March 1

A Doll’s House – opinion on Nora Helmer

From Act 1 in A Doll’s House, we can deduce that Nora Helmer is a very child-like character. Her relationship with her husband, Torvald and her children portray these characteristics. For example, after Ms Linde and Dr Rank leave their home and the children come back, Nora’s whole mood changes. She is no longer being secretive and all her attention is with her children. Everything they say, she listens carefully and with excitement. Even some of the activities that could have been slightly dangerous for them are dismissed by Nora’s curiosity. Since she herself can be considered a child, it seems logical that she is focused on the adventurous side of her children’s stories rather than worrying like a mother-figure would. Furthermore, when Nora holds the baby just before she is to be put to bed, she almost refuses to give her back to the nurse. This suggests stubbornness and selfishness in the sense that she wants to keep the baby to herself as if it was her possession, her doll. When looking at the adaptation of this scene, it is noticed that her possessive actions towards the baby are not intimidating as Torvald’s need for control, but rather playful as Nora does not like the idea of sharing what is hers; a characteristic often seen in a child. Also the fact that she’s running around, screaming and laughing portrays strong childlike characteristics, as her actions exactly match those of the children. This is heightened when surrounded by her children, as she is then in a familiar environment; an environment where she has the freedom to act in this manner without society’s and Torvald’s expectations overwhelming her.

Nora Helmer is also very easily distracted and seems to use these distractions to sway away from uncomfortable situations or negative thoughts. An example is her decorating and chattering at the end of Act 1. Here she uses the Christmas tree as an excuse to busy herself so that she isn’t forced to face what she has done. In the scene, Torvald is confronting her about seeing Krogstad leave the house and instead of facing her husband, Nora hides behind her decorations. She isn’t confident enough to take responsibility for her actions (a trait also seen in her discussion with Krogstad about the forged signature) or to face whatever consequence or judgement she might receive for it. In this case it is simply the fact that she lied about Krogstad. However when looking at Nora’s character throughout the whole of Act 1, it is noticeable that Nora is quick to jump from conversation to conversation and her lack of focus often helps her dismiss unpleasant situations. The specific example of the decorating and chattering at the end of Act 1 also suggests she is very occupied with the appearance of their home; she feels obliged to uphold the ‘perfect’ family image.

 

Category: Uncategorized | LEAVE A COMMENT
February 6

Act 1: First Impressions of Nora Helmer

Nora is introduced during the play as a selfish, irrational character that often acts impulsively and in a childish manner. Throughout the play, we are slowly introduced to Nora as a very 3-D, dimensional, round character that is more than the childish front that she puts up. This is often represented clearly through the different situations she faces and the way that she uses her wit to achieve what she wants. In that way, we can easily observe and understand the stereotypical front that she puts on, and appreciate the raw reality and relatability of this character as she is approached and portrayed in a more realistic point of view. This is relatable today as people tend to put and follow unrealistic fronts and conform to them to be accepted by society and liked by the ‘in-group’. My first impression of Nora Helmer was that she was quite an ‘airhead’ and didn’t think through before saying or doing things. I think also that because of this attribute she tends to find herself in sticky situations that she has no experience in dealing with.  At the beginning, I found that her submissiveness and naivety quite tedious as was easily influenced by everyone around her and didn’t acknowledge her unhealthy relationship with her husband and his continuous manipulation to gain anything he wants from her. As the act progressed, I realized that that was in fact not the case as she was quite aware and manipulative herself nonetheless, in a more subtle and cunning way. This behavior though is understandable because she went from her father being the leading manipulative, idolized male figure to her husband. So she hasn’t really had the time to explore her own personality and have time to herself to understand herself, her goals, and ambitions before diving into a relationship. This leads to her being co-dependent on the men in her life and always acting like a child or a damsel in distress around them.

~Her husband’s nicknames for her:

Throughout the act, Nora Helmer’s husband Torvald uses several nicknames or pet names for her to call on her or just display his ‘affection’. Torvald uses odd nicknames such as; my little skylark, my little sparrow, spendthrift, my little squirrel, little lark, and miss sweet tooth. Most of these nicknames contain a common aspect of birds that are considered a bizarre thing to call your significant other. The usage of birds is used in the text to symbolize Nora as a person in captivity or a ‘pet’ towards Torvald. Additionally, the usage of the possessive pronoun of “MY” shows Torvald’s possessiveness towards her and that he treats her more as a possession than a human with feelings. The usage of birds is also quite demeaning from Torvald’s end as it is an animal and often animals aren’t viewed as an equal to a human. Although Torvald might be doing it unconsciously all the time he instills a mindset in her to show that she will always need him. This is seen through these nicknames as usually, animals need to be fed and have things done for them as they require responsibility. This manipulation from Torvald towards Nora is quite significant as it leads Nora to conform to his choices and follow his irrational decisions even if she doesn’t agree with them simply just because she is blinded by the manipulation. Torvald also tends to do this a lot to stroke his own ego and to display his consistent arrogance, dominance, and superiority.

~Her use of Helmer’s first name (taboo at the time in Norway)

Nora notably refers to her husband, Torvald, by his first name throughout the play which was considered to be taboo at that time period in Norway. That is due to the fact, that women were considered to be more of a lesser being and were expected to follow a stereotypical protocol at home which didn’t include using first names and equating the husband and wife. Women were usually expected to address them in praising and in a more superior manner so that there is a difference in hierarchy and status when interacting with the different sexes. Firstly, Nora and Torvald usually exchange first names when they are in a serious situation that they are discussing and when Nora in particularly really wants something that is important to her. Furthermore, Nora also uses Torvald’s first name when she is quite flustered or anxious about something which usually changes the tone of the conversation to a more serious tone. Nora perhaps also uses his first name consciously to show him at times that she is a grown woman and not a child and shouldn’t be treated in that manner. This also shows that she is aware of his treatments and has some ideas and thoughts of her own that simply do not line up with his ideologies. Personally, I believe that Nora also does that to establish a sense of equality between the couple and to show Helmer that she is just the same as he is. This sense of subtle manipulations and sense of standing up for herself works when she is trying to set her ground but, Helmer usually counteracts that by not taking her seriously, calling her ridiculous nicknames, and trying to distract her with different tactics.

~Her fondness for “contraband” macaroons :

At the beginning, I believed that Nora choosing to eat macaroons even though they were a luxury that they can’t afford, was absurd, as they are undergoing a financial crisis. However, as the play goes on I realize that eating the macaroons wasn’t only based on her love and appreciation of the sweet but it was in fact just to spite Torvald. Nora liking the sweet is part of the reason behind why she is eating it, yet, displeasing Helmer and going against what he said was more of the motive behind her insensible actions. Her stubbornness stems from the reasoning that she wants a fraction of that feeling of superiority that Helmer obtains, and also to show Helmer that she is quite capable of breaking his rules and going against what he says. This helps the reader interpret that she doesn’t have much respect for her husband, as well as her following him and his rules, are notably due to instilled fear from within her and NOT respect. Furthermore, her going behind her husband’s back also shows that she is quite comfortable lying to her husband and hiding things away from him even if they are as harmless as macaroons. I believe that she is doing this as a form of stubbornness by breaking Torvald’s rules and rebellion to try and prove herself as a strong character.

January 24

First impressions of Nora Helmer

Nora Helmer

The first main female character we are introduced to in a Dolls House is Nora Helmer. She is the wife of Torvald Hemler and the main focus of the play.

Two main things that contribute to the character of Nora at the beginning of the play in act one are the nicknames her husband gives her and her fondness for “contraband” macaroons.

 

The nicknames that Helmer gives Nora are spindthreft, little skylark, little lark, little squirrel, miss sweeth tooth. Each showing that she is his possesion and something that he loves and looks after. They also revel that  Nora is looked down on by her husband as these names are all very little things or something you would say to a child. When Hemer uses them he is using them (most of the time) in either a Interrogative sentence or as a Possessive pronoun as they are often paired with my.

Nora also eats macaroons and then hides them from her husband. This interaction can be seen in the folwoing dialogue:

Hemler Hasn’t Miss Sweet Tooth been breaking rules in town today?
Nora No; what makes you think that?
Helmer Hasn’t she paid a visit to the confectioner’s?
Nora No, I assure you, Torvald.
act one, pg 7

This signifies that she is happy to keep secreats from her husband. Even though she has only has eatern a macaroon, she has still gone aganst what he wants for her. Suggesting two things, the first Nora is independent enough to make her own decisions and is not bound by her husband. The second is that she is not scaed of her husband and what he will do.

All of this shows that there are two sides to Nora. One is the loveling wife who is loved by her husband and put down (not conserred an equal).  The other side is a women that will go against her husband and do what she wants without care for the consequenses. She is very two faced from this degree, even if what she does if for the best intentions there is always a bit of sly dishonest side to her. So, from the first act we learn that Nora is not just what you see at the surface, there is a deeper and somewhat darker side to her.

 

 

 

January 24

Opinion on Act 1

Her husband’s nickname for her

In the first act of a ‘dolls house’ it is present that when the husband of Nora is talking with her he uses pet names. Helmer using words as a sign of endearment on the surface however has more disregarding her as an equal in their relation. Birds are a prominent scene throughout Helmers pet names as he describes her as a ‘sparrow’. This is significate as it shows that she is trapped and only used not from her personality or intelligence but is something visually appealing to the owner; the owner being Helmer. Another significant point is that bird is normally free spirted and should not be left in a cage; which Nora is doing being stuck in the house. The house is significate for the metaphor as it her cage that she feels as if she needs to perform instead of just living. Nora feels as

Image result for pet names gif

if it is her obligation to attend the family correctly and sufficiently to the society standards such as a clean house, a well-organized house and as well and very visually appealing presentation of house and self. Helmer use of the word mine; is shown as if he owns her and is the dominate figure in the relationship. He has authority over her and uses this to show his ownership to her and the audience. Nora believe that these nicknames are endearing however is a backhanded complimented that seems innocent on the surface however is very negative. This shows that the characters has a lack of inner respect; by inner I mean that both character are nice to each other however he does not really understand her and therefore deceit his trust in small gesture and foreshadowing what will occur the future.

Decorating the Christmas tree

The Christmas tree presents a lot for the way a family is perceived to either peers. The push to become the perfect family with the perfect family life that has a lot of money and love in the family. Therefore, when Nora is decorating the tree she is trying to put up a front, so no person will suspect her. Artificial beauty as the reader has established that she is more complex than a standard character this is present at the end of act 1. There her wanting to distract herself from her conflict as a character is very present through act 1. She is also very anxious when Helmer arrives into the scene and begins to mess around and to take her mind off the subject that she does not want to fell.

Image result for perfect gif

 

 

Category: Uncategorized | LEAVE A COMMENT
January 24

First Impressions of Nora Helmer

Initially, Nora Helmer is thought to be an ‘air-head’, with the message being reinforced by her husband, Torvald Helmer. He consistently ricochets any hint of endearment with back handed compliments, making sure to put NImage result for gillian anderson a doll's houseora in her place with belittling adjectives such as “little” and “small”.

Nora repeatedly refers to her husband by his first name, a taboo at the time in Norway, this due in largely to the fact that women were considered a lesser to men and so were forced to address them in a praising, God-like manner. The play was released several years before the first suffragette movement in Norway, and many believe that this was a power-play on Ibsen’s end that eventually influenced the empowerment of women, making it a pivotal piece of literature for the feminist revolution. Although this can be seen as merely a political stance and plea for awareness, it may hold importance towards the story line itself. Nora’s speech and actions throughout the first Act lay no judgment nor dismissal of Torvald’s position in society as a man, going as far as defending his name in front of Krogstad. The only faltering element is in her speech: her preference towards calling Trovald by his first name. This characteristic may be Nora’s guilty pleasure: regarding her husband as on a level playing field may delight her. This is abnormally juxtaposed by her otherwise appraisal and respect towards him.

 

Nora’s fondness towards ‘contraband’ macaroons may be in reference to her secret desire to be superior. The act of eating the macaroons despite her husbands ban on them shows natural rebellion, mostly seen in teens and children, who are only beginning to find themselves. For Nora, however, the search continues as long as she is subordinate to others. Her child-like nature is due largely in part to her never being allowed to, or never being taught how to, find her place in this world. She is stuck in time because she feels that this is what is expected of her.

I feel that she will soon realise her intrinsic value in other’s lives.

January 24

Nora Act I

At a first glance, I thought Nora’s character was childish, and quite simplistic. She seems to be dominated by her husband in the house as he seems to control everything. Helmer (her husband) has several nicknames for her, which are all almost the same with names such as my little squirrel, and my little skylark. There are more nicknames, similar to these with the same sort of idea. He is quite possessive and by using small, weak animals to name his wife, we have the general feeling that he is more dominant than her. Nora’s husband’s full name is Torvald Helmer and at that time in Norway it was taboo to call your husband by their first name, meaning that she should call him Helmer. This is not what happens though, and on numerous occasions in their conversations, we see Nora call him Torvald. This personally showed me that her character isn’t as transparent as I first thought. Calling him Torvald once or twice could be explained as an accident, however she decides to call him Torvald multiple times throughout Act I even though it is considered taboo, showing that she doesn’t actually care about the rules other make as long as she has a reason. Although she can have many serious moments, she also shows her childish side many times throughout Act I. First, she buys macaroons, which she shouldn’t have, and hides it from Helmer showing her childish nature, and her sweet tooth. Later on in the act, she plays games such as hide and seek with her children. This was mainly done to juxtapose with the next scene as Nora talks with Krogstad. Here she is very serious and this is quite different to most of the scenes that she is in; further emphasizing the idea that she has a double character and isn’t as transparent as she seems.

November 18

Thoughts on the ending of A Doll’s House

images  

Now that we’ve finished watching the Digital Theatre performance of A Doll’s House, completed reading our translation of Ibsen’s text and read the alternative German ending (Wow! It’s miraculous how much we can get through in a few weeks!) what are your thoughts on Ibsen’s conclusion?

Paying particular attention to the context (Late 19th century Europe) which ending do you believe best fits the societal norms? Additionally, how did you feel as a 21st century reader, when Nora slammed the door on her life?

Leave your much-valued comments below 🙂

P.S Big thank you to Alexis and Elisa for their in-class performance as Helmer and Nora this week!

^ Blame THIS woman for the alternative ending...

^ Blame THIS woman for the alternative ending…

November 4

A Doll’s House quote analysis

“I trust you more than anybody I know. You are my best and my most faithful friend. I know that” page 48

At this point, Nora is talking to Dr. Rank. What is surprising at first is seeing Nora calling Dr. Rank the person she trusts the most. This implies to the audience that she probably has married Mr. Helmer not because she actually really loved him, but rather because this was how society wanted her to be. Yet, at the same time, she thinks that Mr. Helmer would do anything for her (“He [Mr. Helmer] would never hesitate for a moment to sacrifice his life for my sake” page 48), reminding the audience of her ‘naivety’.

On the other side, Dr. Rank actually loves Nora (“That I have loved you every bit as much as anybody?” page 49), which adds tension to the scene, since Nora sees Dr. Rank just as a friend. This tension makes the scene in general more memorable to the audience, since the tension by itself reveals more of Nora and Dr. Rank’s relationship.

November 4

Thoughts on Nora

I think that Nora, no matter how hard she tries to seem as an independent, mature adult, she is still a child. Nora calls herself a “squirrel” infront of Torvald and plays around before saying what she wants. This shows how weak she actually is and emphasizes the strong grip that Torvald has on her.

However, she acts in a totally different way with Dr.Rank. We see how she has dominance over him and controls him. She seduces him to confess his love for her, and then she simply refuses his affection.

I feel sympathy for Nora because she is lost between Torvald and Dr.Rank.