Sunday, February 22, 2009

What's in a Name?

Question #2: At what moment in the play do you understand why it is called A Doll’s House?

(Keep in mind I had not read Act III when I wrote this)

When a doll house comes to mind, I think of a perfect house, with perfect Barbie-and-Ken-like inhabitants completely in love, and the perfect life to accompany both the people and the house itself. With the title “A Doll’s House”, Ibsen seeks to provide the perfect frame to outline material existence that is the Nora’s day-to-day life by focusing on her childish appearance while also glimpsing into inner imperfection of the Helmer’s relationship.

To unknowing bystanders, the life of the Helmer’s would seem almost-overly perfect, a doll’s life. The relationship of Nora and Torvald appears filled with cute pet names such as “my little squirrel” and Nora’s constant praise of the unbreakable love that exists in their relationship with Mrs. Linde. Nora acts as the perfect adoring mother, playing with her children who can’t seem to get enough her loving attention, and the faultless friend, always willing to lend a hand. Just as in a doll’s life, her primary concern regards her clothing and dancing skills. In this way Ibsen sets Nora up as a doll, living in a doll’s house. Though she tries to prove her meaning and hardship of her life to Mrs. Linde through her behind-the-scenes dealings, Nora’s daily life may not be one of true love but in every sense it is material, like a doll’s life. Her life is consumed by Torvald “watching her dance, or get[ting] dressed up, or recit[ing].” Mrs. Linde and Rank help unravel the true nature of the Helmer’s built-up existence and lead us partially out of the doll house to make the members of the Helmer family more human.

Behind the great life of wealth and happiness, lies the Nora the doll, but in another sense; Nora is a doll, a puppet to be exact, in the hands of her husband. She acts only as the perfect child because she knows this role pleases her husband. When exposed to the serious side of her personality in their conversation regarding Krogstad’s job in Act II, Helmer attempts to revert to back to Nora’s childish status by disregarding the serious nature of her inquiries and calling her “my little frightened dove” then immediately leaving her behind in the room to further ignore her distress. Their marriage bases itself more upon necessity than love; they provide an air of comport and duty, but neither serves as a confident or best friend for their spouse. He controls the relationship and never allows it to go beyond his position as the authority figure.

Either way you look at it, Nora is the doll, in the hands of her husband or simply stuck in a material existence. As the truth of her forgery surrounds her life, her perfect doll-esque world slowly crumbles around her as she realizes the faults of her marriage and the life her husband and she have created. (470)


2 comments:

JessicaGordon said...

Hi Isabel!

I really like your commentary on the meaning of the title, which is a very interesting topic in itself. I agree that while Nora's life appeared materialistic, perfect, and seemingly happy in the beginning of the play, she is in fact miserable about her role in the family. She has fulfilled the roll as a "doll" to her father and now fulfills that same roll to her husband. I found it interesting that you compare Nora to a puppet who tries to please her husband even though she is miserable and feels inferior. I also like how you discussed the meaning of Helmer and Nora's marriage and how it is probably not really based on true love. Great job in terms of organization and textual evidence!!!

Kendra Simon said...

Isabel, this is a really well-written and well thought out blog. I particularly like the topic you chose to explore. I had not really thought about the title and its connection to the story before I read your blog. You did an excellent job showing how Nora is the doll in the story. I always love reading your blogs!