- power and powerlessness:

- Ibsen’s target in terms of political and social protest writing is marriage, financial institutions and the role of women.

- repression of women, society that expects caring daughters, wives and mothers, little opportunity to take control of their own lives. Ibsen said he wrote the play because 'a woman cannot be herself in modern society'. The play is clearly a feminist text.

- Krogstad demonstrates how society’s expectations, and the emphasis on reputation, can repress and make people powerless to change their lives. The powerful are represented in the play by the figure of Torvald who not only controls and manipulates his wife but also has authority over Krogstad. By the end of the play Nora asserts her independent thoughts and makes a stand against the oppressive, superficial nature of her marriage. Her exit from the house at the end of the play where she leaves her husband, children and the doll’s house itself, still has the power to shock audiences and can excite both admiration and condemnation. The play’s resolution is likely to produce lively debates in the classroom. Power and powerlessness As a husband who dictates what happens in his own home, even to the extent of controlling what his wife will wear and how she will dance the tarantella, and as a banker who has the power to both hire and fire staff, Torvald represents an authoritative masculine middle class power in the play. He reflects society’s belief that those who work in financial and legal institutions are important and that men are masters in their homes and that their wives are under their care and protection. He is also rigid in his belief that women are subservient to men

and should obey them. Torvald’s power is bound up with his strict and

uncompromising moral values, or more significantly his views on respectability.

For this reason, at the end of the play he says he cannot accept or forget Nora’s

secret past action of forging her father’s signature – even though it was to

procure money for Torvald’s health. After he realises his own reputation will not

be harmed by her action, he wields the power of forgiveness on her: “There is

something indescribably wonderful and satisfying for a husband in knowing that

he has forgiven his wife.” However, by the end of the play Torvald‘s power

diminishes as Nora finds her voice and looks forward to independence; for all his

power, he is unable to stop Nora leaving him.

Krogstad has a kind of power within the play as he blackmails Nora, and in some

respects has the power of the stock villain. However, his position is complex and

like her he himself is oppressed and trapped by society’s rules and expectations.

He too committed forgery, though unlike Nora his crime did not have a “brave”

motive and it was discovered. As a result he is defined by his transgression,

condemned as a criminal and cannot shake off the yoke. In many ways he is

Torvald’s antagonist; he despises Torvald but paradoxically craves the

respectability Torvald commands – largely because he wants to secure the

future of his children. He tells Nora “My sons are growing up; for their sake, I

must try to regain what respectability I can." It is his love for his children and

growing acceptance of Mrs Linde’s love for him that motivates him finally to feel

some compassion for Nora. Thus he returns the bond to Torvald thereby

confirming that the truth will forever be concealed. In the end, he emerges as a

far more humane and charitable character than Torvald Helmer.

Nora is trapped in a society that is run by men who expect her, and other

women, to perform an expected role in a clearly defined way. Women are

restricted in what they can do and how they should think. Many doors are closed

to them. Of particular note in this play is the fact that women cannot take out

loans in their own names. As a married woman there are other obligations on

Nora; she must behave as Torvald requires. In the dramatic present of the

drama, she seems to be the plaything of her husband, petted, dressed and

pampered by him, as if she is his doll. It is important to note, though, that

Torvald is not a cruel man and he does seem to love Nora. At no point does he

say that he does not care for her and he is generous. Such is the complexity of

the doomed hero Ibsen creates. Yet, Torvald is possessive (Nora tells Mrs Linde

he wants “to have me all to himself”) and he does not respect her ideas or

encourage the development of her intellect. In no way is their marriage any sort

of real partnership; neither is it a grown up relationship. Indeed at the end of the

play she declares that in eight years she and Torvald have never spoken of

anything important.

Although the play often seems to be about the change of Nora from a position of

weakness to one of strength, even when she is weak, her position in the

narrative present is undercut with irony. There is much more to her than first

appears. As the backstory emerges, the audience learns that in the past she has

acted independently and with some determination; she has secretly made

decisions and been proactive in financially supporting their marriage and the

health of her husband by taking out a loan to fund his recuperation in Italy. The

irony is sharpened by Torvald’s recovery which was only possible because of her

fraudulent actions and his ignorance of the risk she has taken for him. He is

ignorant too of her working for eight years to pay off her debt and of her now

being blackmailed by her lender. Although what Nora has done is deceitful and

illegal, it does show strength of character and a determination that is at odds

with her husband’s treating her like a child, calling her his skylark and his

squirrel.

What Ibsen dramatises in the play is the collision between Nora’s past actions,

the pressure of her blackmailer and Torvald’s growing awareness of what she

has done. When Torvald discovers her deceit she suffers both his condemnation

and his judgment that she will no longer be permitted to have contact with her

children. When Nora realises that Torvald’s concern for appearances and

reputation far outweighs all else, she can finally see her marriage for what it is.

Other women in the play are also victims of society’s expectations of what is

acceptable and desirable for their gender. Although Mrs Linde seems, on one

level, to be a representation of a ‘new’ independent woman, someone who has

strength of mind and one whom Torvald has no hesitation about employing in

his bank, she is not a happy woman. She is childless and bitter. In Mrs Linde’s

backstory, the audience learns that, as she herself was economically powerless

she had to relinquish her true love, Krogstad, to marry a man who could provide

for her family. But the financial security he offered did not last, his ‘business was

shaky’ and after he died, it collapsed altogether: “there was nothing left”. She

then sacrificed years of her life, in bitter toil, caring for her bedridden mother.

Although she is about the same age as Nora, she is physically weakened by the

life she has led, and she admits that this life has hardened her: “no one to work

for; it makes one so bitter.” For Ibsen, happiness and reward only come through

love and her being reunited with Krogstad at the end of the play is a neat

counterpoint to Nora’s striking out for independence.

Nora’s nanny has also suffered at the hands of society. Having had an

illegitimate baby and been abandoned by its father, she had no option than to

leave her child to take up paid employment as she was “a poor girl what's got

into trouble.”

In a society where status is determined by money, gender and reputation, many

of the characters in the play are victims of repressive attitudes.

The power of respectability

The world of A Doll’s House is comfortable and middle class. In this world those

who have the most power are those who are most respectable. Torvald sets

great store on respectability. In his two professions of lawyer and banker there

are clear rules of conduct and he will not involve himself in anything that is not

“absolutely respectable”. Torvald equates respectability with integrity and

morality. For this reason he thinks he has the right and power to cast judgment

on Krogstad. When Torvald thinks that Nora has ruined his reputation he has a

plan to keep the children away from her to save them from being tainted and he

wants to preserve the appearance of his marriage for the sake of respectability.

However, respectability in the play is shown to be a façade. Although Torvald

sneers at Nora’s father, he was happy to accept the money that he believed had

been left to Nora in her father’s will. And when he finds out the truth of Nora’s

deception his chief objective is in how he can cover it up to save himself. His

relief when he reads Krogstad’s note which says he won’t expose Nora, is to

think of himself: “I am saved!”, he says, as if this is all that is important. In the

eyes of society, of course, it is important and Torvald’s reaction perpetuates the

myth.

The power of money and the significance of a piece of paper

Money is power in the world of this play. It is the central means by which the

powerful exert control. The characters’ lack of money, their need for money, and

their desire to get money motivate much of the play’s action.

Krogstad’s power comes from the two hundred and fifty pounds he loaned to

Nora and it gives him the power to blackmail her: “If I get thrown into the gutter

for a second time, I shall take you with me.”

But the money that Nora borrows has greater significance; it also had the power

to save Torvald’s life. As Nora tells Mrs Linde, Torvald would never have

recovered from his breakdown if she hadn’t obtained the money to finance the

trip to Italy. Since the family did not have the money themselves and since

Torvald would have found borrowing humiliating, Nora took the initiative, found

a loan shark and forged her father’s signature. This act, to save her husband’s

life also makes her a criminal.

However, it could also be argued that in committing her criminal act, Nora

signed her passport into the masculine world of finance and power. In her

conversation with Mrs Linde, Nora expresses some pride in what she achieved:

“Ah, but when a wife who has a little business sense, and knows how to be

clever-” In a sense this act empowers her and gives her something to build on

when she makes her final decision to leave.

Rebellion

The main act of rebellion against oppression and control is clearly Nora’s

dramatic exit at the end of the play. It was so shocking when the play was

written that an alternative ending was also produced, in which Nora is shown

her sleeping children and finds it impossible to leave them. Her declaration that

her first duty is to herself, not to her husband and children, is an absolute

rejection of what society expects of her. A contemporary commentator at the

time wrote of the ending that when Nora leaves 'that slammed door

reverberated across the roof of the world'.

Earlier in the play, however, there are other rebellions from Nora that suggest

she is a stronger character than the simpering, silly woman she can at first

seem. She defies her husband by eating macaroons, even though he has said she

shouldn’t, and, of course, she had the strength of character to get the loan and

then to work in secret to pay it off.

But it is at the end of the play that Nora finds a powerful rebellious voice. After

Krogstad returns the bond and Torvald tears it up, suggesting that life can

continue as normal, Nora defiantly analyses for her husband what she feels her

life and marriage has been. She believes that she has done nothing other than

perform tricks for both her father and Torvald: “You and papa have done me a

great wrong. It's your fault that I have done nothing with my life.” She refuses

Torvald’s offer of education saying that she wants to educate herself. She also

stands strong when Torvald throws at her her duty to her husband and children

and her position in the respectable world; she simply says she only knows what

is necessary for her. Perhaps her most daring act of defiance though is her stand

against religion and morality with which Torvald threatens her to try to coerce

her into submission. She says she does not know what religion is and that the

moral law that says she has no right to spare her dying father or save her

husband’s life must be wrong. Her final defiance, as she leaves the family home,

is to call her husband a “stranger” thereby breaking asunder the marriage bond

on which nineteenth century society was so firmly rooted.

Setting

The action of the play takes place in the living room of the Torvald’s household

and in this respect it satisfies the demands of nineteenth century naturalistic

drama. This small domestic setting, in which all three acts take place, helps to

create the feelings of oppression and repression that run through the play. Ibsen

clearly describes the setting in the stage directions at the start; the presentation

of a comfortable middle class home is important to the story. However, although

the action is all in one room, society’s pressures and expectations, particularly

with regard to reputation, press in on the world of the drama from outside and

are brought into the home through letters and through the characters who visit.

The title of the play is worth considering here, also, implying, as it does, so many

things about the Helmers and their marriage. The indefinite article ‘a’ suggests

their situation is representative of many.

Social commentary

- late 19th century Western European society, the middle class. reflects Ibsen’s concerns about women’s rights, but also about human rights in general. It is a powerful exploration of how ‘free’ people can be oppressed by social expectations and what sacrifices might need to be made to truly break free, if such freedom is possible. one of the major questions that the play raises: is freedom ever achievable in civilised society? Some critics have seen this as a play exposing the oppression of women; others feel that the play is about every person discovering who they really want to be. When Nora says “I believe that I am first and foremost a human being” her comments resonate with everyone.