The marital discord that is ever present within the relationship between Nora and Torvald Helmer is furthermore portrayed through the differences in the demeanour of both Torvald and Nora. Torvald is constructed as someone who is both visually stable and emotionally collected, as seen when he is “smiling” (Ibsen, 11) whilst Nora is “clapping her hands…takes his arm” (Ibsen, 11). Ironically enough, the playwright constructs an almost father-daughter relationship rather than a husband-wife, as we say Nora’s playful actions and Torvald’s subsequent emotions. Even the basic roots of their relationship remain unclear as seen through the visual stage directions; however, one thing remains the same. Regardless of whether it is a husband-wife or father-daughter …show more content…
Ibsen’s manipulation of particular diction choices further constructs the notion of a disillusioned marriage. Ibsen’s microscopic focus on the Nora and Torvald’s fractious marital relationship achieves his purpose of criticizing the imbalanced power dynamics within marriage. Ibsen’s use of stage directions and the way in which they expose the subservient role of Nora in contrast with her husband extent to show the superficial roots upon which their marriage was based and built. Although this message was performed for a 19th century Norwegian audience, the central theme of inequality within a marriage is timeless. Whilst the notion of a restricted wife is uncommon in the current period, the sharp contrasting ideologies of the 19th century audience for which this was written help the current audience capture full extent of Ibsen’s
Nora Helmer was a delicate character and she relied on Torvald for her identity. This dependence that she had kept her from having her own personality. Yet when it is discovered that Nora only plays the part of the good typical housewife who stays at home to please her husband, it is then understandable that she is living not for herself but to please others. From early childhood Nora has always held the opinions of either her father or Torvald, hoping to please them. This mentality makes her act infantile, showing that she has no ambitions of her own. Because she had been pampered all of her life, first by her father and now by Torvald, Nora would only have to make a cute animal sound to get what she wanted from Torvald, “If your little squirrel were to ask you for something very, very, prettily” (Ibsen 34) she said.
In the 1800’s, women were considered a prize to be won, an object to show off to society. They were raised to be respectable women whose purpose was to marry into a higher social class in order to provide for their family. These women were stuck in a social system which seemed impossible to escape. Henrik Ibsen, a Norwegian playwright, saw these barriers and wrote one of the most controversial plays of his time, “A Dolls House”. In his play, Ibsen argues the importance of opposite sex equality in marriage by using his character, Nora Helmer, to bring to light how degrading the roles of women were in the 1800’s.
Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, written in 1879, is set in late-19th century Norway. Upon publication, Ibsen’s biting commentary on 19th century marriage stereotypes created widespread uproar. In the play’s first act, the viewer is introduced to a young married couple by the names of Nora and Torvald. In tune with stereotypes of the time, the relationship is controlled almost dictatorially by the husband. Nora is often treated by Torvald the way one might expect a father to treat his daughter. For instance, Torvald incessantly refers to Nora by child-like nicknames such as “my little squirrel” and “skylark” and often speaks to her in a condescending manner. Nora, who acts as a symbol of all women of that time, initially fits in very well with the common perception of women in late-19th century Scandinavia. Torvald himself even extends this sentiment of male infallibility and female submissiveness to the whole female race, saying, “Almost everyone who has gone to the bad early in life has had a deceitful mother (Ibsen 27).” However, throughout the play Nora begins to break the mold of inferiority that was associ...
she is no longer his doll that will do whatever he asks to please him,
The manner in which Torvald talks down to his wife and the apparent. unopposed acceptance of this by his wife, is evidence that, at least. Initially, power firmly rests in the grip of Nora’s husband. Nora’s language is full of indefinite, qualitative statements, demonstrated. especially when talking about Torvald's salary, however, when Torvald speaks.
Though unknown to the outside world, many seemingly perfect relationships are dark moral places to investigate. We constantly see idealistic relationships that appear flawless at first glance; however, we are too taken aback when we discover such relationships are based on deception. In A Doll House, Henrik Ibsen contends through Nora that truth plays a crucial role in idealistic living; and when idealistic lifestyles are built on deceit an individual will eventually undergo an epiphany resulting in a radical understanding of reality, potentially leading to the destruction of relationships. This idea is exercised in the play when Ibsen immerses us directly in the center of a romantic and idealized relationship between an older man, Torvald Helmer, and his childlike trophy wife Nora. While Nora is young, beautiful, childlike, immature and naïve, her husband Torvald is a stern, serious and controlling business man. Throughout the play, we discover how faulty and deceptive based the relationship between Torvald and Nora is, and so does Nora. Act one involves an introduction of the relationship between the two, and we are first introduced to the idea of how baseless the relationship really is on truth. The second act develops Nora’s recognition of the faulty marriage and further problems begin to complicate as well as develop Nora’s understanding; finally, the third act is when Nora experiences the epiphany that her relationship with Torvald is truly faulty and is based on nothing true at all. Although the idea that was significantly radical in Ibsen’s time, it is significant and seems to become more evident as a truth in our society today. Openness and truth is necessary for a truly idealistic lifestyle.
Edvard Beyer quoted in Aderholts translation of the Henrik Ibsen play, “There is hardly a single line that does not have a demonstrable dramatic function…. And all of a sudden single everyday words take on a double meaning of foreboding undertones.” (2) Nora’s “important thing” and Mrs. Linde’s “[y]ou are a child” are just a few exhibits of Ibsen’s double meanings. “Important thing,” the misrepresentation, a secret, laid the foundation of colored building blocks of their eight years of marriage. Is this truly the start of that first lying block Nora so easily laid down? No, it started with the injustices her father played upon her; treating her as his little doll, a doll to play dress-up and present his doting daughter to others. Subsequently, it was not hard for Torvald to continue Nora’s life as a living doll; his own game within as she is a willing subject. “[Quite] right, Christine. You see, Torvald loves me so indescribably, he wants to have me all to himself, as he says.” (Act II 54) Reveals how Torvald wants his toy all to himself; all along Nora knowing this she plays along with the game. While she keeps Torvald from finding out her biggest secret, she knowingly continues to play the role of Nora the doll; helpless without direction from the puppet master. Impressively Ibsen’s suggestions are lines of double meaning and the game of manipulation between Nora and those surrounding
At first glance, one might think that the Helmers have a successful marriage—but only at a superficial level. Once we delve beyond the comfort of middle-class security, we see that the foundation of the marriage is built on the utter subservience of the woman. Additionally, Nora’s actions show that—with good reason—she does not truly respect her husband’s value system. Her day is filled with constant acts of subterfuge—some minor, like sneaking macaroons, and some of the utmost importance, like paying back a loan that saved her husband’s life. No matter the level, deceit is a constant in the relationship. This outwardly typical, happy marriage is anything but. In fact, the interactions between husband and wife serve a specific purpose: they illustrate the banality of the discourse between the two. Torvald does not address his wife regarding any subject of substance. Instead, he bestows her with pet names that often begin with the personal pronoun “my” and often include the diminutive “little”: “Is that my little lark?” In this respect, Torvald may think he is flattering his wife. However, he is actually reducing her to a cute, harmless pet—one that is clearly owned. And like a pet, Nora is expected to obey her owner/husband and his petty tyrannical r...
A contrasting difference in the characters, are shown not in the characters themselves, but the role that they play in their marriages. These women have different relationships with their husbands. Torvald and Nora have a relationship where there is no equality. To Torvald Nora is an object. Hence, she plays the submissive role in a society where the lady plays the passive role. Her most important obligation is to please Torvald, making her role similar to a slave. He too considers himself superior to her.
though maybe it isn’t real and their love is just part of a game. It
The enforcement of specific gender roles by societal standards in 19th century married life proved to be suffocating. Women were objects to perform those duties for which their gender was thought to have been created: to remain complacent, readily accept any chore and complete it “gracefully” (Ibsen 213). Contrarily, men were the absolute monarchs over their respective homes and all that dwelled within. In Henrik Ibsen’s play, A Doll’s House, Nora is subjected to moral degradation through her familial role, the consistent patronization of her husband and her own assumed subordinance. Ibsen belittles the role of the housewife through means of stage direction, diminutive pet names and through Nora’s interaction with her morally ultimate husband, Torvald. Nora parades the façade of being naïve and frivolous, deteriorating her character from being a seemingly ignorant child-wife to a desperate woman in order to preserve her illusion of the security of home and ironically her own sanity. A Doll’s House ‘s depiction of the entrapment of the average 19th century housewife and the societal pressures placed upon her displays a woman’s gradual descent into madness. Ibsen illustrates this descent through Torvald’s progressive infantilization of Nora and the pressure on Nora to adhere to societal norms. Nora is a woman pressured by 19th century societal standards and their oppressive nature result in the gradual degradation of her character that destroys all semblances of family and identity.Nora’s role in her family is initially portrayed as being background, often “laughing quietly and happily to herself” (Ibsen 148) because of her isolation in not only space, but also person. Ibsen’s character rarely ventures from the main set of the drawi...
In the play A Doll House, by Henrik Ibsen, Nora and Torvald’s marriage seems to have been torn apart by Krogstad’s extortion plot, but in reality their marriage would have ended even without the events in the play. Torvald’s obsession with his public appearance will eventually cause him to break the marriage. Nora’s need for an identity will ultimately cause her to leave Torvald even without Krogstad’s plot. Lastly the amount of deception and dishonesty between Torvald and Nora would have resulted in the same conclusion sooner or later. In this essay I will argue that Nora and Torvald’s relationship would have ended even without Krogstad’s extortion plot.
Nora engages in a mutually dependent game with Torvald in that she gains power in the relationship by being perceived as weak, yet paradoxically she has no real power or independence because she is a slave to the social construction of her gender. Her epiphany at the end at the play realises her and her marriage as a product of society, Nora comes to understand that she has been living with a constr...
We see a woman who is making a bold action against gender inequality and the position society and culture has given her. As for Nora, we see in this first conversation that she seems entirely dependent on Torvald for her money, her food, and her shelter, despite the fact that she is keeping a secret. This secret is the kernel of her individuality and her escape from the doll’s house. While it is easy to paint Helmer as a tyrant and Nora as the naïve wife who suffers under his control, one must not forget that torvald is not aware of any damage he is causing. His greatest sin is perhaps his ignorance. The shock he shows at Nora’s revelation shows that he has no awareness that there is anything wrong with the status balance in his
Torvald is the personification of masculine authority of Ibsen’s context. He is a husband who is “proud to be a man”; and hence constantly patronizes Nora with a playful manner calling her “feather brain”, implying that as a feminine figure she is inferior to him. Although Nora is constantly chided as if she were a child, an audience with Ibsen’s context would see Torvald’s tr...