Revolutionary Ideals in The Play “A Doll’s House”

Published in 1879, “A Doll’s House” illustrates ideals that were revolutionary in the nineteenth century. The characters and conflicts are portrayed truthfully. Nothing in the play is glorified, there is no stereotypical happy ending, and there is an absence of romance. Ibsen uses realistic diction, which strives to portray life accurately and shuns idealized visions of it. His word choice throughout the story portrays the social change needed in the ideas of unequal marriage; the toxic imbalances Nora suffers from incites female empowerment. Ibsen’s words reveal Nora and Torvald’s marriage as the farce it truly is. Torvald embodies the ideal husband in the late 1800 Norwegian society. He embraces the belief that a man’s duty in marriage is to defend and conduct his wife. Torvald frequently seizes the power in the relationship and treats Nora like a helpless child. In Act I, Torvald rewards Nora with money when she displays her obedience, an indication that he believes he controls her. He refers to her as his “little squirrel,” “little skylark,” and “little songbird” throughout Act I. This reveals how Torvald views Nora as fragile, childlike, and incapable of independence. Nora reveals her deepest secret of borrowing money without Torvald’s permission to Mrs. Linde, her wise childhood friend.

After Mrs. Linde counsels Nora to confess to Torvald, Nora replies ‘Good heavens, no…It would upset our mutual relations altogether; our beautiful happy home would no longer be what it is now (Ibsen 14). Ibsen demonstrates the standard colloquial of the 1800s in Nora’s dialogue; thus, by using troubling phrases like ‘good heavens’ or ‘upset…altogether,’ Ibsen creates a tone of apprehension for a bleak future. Deeper into Nora’s reply, however, is her belief that she must sacrifice the truth in order to avoid conflict with her husband, demonstrating a great imbalance in her marriage. Nora finally addresses Torvald that behind the facade of their harmonious relationship “has been nothing but a playroom” and she has acted as “your (Torvald’s) doll-wife” (Ibsen 63). This contrasts with the modern authentic partnership of mutualism. Ibsen succeeds in depicting the actuality of the marriage, a bond sealed merely by a contract in which Torvald arrogantly controls his wife, treating her as his inferior. Ibsen also demonstrates the engrained social classes of the nineteenth century through how characters speak to one another. For example, Torvald categorizes people corresponding to his personal value and their standing in Norway. His exchanges with Mrs. Linde and Krogstad display the opposing treatments.

Torvald interacts with Mrs. Linde indifferently as she initially holds no worth to him. However, when Nora entreats him to find a job for Mrs. Linde, he responds, grimly, ‘Ah! Well, it’s very likely I may be able to find something for you. Contradictory is Krogstad’s situation. Mr. Helmer treats Krogstad cruelly because he views him as a disgrace to his reputation at the bank. Krogstad’s unrefined behavior and conversations with Mr. Helmer “would make my (Mr. Helmer’s) position at the Bank intolerable” (Ibsen 35). Torvald’s regular exhibition of bigotry towards Krogstad, and on a broader scale, the lower class, reflects his strict traditionalist beliefs and pride. In Act I, Nora naively asks Mrs. Linde why the old woman married a man whom she did not love. She responds with “My mother was alive then and was bedridden and helpless, and I had to provide for my two younger brothers; so I did not think I was justified in refusing his offer.” This matter-of-fact unhesitant answer reveals the shamefully limited options women in the nineteenth century faced.

Mrs. Linde automatically sacrifices her happiness for her family, an action Nora remarks that “thousands of women have done” in Act III while leaving Torvald (Ibsen 66). This reflects the prevailing idea that women were nothing more than objects of men’s convenience and amusement. This is why Torvald is furious when Nora demands to fulfill her duties to herself before all others. The traditional man believes that first, she is “a wife and a mother” (Ibsen 64). Nora’s revolutionary vision of herself as independent, pleasure-seeking, and intelligent ultimately leads her to destroy her marriage by leaving; although, this choice awards her freedom that women lacked. The revolutionary spirit and the emergence of modernism during the 19th century influenced Ibsen’s choice to focus on an unlikely hero, a housewife, in his attack on middle-class values. A lack of human rights, slightly focused on females, was prevalent during this era. Through his realistic diction, Ibsen sends the message of self-liberation.

Cite this page