A Dolls House: Noras Case - Book Report/Review Example

20 June A Doll’s House: Nora’s Case Nora decided to leave her house, to abandon her husband, not only her husband but also her children. Most of the critics argue, with common sense on their side, Nora is not justified in abandoning her children. Her children had no part in the situation, so naturally she should not have to think letting them behind. They had the right to receive their mother’s attention. Besides the viewers may point out that motherhood does not permit a mother to abandon her children. And for a woman with Nora’s nature, full of love and care, it is not psychologically acceptable to leave her children behind, except in extreme circumstances. But this issue would get solved if we consider the situation by keeping ourselves in Nora’s place. From the beginning of the play the viewers (or readers) notice that Nora is a girl who surrenders her thoughts to those of her husband’s. Her pleasure resides in taking orders from her husband and fulfilling them. Although she shows her own thinking and will, she does so only on few occasions. Neither she feels any impulse to be independent from her husband’s will. In her house she is a perfect wife, the kind of wife Torvald adored to have. And when he knows that Nora meets his standards, he does not rethink over it. He does not think that his wishes might be at odd with the wishes of Nora. He, from Nora’s attitude, perceives that she is happy and does not bother to find what the wits of Nora are. Because he never imagine that Nora can have any role other than being a wife, or have any job other than household chores. And from Nora’s view point, she gives him a perfect life, a life which is perfectly in line with Torvald’s perceptions, she think she has the right to expect utmost care from him. This expectation has limited her eagerness to know herself and to know the life which is being lived outside her doll’s house. Worst is her ignorance to the fact that she needed this insight. And when she realizes her ignorance she decides to rectify her mistake. She leaves the house to study her inner-self. She understands that her worst mistake is not getting involved in forgery, but to live a fake life, a life without knowledge of herself. She does not want her children to have same complexes as she has. She wants to save her children from controversies and conflicts in their personalities. She does not want to pass her personality to her children, rather she wants them know as an independent, free and reformed person if they ever rejoice. “These women of the modern age, mistreated as daughters, as sisters, as wives, not educated in accordance with their talents, debarred from following their mission, deprived of their inheritance, embittered in mind — these are the ones who supply the mothers for the new generation. What will be the result?” (Durbach) Being a sheltered child of her father she grown up to become a protected and dependant woman with no wills of her own. She has to do what, first, her father and, then, her husband asks or expects her to do. This fact of the play is re-emphasized when her friend Mrs Linde points out that she was ever a carefree and protected girl like a child that she has no worries. And the next important thing derived from the two friends’ conversation is that Nora has, apparently, nothing to be proud at. That is she is lacking satisfaction of one of her basic psychological need-her self satisfaction. (Although she has secretly satisfied this need.) From the first dialogue Nora has with her husband Torvald, the way they treat each other is a good indication of their relationship. The names they (both, Nora and Helmer) use to call Nora with, show her position and her status in her house-she was the most adorable resident of her house, yet no more than a lovely little doll which has only one task, to act as a decoration piece. Torvald never shares with her any of his problems, apparently not to make her worried. But this turned out to be the major cause of misunderstanding they undergone through, as they didn’t know their spouses’ full personality. So they both expects from each other more than their capabilities. Torvald expects her to be only his wife and not to be involved in any other occupation. Nora expects him to be the most loving and caring husband, the ideal one. She believes a false believe that she means most in the eyes of Torvald, that he cares for her and loves her more than anyone else can. She supposes that he would never let her get hurt even by a small sting. Later in the play, she learns how much mistaken she was. She comes to know that everything, every personality trait she supposed from her husband was her imagination. She understands that she made an overstatement of care she received from Torvald. When the turning point came in her life, she is accused for the only crime she did in her whole life. Her husband does not even ask for the motives behind her forgery, let alone understanding or forgiving her. Mirror palace of her dreams smashes by a single blow. In the play we see that Helmer takes pleasure in imposing positive influence on his wife. But in the last Act when he scolds her and forbids her to bring up her children he shows that he has control over her. And that he is capable of using that control. Making this control visible in her eyes he actually unconsciously makes her lose confidence over him. From Helmer’s reaction on the letter from Krogstad Nora’s hopes ends and she starts to think about securing her future by making her independent of anyone else. She wants to be more on her own self now. “Patriarchy’s socialization of women into servicing creatures is the major accusation in Nora’s painful account to Torvald of how first her father, and then he, used her for their amusement. . . how she had no right to think for herself, only the duty to accept their opinions.  Excluded from meaning anything, Nora has never been subject, only object.”  (Templeton 142). She wants her children to be objective in there views and not to copy her or their father in their lives, to be free of control being imposed on them. She knows that being brought up in an imposing environment, so she could only pass-over overwhelming caution, care and love, which she have acquired. She wants them to grow up to their full personality, a personality which is their own, a personality which is not borrowed from an imposing mother. By taking such an action she actually gives them a lesson never to accept anyone’s influence, and be a pet or a toy for him. Human beings are human beings with individual believes and perception. One should not sacrifice one’s identity for the sake of others wishes, or for the sake of social behaviors and expectations. Being free of pressure, being independent she could be a role model for her children, to teach them not to accept influences, not even of emotions and relations. She does not want that her children have the same disagreements with her as she had with her father. When Nora closes behind her the door of her doll’s house, she opens wide the gate of life for woman, and proclaims the revolutionary message that only perfect freedom and communion make a true bond between man and woman, meeting in the open, without lies, without shame, free from the bondage of duty. (Emma Goldman) And so she could think the reaction of her children. She must have imagined them understanding her motives the motives to let them learn live their lives without depending on others, not even their mother. She must have foreseen them having her memories, positive adorable memories, rather than her memories as an oppressive and imposing mother. In short, her act to abandon her children may seem to be a socially wrong act. Being a mother its her duty to take good care of her children. But her step to abandon her children should be judged keeping in mind the background circumstances, the childhood she spent, and the recent trauma she faced. This decision, leaving her home forever, can be justified for a woman who, after life-long suppression and lack of self recognition, suddenly acknowledges her identity. This act of her is a try to save her children from accepting influence of dual nature of society and to save them from building up a complex personality that society presents a child with. Work Cited Errol Durbach In The Cambridge Companion to Ibsen, Cambridge University Press, 1994 Templeton, Joan.  Ibsens Women.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997 Emma Goldman, The Social Significance of the Modern Drama (Boston: Richard G. Badger, 1914; The Gorham Press, Boston, U.S.A.) Ibsen, Henrik.  A Dolls House.  Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981 Read More