A Doll’s House – questions to consider after Act II

A Doll’s House – questions to consider after Act II

1. In what ways does Ibsen show Nora Helmer to fulfil the role of the Victorian woman?

She takes care of her husband and children; she becomes the person they want her to be when she’s around them e.g. she acts as a source of entertainment for Torvald rather than a wife, eventhough at some point in the play, we see that she’s worried about Krogstad revealing their secret but when Torvald enters, she suddenly acts all sweet and frivolous again (though she really isn’t). We see a strong sense of loyalty when it’s revealed that Nora chose her husband over her sick “Daddy” and as she keeps calling her father “daddy”, he must’ve meant a lot to her as only a little girl would call her that yet Nora is in her twenties already. As for the children, Nora doesn’t rely too much on the maid as she immediately takes the children’s coats after they played from outside and insists that she can do it. Also, she plays with them like a friend e.g. hide and seek where she actually hides under the table.

Nora not only takes care of her husband and children but she also takes responsibility in maintenance around the house e.g. takes care of the Christmas tree and decorations.

2. In what ways does she not adhere to the role?

From the beginning of the play, we get the impression of Nora being a frivolous trophy wife though later it is revealed that her intentions are different but are not considered to be exactly “correct” in the Victorian society. First of all, she starts of little white lies like the macaroons though those little white lies progresses into bigger, more serious lies like how she forged Daddy’s signature to borrow money in order to get Torvald cured. Although saving her husband’s life was the expectation of a wife, the way she did it caused very severe reactions from Victorian society as a woman is forbid to have any kind of business to do with money, house keys, mails etc.

3. In what ways does Ibsen develop Nora’s character to present her complexity? In what ways might this have been a challenge to the audience of the period it was written in?

Ibsen carefully crafts an outside appearance for Nora as a frivolous, typical trophy wife of a wealthy man in the Victorian era. Though into his play, Nora starts to show/develop signs of her being bigger than a woman people think she is and she keeps hinting that she’s not as stupid or frivolous as they think, that she is capable of more serious things. The fact that whenever Nora asks Torvald for more money, she is misunderstood and is called a “little spendthrift” and not only that, Torvald also insults her by comparing her similarities to her father and how it is “inherited” shows that Nora’s husband doesn’t understand or know her at all which suggests how he doesn’t bother to get to know her but only to use her to his satisfaction and how he wrong-foots her with those diminutive names really emphasises how nobody believes in Nora, they only underestimate her and for Nora to go through that by herself, risking her life for a man who doesn’t love her for who she is, but for what she is when he’s around. And the fact that Nora has to do much manual work to earn as much money as she can to save her husband who doesn’t appreciate it at all really gives her that complexity to a woman with a frivolous appearance.

Though she loves her children like what is expected in a woman back in those days, her husband, who devotes to the other half of the embryo can’t simply stand the children and for Nora to take care of her husband while giving her children double the love that they need really puts a lot of pressure on Nora and this could contributes to the ending of the play. The audience in that period might’ve been outraged by the lies she tells and could see her as a “fake” since she can easily turn into someone different whenever Torvald is around and how she “manipulates” him to get what she wants. And the fact that she showed her stockings to Dr. Rank probably really gave a shock to the audience as it was considered unethical for a woman as it shows no sense of self-respect and suggests the motivation for adultery. What’s more is that she wanted to say the word “Damn” in Act 1 which is considered the worst swear word during the period hence, the audience wouldn’t be so pleased with a woman, wife and mother with that kind of language.

4. What elements might have shocked a Victorian audience in Act 2?

The fact that she showed her stockings to Dr. Rank and the way she talks to him suggests she is motivated for adultery and because of her dialogue, she implicitly encouraged Dr. Rank to confess his feelings for her and since Dr. Rank is her husband’s bestfriend, it makes matters worse.

5. Through the presentation of Nora, what ways does Ibsen suggest that it is a necessity for a person to fulfil their “destiny”?

At first, Nora thought it was her duty/destiny to get her husband cured even if that means leaving her father by himself at his death bed but it is later revealed that even though Nora is the reason why Torvald is cured and healthy, he doesn’t actually appreciate her and what she did but he cares more about what a disgrace Nora was to him and his friends hence, this wasn’t her destiny. It is shown how much Nora loves her children, perhaps more than she loves Torvald, she had to leave them behind due to the things that their non-loving father said about “poisoning” them with her presence which persuaded her to leave them so they could live.

6. Does Ibsen build empathy for Nora in Act 2? If so, in what ways?

Ibsen does, in a way, builds empathy for Nora in Act 2 by highlighting the innocence in her when she tried to talk to Dr. Rank about her troubles with Krogstad but her dialogue implies something different in Dr Rank’s head which encouraged him to express his true feelings for her. Though some people in the Victorian era might not think Nora is that innocent as they’ve taken a dislike towards her through their first impression of her and how she lies to her husband and goes behind his back. Also, it’s distressing to see Nora facing Krogstad by herself and blackmailing her, pushing her to the edge but Nora proves not to be threatened and that really gives her strength to the frivolous character she’s made to be and the some audience could’ve applaud her for that since she’s facing a person who’s disliked by everyone for his actions.

Moreover, after hearing what Torvald said about “poisoning” the children, she tries to not see them eventhough she loves them so much, she has to sacrifice her love for them in order for them to “survive” and seeing how she treats them and their love for her, it seems like an impossible thing to do; to leave your children but she had to do what’s ‘right’ for her children’s lives and I think some audience would emphathise with that kind of sacrifice.

7. Ibsen parallels some themes with other subplots in the play for example lies and deception, breaking the law, poisoning one’s offspring, if someone goes away – everyone will soon get used to it. Name which parts in the play it occurs and the effects it has on the audience.

As for lies and deception, Nora is the first example that would come to mind because when she was first introduced, she has already started lying about the littlest thing like eating a macaroon or two and those little lies transforms into much bigger lies. In order to get what she wants, Nora ‘manipulates’ Torvald by complimenting him, satisfying him, etc. And that could be seen as deception in that period. The audience in the Victorian society would’ve been strongly against the things Nora does though some might be more understanding towards little lies like eating a macaroon but for her to go behind her husband’s back, forge her father’s signature was seen as a ‘crime’ since woman were never allowed to handle family’s money, keys and mails but not only that, she actually committed a crime and broke a law.

Torvald’s feelings towards Krogstad is very negative eventhough they were childhood friends and when Torvald commented on the similar crime Krogstad committed by saying how he poisons his own offsprings, Nora took it as though it was for her since her and Krogstad were on the same boat and that really left a deep impact on Nora and how she thinks she’s the cause to her children’s deteriorating deaths. Ibsen presents Torvald as the typical domineering male of the Victorian society so if he thinks about Krogstad like that, the actual Victorian audience must’ve thought like that too hence, Torvald’s opinions reflects the society’s. Because Ibsen withholds information from Torvald but not the audience, it builds up a dramatic tension then will eventually burst and that’s what happened at the end of the play.