Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House explores the dilemma of being a woman in late 19th century Norway. At the start of the play it is arguable that the Helmers appear to have a perfect marriage. However, this is only because Nora appears to conform to male patriarchal stereotypes about the role of women. As the play proceeds secrets from the past are revealed as are the other characters’ perceptions of Nora and this culminates in the final scene of the play in which Nora experiences an epiphany which reveals to herself her true identity, and the lies and misconceptions that her socially-sanctioned identity have been based on. My thesis is that the action of A Doll’s House is centrally concerned with Nora’s discovery of her true identity and in the final scene she acts with honesty and integrity towards her new-found sense of identity.
Nora is not the only character whose true identity is revealed by the events of the play. Torvald the strong, loving, patriarchal husband is revealed to be a weak, ineffective man concerned solely with social appearances and so self-centred that he never once thinks Nora for her help in securing the loan that saved his health nor for her hard work in the intervening years to pay off that loan. Torvald is not the devoted husband that he appears to be: he is study in patriarchal solipsism. Krogstad too reveals a compassionate side as the play proceeds: he is not a heartless blackmailer, but an unrequited lover of Mrs Linde and his return of Nora’s promissory note is the cat of a king and generous man – no matter what has happened in the past. Mrs Linde too reveals her true identity in the course of the play. We assume she is Nora’s closest friend and confidante, but it is she who forces the situation where Nora has to face the truth about what she has done. Therefore, quite apart from Nora, the play concerns itself with the theme of appearance versus reality, and the revelation of the true identity of the central characters.
At the beginning of A Doll’s House the Helmers' marriage seems very secure and happy. They are well-off, have a lovely home and Nora adores her children. Nora seems especially content. Torvald’s teases her, but she responds with girlish affection; she speaks with enormous anticipation about Torvald’s new job and the extra money that they will enjoy; she seems to relish the company of her children and her friends. However, in a sense Nora is conforming to the identity that Torvald and society expects of her: she acts like a doll – she is patronized, teased, pampered and indulged by her husband – as long as she fills that socially-determined role. However, the audience is aware from a relatively early stage of the play that being a domestic doll is not the real Nora, despite her seeming happiness in this role. By taking out a secret loan to preserve Torvald’s health and, in doing so, breaking the law, she shows qualities of courage, determination and intelligence which are not recognized in her role as a subservient wife to Torvald. In addition, the year of hard work she has had to do secretly display qualities of resilience and determination unimagined by Torvald.
Torvald treats Nora like a father. In the marriage Nora is definitely presented as the weaker partner and Torvald enjoys his domination of her – even over something as petty as the macaroons. He likes to patronize her with trite maxims such as: “A home that depends on loans and debts is not beautiful because it is not free” ($%) – an especially ironic remark given the illegal loan that Nora has taken out. Moreover, Torvald is a complete hypocrite: after the party he says to Nora, “I’ve often wished you were facing some terrible dangers so that I could risk life and limb, risk everything for your sake.” (88) However, when it turns out that Nora has, in effect, actually done this for Torvald, his reaction is one of annoyed and intemperate anger. We might almost go so far as to say that Torvald does not love Nora – he loves a doll called Nora and as soon as that doll shows unexpected, valiant qualities, he rejects her. His appeal to Nora to stay at the end of the play is not motivated by love or genuine passion; it is motivated by social decorum: Torvald is worried about what the townsfolk will say about him, if his wife leaves him. Put another way, Thrall cannot cope with the identity that Nora discovers for herself in the course of the play.
In Act One Nora admits to Mrs Linde that one day she might tell Torvald about the secret loan: “One day I might, yes. Many years from now, when I’ve lost my looks a little. don’t laugh, I mean a time will come when Torvald is not as devoted to me, not quite so happy when I dance for him, and dress for him, and play with him.” (26) This is a very revealing quotation because it seems to suggest that Nora knows that Torvald’s love for her is based on superficial and petty things, and that there may come a time in the future when she needs something tangible - the secret loan – to use to keep Torvald’s attention. At this point in the play, however, Nora does not know that Torvald will find out very quickly about the loan and that his reaction will be what it is. She also says to Mrs Linde that in the New Year she will be “Free. To be absolutely free. To spend time playing with the children. To have a clean, beautiful house, the way Torvald likes sit.” (29) Ironically, in the light of Nora’s development in the lay, here she highlights the exact things which imprison her and to stop her being free. She is referring to paying off the loan, but the extra time she will have is going to be devoted to fulfilling the role of the stereotypical doll that Torvald expects her to be. Nora’s concept of freedom changes before the end of the play.
Ibsen uses further proleptic irony towards the end of Act two when Nora tells Mrs Linde: “Something glorious is going to happen.” (44) What Nora anticipates here is that when her husband discovers the forged signature and the attempted blackmail by Krogstad he will protect Nora by taking all the blame himself. However, this is not Torvald’s reaction at all and his anger and shock at Nora’s actions starts the process of Nora finally facing up to the hollowness of her marriage and her true identity. I think, given the paternalistic way that Torvald treats Nora throughout the play, she has every right to expect him to protect her when the loan and the blackmail are revealed, but Torvald’s identity depends on what society thinks of him and, as he tells Nora, late in Act Three “From now on, forget happiness. Now it’s just about saving the remains, the wreckage, the appearance.” (93) Torvald is more concerned with appearances than integrity: he is shallow and superficial, hypocritical and vain. His words are worse for Nora because, in a way, she has mis-judged his identity. She expects him to courageously protect her; all he wants to protect is his social reputation and image. This is the prompt for Nora’s great epiphany – her realization of Torvald’s true identity allows her to assert her own. Without Torvald’s reaction of solipsistic self-preservation the marriage might have continued, but now she knows what Torvald is really like Nora must break free.
Nora’s key speech is her realization that all her life she has been playing a role and living up to an identity created in the minds of men: “I’ve been performing tricks for you. Torvald. That’s how I’ve survived. You wanted it like that. You and Papa have done me a great wrong. It’s because of you I’ve made nothing of my life.” (102) And her abandoning Torvald and her children is Nora’s triumphant embracing of her true identity as a courageous, resourceful and intelligent woman.
Work Cited
Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll’s House. 1998. London: Penguin. Print.
