A Doll's House Controversy

In the nineteenth century, and even before, society was not as it is today. A lot has changed since then, such as cultures, works, rights, laws and even society itself. Plays were a form of entertainment back in the days and even now. Entertainment has never been so pivotal for the society until the play “A Doll’s House”. Henrik Ibsen, the creator of the play “A Doll House”, have led the readers and public with the desire to study, analyze, comment, question the actions and characters of the play. In the play, a woman, call Nora, took a loan to save her husband’s life, Torvald. The problem of the play is that she did not tell him. Due to a letter Torvald receive from Mr. Krogstad, he gets to know about the debt. The husband reclaims Nora for her actions, calls her a stupid woman and then tells her she is not an adequate mother. As the result of Torvald acts and words, Nora decides to leave the house. Ibsen’s play has evoked a lot of controversy and new views of the
norms in the nineteenth century. The aim of this paper is to explore the norms in the 1800 that as a result gave shape to the play, “A Doll’s House”, and what critics rise after the premier.
Henrik Ibsen was an exiled Norwegian playwright born on March 20, 1828 (Tedford 1961). In 1862, he was exiled to Italy, where he wrote the tragedy Brand. In 1868, Ibsen moved to Germany, where he wrote one of his most famous works: the play A Doll's House. By 1891, Ibsen returned to Norway as a literary hero (Tedford 1961). Unfortunately, he died on May 23, 1906, in Oslo, Norway. Moreover, Ibsen has a lot of plays that cannot be easily forgotten, for example A Doll's House.
The play “A Doll House” by Henrik Ibsen involves a family that seem to be happy and where money does not seem to be a problem. Nora, the wife of Torvald told her friend, Mrs. Linde, her secret. Nora’s secret is that she borrowed money to save her husband’s life, but her husband does not know about the debt until later on the play. Mr. Krogstad, who loaned Nora the money, threatens Nora of telling Torvald about the crime she committed of borrowing money by falsification her dad’s signature. Nora was worried and hoped that Torvald will take the blame of her crime, after knowing the truth. However, Torvald does not react as Nora expected and Nora leaves the house after knowing Torvald’s true feelings and thoughts toward her.
Plays premiers are usually full of excitement, thrills and in occasions, after the acts is concluded, it makes people to reflect about certain topics. In “A Doll’s House” premier in 1879, critics were mostly raised at the end of the play. The reason is because of two main dramatic and rebellious facts of the play. The first one is Nora’s character and the second one is the dramatic end. According to Cron, author of “Commentary by Artists or Critics – “A Doll’s House””, mentions “critics saw Nora’s actions as shocking and scandalous for a woman, whereas today, critics tend to see Nora’s actions as a way of reinforcing an individual’s right––regardless of gender––to protect themselves”(). Indeed, Nora actions were not normal; a woman who handles debt by forging her father’s signature and does not tell her husband. This action, among others, was not a thing heard or seen back in the 1800’s. It is interesting to see how in 1879, a journalist talks about Nora and mentions, “the woman, who acts as a spokesman both when it comes to the dissolution of the marriage and to entrusting the children she herself has borne to the care of a nanny. There is something indescribably unnatural in this, and therefore, in the final instance, artificial” (Cron). Nora’s choice of leaving her home was something that was not seen in upper middle class Norwegian society, especially not on stage. Vullum dismissing her as “unnatural” and deeming her actions “artificial” demonstrates how shocking Nora’s character was to audiences at the time (Vullum).
A Doll House is a play that has been translated to the big screen and into other languages as we all know, but there is more to this play. One of the questions that can be addressed is how the play and characters influenced the society back in the 1800s? According to Cron, “Some critics found A Doll’s House to be relatable as well as influential in potentially changing social norms” (para. 2). This is most likely due because Nora showed strength and independence through the play. For example, as seen in the last act at the table before she left the house. It’s something that was not usually seen or demonstrated in the 1800’s. It was something to fear. As Chron mentioned, “However, other critics feared just that. Some critics responded negatively to Nora’s strength and independence, believing the ideas Ibsen presented could negatively impact audience members” (para. 5). Even though, Ibsen received negative critics, he triumphed because of the impact caused to the audience. However, the impact of the play was negative and positive for some people. Even though, people disagree with the play, some women raised against the norms. For instance, “A year after A Doll House appeared, when Ibsen was living in Rome, a Scandinavian woman arrived there, who had left her husband and small daughter to run away with her lover” (Templeton 35). Letting them know that women are not a toy, as “When Nora accuses her father and husband of having committed a great sin against her by treating her as if she were a playmate” (Templeton 32). And thus, proving that each one has the capacity to contribute to the house and that they deserve equal rights.
Although it is easy to interpret A Doll’s House as a play promoting feminist ideals, A Doll’s House is about more than a woman fighting for her rights. Joan Templeton stated, “Ibsen’s Nora is not just a woman arguing for female liberation; she is much more. She embodies the comedy as well as the tragedy of modern life,” proving that Nora’s actions are not a pro-feminist device, but a way to depict humanity (Templeton 28).
Human rights are norms that help to protect all people everywhere from severe political, legal, and social abuses. Examples of human rights are the right to freedom of religion, the right to a fair trial when charged with a crime, the right not to be tortured, and the right to engage in political activity. Historical sources for bills of rights include the Magna Carta (1215), the English Bill of Rights (1689), the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789), and the Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution (1791) (Nickel 1). On the other hand, social norms are the customary rules that govern behavior in groups and societies (Nickel 1). The actions and expressions of Nora were not common social norms in those times. Some people say, “after Freudianism had produced a widely accepted "clinical" language of disapproval, Nora could be called "abnormal” (Templeton 29). Whereas, others categorize her as “one of the "neurotic" women” (Templeton 29). The norms of a woman and wives were to respect and obey their husband. Women do not have a lot of options and struggle a lot to find jobs. For example, Mrs. Linden has to marry a man who does not love and not know well to be able to provide support to her family. Another common norm was husbands to treat their wives as toys or a trophy, which was commonly seen in the play when Torvald make Nora dance the “tarantella” (Ibsen 891) in front of Dr. Rank. At the end of the play Nora make an interesting comment that goes as follows, “ Yes, it is so, Torvald. While I was at home with father, he used to tell me all his opinions, and I held the same opinions. If I had others I said nothing about them, because he wouldn't have liked it. He used to call me his doll-child, and played with me as I played with my dolls. Then I came to live in your house- ” (Ibsen 903). This expression gave us a clear picture and testimony of how norms were back in the 1800’s. Man ruled everything, and a woman’s opinion does not count at all. It was interesting that not only Nora’s father treated her as a doll. According to Ibsen, Torvald did the same. As Nora mentions:
I mean I passed from father's hands into yours. You arranged everything according to your taste; and I got the same tastes as you; or I pretended to- I don't know which-both ways, perhaps; sometimes one and sometimes the other. When I look back on it now, I seem to have been living here like a beggar, from hand to mouth. I lived by performing tricks for you, Torvald. But you would have it so. You and father have done me a great wrong. It is your fault that my life has come to nothing. (Ibsen 903)
These two quotes from the play prove that treating women as toys, trophies, and dolls were a common norm back then. Nora did a lot of things that were not normal for a woman in those times, which includes taking money, talking seriously with her husband and then leaving his family, which could be caused because of the way norms were.
Past and present, no one can deny that Ibsen’s play made an impact on society in the late 1800’s, whether they agreed with it or not.
As time passed, critics continued to recognize how this play’s theme transcends its 19th century context to relate to the lives of people today. A Doll's House shows his gifts for creating realistic dialogue, a suspenseful flow of events and, above all, psychologically penetrating characterizations that make the struggles of his dramatic personages utterly convincing. Overall, Ibsen’s work created a social backlash with those opposed to the feminist movement. While women’s groups eagerly stacked up praises and honors for Ibsen, he fervently tried to disassociate himself from the feminist movement and satiate the critics with “humanist” rather than “feminist” intentions. His creation of an alternate ending to save himself from vituperative critics proves the extent of social upheaval created by his play in the context of the women’s rights movement in Europe and
America.