Introduction
The Oxford dictionary defines a “play” as a “dramatic work for the stage or for broadcast” (2012). We also know that the term is also used to indicate moments of fun and enjoyment. The evolution of drama and theatre can be traced back to the Greek period where it emerged in close relation to religion and rituals of the time. F.L Lucas in his interpretation of Aristotle’s “Poetics” explains how the drama at that time was similar to rituals and sacred mysteries as they provided a different kind of purification to the spectator by means of thought provoking stories and visual gratifications (1957). Although the plays in question here were often time Greek tragedies, most plays even today follow a certain format and can be classified under the standards set by Aristotle regardless of their content. According to Aristotle all good plays have three important elements in them,
1. Hamartia, where an injury is committed by circumstance rather than by intent.
2. Anagnorisis, a moment when a great secret or truth is unfolded.
3. Peripeteia, a moment in the play when the complete mood changes where the crux of the story is exposed. (Lucas, 1957)
A successful play is usually viewed from the standpoint of its entertainment value, impact it has on its audience and the message it conveys in the process. Therefore it is necessary for a good play to have a strong plot and be able to convey an important message across without being patronizing or appearing to sermonize. (Huey, 2012) When we look at the dramatic structure in a play however we dwell deeper into the various nuances used by the playwright to convey the message to the audience.
In this article we will analyze Henrik Ibsen’s play, “A Doll’s House” a simple Norwegian story published in the year 1879 (Hemmer, n.d.). The Story revolves around the lives of the couple Nora and Torvald and the various characters and circumstances that influence their life together. The protagonist in this play is definitely Nora. Ibsen has woven the entire story around her feelings and actions. The other important characters in the play apart from Nora and Torvald are Nora’s friend, Mrs Linden, the kind doctor and family friend Dr. Rank, Nora’s nurse and Krogstad. The impression that we get of Nora is that of an immature and child like person and someone who needs to be taken care of and directed every step of the way. Nora is depicted as being a cheerful and happy woman playing the part of an ideal wife who keeps a good house and keeps her husband and children entertained. The title of the play is very apt as the character of Nora is more like that of a doll living in a doll-house created by her marriage and as a result, her family. Nora also gains the sympathy of the audience as a character who has been living in the shadow of the men in her life - her father growing up and of her husband later in life. The crux of the story is Nora’s struggle to break free from this doll’s house and realise herself as an individual.
Introduction to the plot and the characters of the play
As the heading suggests this is the point at the beginning of the play where the audience get introduced to the principal characters of the play. An effective play can be analyzed on the basis of how the characters are introduced and the number of scenes that are dedicated to it. An ideal scenario would be one where it all takes place in one place.
Ibsen very cleverly leads the audience into the plot of the play as well whilst introducing the various characters involved. We get a good idea of the character of the principal character Nora right in the first Act and by the dialogue between her and her husband Torvald. The setting is their home and a prelude to Christmas as Nora walks in merrily after shopping for presents for the family. Her husband calls out to her and refers to her as a “Lark” and “squirrel” twittering around. (p.12) While these words are used as terms of endearment the tone of the dialogue suggest the way one would talk to a child rather than an adult. Her husband Torvald also refers to her as featherbrain and chides her on her simplicity and on being a spendthrift. Although the scene appears to be casual and designed to be a casual conversation between a husband and wife we get introduced to the ideals that the characters hold dear to their heart. Nora’s excitedly and casually refers to their good fortune and about not having to worry about being unable to repay money even if they had to borrow, now that Torvald has been appointed as the manager of the bank. We realize much later on in the scene that the conflict is about Nora’s borrowing of money by illegal means, regardless of the reason. Ibsen however sets the stage right at the beginning on how they should expect Torvald to react by Torvald’s retort to Nora’s excited statement,
Nora, Nora! What a woman you are! But seriously, Nora, you know my principles on these points. No debts! No borrowing! Home life ceases to be free and beautiful as soon as it is founded on borrowing and debt. We two have held out bravely till now, and we are not going to give in at the last. (Ibsen, 1879, p.13).
Similarly we are introduced to Mrs. Linden who appears to be more mature than the ever-chirpy Nora. Nora does not recognize Mrs. Linden or the Christina she knew years ago. Ibsen cleverly introduces one more aspect in Nora’s character here by her remark to Mrs. Linden, “How changed you are; Christina! (p.15). We are given privy to the fact that they have known each other long and how time and troubles can influence personality changes. We are able to further ascertain that Nora has remained the same through the years from the conversation they have where Mrs. Linden reminds her of her spendthrift days and her gullible character. The characterization of Nora is brilliantly captured as seen through the eyes of her husband Torvald (Helmer), the kind doctor Rank, her friend Christine or Mrs Linden, the Nurse and Krogstad. This further adds to the need for Nora to break away from her Dollhouse.
In her bid to prove to her friend that she has also had to undergo hardships Nora reveals the plot and the main conflict in the play. We also see a different side to Nora that contrasts with the image that the people close to her have of her. “When Torvald gave me money for clothes, and so on, I never spent more than half of it; I always bought the simplest and cheapest things.” (Ibsen, 1879.p 20).
Dr. Rank as the kind doctor and close friend to the family is also introduced to the audience in the same exchange of words between Nora and Mrs. Linden. Ibsen manages to also convey the image of him as a personable character with a sense of humour when he questions Mrs. Linden if looking for a job was an approved remedy for overwork. (p.22) Krogstad as the mysterious antagonist is also introduced in the first Act itself. Ibsen also opens another angle to the story by showing that Mrs. Linden and Krogstad have a prior relation. This is conveyed to the audience by Mrs. Linden’s reaction to his appearance at Nora’s door as well as Krogstad’s enquiry about her to Nora later on in the scene. Nora’s indignation to Krogstad’s presence also adds to the suspense. The audience at this point have an idea of what Nora’s big secret is. They realize the possibility of some relation in the past between Mrs. Linden and Krogstad, the antagonism between Krogstad and Torvald but no direct indication to the fact that Krogstad is the mystery loan shark. All these events take place in the same scene and at the same venue.
Cultural Relevance
Ibsen very subtly leads the audience to understand the plot of the play through Torvald’s chiding of Nora, which becomes increasingly demeaning. The play is also a reflection of Ibsen’s own struggle with money and the trying times of his life (Hemmer, n.d.). The three-act play has repeated references to the shortage of money, and stresses on saving and putting money away for future. Ibsen does not purposely make Torvald the antagonist in the play although it may seem so as the play proceeds. Here it is important to consider the period that the play was published in and the culture of the times. This play came at a time when a wife’s role was that of a subservient spouse who took her husband’s counsel at all times. We see evidence to that in Mrs Linden’s disbelief over Nora borrowing money without the consent of her husband even though the money was borrowed to benefit the husband and in view of his failing health.
Forgery is a crime morally as well as in the eyes of the law and this is true no matter what cultural era we live in. Ibsen brings in a more moralistic viewpoint to forgery especially in his characterization of Krogstad, a possible victim of circumstance. Ibsen conveys that in Krogstad’s single-minded goal to regain his honour in the eyes of society for the sake of his sons.
My sons are growing up; for their sake I must try to recover my character as well as I can. This place in the Bank was the first step; and now your husband wants to kick me off the ladder, back into the mire. (1879. P.26)
The word “mire” gives us an idea of the horrors of societal ostracization. Ibsen has also subtly injected many other nuances in his play, which give us an idea of the mindset of the people during that time. The abject fear and belief that things in one’s life can be passed on to generations is seen in the above passage. We also see this kind of mindset in Torvald’s character with reference to Krogstad’s crime of forgery, “As a lawyer, my dear, I have seen it often enough. Nearly all cases of early corruption may be traced to lying mothers.” (p.31). Ibsen is not being discriminative or sexist in this comment as he also has Torvard blaming Nora’s frivolity on her father’s character. The same fear is seen in Nora who fears that her dark secret will “corrupt her children” and poison her home. (Ibsen, 1879. P 31)
Ibsen also injects a bit of realism into hereditary traits by extending it beyond family traits to diseases. Europe at the time of the play was emerging from many wars and thereby exposed to a different lifestyle. Dr. Rank is shown as being afflicted with Syphilis, which was passed on by his promiscuous father who was in the army. (Emma, n.d. para 3).
Resolution of Conflict and Suspense element
In the resolution of the conflict Ibsen keeps the audience engaged by showing them the characters involved plan to resolve the issue. The turning point in the play is what makes a play enjoyable, suspense filled and thereby a success. Up until the last scene of the play the audience are introduced to the character of Nora as a timid woman who is petrified of her husband and ever eager to please. She is an obedient wife who would rather die or disappear than tell her husband Torvald her dark secret. Ibsen creates a twist in the reveal as well by injecting a tension in the audience. They know that Mrs. Linden has done her part in helping resolve the issue but the damage is already done.
Torvald shuts himself in the study and reads the mail while Nora paces back and forth muttering, “Now he has it; he's reading it. Oh, no, no, no, not yet. Torvald, good-bye-! - Good-bye, my little ones!” (Ibsen, 1879. P. 59). Torvald’s reaction to Nora’s secret is quite expected as we saw in the initial scene itself. However Ibsen brings in a very unexpected twist to the end of the play. Nora uncharacteristically stands up to her husband and reveals her decision to exercise her freedom and regain her individuality. All through the play Ibsen gives the impression of Nora being a dedicated wife and mother who will do anything to maintain the balance in her married life and thereby maintain her place in the family. In the final act of the play she is willing to forsake everything and leave her children behind in pursuit of her individuality. The final dialogue between Torvald and Nora is the highlight of this work of Ibsen. He has very beautifully articulated his view point on marriage and what it means to each individual involved in that union, through Nora in her sudden bout of clarity. Ibsen shook the grounds that the institution of marriage stood on in the 1800’s by the words “you are not the man to teach me to be a fit wife for you.” (1879. p. 62) and defied all norms of cultural bindings with the unexpected ending to the play.
Conclusion
As we discussed earlier, a play cannot be analysed or branded a success or not solely on its entertainment value. When viewed from the standpoint of storyline, aspect of conflict, suspense element and message, we can see that Ibsen’s work was way ahead of its times. It carried an important message for women and also set a groundbreaking precedent for the role of a man and a woman in a marriage. Ibsen conveyed this message very artistically and added many nuances to the play that emulated the norms of the time that helped the audience empathize with the characters as well as with the story. We also see that in Ibsen’s handling of the plot, characterization and resolving of the conflict have been in accordance to the three elements that Aristotle talks about in his poetics. It may be prudent therefore to say that “A doll’s House” fits the criterion for a good play.
Works Cited
Lucas, F. L. Tragedy. Serious Drama in Relation to Aristotle's “Poetics”. New York.
Collier. 1957. Print
Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll's House. Trans. William C. Archer. June 27, 1879. May
01, 2012. Web
Oxford Dictionary. “Play”. Oxford University Press. 2012. Web
Hemmer Bjorn. The Dramatist: Henrik Ibsen. N.d. April 30, 2012.
http://www.mnc.net/norway/Ibsen.htm
McMahan Elizabeth, Day X. Susan,Funk W. Robert, Coleman S. Linda.
Literature and the Writing Process. Prentice Hall. 9th (ed). January 13, 2010.Print.
Huey Fen Cheong. Criteria of a Good Play. February 3, 2009. April 30, 2012. Web
Emmacxoxo. The Role of Heredity and Hereditary Diseases in A Doll’s House. N.d. May 03,
2012. Web
