Nora In A Doll's House By Henrik Ibsen

But listen to this, Kristine - I got something to be proud and happy for.” (Ibsen, 1256), This statement by Nora changes the conversation from Kristine’s troubles and accomplishments and turns everything around so that Nora can brag about what she has done. We also see Nora’s selfishness in the last act of the play when Nora leaves her family. It is understandable for Nora to leave Torvald if she no longer feels loved, but Nora decides to leave her kids

In the 19th century Victorian era, Ibsen delves into a society vastly different from the society we know today. He explores a society in which the men are in control, the men run businesses, the men control the money, while the women manage the home and children. Throughout the play, we see Torvald asserting that dominance over Nora, not only in spoken orders but also in how he speaks to her, “No borrowing, no debt. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt,” (Ibsen,1879). Frequently, Nora is referred to as "little songbird," "little squirrel," "little spendthrift," or "little Nora."

After eight years of marriage, what allows Nora to see that she must break free from the “Doll’s House”? “A Doll’s House” is a play written by Henrik Ibsen, set in late nineteenth century where women were expected to uphold social norms of being a submissive wife and a caring mother. In the beginning of the play, Nora is initially portrayed as a naive and obedient “doll” trapped inside of a “Doll’s House”, but towards the end of the play, Nora is able to come to the realisation that she was never happy during her eight years of marriage with Torvald, leading to her leaving Torvald and breaking free from the “Doll’s House”. This essay will explore the different factors which allows Nora to see why she must break free.

However, we now see Nora showing a more adult attitude by stating “I’m a human being” in order to get across the fact that she wants to be treated as an equal and that she is done being an object and in particular a doll. Towards the end of the play we see another sense of irony which is the fact that once Nora brings out her true self and sits Torvald down to tell him the truth, he is completely new to this side of Nora and as a result is shocked. However, with Torvald still wearing his costume from the party, this is a reprsentation of the artificial world he lives in whereby `Nora is his doll, but by confronting him, he realizes that she is not the Nora he thought she was, making him realise that his world is a facade, and that just like Nora, he too, is nothing more than a doll in a pretend

Nora is a married woman and has children to take care of. She really has little freedom because of the way Torvald treats her. She is not even I feel as if deep down she knows she is not free and wants something more in her life then to be a entertaining puppet for Torvald. She realizes at the end of the story that Torvald is not good to her because of the way he acted when she told him about forging the signature. When Torvald called her a criminal and other harsh words she realized that she had no true love from Torvald and wanted to be free from him.

This brings in to question whether or not it is acceptable for a woman to simply walk away from a marriage, involving three children, and not attempt to work things out. Nora realizes she and the life she has been living has been a complete construct of the way society expects her to be. Nora is Torvald’s doll and her life has not amounted to anything more than making sure he and the world around her is happy. The result of the inequalities she is faced with results in Nora being completely unhappy. Torvald fails to recognize everything that Nora does to ensure his happiness.

During act III, Nora asked to speak to Torvald after her performance of the tarantella dance. The following conversation demonstrated her quest for autonomy and freedom, as well as Torvald’s inadequate responses to her arguments and demands; it also showed how deeply connected her unhappy situation is with society’s regulation of the relationship between the sexes. She asserts that she is “...first and foremost a human being”, and her strong conviction that her womanhood, and the expectations associated with it, are secondary, strengthens her resolve to make a radical choice: A break with both husband and, with necessity due to her legal position, her children (Ibsen, 184). During her conversation with Torvald, she proclaims, “I have other sacred duties... The duties to myself (Ibsen, 184).”

Nora is depicted as a dependant, childish and unexperienced woman (as said by mrs.Linde p.34). Torvald sees Nora as a dimwitted person as can be seen on p.89 where Torvald finds it impressive when ‘little Nora’ used to word ‘Scientific experiment’. Evidently Torvald

(Ibsen 7). Torvald questions Nora, as a father would, while Nora lies, like a child. Although, Nora and Torvald are married,

A Psychoanalytical Approach to A Doll’s House Sigmund Freud, a well known psychologist, argues that childhood experience influences adult life in the pursuit of happiness. Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House is a prime example of Freud’s theory as the protagonist, Nora, regresses to her past childlike habits of happiness within a voiceless marriage. Nora is limited to mental developmental growth because she is fixated in an adolescent state. In order for Nora to truly find her identity in the end, her illusions of happiness must be shattered.

Gender representation is a theme in which is common when focusing on the form and content of both Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House and Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godott. Even though they are represented in different manners they both highlight the gender norms during the time period they were written. Within Beckett’s writings masculinity is prominent, centralizing the powerful and protruding gender focal point. Whereas Ibsen includes the female perspective and allows the readers to become aware of the gender representation as such.

Entry #1: Act I, Pages 1 – 13 I started the play, “A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen and since I came late into the course, I have some background on the play and some minor information about Nora, Torvald and Mrs. Linde, Christine from some of the IOPs presented. The first impression for each character introduced differed. Torvald seemed like a dominant man that was the essence of a typical Norwegian man during the time the play was written. He’s constantly being demeaning towards Nora and women in general during the dialogue between him and Nora. For example when he says, “That is like a woman!”

Towards the end of the play, Nora herself comes to the realisation that she has in fact been nothing more than a ‘doll’, made to humour the men in her life. She states ‘I have been your doll wife, just as at home I was daddy’s doll child.’ This statement concluded the fact that Torvald has never truly seen Nora as his equal, whether that’s by objectifying her or infantilising her. Torvald has many nicknames for Nora such as ‘skylark’ or ‘squirrel’, which while on the surface seem like terms of endearment, are actually ways in which Torvald belittles her, as it allows Torvald to further view

Nora is a dynamic character in this play, fitting Ibsen’s scheme of creating characters who struggle with "authentic identity” one that Nora fits perfectly. Her character changes through the play progressing from an inauthentic identity to an authentic, whole person. Through most of the play she displays a highly falsified and inauthentic character, one that developed due to the expectations of her surroundings, treating her father and later

The play closes on a positive note with Nora, representative of the supressed female, overcoming Torvald, representative of the oppressive male, however to express the true extent of this achievement, Ibsen makes evident the context of the struggle that society dictated women live by. The progressive characterisation of the protagonist Nora encapsulates Ibsen’s intention of pushing theatrical and societal norms through showing how women deserve to create their own identity and not be restricted by their male oppressors. Ibsen crafted every line to show the development of her dialogue, actions, setting and properties, and in doing so he potently slammed the door on the patriarchal society of the 19th