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

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

The role of Victorian women would include their daily household activities and their extreme devotion towards their families, especially their husbands. Women would see their husbands as Bible and that every single word in the Bible is true, therefore, the husbands’ wishes in the house are always right, and his words are God-like within the household. Nora is represented to be a stereotypical wife, who fulfils her role of a Victorian woman to an extent that she always stays home, takes care of the children, completes her responsibility in the household very well, although her thought of leaving the family for them to have a better life could be seen as rebellious and inappropriate for a Victorian woman, it suggests that Nora is willing to sacrifice herself for the family’s better future. As for obeying her husband, she does it very well, as in act II; she is wholly stressed/nervous to practice the best tarantella dance to not let her husband lose face in front of the crowd. She would serve as Torvald’s pet: “sining bird”, “little squirrel” that she would find ways to keep Torvald satisfied, as well as to keep her naïve/innocent/pure wife in Torvald, that she would even do childish things “I’d pretend I was an elfin and dance a moonlight dance for you, Torvald.”

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

Victorian women were not given any right to participate in social activities; they were also restricted from the financial area of the family but only the household jobs: taking care of the family, housework, etc. As that being the expectations/rules for a Victorian woman, Nora has broken them. First of all she forged her dad’s sign to borrow money. This act of hers would be seen as breaking the laws under the Victorian time, as women must not take part in any financial activities and that they must have their husband’s confirmation in order to borrow money. Secondly is her ability of making up white lies instantly, she would immediately/calmly lied to her husband about the macaroons and blame it on Ms.Linde, right in front of Torvald. Also it is the biggest/most unacceptable lie which she wishes Torvald would never find out, the forgery. Doing so is seen as shocking and going against the laws, Nora goes against the expectations of a woman to follow/obey her Torvald’s words and being a criminal.

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?

The complexity in Nora that Ibsen suggests is that under the image of Nora, she plays multiple and different characters with different characteristics. She would be portrayed to be a completely different person each time she talks to Torvald, Ms.Linde, and Kurdstag. Talking to Torvald she would show obedience, softness and naivety/pureness, whereas when she talks to Ms.Linde, though she still maintains her calmness, her crime is exposed, she turns to who she really is as she tells Ms.Linde everything. By talking to Ms.Linde, her mysteries are revealed: the forgery and her connection with Dr.Rank, the bad things that she does are brought into light. Finally she turns to a furious/angry/solid/brave woman while talking to Dr.Rank, to fight back when Dr.Rank blackmails her. There are so much to understand in Nora, due to the different situations she is in and the presentation of a wide range of characteristics that she has makes her a complex woman.

The complexity in her character is her actions, she would do anything to satisfy her husband, fulfil the household activities: do the dance for Torvald, design the Christmas trees, taking care of the children contrasts with the white lies she makes and the crime that she has got herself into, forgery.

The complexity in Nora’s character is shown through what she does, of being different people at the same time. This creates a difficulty for the audience in terms of shaping their thoughts and emotions towards her, deciding whether she is an empathetic character and accepts her actions, or going against her and would like to see her to pay some prices for going against the laws.

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

Her open-upness towards Dr.Rank, when she said she would do the dance just for Dr.Rank, and for Torvald as well. Also the fact that she showed Dr.Rank her stockings, considering she sees him as a part of her family, showing a man stockings is rather be seen as a seductive sign from a woman (especially Victorian women). This comes out to be very shocking towards the audience to witness a Nora flirting with another man behind’s Torvald’s back.

Another shock would be her consideration of leaving her children “Do you think they would forget their Mummy if she went away for good?”. Nora’s simplicity in thinking, taking words very seriously that leads her to the consideration of suicide to prevent her children from be “poisoned”. Although it has not yet been made clear up to Act II, the audience however can sense this through her dialogues.

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

Linked to equal right in men and women. Perhaps Ibsen wanted to open up a new door in the audience’s view of the society, in which a woman, like Nora, could be capable of doing things that they were restricted from (Torvald wouldn’t have lived if it wasn’t for Nora borrowing money). For Ibsen, this could be meant to be a revolution in the society where men and women are treated equally, there are less and not as extreme barriers among what women are and are not supposed to do.

It could also be linked to the fact that Nora wants to end her life, she sees it as a destiny. “Five. Seven hours to midnight. Then twenty-four hours till the next midnight. The tarantella will be over. Twenty-four and seven? Thirty-one hours to live.”

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

For the Victorian audience, it could perhaps be difficult for building empathy towards Nora as what she did was extremely wrong and against the law, the audience might feel very shocked. Not to mention that A Doll’s House was the first play to introduce realism among husbands and wives under the Victorian era, therefore they might struggle to truly interpret Nora’s self-sacrifice and deep/full of love reason of her intention à empathy is not easily built. However, it is also possible that the Victorian audience might be touched by what he does and admires her love towards her husband and her children. (forgery for Torvald’s health, leave for a better future for the children).

For the modern audience might build up more empathy towards Nora as there are revolutionaries among their society and that their rights are more developed. When Torval “I forgive you this anxiety of yours, although it is actually a bit of an insult” it could perhaps be seen that Torvald is rather a father-figure who controls everything rather than a husband. He talks to Nora as if she is in a lower class rather than his wife, even there is still the sense of ego and high-pride when he forgives Nora for speaking up. By seeing this as an unfair and unjust thing to do, the modern audience might become more understanding and forgiving towards Nora and towards what she did.

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.

Lie and Deception: At the beginning of the play where Nora’s first lie is revealed about the macaroons. This is when the audience starts to have a bad impression at Nora and this works as a trigger into believing more about Nora’s other lies which are revealed later in the play.

Poisoning one’s offspring: “Because such an atmosphere of lies infects and poisons the whole life of a home. Each breath the children take in such a house is full of the germs of evil”. Torvald implants this idea in Nora’s mind when they are talking about Krodstag at the end of Act I, that Torvald believes his children might be “poisoned”. It is irony that a non-loving father now talks about being afraid of having his children “infected” by immoral.

If someone goes away everyone will soon get used to it: This idea is suggested during the conversation of Nora and the nursemaid at the beginning of Act II. The nursemaid said “The children get used to anything in time” after Nora asked the nursemaid whether the children would miss her if she decides to leave.

End of Act 2 - Questions to consider

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

Nora fulfills her duty of being a housewife by buying presents for her children on Christmas and playing with them shows that she immensely love her children. She also tries to please her husband by decorating the house for Christmas and obeys his advice to “control her spending habits”. Many of Torvald’s advice for Nora is abstract, when he mentions being acquainted with Krogstad can “poison” their children (as he sees Krogstad as a bad influence on the household), but Nora takes this idea very literally (due to woman’s lack of education in Victorian society in general) and so she is actually scared of her children getting poisoned, because of her, as she has committed a similar crime to Krogstad’s.

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

She is not completely obedient to her husband as she hides the loan secret from him, and secretly eating macaroons behind him and telling another man about it (Dr Rank). She also tries to persuade her husband to keep the job at the bank for Torvald instead of Mrs Linde for her own benefit. This tells the audience she is not very truthful, which is not the Victorian ideology for women.

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?

In the beginning of Act One, the audience sees Nora as a frivolous woman through her responses to Torvald, and a child-like, self-centered and insensitive character through her conversation with Mrs Linde. Nora seems to be a character that seems to have a candid, transparent mind-set at first, as the audience can see her personalities so easily. But towards the end of Act One, the audience learns that Nora bears a secret with her, borrowing a loan to help her husband in need, and her conversation with Mrs Linde builds up the dramatic tension within Nora, her internal conflict between her childish nature and her need to grow out of it.

In Act Two, the audience can see more of Nora’s internal conflict as her worry about her “poisoning” her children grows. She expresses this worry with her nursemaid. She also confides her personal matters with Dr Rank. All these events lead to the ultimate revelation of Nora’s secret in borrowing the loan from Krogstad and forging her father’s signature to Mrs Linde. Nora keeps the secret of Krogstad’s letter to her husband till the end, causing her to worry the whole time during her dance with Torvald. At the end of Act Two, Nora reveals the dramatic irony by confirming to her husband, “(I) am dancing as though (my) life depend on it”.

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

·         How she wants to leave the house without consulting with Torvald – women do not have power to make her own decisions in society without her husband

·         Her insistence on letting Krogstad stay and how she calls him “petty” – women are not supposed to devalue a men’s pride

·         How she lets Dr. Rank see her stockings and “a bit higher up” – a married woman cannot show her inner stockings to other men

·         She knows about Dr. Rank liking her but completely ignores it – a married woman has to stay loyal to the man she married

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

Ibsen builds empathy for Nora for the modern audience. The modern audience would support Nora’s choice to disobey the Victorian ideology for woman is motivated by her love for her family members. This highlights to the audience Nora’s good-natured character. as her maturity evolves from the end of Act One to the end of the play, helping her to understand more of the society around her, which influence her responses to her life situations (i.e leave the house on her husband), although are morally just (as the modern audience understands her motivations), are not accepted by Victorian society at the time, making the modern audience to feel sympathy for her even more.

6.      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.

·        Lies & Deception: Macaroons, Secret of her borrowing money, Lying some part of the secret to Mrs Linde

·        Breaking the law: during the first conversation between Nora and Krogstad

·        Poisoning one’s offspring: When Nora insists Torvald to let Krogstad stay in the bank and Torvald refused

·        If someone goes away – everyone will soon get used to it: during Nora’s conversation with the nursemaid and Dr. Rank in Act 2

Veronica's A Doll's House Act II Answers

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Annette's response to Act 2

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?

Nora, on one hand rebellious and daring is at the same time a model for ideal Victorian housewives. Her family, Torvald and the children are her first priority and she is ready to sacrifice many of her own wishes for their well being. This however may not encompass what is necessarily best for the family however it demonstrates her obedience to Torvald’s wishes and veneration of is rules and ideas. This obedience is crucial to a Victorian housewife because her place in the marriage is not to make decisions, her prime responsibilities should be within the four walls of the house, to keep her husband and her children happy and to make the home a safe haven where her husband may find solace from the perils of the outside world.

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

Nora’s dichotomy is that at the same time she is the ideal Victorian housewife, she is also the antithesis of the stereotype, recalcitrant and strong as she stands her ground instead of surrendering and upholds her personal values even though acting as if she followed only Torvald’s wishes not her own. As if intentionally, she breaks the smallest of his ground rules (macaroons) and the largest that are protected by the law (fraud). She blatantly lies about Mrs. Linde’s possession of the macaroons and exploits the sacredness of her marriage as she commits fraud behind his back and keeps it secret from him. Nora, quite childish and naive emotionally does not see the inappropriateness of her intimacy with Dr. Rank. She openly expresses disbelief when Mrs. Linde suggests a deeper relationship between them yet the interaction between her and Dr. Rank often touch on sexual innuendo- when Nora speaks ambiguously about Dr. Rank’s inability to pursue pleasure Dr. Rank and the audience are led to think whether or not Nora is conscious of the double entendre of her dialogue.

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 reveals Nora’s multiple facets by introducing various other characters used to elicit a different aspect of Nora. For example Torvald brings out the child/ wife in Nora, around him she is obedient though capricious and ingratiating. By comparison with Mrs. Linde we become aware of her emotional immaturity however we also get an in depth look at Nora’s almost selfless motivations. By juxtaposing an idealistic characteristic for a Victorian woman with characteristics women would have been strongly reprimanded for, Ibsen demonstrates the limitations Victorian ideals have set for women and their potential beyond that. Audiences from the era would have found her recalcitrance preposterous and punishable so perhaps Ibsen wanted to pass on the idea that women and married women should be able to legally make important decisions within the family as they were capable of doing so without compromising the happiness and well being of her family. This is paralleled by Mrs. Linde’s success in taking care of her ailing mother and supporting her brothers. Being a widow there were no legal restrictions to her ability to work and is not only self sufficient but taking on the role of a wife to Krogstad and caretaker of his children. Nora’s secret meetings with Krogstad would also be a cause for concern, as women weren’t supposed to meet with their husband’s acquaintances when the latter wasn’t present. Nor should she be making illegal transactions behind his back no matter how loyal the cause. A woman should be transparent with her husband. Her ambiguous flirtation with Dr. Rank is more deplorable because of his status as a family friend but more so their blatant, indiscreet discussions about his syphilis a sensitive subject and social taboo.

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

Firstly the revelation of Krogstad as Nora’s creditor is shocking as the deed itself is immoral, especially, in the Victorian context, for a woman, behind her husband’s back. Nora’s flirtation with Dr. Rank would gain much disapproval as it suggests her infidelity in the sanctuary of her own home! And with her husband’s best friend, a factor that makes their innuendo more unacceptable. However, despite seeing so many faults in Nora we also see Torvald in a new light when he reveals his reason for firing Krogstad- his pride. His pettiness compels audiences to take a second look at

his “correctness” and begin to question his righteousness, wisdom and authority. It is also shocking that Nora was prepared to take her own life to protect Torvald from blame; such a hard decision was not expected from a woman so seemingly naive.

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

Ibsen always denied being a feminist as he advocated first and foremost, equal human rights. In his forward thinking he suggested that women like Nora should fulfil their destiny because equal human rights was the right path to follow and he encouraged women to make it happen rather than waiting for it to be. Nora’s infamous door slam asked women to stand up for the cause and be the change, no social change could occur if women themselves refused abandon coveted Victorian values. The structure of the play helps represent this symbolism. A well made play expects the plot to return to normal after the denouement however Nora shockingly decides not to accept Torvald’s pleads and forgiveness but chooses to leave her family without any particular set plan of action. Her daringness defies the bounds of set theatrical structure, and perhaps indicates the birth of a revolution in human rights. Ibsen’s controversial subject matter did make people stand up, his plays often elicited debates and arguments in theatres and venues around the world, they became not only a past time for people as traditional plays were meant to be, but a medium for social change, an object of conversation.

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

Ibsen does build empathy for Nora. Although many audiences would have reprimanded her, being aware of the full extent of her crime however audiences would also be moved by the extent of her devotion to her family. She is willing to kill herself for their sake. Her selflessness moves audiences and washes over the blame we assert to her, and we begin to transfer frustration with Nora, to frustration with short-sighted legal restrictions that begin to seem unreasonable. It is hard to imagine the chaos of Nora’s internal conflict, juggling the need to stay calm, maintain her stature as a wife whist contemplating suicide. The strength it takes to remain so calm is commendable and increases our empathy for her character.

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.

All these subplots are interwoven into the play in act 2, for example we find out the true extent of Nora’s crime between her tense conversations with Krogstad, and her immediate change of character in Torvald’s presence. The idea that one’s children could be “infected” with moral corruption is introduced by Torvald whilst he reprimands Krogstad for poisoning his children. It has the effect of dramatic irony on the audience as Nora is the embodiment of the claim however there has been no evidence to be viable. Another questionable idea introduced and taken to heart by Nora is she believes Anne- Marie’s claim that anyone can get used to the absence of a parent in time. Despite many lapses in their arguments that their ideas hold truth, Nora takes them as knowledge and falls prey to their false arguments. It suggests that although Nora can be an adult, and has the potential to be one she is still widely immature and needs to gain experience by herself to understand and grow. It may allude to ingrained Victorian attitudes towards society and its functioning, how many people will take ideas as facts and change the course of their life for better or worse because of them, without even hesitating to question whether there is any other way to live or whether the way of thinking is correct at all.

Rosa's "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?

A. A Victorian woman is one who is gentle, subservient to her husband, and both an ideal mother and wife to her family. In this way, Ibsen portrays Nora to fulfil this role as she primarily stays home, taking care of the household-her husband, Torvald, and her children (the role of motherhood and marriage). She values her family highly (she commits crimes to protect the sanctity of her family-e.g. forgery, going against her husband’s wishes to borrow money to save his life), and strives to maintain a harmony within her relationships. Nora is also self-sacrificing, as she wilfully serves her husband by adhering to his rules when in front of him, providing entertainment (Tarantella), and ultimately, situating herself below Torvald’s status, so he feels more powerful. Ibsen shows this through the unbalanced level of power within Torvald and Nora’s conversations-e.g. when Torvald continuously questions Nora or calls her diminutive nicknames (“my little skylark”), Nora simply accepts Torvald’s patronization by replying with “Yes, Torvald”, allowing her husband to reign over her.

2.    

             In what ways does she not adhere to the role?

A. Although most of Nora’s actual actions take place in the household, the type of actions do not classify as those of a housewife- e.g. forgery, lying to family, borrowing money off her husband’s employee…. Therefore, this other side of Nora’s personality prevents her character from being matched to a typical Victorian woman, as her character is too complicated to be classified as a type of woman. Also, the fact that she does not consider the severities of Victorian taboo/crime differentiate her from the banal mother/wife figure; Nora does not understand the fine line between a white lie and a dangerous lie (no limits), causing her to not be able to fully see the seriousness of her actions. E.g. When she chooses to leave her family at the end of the play, this completely goes against all Victorian morals, although she believes it is the right thing to do, and therefore, Nora cannot be compared to the role of a Victorian woman.

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?

A. Nora strives to follow the ideal Victorian woman’s role of being a model wife and mother to her family, but to do this, she takes part in illegal, immoral acts, which contradicts the qualities of who she should be. Therefore, the contrast between these two sides of Nora’s personality makes it difficult for the audience to understand the character, making Nora complex. Also, Nora refuses to let these two sides meet, preventing her family from knowing about her forgery and borrowing by putting on a jolly, frivolous attitude in front of Torvald and her children, speaking of Christmas, parties, and games. When she does delve into the darker side (meeting Krogstad/discussing her crime with Mrs. Linde), her personality becomes more somber and her tone becomes more serious, as she speaks of business transactions and her future. This other contrast of frivolous to serious may confuse the audience as in the Victorian era, women were supposed to follow legislation and moral law thoroughly, without any hidden opinions. Women were also thought to be simpler than men, only dedicating themselves to the household. Therefore, the audience may not understand Nora’s intentions of keeping one side of her secret to her family, and why there are such stark contrasts within of her personality (why a woman should be so mentally complicated).

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

A. Nora’s consideration of leaving her family for good/the ambiguity of whether she will commit suicide “Thirty-one hours to live”, the extent to which Nora lies to Torvald and desperately tries to steer him away from being exposed to her big secret/ the ease in which she lies to her husband, the suggested intimacy between Nora (already married) and Dr. Rank, and how Nora allows this intimacy (if she is aware of it).

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

A. Ibsen was known to be occupied with the fulfilment of destiny within his plays. In “A Doll’s House”, one’s destiny may be linked to their life ambition or purpose. During Victorian times, a woman’s life purpose was to take care of the household in terms of family and household duties (e.g. cleaning, entertaining, hosting…). Ibsen presents Nora consistently trying to carry out house tasks such as preparing the house for Christmas (cooking, decorating the Christmas tree, buying presents), in order to maintain a harmony within her family. Nora goes to great lengths to assure that her husband and children stay in the comfortable bubble of middle-class Victorian life, by handling the family difficulties herself. For example, she lies to her husband (by taking advantage of her inferiority to him “Yes, Torvald…I can’t get anywhere without your help. I’ve completely forgotten [the Tarantella]” <-she does this to divert Torvald from looking in the letter box and discovering Nora’s outstanding debt.) Nora also forges her father’s signature and goes against Torvald’s rules of never borrowing money, all in order to save her husband’s life from a time of serious illness, but she does not mention her actions to any of her family members, so they remain ignorant of the harsh reality that the family has put itself in. Furthermore, Nora purposely distances herself from her children so she doesn’t “poison” them (it is unclear if Nora literally believes her sinful actions will physically or mentally poison them). Therefore, Nora is sacrificing her mental stability to fulfil her life purpose, showing how important “destiny” is.

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

A. In a way, Ibsen does build empathy for Nora in Act 2 through her gradual build-up of paranoia of Torvald discovering her secret. This is shown through Ibsen’s stage directions for Nora becoming more “terrified…wide-eyed with terror..”, and because Nora’s complex character allows audience members to relate with her, the audience at this point may empathize with her emotions as well. However, as the play continues, Nora finally deals with the harsh reality she has brought on to herself, and her stage directions are no longer frenzied, but rather “toneless…hoarse…”, solemn, as though the impact of the truth has robbed her of her pureness and energy. Therefore, the audience may empathize for Nora, as a delicate Victorian woman in this era would not be expected to have to deal with such serious matters on her own.

            Ibsen also builds up the drama of Nora’s secret, by adding different scenes with different characters to increase the complexity of Nora’s burden. At first, Nora was focused on paying back her debt and keeping it hidden from Torvald. However, in Act 2, the debt is no longer as serious of an issue when Krogstad threatens to publicize Nora’s forgery and borrowing if his position at the bank is not secured. This makes the situation more intimidating for Nora, as she can no longer just pay the debt back and forget/eliminate her problem. Now, she has to directly confront Torvald about Krogstad’s position without exposing her secret, making Nora’s life increasingly more risky. This, and Dr. Rank’s proclaimed love for Nora, ultimately adds to the level of intensity of tension and drama in Act 2, which may provoke empathy from the audience, as a Victorian woman should not have to endure such difficulty, while trying to fulfil her “destiny” in tandem. However, the audience may not empathize as such difficulties could be interpreted to be caused by Nora herself, and that empathy should not be given to a character that put herself in trouble.

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.

A.  Lies & Deception: Nora lies to Torvald when she gives a reason to her wanting her husband to secure Krogstad’s job at the bank: “It’s your father you are thinking of.” “Yes…yes, that’s right.” She constantly bends the truth, or corroborates Torvald’s assumptions, to prevent him from knowing the crimes she has committed and the effect it will have on the family. The audience may not feel empathetic towards Nora as her consistent lying could represent an attempt to overpower the male figure of the household (knowing something important that Torvald doesn’t know). Her lying goes against the ideal Victorian woman role, and therefore, she defies the norm, and because society did not accept any sort of defiance towards traditional morals, Nora may not have been favoured at this point.

            Furthermore, Ibsen presents some ambiguity of Nora’s intentions during her conversation with Dr. Rank. One can interpret Nora to be leading Dr. Rank on, as when Dr. Rank teases Nora: “You are a bigger rascal than I thought you were”, Nora mirrors his tone and energy, “I feel full of mischief today”, and this mirroring suggests that Nora feels the same way that Dr. Rank feels towards her (in which Dr. Rank hints that he is in love with Nora and would like her to have an affair with him). However, when Dr. Rank explicitly tells Nora his true feelings, “…I have loved you every bit as much as anybody…”, Nora instantly rejects his confession and the dialogue is no longer mirrored. Therefore, this sudden change of tone and intention may confuse the audience, as though they have been deceived of who Nora really is. Also, the level of misunderstanding between the two characters may throw off audience members (e.g. Nora saying one thing that Rank interprets as something else, and Nora then interprets what Rank interprets as another meaning entirely). 

Breaking the law: Ibsen presents sub-themes of breaking the law in Nora and Krogstad’s secret conversation, when Nora locks Torvald in his own office. By trapping the male figure of the household, Ibsen suggests that the contents of the following conversation are not to be heard by the head of the house, implying that such contents are against both moral and legal law. Krogstad’s blackmailing “You still wouldn’t get your IOU back from me…Your husband is going to create a new vacancy, just for me…” also portrays feature of law breaking, by forcing Nora to improve his economical standings (his income, job-basically official, legitimate matter) under the government’s eye. Therefore, the audience may feel scandalous towards the two characters, as Victorian law did not permit such transactions, and therefore the audience may not have been able to relate to the conversation, and may have felt angry towards the defiance of the law, as if the play suggested that the legislation at the time was weak and sketchy transactions were easily carried out.

Poisoning offspring: pg. 35-36 “You’ll catch a death of a cold” “worse things might happen-how are the children?” and “from now on I can’t be with them as often as I was before”. Ibsen portrays Nora to imply that a deathly cold is not as threatening as the poisoning of her children (because she mentions her children right after she replies that “worse things might happen”), suggesting that her responsibility as a protector of her children is more significant than her own life. This may show the audience how highly Nora prioritizes her children, purposely distancing herself from them to keep them safe, showing her selflessness. It also shows that she, like many other Victorian women, is not highly educated, if she thinks that committing her crimes physically poisons her children.

If someone goes away-everyone will soon get used to it: pg. 36 when the nursemaid suggests that “children get used to anything in time”, Ibsen may imply that children during that era were not as close to their parents, so if anything were to happen to them, the children would adjust with time, as they are young; children adapt easily. In this way, the audience may feel empathy towards Nora, who is painfully considering leaving her family, but it is suggested that her children will not feel the same pain. However, the audience may not empathize with Nora in that, because children were not close to their parents during Victorian times, the audience may focus more on the notion that Nora is abandoning her motherly duties.