Talola John 11I
Mr Jarosek
QUESTION 1: Explain how Ibsen’s play has challenged or reinforced particular beliefs, values
and/or attitudes in its context of production.
The question of whether it is public opinion that influences media or media that influences
public opinion must always be considered, especially during times of great societal change.
Such was the era of the late 1800s, when the now-revered Norwegian poet Hendrik Ibsen
penned the first of his four major plays, A Doll’s House (Ibsen, 1879), at the same time that
feminist movements were gaining traction all over Europe. The play follows the affluent,
archetypal household of the Helmers—Torvald, a lawyer who has recently been promoted
to bank manager and Nora, his wife, seemingly the ideal homemaker and the ‘angel in the
house’—over the course of an eventful three days, in which the private and intimate life of
the house is opened up to Kristine Linde, a widowed childhood friend of Nora who has spent
all her life working to support her mother and brothers, Doctor Rank, a wealthy family
friend who suffers from an illness of the spine, and most importantly, the down-on-his-luck
Nils Krogstad, who Nora owes a great sum of money to. Krogstad blackmails Nora with the
knowledge of her secret, which she is withholding from her husband. Eventually, the secret
is revealed, and Nora is struck by the revelation that she is unhappy in her domesticated life,
rendering conservative theatre-goers agog and aghast, and transforming the theatre into a
platform for social criticism and debate. Despite Ibsen’s assertions that the play was not
primarily concerned with women’s rights, instead focusing on the universal human need of
freedom of expression, the play is considered an important and influential piece of feminist
literature even today. "A woman cannot be herself in modern society," the playwright
remarked. "An exclusively male society, with laws made by men and with prosecutors and
judges who assess feminine conduct from a masculine standpoint." A Doll’s House by
Hendrik Ibsen challenges attitudes and beliefs entrenched in this patriarchal, ‘exclusively
male’ society of 19th century Europe, such as the gender roles of men and women and the
institution of marriage. This is done through the characterisation of the spirited housewife
Nora Helmer and her controlling husband Torvald, and the portrayal of their ill-fated
relationship.
Ibsen challenges the gender roles and expectations of women through the character of
Nora, who is used in the play as a vehicle to demonstrate the oppression that pervaded the
lives of women throughout Europe. Nora is a dynamic character—throughout the play, she
goes from embracing and embodying the role of the dutiful housewife to rejecting this role
and embracing her identity as an individual. In the first act, she is portrayed as subservient,
vulnerable and sweet, possessing little power and seemingly embodying the image of the
‘angel in the house’. This is shown through her dialogue with her husband. Helmer
constantly addresses Nora using pet names, such as ‘my little singing bird’ and ‘my little
squirrel’. Association of Nora with small animals conveys her purity and innocence, in line
with the ideal. Helmer’s reference to her using these diminutive nicknames indicates that
she is his possession, and she is entirely reliant on him, as a pet would rely on its master.
Nora, on her part, affirms this status, declaring ‘I would never dream of doing anything you
didn’t want me to.’ She sacrifices her own free will by submitting to that of her husband. In
the 19th century, women were considered both socially and legally to be ‘owned’ by their
husbands, and wielded little societal influence. Nora is treated by other characters in a
similar manner—Mrs Linde remarks ‘What a child you are, Nora!’ and Krogstad calls her a
‘precious pampered little thing.’ They have little respect for her due to her role as a
housewife, revealing that is not solely her husband who she is powerless beneath—it is
society as a whole. Setting is also used to signify Nora’s adherence to gender roles.
Throughout the play, Nora is never shown to enter her husband’s study. This represents the
social phenomenon of ‘separate spheres’, or ‘domestic-public dichotomy’, in which women
were advised against entering the ‘public sphere’ of work, commerce and law, the realm of
men, and instead confined to the ‘domestic sphere’, which was concerned with the
household and upbringing of children. In A Doll’s House, Helmer’s study represents the male
sphere, which Nora, as a woman, cannot enter. Conversely, when the children enter the flat,
Helmer states that ‘The place now becomes unbearable for anybody except mothers.’ This
reinforces the separation between Nora’s role and her husband’s in the household.
Additionally, the action of the play largely takes place within the confines of a single room,
described in the mis-en-scene of the first act. The second and third acts are said to begin in
‘the same room’. The limited setting conveys a sense of oppression, showing Nora to be
trapped within the ‘domestic sphere’. From this use of dialogue and setting, the text
constructs Nora as a stereotypical 19th century housewife—innocent, submissive and
sacrificing, but ultimately trapped. However, as the events of the play unfold, Nora begins to
shed the image of the ideal housewife. This comes to a climax in the final act, where her
secret is revealed to Helmer, and she confronts him, declaring that she is going to leave him.
Helmer tells her that ‘First and foremost, you are a wife and mother.’ Nora replies, ‘That I
don’t believe any more. I believe that first and foremost I am an individual, just as much as
you are.’ This exchange highlights the central message of the play. It is more than just a
serious conversation between husband and wife—it is openly defiant of societal norms.
Helmer is representative of the voice of the patriarchal society that the play is challenging,
having controlled Nora’s life just as gender roles and societal expectations controlled the
lives of women at the time. Nora’s act of revolt, which comes to a crescendo with the final
directive of the play— ‘[The heavy sound of a door being slammed is heard from below]’,
signifying that she is turning her back on the role of the subservient housewife that she has
been forced to play, is a slap in the face to the patriarchal society. In the words of the
American theatre critic James Huneker, ‘That slammed door reverberated across the roof of
the world.’ Dramatic conventions are used to show Nora’s character development from an
oppressed, submissive housewife to a liberated, independent woman, which confronted the
societal status of women at the time and set an example for those in similar positions.
Societal roles and expectations of males are criticized in the text through the character of
Torvald, who represents the voice of the bourgeoise male audience. Over the course of the
19th century, the ideal man became more and more stereotypically masculine, and male
domesticity decreased. Like most men of his time, Helmer takes a great amount of pride in
his work and is loath to appear weak or fallible. However, this firm adherence to gender
roles is shown to cause him significant detriment. This is shown in the text through
dialogue—in the beginning of act I, he remarks ‘Oh, what a glorious feeling it is, knowing
you’ve got a nice, safe job and a good fat income,’ indicating the amount of importance he
places in his occupation. It is almost as if he is showing off his financial security to the
audience, who, just like him, are striving towards the ideal of masculinity, to which work
was considered integral, as men were expected to be the main providers of income in the
household. However, this dedication to his career places Helmer’s health at risk. Nora
explains to Mrs Linde that ‘…he wore himself out completely. He had to take on all kinds of
extra jobs…he found himself working at all hours of the day and night. But he couldn’t go on
like that, and he became seriously ill.’ This presents the masculine obsession with work as a
harmful preoccupation and challenges the societal pressure on males to be the sole
providers of income. Additionally, within the text, Helmer constructs himself as an image of
strength and stoicism. As the pater familias of his household, he refuses to be swayed or
threatened by anyone—especially not by his wife. Helmer tells Nora that ‘I’ve enough
strength and enough courage, believe me, for whatever happens. You’ll find I’m man
enough to take everything on myself.’ When she tries to convince him to keep Krogstad on
at the bank, he replies with ‘Do you want me to make myself a laughing-stock at the office?’
This reinforces the societal expectation of men to be powerful and dominant, presenting
the idea that if a man’s wife has any power over him, he is seen as weak. Helmer’s
conformation to gender norms has consequences for him—when Nora tries to convince him
to go south on vacation to recover, he argues that ‘it was his duty as a husband not to give
in to all these whims and fancies’, and Nora refuses to confide her actions in him, stating
that ‘Torvald is a man with a great deal of pride—it would be terribly embarrassing and
humiliating for him if he thought he owed anything to me.’ Though Helmer believes that to
be influenced by his wife would make him less of a man, his stubbornness forces Nora to go
behind his back, which ends up jeopardizing their marriage and damaging their relationship
at the climax of the play. By presenting the negative effects of Helmer’s refusal to deviate
from the ideals of masculinity, the text challenges the roles of men and the values of this
masculine ideal, forcing the audience to re-evaluate their own ideologies.
The text additionally challenges the societal belief in the institution of marriage through the
portrayal of Nora and Torvald’s relationship—at first glance, it appears to be a loving
relationship, but over the duration of the play, Nora begins to realise that it is constricting
and dysfunctional, mirroring the relationship between father and child rather than between
lovers. This is shown through the use of props, stage direction and metaphor. One such prop
used to illustrate the deterioration of the Helmers’ marriage is the Christmas tree, which is
introduced in the very first line of dialogue. ‘Hide the Christmas tree away carefully, Helene,’
Nora says to the maid. ‘The children mustn’t see it till it’s decorated.’ While this statement
conjures up images of a traditional Christmas scene, associating the tree with family,
warmth and comfort, Nora’s insistence that the children must not see the tree until it is
decorated has undertones of personal suppression, hinting that she is maintaining a
pretence. After Krogstad has threatened to expose Nora’s secret to her husband, she tries
to reassure herself that his threat is empty. ‘There’s nothing to worry about. We’ll have a
lovely Christmas tree. And I’ll do anything you want me to, Torvald; I’ll sing for you, dance
for you…’ Nora is essentially stating that she must submit to Helmer’s will in order to
maintain the relationship, represented by the Christmas tree, showing that she is
constricted in her marriage. When Nora tries to change Helmer’s mind about laying off
Krogstad at the end of the act, he responds with utter contempt, unknowing that his wife
has committed the very same act as Krogstad. Distressed, Nora feels increasingly isolated
from her husband and family. Helmer closes his study door to her, and she in turn does
closes the door to her children out of guilt. Directly succeeding this scene, at the beginning
of the second act, the mis-en-scene describes ‘the Christmas tree, stripped, bedraggled and
with its candles burnt out.’ –it dies at the same moment the Helmers’ marriage does. The
text takes an object that is associated with family and togetherness and uses it to represent
a deteriorating marriage, thereby challenging the tradition. During the third act, after the
secret has been revealed, the intimacy between husband and wife appears to have
evaporated. This is evidenced by stage directions—of Nora, it is directed that '[She sits on
one side of the table]’ and Helmer ‘[sits down at the table opposite her].’ Despite being
married, there is now a great distance between them, a far cry from the romantic gestures
shown at the start of the play, such as ‘[Toying with his coat buttons…]’ and ‘[Puts his arm
around her waist.]’ This shows the dysfunctional state of their marriage—they have ‘never
exchanged one serious word about serious things.’ Furthermore, in the climax of the play,
Nora reveals how unhappy she is in her marriage, comparing it to a doll’s house. She states
to Helmer: ‘…you have always been so kind to me. But our home has been nothing but a
playroom. I have been your doll-wife, just as at home I was papa's doll-child; and here the
children have been my dolls. I thought it great fun when you played with me, just as they
thought it great fun when I played with them. That is what our marriage has been, Torvald.’
The metaphor conveys to Helmer and thus the audience the oppressive nature of her
marriage, where, like a doll, she is controlled and influenced, possessing no freedom. Nora
is not unique in her situation, as this relationship between husband and wife was the norm.
The act of marriage was a traditional, binding institution. Divorce was possible but difficult
and heavily stigmatised due to societal conservatism, particularly regarding women.
Legislation regarding divorce in Norway varied greatly from era to era. In the 19 th century,
after gaining independence from Denmark, the laws surrounding divorce became more
restrictive until the 1890s. The subsequent change in attitudes towards divorce led to the
1909 Norwegian divorce law. Ibsen almost certainly played a prolific role in this
liberalisation—the historian and politician Halvdan Koht stated that A Doll’s House
"exploded like a bomb into contemporary life.” By portraying this stereotypical marriage as
stifling and oppressing, and by revealing its dysfunctional nature, the play challenges the
importance of marriage in a time when it divorce was highly stigmatised.
Through dramatic conventions, Ibsen constructs a deceptively normal couple, but uses
these familiar characters to criticise the strict norms of contemporary society regarding the
subjects of marriage, seen as a binding, unchallengeable traditional, and gender roles, which
heavily segregated males and females, even denying women rights that are now considered
basic. Simultaneously, it mirrors the changes that began to unfold on a social, political and
legal level, such as the growth of the feminist movement and increased social tolerance
towards divorce. Through this play, the action of a housewife, who lacked freedom of
speech and thought, gave voice to thousands of women, not just across Europe, but across
the world. When one is asked if public opinion influences media or if it is the other way
around, in the case of A Doll’s House, it can be said that both have bearing on each other.