A Dolls House by Henrik Ibsen - Assignment Example

A DOLL’S HOUSE What is the significance of the play’s The term ‘doll’ refers to an object often used for entertaining children. It is worthy that a doll, being an inanimate creature is condemned to a mute existence and is not afforded the opportunity to voice its: opinions, desires, likes or dislikes. With reference to the play, the title denotes that for most of her life, Nora has been subjected to a doll-like existence- devoid of any essential meaning. Her family and societal expectations persistently require her to impeccably enact the roles of an all-sacrificing wife and mother. Over a period of time, these over-whelming expectations compel her to become oblivious to her own quest and desire for self-fulfilment. Consequently, similar to a doll, her life is reduced to that of a silent, non-expressive automaton. After undergoing rigorous introspection and contemplation she exclaims to Helmer that: ‘Our home has been nothing but a play-room’ and ‘I’ve been your doll-wife’ (Act III. 83). She also feels that she has merely performed the role of an entertainer- both in her father as well as her husband’s home; a realization that perturbs her deeply. ‘Nora lies several times during the play. What kinds of lies are they? Do her lies indicate that she is not to be trusted, or are they a sign of something else about her personality? During the course of the play, Nora resorts to harmless lies or half-truths in order to avoid an unpleasant confrontation with her husband. It needs to be stressed that at times, Nora resorts to these frivolous lies in order to conform to the role that is expected of her- both as a wife and as a mother. Her fear of disappointing her husband or being reprimanded by him is also one of the factors that impels her to seek refuge in lies. For instance, after her brief initial encounter with Krogstad, she immediately conceals this meeting from her husband and lies. Moreover, after procuring a loan from Krogstad during Helmer’s illness, she lies to her husband about the actual source of the money and attributes the loan to her father. In this case, her lie is motivated- and justifiably so- by a desire to avoid any emotional or psychological injury to her father and her husband. Thus, the nature of the lies uttered by Nora, does not indicate her conniving or deceitful nature. On the contrary, such well-intended lies only serve to reinforce that Nora’s world-view does not endorse the rigid paradigms of good and evil. What kind of wife does Helmer want Nora to be? He affectionately calls her names such as ‘lark’ and ‘squirrel’. What does this reveal about his attitude toward her? ‘Lark, squirrel, little song-bird’ and ‘hunted dove’ are some of the terms that Helmer frequently uses to address Nora. A common denominator underlying all the afore-mentioned terms of endearment is their patronizing connotations. All these terms seem to imply that Helmer fails to acknowledge the unique individuality and potential residing within Nora and instead views her as a mere defenceless creature- an inferior, fragile being- who is entirely dependent on him. He refers to her as his ‘poor, frightened, helpless little darling’ (Act III. 80). These chauvinistic terms also serve to emphasize that Helmer wants Nora to be a meek, submissive wife who should not- under any circumstances- exhibit a sense of assertiveness or independence. He simultaneously views her as ‘his wife and his child’ (Act III. 78) who intermittently needs to ‘be disciplined and looked after’ (80). Thus, it can be asserted that Helmer exhibits a perverted sense of ownership towards his wife- a trait commonly observed among domineering and self-absorbed individuals. Why is Nora pale with terror at the end of Act I? What is the significance of the description of the Christmas tree now ‘stripped of ornament (with) burned- down candle stubs on its ragged branches’ that opens Act II? What other symbols are used in the play? When Nora realizes the legal repercussions of the crime of forgery and her husband’s utter disgust towards it, she becomes ‘pale with terror’. Thereafter, she suffers from a profound sense of guilt and is petrified by Helmer’s repetitive insistence on the fact that all those who resort to ‘lies, cheating’ and forgery as adults invariably have had ‘awful mothers…lying mothers’ (Act I. 37). This adamant judgement pronounced by her husband makes her feel as if she has morally jeopardized the security of her home. In addition to this, Christmas is regarded as an occasion of merriment, sharing, comfort and enjoyment. A sense of rejuvenation is also equated with Christmas. Symbolically, the worn-out description of the Christmas tree represents the internal emotional state of Nora. She strives to provide laughter and comfort to her family; Helmer’s disclosure of the gravity of the crime of forgery, extinguishes the rejuvenating spirit within her and her enthusiasm considerably dwindles due to the emotional cataclysm that erupts within her. Apart from the symbol of the Christmas tree, another poignant symbol within the play is that of the ‘fancy-dress party’. This party primarily aims at entertaining an audience and is considered an essential requisite of societal conventions. On a symbolic level, this party aims to delineate the hollowness and utter pretentiousness of the Helmers’ household, where the more significant questions of life are either dismissed or relegated to a secondary position. Similar to the fancy-dress party, Helmer and Nora’s marriage is merely a performance- a farcical act in order to appear well-adjusted in the society. What is Dr.Rank’s purpose in the play? In ‘A Doll’s House’ Dr.Rank appears to be a non-conforming realist who highlights the existential predicament that engulfs modern man. Having abandoned all hope in life (towards the end of the paly), Dr. Rank seems to be a nihilist who believes that people struggle to survive- ‘to live’- because ‘ there’s a general impression that it’s necessary’ (Act I. 33). Till the end, he is unable to find a viable niche for himself. Despite the fact that he has been a comforting presence for both Helmer and Nora, he harbours the conviction that as an individual, he is replaceable and that one’s death ‘is nothing but an empty space to be filled by the first person that comes along’ (Act II. 47). Thus, in a way, the haunting reality of life outlined by Dr. Rank compels one to delve into the essential meaning of life. How does the relationship between Krogstad and Mrs. Linde serve to emphasize certain qualities in the Helmers’ marriage? The relationship between Krogstad and Mrs.Linde serves as a direct contrast to the Helmers’ marriage. The empathy and understanding that exists between Krogstad and Mrs.Linde is entirely lacking in the Helmers’ marriage. It is note-worthy, that once Mrs. Linde assures Krogstad of the fact that her decision to leave him was a result of the familial responsibility she felt for her family, and not due to her lack of love for him, he immediately accepts her frank admission of truth without question or without being sceptical about the motives of her decision. On the contrary, when Helmer realizes that Nora has committed forgery, he pays no consideration whatsoever to her motives and his adoration towards her instantly changes to an unjust reprisal and he calls her a ‘ wretched woman, a liar and a hypocrite’ ( Act III. 78,79). Moreover, as opposed to the abiding and redeeming quality of Krogstad’s love for Mrs.Linde, Helmer’s love for Nora has a narcissistic quality. The relationship between Mrs.Linde and Krogstad is self-fulfilling for both of them whereas; the relationship between Helmer and Nora proves to be self-restricting for Nora. Instead of admiring and appreciating the sacrifices that Nora has made, and commending the purity of her intentions, Helmer unabashedly exclaims that, ‘you’ve completely wretched my happiness, you’ve ruined my whole future- I’m brought so pitifully low because of a shiftless woman’ (Act III.82). In the final analysis, the relationship between Krogstad and Mrs.Linde is a perfect example of a symbiotic unison in which give-and-take exist in equal proportions whereas the relationship between Helmer and Nora is an utterly disharmonious one where Helmer vey conveniently places himself on a pedestal and after becoming aware of Krogstad’s decision of not pursuing the matter further, exclaims that, ‘Nora I’m saved! I’m saved! I’ve forgiven you!’ (Act III.78). Perhaps the relationship between Nora and Helmer is best summed up in the following comment made by Nora: ‘You don’t understand me and I’ve never understood you’ (Act III.83). Is Krogstad’s decision not to expose Nora’s secret convincing? Does this shift from villainy to generosity seem adequately motivated? It needs to be stressed that Krogstad’s ultimate decision pertaining to Nora’s secret is the outcome of his all-consuming love for Mrs.Linde. Another motivating factor behind his decision of not exposing Nora’s secret is that on a subtext level, Krogstad can comprehend the conflicting desires and trying circumstances that urged Nora to forge her father’s signature. It is note-worthy, that for the most part of the play, Krogstad is depicted as a man who is struggling to find his way in life- to find some sort of anchorage and support. Moreover, his fervent desire to provide a better life to his sons depicts the goodness inherent in him. Thus, when Mrs. Linde proposes that they reunite, Krogstad’s inherent goodness magnifies; he finally receives the anchorage that he has been desperately striving for and as a consequence of this ‘fortunate change in his circumstances’ (Act III.81) he decides not to pursue Nora’s forgery matter any further. Read More