In what ways does Ibsen show Nora Helmer to fulfil the role of the Victorian woman?
Nora Helmer is characterized as a somewhat docile typical housewife. She is glad to be subservient towards her husband and three children for their sake; for Nora, putting her family foremost is almost taken for granted. Perhaps the clearest way in which Nora fulfils the role of a typical Victorian matron is in the way she knowingly acts inferior to that of her husband. Readers can see plainly that Nora gives up being herself up for the supposed happiness of her husband. When Torvald and Nora were first married, ‘it even used to make him sort of jealous if [Nora] only as much mentioned any of [her] old school friends from back home’, ‘so of course [she] stopped doing it’ (38). From this we can see that Nora is willing to limit, almost abandon the amount of her social interaction and attachment from her maiden life purely out of marital obedience for her husband. Nora is also seen almost too attached to her three children; this is shown by Nora’s interaction with the children as it transcends a motherly, caring relationship to an almost friend-like relationship with them. This again shows how much affection Nora feels for her children. When Nora is not shown with her children on set, she is characterized as somewhat barer in appearance and demeanor. In many ways, her children are a source of constant motivation and the reason Nora can uphold her vitality and to a degree her ‘frivolousness’.
In what ways does Nora not adhere to the role?
Readers have already seen in the previous Act that Nora is more than capable of lying, albeit ‘small’ white lies which do not usually directly affect anyone. However, as Nora’s lie count steadily increases throughout the Acts, it is almost completely transparent now that there will be a final immense lie which may shape her whole future. Nora is seen lying frequently to her husband, mostly about frivolous little things such as eating macaroons – which Torvald has expressly forbidden her from doing – , but occasionally also choosing to almost indulge herself in a ‘bigger’ lie – that of her forging her father’s signature for the IOU that eventually came to save Torvald’s life. Nora’s relationship with certain male figures, especially with Dr. Rank, may have been deviating from the traditional Victorian woman slightly. Nora, whether knowingly or completely unknowingly, very overtly flirts with the Doctor. Because it is made ambiguous as to whether Nora truly realizes her intentions, the heresy of her flirtatious disposition is watered down a little. Her flirting with the Doctor is almost painfully full of innuendoes and insinuations, which may have disturbed conservative playgoers in seventeenth century Northern Europe. Nora is also characterized as a somewhat manipulative wife; she almost ‘plays’ Torvald’s mind to get what she desires, to varying degrees of success.
Nora Helmer is characterized as a somewhat docile typical housewife. She is glad to be subservient towards her husband and three children for their sake; for Nora, putting her family foremost is almost taken for granted. Perhaps the clearest way in which Nora fulfils the role of a typical Victorian matron is in the way she knowingly acts inferior to that of her husband. Readers can see plainly that Nora gives up being herself up for the supposed happiness of her husband. When Torvald and Nora were first married, ‘it even used to make him sort of jealous if [Nora] only as much mentioned any of [her] old school friends from back home’, ‘so of course [she] stopped doing it’ (38). From this we can see that Nora is willing to limit, almost abandon the amount of her social interaction and attachment from her maiden life purely out of marital obedience for her husband. Nora is also seen almost too attached to her three children; this is shown by Nora’s interaction with the children as it transcends a motherly, caring relationship to an almost friend-like relationship with them. This again shows how much affection Nora feels for her children. When Nora is not shown with her children on set, she is characterized as somewhat barer in appearance and demeanor. In many ways, her children are a source of constant motivation and the reason Nora can uphold her vitality and to a degree her ‘frivolousness’.
In what ways does Nora not adhere to the role?
Readers have already seen in the previous Act that Nora is more than capable of lying, albeit ‘small’ white lies which do not usually directly affect anyone. However, as Nora’s lie count steadily increases throughout the Acts, it is almost completely transparent now that there will be a final immense lie which may shape her whole future. Nora is seen lying frequently to her husband, mostly about frivolous little things such as eating macaroons – which Torvald has expressly forbidden her from doing – , but occasionally also choosing to almost indulge herself in a ‘bigger’ lie – that of her forging her father’s signature for the IOU that eventually came to save Torvald’s life. Nora’s relationship with certain male figures, especially with Dr. Rank, may have been deviating from the traditional Victorian woman slightly. Nora, whether knowingly or completely unknowingly, very overtly flirts with the Doctor. Because it is made ambiguous as to whether Nora truly realizes her intentions, the heresy of her flirtatious disposition is watered down a little. Her flirting with the Doctor is almost painfully full of innuendoes and insinuations, which may have disturbed conservative playgoers in seventeenth century Northern Europe. Nora is also characterized as a somewhat manipulative wife; she almost ‘plays’ Torvald’s mind to get what she desires, to varying degrees of success.
In what ways does Ibsen develop Nora’s character to present her complexity? In what ways might this have been a challenge for the audience of the period it was written in?
Nora’s character is almost twofold; she has a metaphorical ‘mask’ which she puts on in Torvald’s (and presumably also in her late father’s) presence, and her true self revealed in her children’s and Kristine Linde’s presence. Nora’s personality appears pronouncedly subdued and much more under control when she is with her husband. This duality of the female protagonist allows complex presentation of the character on Ibsen’s part. While the duality allows the modern audience to appreciate Nora’s complexity, the reality is that the duality is built on a foundation of lies and deception. Many may have taken such a personality trait to be immoral and unsuitable based on Victorian ideals. Because Nora Helmer is such a complex character, she may not have received empathy as her character could have been hard to relate to for many average women – in this way, misunderstanding (or reluctance to understand) may have hindered the audience from fully appreciating the play.
What elements might have shocked a Victorian audience in Act II?
Victorians were notorious for their conservative way of life and strict ideals; because of this, Nora’s character had a huge negative impact on their lives. Perhaps one of the most scandalous was the fact that a married woman with children so brazenly and blatantly engaged in flirtatious behavior with a man, a rancorous family friend at that. The very character of Dr. Rank – a man maimed by a sexually transmitted disease passed on by his father’s reckless escapades as a young man – may have been seen as shocking in itself. Readers gain more insight into Nora’s personality and her predicament regarding a loan from Krogstad in Act II. We see that Nora has lied her way through the last few years trying to cover up the illicit way in which she chose to forge her father’s signature to obtain money for Torvald’s sake. We also found out in the previous Act that no woman is allowed, by law, to borrow money without her husband’s consent. This outright breaking of law must have seen heretical and unkempt for a woman to a Victorian audience. Nora, in the beginning of Act II, is seen contemplating suicide and ‘never seeing her children again’ (36). Although modern readers now may appreciate the true motives for her contemplating such thoughts, our Victorian counterparts may have felt that a housewife, someone bound to the household, was to be running away from her personal problems and leaving her greatest assets and treasures behind.
Through the presentation of Nora, in what ways does Ibsen suggest that it is a necessity for a person to fulfil his/her ‘destiny’?
Nora is, in a way, the most mentally mature character throughout the play – she is the only one to realize that whatever the case, her happiness comes first as opposed to anyone else’s.
Nora is, in a way, the most mentally mature character throughout the play – she is the only one to realize that whatever the case, her happiness comes first as opposed to anyone else’s.
Does Ibsen build empathy for Nora in Act II? If so, in what ways?
Modern readers may feel empathetic towards Nora to a degree, but the Victorian audience not so much. Our view of morality and ideals are nowhere as strict compared to that of the past; because of this, many modern women may relate to Nora’s struggles and the motives behind her eventual deserting of her family. Through the dialogue from conflicts between Nora and Krogstad and Nora and Torvald, readers can see that Nora’s mental and emotional burden increases exponentially throughout the Act. Nora becomes increasingly fidgety and irritable throughout the Act, and all because of a ‘crime’ driven by love for her other half. Ibsen in a way justifies Nora’s actions, that sometimes love so strong can result in someone breaking the law notwithstanding the consequences of such an action. I believe modern women will be prone to feeling empathetic towards such a character and her predicament as they may believe that her only ‘sin’ in a sense was unconditional devotion and love for her husband.
Modern readers may feel empathetic towards Nora to a degree, but the Victorian audience not so much. Our view of morality and ideals are nowhere as strict compared to that of the past; because of this, many modern women may relate to Nora’s struggles and the motives behind her eventual deserting of her family. Through the dialogue from conflicts between Nora and Krogstad and Nora and Torvald, readers can see that Nora’s mental and emotional burden increases exponentially throughout the Act. Nora becomes increasingly fidgety and irritable throughout the Act, and all because of a ‘crime’ driven by love for her other half. Ibsen in a way justifies Nora’s actions, that sometimes love so strong can result in someone breaking the law notwithstanding the consequences of such an action. I believe modern women will be prone to feeling empathetic towards such a character and her predicament as they may believe that her only ‘sin’ in a sense was unconditional devotion and love for her husband.
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 the above occurs and the effects they have on the audience.
No comments:
Post a Comment