During the past week we finished reading Act I of Henrik Ibsen's, A Doll's House. We were introduced to the characters of the play, the most notable being Nora, the wife of Torvald Helmer. From the start it is evident that the relationship of this couple is different than to that of a married couple today, Torvald treats his wife Nora as though she is lower than him. One of his first interactions with her is, "Nora! [He goes to her and takes her playfully by the ear.] The same little scatterbrain" (Ibsen 148). This frivolous act would make Nora seem as though she is a small child and belittling her. My reaction to this was that he doesn't respect her like she is equal to him but almost inferior. This is similar to when I entered the high school last year and the upperclassmen wouldn't take me as seriously as they would their classmates because I was younger. This must have been how all men treated their wives in the time this play was written since it was a male dominated society. At what point did that philosophy change to where women were treated as more of an equal by their husband?
Despite being treated this way we learn a lot about Nora's character in the first act. We first see that she loves to receive and squander money. when talking with her friend about what she has, Nora responds with, "Oh, not just what we need! Heaps and heaps of money!" (Ibsen 155). This shows how Nora is used to being spoiled and her strong desire for material items. We also see that she is very clever and sneaky. Nora is able to get away with many things behind her husbands back. For example she brings macaroons home when Torvald had forbidden them. This is only a small act compared to the predicament she had placed herself in. Without Torvald knowing, she borrows a large amount of money to take him on vacation and relieve his stress.. Her excuse for this action to her friend is, "Is it rash to save your husband's life?" (Ibsen 160). My thoughts were mixed about this idea. Although Nora is saving Torvald's life she is creating a very big lie which can disrupt her marriage. If she has any problems with amortization Torvald may find out about her actions and there will be a large disturbance in their seemingly happy marriage. A question I pose is, was it right for Nora to go behind her husbands back to save his life?
Yes, Nora had every right to go behind her husband's back to help save his life. Without Nora, Helmer would be in really bad shape so she took action. If I was in the same position as Nora, I would have done the same thing. Nora was not just going to let her husband die and if she did tell him what she did it would make his condition worse.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Nora had the right to go behind his back because she thought she was saving her husband's life. I think she could have gone a different way about it, but none the less she did what she did because she thought by doing so, she was taking care of her family. If I were in her spot I would have done the same thing because during that time period, men were taking care of their wives, but the wives always cared for her husband, and the fact that she was able to pull this off shows that she was ahead of her time. To answer your other question, the philosophy changed throughout history because men realized that women were much more than a pretty face, that they could actually do the same thing as a man. When men went to war, women were the ones who took over and did the same or better job than the men. Women are still trying to be equal but this play shows that women can do anything and will do anything to make sure their families are taken care of.
ReplyDeleteI commented on Elliot's, Nyree's, Connor's, and Danielle A.'s blogs.
ReplyDeleteI think Nora had the right to go behind her husband's back to save him. Whether she did it for love - as she claims - or his money, I am not certain yet. Not only was she looking out for him, but she was ultimately looking out for herself as well. Had Torvald died, she most likely would have had difficulty getting a job like Mrs. Linde, and other difficulties probably would have arised, since a woman without a husband at the time was looked down upon.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it was the best decision to go behind her husband's back. Assuming that Torvald was just stressed, and not literally dying from a serious medical conditions, there were many better options she could've used instead of borrowing money, going behind her husband's back, and forging a signature. Although it would have been difficult to handle, she could have found a way to get it through Torvald's head that the stress was damaging him, whether that be convincing him herself or getting other people/doctors to tell him what his problem was.
ReplyDelete