helmer then states, “Is that my little sky-lark chirruping out there?” (Ibsen 1). No longer is his wife her own person but classified as his property. This implies that women of the time period were given few rights and little freedom. Instead of doing their own thing they were forced to adhere to their husbands orders. Ibsen writes, “What do we call my pretty little pet when it runs away with all the money?” (4). Helmer states that Nora is his “pet” rather than wife and human. Pets are defined as “a domestic or tamed animal or bird kept for companionship or pleasure and treated with care and affection” (dictionary.com). By referring to her as a pet it demonstrates how highly and powerful men viewed themselves in relation to women. While juxtaposing Nora to her father Helmer says, “...I wouldn't want my pretty little songbird to be the least bit different from what she is now” (Ibsen 5). Rather than referring to his wife by her name, Helmer compares her to a bird and makes it clear that he does not want her to change anything about herself as he is in control. Throughout Act 1 Helmer makes a significant amount of bird and animal references while speaking to his wife to portray both gender norms and the growing inequality between men and women during the time.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your analysis. My first blog is very similar to yours. I also talked about animal diction/allusions but in addition, I discussed Nora’s diction specifically to help further reveal the theme of gender inequality. I used the quote, “Oh, please, Torvald dear! Please! I beg you” (Ibsen 4). Nora says this at the beginning of Act I and is begging Torvald for money. This reflects how men were much more powerful than women in this era because men were in charge of the money. Women often did not work and if they did, they got paid much lower than men, so women had to rely on men for an income. A lot of households were run like this during the Victorian Era: the men worked and made the money while the women stayed home and took care of the children.
DeleteIn “A Doll’s House”, Henrik Ibsen utilizes animal diction to emphasize the minuscule role of women during the Victorian Era. Torvald Helmer refers to his wife, Nora, as an animal multiple times in act one. Helmer hears Nora’s chirping and tries to gather her attention, “is that my little sky-lark chirruping up there? (Ibsen 1). A skylark is a small bird, known for their song. Helmer’s comparison emphasizes her small role, as the bird is physically strong,b but also only known for a nearly irrelevant factor. Similar to how women during this era, didn’t have many skills to offer due to their lack of education. Also, Helmer describes his wife as his property by calling her his skylark, demonstrating the power men had over women during this era. Helmer disagrees with Nora about her ability to control money and refers to her as his little pet, “My little pet is very sweet, but it runs away with an awful lot of money. It’s incredible how expensive it is for a man to keep such a pet” (4). He refers to his wife as his own property, his pet. Pets have owners who control almost every aspect of their life, which is similar to women during this era, who had to watch men have all the political and social power. Helmer also does not refer to Nora by her name here, but instead fills her name in with his animal characteristic of her. That emphasizes the small power women had, as they weren’t even referred to as a person. Nora is described briefly described positively as being sweet, then quickly referred to as just an expense in Helmer’s life. Due to her lack of income, which was usually consistent for all women at this time, she was described as an expense. This treatment has become so normal to Nora, that even she refers to herself as animals, “Ah, if only you knew how many expenses the likes of us skylarks and squirrels have, Torvald!” (4). Nora even refuses to refer to herself as her own independent person, but instead also describes herself using the same animals her husband attached to her.
ReplyDeleteI heartily agree with your analysis, and believe it to be well thought out. Hellmer has quite the condescending tone when it comes to his wife, and this same tone is mimicked, in lesser degrees, to Nora by other men of the story. However, I feel as though Nora's use of the same pet names stems from her attempts to manipulate the situation to her advantage, rather than the relinquishing of her independance. After all, Nora tells Mrs. Linde that she enjoyed working on the memos, as she felt just like a man.
DeleteIn A Doll’s House, Henrik Ibsen clearly distinguishes the different gender roles of men and women living in this time period. This play takes place during the Victorian era, a time where women had little to no rights. At this time, men were considered above women, and they were in charge. The men worked, while the women stayed at home. Along with this, the men were in charge of the household’s money. There was a great amount of inequality between men and women during this time. This shows why Act 1 of A Doll’s House is full of gender inequality, specifically between Nora and her husband, Torvald. To start, Torvald never addresses Nora as Nora, or as his wife. She is always called the name of an animal, Helmer: “Is that my little sky-lark chirruping out there?” (Ibsen 1). Here Torvald Helmer is referring to Nora as a type of bird. This is degrading, and shows the little respect men had towards women, and their little value. Another example of the gender inequality is when Nora has to beg Torvald for money. After being asked what she wants for Christmas, Nora “Oh, please, Torvald dear! Please! I beg you” (Ibsen 4). Nora asks her husband to give her money for Christmas so she can buy what she wants. The gender inequality of the time period is shown through this because Nora, the woman of the household, has no access to money other than through her husband. Women did not work at this time, so she has to beg for money. Torvald keeps refusing to give her money because she “wastes” it in his opinion. Because he is the man of the household he has the right to all their money, and gets to decide how it is spent. This means he does not have to get Nora any money. Due to the fact women don’t typically work, Nora would struggle being able to find her own job because of her lack of skills. Overall, there is a big differences in the roles of men and women throughout the first act of this play.
ReplyDeleteThe play begins with Norma and her husband Helmer talking about how he recently just got a promotion at his job at the bank. The couple was extremely excited, because this promotion comes with a huge pay bump. Nora seems even more excited than Helmer is, and it seems a bit odd how excited she is. Helmer starts off from the very beginning demeaning his wife by accusing her of wasting money and calling her a spendthrift. "Has my little spendthrift been out squandering money again?" Helmer uses the word "again" giving his accusations a little bit of validity because she might have been a spendthrift in the past. She also seems a little too excited about getting more money, but this might be because she won't have to work her "odd jobs" anymore. It was very uncommon for a wife to work during the Victorian era, so they must have been very poor for her to have to work.
ReplyDelete"Helmer: and you don't have to strain your dear little eyes, and work those dainty fingers to the bone....
Nora: ...now I want to tell you how I've been thinking we might arrange things..." Pg 6
This shows two different themes that will most likely be evident throughout the play. It shows the belief that all women are dainty little creatures that can hardly work, and it also shows that Nora may actually be a spendthrift. She immediately asks him how they will rearrange things, because they have new money. It is very troubling to see this behavior so evident in the early stages of the play. I think Nora will probably go on a shopping spree and cause some major turmoil in her house.
In Act 1 of “A Doll’s House,” Henrik Ibsen clearly establishes an ongoing theme of secrecy through the characterization of Nora. To begin, Nora has been keeping a secret from her husband for several years, just now revealing it to a good friend. She visits with Mrs.Linde, Nora: “But the whole point was that he musn’t know anything” (16). Years ago, Torvald became very sick, and the only way to save him was to take at trip south. Nora lied to Torvald and told him her dying father gave them the money, but recently told her good friend Mrs.Linde this was not true. She secretly got a loan from Mr.Krogstad, which was unheard of a woman to do in this time period. When Mrs.Linde urges Nora to tell her husband this secret, Nora refuses, and says she does not want him to know because it will ruin their relationship. Another instance where Nora is secretive is when Mrs.Linde brings Nora macaroons. When Nora pulls out a bag of macaroons, Rank: “Look at this, eh? Macaroons. I thought they were forbidden here” (19). Mrs.Linde brings Nora a bag of macaroons as a gift, without knowing Torvald’s rule. He is limiting Nora’s sugar intake because he does not want her to ruin her own teeth. Despite this rule, Nora goes behind her husband’s back and eats the macaroons, without telling him. When Torvald returns to the room, she hides them under her coat so that he will never know. She keeps the macaroons a secret. Lastly, the theme of secrecy is evident when Torvald asks if anyone visited Nora while he was gone. Once returning home, Torvald: “Anybody been?” Nora: “Here? No” (30). Mr.Krogstad did in fact stop by the Helmer household when Torvald was gone, but Nora wanted to keep that a secret. He threatened to reveal her secret about the loan if she did not help him keep his job. Feeling scared, as well as nervous, Nora did not tell her husband about his surprise appearance. This lie was not successful, because Torvald saw Mr.Krogstad leaving their house. Although her secret was not completely kept secret this time, Nora still tried to be as secretive as she could. These examples show Nora’s dishonesty in Torvald and her relationship.
ReplyDeleteThe secrecy can also be seen by Torvald’s many conversations behind the doors of his study. Nora does not ask what happened and he does not tell her anything. This shows it is normal for a man’s business to be kept his business. Henrik Ibsen shows all of Nora’s secrecy, but fails to show Torvald’s conversations behind the door. This could be hinting that women keeping secrets from their husbands is looked down upon more that husbands secrets. Nora’s secrecy is done so her family can be happy and conform to the Victorian society behaviors. She tells Torvald she use to work hard making everything appear nice and good when they were struggling financially. They were not suppose to show any problems they were dealing with when in society. I also noticed that Nora’s relationship with Torvald is based on lies from both of them. Their relationship appears stable and strong, but once all the secrecy is revealed their relationship will face major issues.
DeleteIn Act one of “A Doll’s House”, Henrik Ibsen displays the importance of money, and it’s ability to define gender roles. A common motif throughout act one is the idea of wealth and money, which would foreshadow its importance throughout the rest of the play. During this time, more wealth meant a higher social class. Helmer was recently promoted in his position at the bank, which increased his popularity and visitors. Nora, the wife who has no salary, asks the husband for money in order to make Christmas extravagant, but he replies, “Has my little spendthrift been out squandering money again? “ (Ibsen 2). Helmer refers to his wife as a spendthrift, which is someone who is an extravagant spender and irresponsible with money. This name given to the wife by the husband demonstrates his financial power over her due to his control over her and the income. Also, Helmer refers to Nora as “my spendthrift”, displaying his ownership of his wife in all aspects of life, but primarily when it comes to financials. Men’s superior powers over women was very common during this era, as it was rare for a women to even hold a job. The importance of a steady income and societal power was very important to most even Krogstad, “ I shall fight for my little job in the bank as if I were fighting for my life” (25). In this dialogue, Krogstad reveals that he finds money as important as his own life. Krogstad’s line literally means that he would die just to keep his job at the bank, however he is just displaying the importance of money in the hierarchy of society. With his past he understand this is one of his few job opportunities and wants to take full advantage and not lose it, thus losing his income and money.
ReplyDeleteIn his play “A Doll’s House”, Ibsen uses the symbol of the doll to characterize Nora.The doll represents what men viewed a woman's place in society should be. Women at the time were viewed as submissive, childlike, and inferior towards their husbands rather than equals. In the first act Ibsen characterizes Nora as an inferior, childish, and obedient wife to her husband Torvalt. She is portrayed as a doll, with little power and little control over situations occurring around her. While speaking to Nora, old friend Mrs. Linde states, “What a child you are Nora!” (Ibsen 12). Unlike the other adults in the play she is portrayed as a careless little girl with no power in comparison to her husband and friends. Nora isn't given the opportunity to be completely in control of a situation until she begins to play with her children. While referring to her daughter she states, “There’s my sweet baby-doll!” (22). This is one of the few instances where Nora herself is looked up to. Rather than referring to her daughter by her name she calls her a “baby-doll” as if she were a toy she could control. When Nora is with her children she transforms herself from a submissive “doll” to an empowered women that has influence over individuals lives.
ReplyDeleteI also did one of my blog entries on the symbolism of a doll and a doll’s house! I like how you connected the diction of Torvald with the symbol and now I understand how the animal allusions/diction that Torvald uses connects to the symbol of a doll. To better your analysis you could discuss when Nora says, “He used to call me his baby doll, and he played with me as I used to play with my dolls” (Ibsen 80). This quote is at the end of the play, so you hadn’t read it yet, but I think it would add some depth to your blog entry. This quote is really interesting because it is Nora explaining how she feels: like a doll that is controlled by the men in her life. It mirrors the gender roles present during the Victorian Era.
DeleteThroughout his play “A Doll’s House”, Ibsen uses stage directions to portray how deceiving appearances can be. The title, “A Doll’s House”, is symbolic of an ideal, successful, and loving family. The play begins by discussing a family with an average sized home, steady income, and open living space. Few things are said about the family through the stage directions, instead, their actions and wealthier qualities are shown. The stage directions in the play constantly refer to the luxury items and comfy interior of the family’s home rather than the interior conflicts characters hide. Ibsen writes, “She sits down on the sofa… she takes off various things out of the box” (47). Prior to these stage directions Dr. Rank had confessed his long love for Nora. However, they do not relate at all to this situation in the stage directions. Instead, the idea of comfort and wealth is evidenced by the objects inside of the room. Rather than listing specific items Nora removes from the box Ibsen uses the word various to suggest a large amount. In addition to this Ibsen writes, “[Rank sits down at the piano and plays. Nora dances more and more wildly. Torvald stands by the stove giving her repeated directions as she dances; she does not seem to hear them. Her hair comes undone and falls about her shoulders; she pays no attention and goes on dancing]” (59). While the directions portray the Helmer’s lives as jocund, analyzing the actions more in depth foreshadows the problematic situations that have risen. This is also an example of how dramatic irony is utilized as Torvald is unaware of the secret Nora has kept behind his back for years. What had happened when he was diagnosed with tuberculosis of the spine, the actions she had completed, the forgery that took place. Throughout the first two acts the “ideal” family that had once appeared to live such a perfect life in their “doll house” is undermined by the dark secrets that Nora, Dr. Rank, Krogstad, and Mrs. Linde hold onto.
ReplyDeleteIn the play “A Doll's House” Ibsen uses euphemisms and jargon in order to accurately portray elizabethan era social classes and the time period itself. Anything pleasurable in the elizabethan era was considered taboo, and was absolutely forbidden to talk about. This includes: gambling, dressing in a provocative way, cursing, especially sex and anything to do with sex. Talking about any of these subjects was out of the question, and everyone had to be so prim and proper outside of their homes, even though people were just as bad if not worse back then. This means everyone had to avoid most subjects and were probably pretty bored, because all of the fun topics are taboo. The most taboo of all was sex. Which is ironic, because we still are here so they obviously had sex. Anything to do with sex was forbidden. Especially STD’s. The most common and the most dangerous STD of the time was syphilis. In the play “A Doll’s House” Ibsen addresses this taboo very subtly by using a euphemism, “He’s got something seriously wrong with him, you know. Tuberculosis of the spine, poor fellow. His father was a horrible man, who used to have mistresses and things like that. That's why the son was always ailing right from being a child” (pg37). They called syphilis “tuberculosis of the spine” that shows just how backwards this time was from our own. They all know what caused the disease, and they all know what it is called, but they are so afraid to talk about sex that they have to give the disease some dumb euphemism like TB of the spine.
ReplyDeleteWow, what a post! I thought that your points on how many of the statements that Ibsen made were conveyed through euphemism were spot on. In the time period of the story, taboo topics were often skated around by society, so this method of writing was crucial in making the setting feel authentic and genuine. In a way, I think that even current society reflects this unwillingness to discuss the elephant(s) in the room, as we still tend to lean away from tough topics. Elizabethan Era definitely seems boring, by the way.
Delete
ReplyDeleteNora: “Five. Seven hours to midnight. Then twenty-four hours till the next midnight. Then he tarantella will be over. Twenty-four and seven? Thirty-one hours to live.”
Helmer: “ What’s happened to our little sky-lark?”
Nora: [running towards him with open arms] “Here she is!” (61)
Henrik Ibsen utilizes symbolism to characterize Nora and her relationship with her husband, Helmer. Throughout the play you are able to see the weak marriage between Nora and Helmer due to the constant secrecy between the two. Helmer continually has conversations behind closed doors and Nora has yet to tell him about her forgery. However, she knows that when Helmer finds out about her mistake the marriage will end as she will lower down in society similar to Krogstad. She counts down and is preparing for the end knowing the marriage will immediately end and she will be sent to the bottom of the social hierarchy. The marriage is revolved around money and the position in society they have as a couple. Helmer’s reference to his wife as a sky-lark displays his control over his wife. The skylark symbolizes Nora and her submissive behavior towards her husband. A sky-lark is a bird typically found in the open country, however rather than being free, Nora is locked in a specific area. This is typical of women during this era, due to their lack of independence at the time. Husbands had the power and women were directed to listen to them and unable to attain jobs. Nora is displayed as an obedient wife to Helmer, however dramatic irony is used to allow the readers to know Nora’s true behavior. The tarantella is used to symbolize the end of the marriage, because once it ends, Nora knows the marriage will as well. That is why she counts out how much time she has left to enjoy herself. She continues to act normal to her husband, by running into his arms, in order to make him believe nothing is wrong.
Nora: “I shan’t be able to dance tomorrow if I don’t rehearse it with you.”
ReplyDeleteHelmer: “Are you really so nervous, Nora dear?
Nora: “Terribly nervous. Let me run through it now. There’s still time before supper. Come and sit here and play for me” (Ibsen 58).
After Krogstad leaves a letter in the letter box, revealing Nora’s secret, Nora becomes incredibly nervous. She does everything she can to distract Torvald from going to the letter box, and reading the letter. In order to keep Torvald from opening the letter, she purposely forgets the dance she is supposed to perform the next night, in order to get Torvald’s full attention. He must now teach her the dance again, which wastes time. In this conversation between Torvald and Nora, Nora’s short sentences show her nervousness, and anxiety. She is speaking very quick, with lots of short sentences that give the impression that she is trying to hide something. She is speaking quick enough that no one can interrupt her while she continues rambling. Ibsen purposely structures Nora’s lines like this to show how frantic she was. As their conversation continues, this pattern does too. Torvald begins to catch on to Nora’s strange attitude, and is persistent on checking the letter box. Along with this, the letter itself is a symbol that secrets and lies do not always stay secret, and this can be uncontrollable at times. Nora thought Torvald would never find out about her loan. This letter shows that she was wrong, and that she has no control over this secret. This theme goes along with the rest of the play, because there are numerous lies and secrets throughout the play. Having no control over the letter makes Nora feel hopeless, and wishing she had never lied in the first place. This incident serves as a lesson that lying is not the best option, and that it may come back and hurt you later on.
In his play “A Doll's House”, Henrik Ibsen uses doll diction to symbolize manipulation and control. During the Victorian Era, a “woman's” place was considered to be working in the home while also caring for and respecting their husbands. The play opens with Nora doing everything in her power to keep her husband Torvald content and happy. However, as the play progresses the couple's marriage slowly begins to disintegrate and unravel as long kept secrets are released. Throughout the play Nora, Torvald’s pretty, submissive, and secretive wife is viewed as his “Doll”. For the eight years they were married Nora was powerless in comparison to her husband. Nora’s statement is symbolic of women's suffrage and the increase in pride and dignity that became distilled in women. Thus beginning the drive for women's rights in society. During the argument between Torvald and Nora she states, “I have been your doll wife, just as at home I was Daddy’s doll child. And the children in turn have been my dolls. I thought it was fun when you played with me, just as they thought it was fun when I went and played with them” (Ibsen 80-81). This reveals the parallels between the relationship between Nora and her father and Nora and Torvald. Her relationships show the ways she feels she is trapped in a society where women are unable to become independent individuals because of the prominent male figures. Prior to leaving her husband and children, Nora states, “Perhaps… if you have taken your doll away” (85). This act is symbolic of women realizing their true potentials. Rather than being trapped in a “dolls house” constantly being manipulated and pushed around, women of the late 1800s wanted to attain their own independence and freedom.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your analysis; as typical as that sounds. I also talked about the same topic in the fact that Nora, along with many other women during the Victorian Era, were the “dolls” of the house and they were constantly thought of as nothing more. Their only real job was to make sure their husbands were happy and satisfied, and although important, not the job that would bring them great honor in pride. I think by Ibsen starting the play off with her constantly being in the house, it quickly shows the symbolism of the word usage of “doll” in the title and sets the mood for the rest of the play as well.
DeleteIn Act 3 of, “A Doll’s House,” Henrik Ibsen uses contrasting diction to display the effects Krogstad’s letters had on Torvald. After first reading the letter, Torvald: “Oh, what a terrible awakening this is. All these eight years...this woman who was my pride and joy...a hypocrite, a liar, worse than that, a criminal!” (Ibsen 75). When first finding out about Nora’s loan from Krogstad, Torvald is befuddled. He cannot believe his own wife could go behind his back and do something illegal. Torvald’s diction is harsh and negative. This shows how upset he truly is, and how big of a deal Nora’s loan is. Torvald later says that they will have to pretend they are happy when out in public, but at home there will be no happiness. They have to keep on acting like they are in love to preserve their names, and images. During this time period, reputation was everything, and if Nora’s secret was found out by the public, their whole family’s reputation would be completely destroyed. This is what Torvald fears more than anything. Once the IOU is returned, Torvald: “You can’t bring yourself to believe I’ve forgiven you. But I have, Nora, I swear it. I forgive you everything. I know you did what you did because you love me” (Ibsen 77). Torvald’s diction dramatically changes from negative and harsh, to positive, forgiving, and kind. He speaks at a rapid pace, which shows how at ease Torvald has become now that the stress of his reputation has been lifted. Torvald at one point said him and Nora could no longer be happy together, and he was disgusted with her actions. Now he has forgotten all about that, and tells Nora they can live happily ever after again. Ibsen uses this contrasting diction to characterize Torvald, and reveal his true intentions, and what he really cares about. Because the IOU did so much to change Torvald’s attitude towards the situation, it is obvious Torvald did not care about his wife as much as he cared about his own reputation. Torvald is expressed as an even more selfish character because of this. He does nothing to stand up for his own wife, nor acknowledge that what she did was all for him. Torvald’s selfish behaviors are what eventually lead Nora to leave him. Before she decides to leave, Torvald forgives her and says they can forget about what happened. Nora does not let this stop her, and she leaves. She has realized Torvald never really cared for her, but used her as a way to boost his own reputation.
ReplyDeleteI highly agree with your post and all the points you made because, similar to my post, you expressed the themes of reputation over relationship. However, in my post, I talked about the progress within their relationship throughout the play and how in the beginning Torvald was acting normal and just going with the norms of how a husband is supposed to act, while during the end of the play, he completely changed. I thought your analysis about his pacing in words and sentences and how Ibsen structured the sentences was a really in-depth and good point. It made me notice something I didn't take in consideration of before. Thanks!
DeleteIn Act III of “A Doll’s House”, Dr. Rank’s sarcastic and metaphorical dialogue, based off of their last conversation, allows Nora to learn about his imminent death. Nora and Rank’s deep friendship and love for the companionship is revealed in act three. Rank reveals his bad health to Nora, “These last few days I’ve made a careful analysis on my internal economy. Bankrupt! Within a month I shall probably by lying rotting up there in the churchyard” (Ibsen 45). Nora is now aware of Dr. Rank’s death in the future. The reader is able to see the friendship between the two. They both trust each other, and crave companionship. That’s why the reader is able to conclude that Helmer is unaware of the death, because neither Dr. Rank nor Nora tell him secrets in hope that he will keep them, so they decided to keep one more from him. Rank also tells Nora that she will be unable to visit him and he will send her a goodbye, “As soon as I’m absolutely certain of the worst, I’ll send you my visiting card with a black cross on it” (45). Later, Dr. Rank visits with Nora and Helmer and tells her about his medical test, “Rank: The best possible, for both doctor and patient-certainty! Nora: Certainty? Rank: Absolute certainty.” (71). The term certainty allows Nora to understand that the test did in fact not go well, but rather that Dr. Rank now has certainty of his near death. This leaves Helmer with the believe that Dr. Rank is perfectly healthy, since we was uninvolved in the previous conversation. Immediately prior to leaving, Nora says goodbye, “Sleep well, Dr. Rank” (72). He wishes for her the same thing. Sleep symbolizes death as Nora says goodbye to Rank. However, Rank returns the favor when being asked to, so it becomes evident that he is wishing her luck on staying alive during her future endeavors, whether it involves Helmer finding out her secret, or her life on her own. After leaving, Dr. Rank leaves a letter with a simple black cross on it. Nora understands its meaning, thus ending their friendship as she is no longer allowed to see him and must tell Helmer about his death.
ReplyDeleteThrough Ibsen's uses of transforming diction and jargon the characters are elusive and vague in act 1, but by act 3 every character has fully developed and relationships become more distinct. All of the characters in the play use all sorts of phrases and jargon consistent through the era, and as a result they never seem to talk about anything that reveals them as a character. Part of this is due to that the play is set in the victorian era, so most things that reveal oneself were taboo to show to other people for example emotions. This rejection of what people truly want and the rejection of any sort of emotional or rational conversation is shown when nora asks for a more extravagant christmas.
ReplyDelete“Nora: But Torvald, surely this year we can spread ourselves just a little.. This is the first Christmas we haven't had to go carefully.
Helmer: Ah, but that doesn't mean we can afford to be extravagant you know”
When Nora asks for a simple thing, not even that much to ask, and she gets completely shot down with Helmer talking to her like a child. Helmer talking to her like a child never stopped, but the way Nora reacted to this demeaning behavior did change. We watched her evolve massively as a character when she talked with Rank and Krogstad, as she was no longer the victim in this relationship. She slowly started to take control of her relationships and her life. As a result we get to see Nora evolve from this week little subservient wife, to a grown and strong women that is willing to stand up for herself and free herself from her “doll like” life.
ReplyDeleteIn “A Dolls House”, Henrik Ibsen uses the motif of freedom to characterize Nora. Nora’s understandings and views on freedom drastically change throughout the play. In the first act, Nora believes that once she pays off her debt she will be free from her troubles. Without debt, she would be given the chance to completely fulfill her domestic role as an obedient housewife. While conversing with Krogstad about the loan she took from him Nora states, “Why? You'll soon have all your money back… This was the thing to save my husbands life” (Ibsen 28). Even though it's against the law, Nora uses forgery and risks her marriage in order to save her husband's life. Although she had good motives, the law has no By the end of the play, Nora learns that money won't solve all problems. In order to save her marriage from turmoil she must do what's best for her family. Nora risks her marriage for the love of her family.
She states, “you must not feel in any way bound, any more than I shall. There must be full freedom in any way bound, any more than I shall. There must be full freedom on both sides. Look, here's your ring back. Give me mine” (85). Once Torvald reads over Krogstad’s letter about the secret him and Nora had been hiding Nora realizes that the only way for both of them to be content and free is by permanent separation. Prior to this she had believed that simply paying off her debt would solve all problems. However, she must find her self identity before she can share her life and love with another individual.
In Act III, the motif of control and manipulation along with the on-going doll metaphor to characterize Nora and demonstrate the gender roles during this era. On the outside, Nora looks like a normal wife during this era. By the end of the play, Nora has broken away from the normal standards and declares that she wishes to be independent. She tells Helmer, “I believe first and foremost I am an individual, just as much as you are” (Ibsen 82). By telling Helmer that she views them as equals she is decreasing his control over her which she has put up with for many years. She also ends her submissive behavior and stands up for herself and the things which she wishes to do in her own life, which was very rare during this time. In fact, most wives did not leave their husband and generally they weren't supposed to, which emphasizes Nora’s bravery and individual fight for independence. She ends the manipulation by Helmer, which she commonly relates to a doll in a doll house. She argues with Helmer claiming that it all began with her father, “He used to call me his baby doll, and he played with me as I used to play with my dolls. Then I came to live in your house…” (80). Nora’s bravery is displayed here as she is not only arguing her husband’s control over her, but also generalizing the harsh control of men over women, by declaring that the mistreatment began with her father. After being controlled her whole life, Nora ends it and leaves it behind her hoping to start anew. She also describes how she adapted to minimal rights and opinions, “I passed out of Daddy’s hands into yours. You arranged everything to your tastes, and I acquired the same tastes” (80). Nora is now referring to all treatment of women during this time. And explaining how women never have freedom since they are controlled since birth. In Act III, Nora uses her bravery to display the gender roles during this time period.
ReplyDeleteHello Everybody,
ReplyDeleteMy name is Mrs Sharon Sim. I live in Singapore and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave me happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of S$250,000.00 to start my life all over as i am a single mother with 3 kids I met this honest and GOD fearing man loan lender that help me with a loan of S$250,000.00 SG. Dollar, he is a GOD fearing man, if you are in need of loan and you will pay back the loan please contact him tell him that is Mrs Sharon, that refer you to him. contact Dr Purva Pius,via email:(urgentloan22@gmail.com) Thank you.
BORROWERS APPLICATION DETAILS
1. Name Of Applicant in Full:……..
2. Telephone Numbers:……….
3. Address and Location:…….
4. Amount in request………..
5. Repayment Period:………..
6. Purpose Of Loan………….
7. country…………………
8. phone…………………..
9. occupation………………
10.age/sex…………………
11.Monthly Income…………..
12.Email……………..
Regards.
Managements
Email Kindly Contact: urgentloan22@gmail.com