The dealing between Nora and the porter materializes as one of the dynamic conflicts of the play regarding gender roles as it directly places the focus on wealth. While Nora lets the thought of spending suppress financial matters (she gives the porter a shilling instead of a sixpence), Torvald has a more realistic outlook, and claims that Nora’s misunderstanding of monetary concerns is because of her gender: “That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt” (Ibsen 5). By treating Nora like a decoration or prize, Torvald makes it clear that appearances are extremely imperative to him, and that Nora’s responsibility is to refurbish his house and his standing.
Likewise, by calling Nora loving nicknames such as “my little lark” and “my little squirrel” (Ibsen 4), Torvald makes her seem powerless and utterly reliant on him, and thus, stresses his authority over Nora, dehumanizing her. When Torvald asks Nora “what are little people called that are always wasting money” (Ibsen 6), he hints that Nora does not have the basic male skill to encounter money concerns. However, Torvald offers Nora more money just to see her happy. By doing so, Torvald is able to entertain himself by maneuvering his wife’s emotions, taking Nora like a doll as she beautifies his home and delights him by remaining dependent.
Ibsen establishes Nora’s naïve and selfish personality through her exchange with Mrs. Linde because though Nora claims to be concerned by Mrs. Linde’s troubles, she continually relates and then talks about her own life problems. Nora’s selfishness is shown again as Nora divulges her failure to mail Mrs. Linde after her companion’s death. Nora didn’t even attempt to think past herself, and the revelation that she is expressing her compassion now, three years later, appears simply a substance of civil reflex. Then again, Nora doesn’t think before she speaks and articulates the first idea in her mind like an impulsive adolescent, insensitively stating that Mrs. Linde’s appearances have worsened over time. By smugly noting that she will have “heaps of money” (Ibsen 10) even after she’s made aware of Mrs. Linde’s poverty, Nora doesn’t realize her remarks are upsetting to her friend.
Structurally, Ibsen suggests that Nora must mature throughout the play, and her childish exchange with Mrs. Linde hints that this maturity will entail learning and detaching her apparent inexperience. While Nora hangs to idealistic ideas concerning affection and unity, Mrs. Linde hangs to a more practical recognition that she had already experienced from her marriage. Ibsen points out that Nora’s skepticism at Mrs. Linde’s comment makes Nora appear secluded and rather, unsophisticated as she’s stuck between her childlike personality and her desire to grow out of it.
While the play starts off with a content, genuine couple with nothing to conceal, Ibsen later makes the readers perceive that the home is actually filled with secrets and dishonesty. One small case of this dishonesty is when Nora lies about eating macaroons. Although lying about eating macaroons is exceedingly trivial, the inconsequential nature of eating macaroons is the same matter that makes the lie so disturbing. Thus, the need to lie about a matter so unimportant points to the profundity of her fault and her anxiety toward Torvald.
A severe example of dishonesty regards the loan Nora unlawfully obtained to help Torvald. Although Nora is accountable for forgery, Ibsen makes the readers comprehend and excuse Nora for her measures because she is provoked by good intentions. However, for both cases, Nora lies due to Torvald’s unwarranted belief regarding gender roles. If Torvald could acknowledge Nora’s assistance and didn’t think he must manage her, Nora wouldn’t find it necessary to lie to him.
Torvald demonstrates his prejudices regarding women’s appropriate roles by instantly supposing that Mrs. Linde is a widow once Nora asks for Torvald to get Mrs. Linde a job. His supposition illustrates how he deems a good wedded woman should not work out of the house. And thus, this insistent belief signifies that Torvald is incapable to mature and develop. While Nora’s perceptive of those around her grows, Torvald’s perceptive stays fixed.
Moreover, Ibsen shows that Torvald’s failure to recognize Nora’s resistance when he tries to seduce her is due to his conviction that Nora is his possession, his doll. Since Torvald thinks of Nora merely a part of the life that he romanticizes, Nora’s aloofness and refusal to his sexual advances bewilders him. For a long time, he has lived in the illusive relationship Nora helped build and so, he could not understand the truth of the condition: Nora is unhappy and is ready to convey it.
The futility of Torvald’s assurance to help Nora depicts how slight he values her help. Torvald’s egocentricity emerges when he panics after discovering Nora’s offense of forgery—not because of his wife’s fate but because of his own standing and how it might be ruined. Rather than thanking Nora for her good intentions, he pressures and subsequently censures her, instantaneously considering ways to conceal the humiliation Nora has emit. Once Torvald reads Krogstad’s letter of withdrawal, his declaration, “I am saved! Nora, I am saved!” (Ibsen 71), reveals that he has only thought of himself. Even after Nora asks “And I?” (Ibsen 71), Torvald’s sloppy answer “You too, of course.” (Ibsen 71) shows that her comfort and security is merely an afterthought to him.
Ultimately, Torvald’s self-interested response to Krogstad’s letter made Nora see the reality of her marriage with Torvald. Her final decision to leave Torvald reveals a bigger freedom and sense of self. While she previously yields to Torvald’s demands in protecting the appearance of his romanticized family life, she’s now aware that she could survive away from Torvald’s restricted dominion.
No comments:
Post a Comment