General Vision and Viewpoint in A Doll’s House
Central Characters
At the beginning of the play Nora is not presented in a particularly sympathetic light. She appears immature and overly dependent on her husband’s opinion of her. Her language is childish: she tells Torvald that he will have ‘a big salary and earn lots of money’ and begs him to let her spend ‘a tiny wee bit’ more money at Christmas. Torvald rebukes Nora for what he sees as her irresponsible attitude towards the household finances and she meekly accepts his judgement. When Torvald suspects Nora has been eating sweets, he treats her as if she is his daughter rather than his wife, asking, ‘Hasn’t Miss Sweet Tooth been breaking rules in town today?’ The idea that Torvald believes he has the right to control what Nora eats gives us little hope of her achieving any real freedom and fulfilment in her life, an idea that is reinforced when she assures him, ‘I should not think of going against your wishes.’ Of course, we know that Nora is lying to Torvald and that she has been eating macaroons. This little lie simply serves to make Nora’s situation more depressing: she cannot be honest with her husband or true to herself in his presence.
Nora’s initial treatment of her friend Christine Linde does little to improve our impression of her. Christine has been a widow for three years and Nora admits that she never wrote to express her condolences, saying, ‘I meant ever so often to write to you at the time, but I always put it off and something always prevented me’. When Christine tells Nora that her husband left her childless and penniless, Nora immediately points out that she herself has ‘three lovely children’ and that Torvald’s promotion means they will soon have ‘heaps and heaps of money’ and no anxiety about the future. Nora appears little more than a selfish, frivolous woman at this stage in the play and her attitude contributes to a negative general vision and viewpoint.
As the play progresses, we begin to see there is more depth to Nora’s character than we could have suspected from her initial interactions with Torvald and Christine. She is stung when Christine says she knows ‘so little of the burdens and troubles of life’ and that she is simply ‘a child’. In order to prove that she is not ‘incapable of anything serious’, Nora reveals that she took out a secret loan to pay for a trip to Italy when Torvald was seriously ill. This is the starting proof that Nora has a will of her own and the ability to make decisions without Torvald’s knowledge or permission. This information creates a slightly more positive vision and viewpoint in that we now know Nora is a deeper character than she first appeared, and we are more interested and engaged with her character as a result. While we might not admire the means Nora employs, we can understand her goal. It is incredibly difficult for Nora to pay back the money she has borrowed: she has to take on work behind Torvald’s back and scrimp and save to meet the repayments. She succeeds admirably, driven by her great love for her husband and family. Nora’s strength of character is clear but her decision to break the law makes us fear that the story may not end well. The revelation to Christine raises two obstacles to any improvement in Nora’s situation. First, we know that Torvald will not tolerate any deviation from his rules and that is dead set against loans of any sort. Second, the fact that Nora has been lying to her husband about such an important matter is further proof that she is in a dysfunctional and unequal relationship.
Torvald is an antagonistic force in the play and his behaviour contributes to a depressing general vision and viewpoint. It is difficult to feel any sympathy for such a selfish, pompous and controlling character. His fury when he discovers the truth about the loan seems to put an end to any hope of a happy ending. Torvald is incredulous that Nora had behaved so irresponsibly and he is far more concerned with his reputation than he is with his marriage. He scorns Nora’s claim that the will be fineif she is ‘out of the way’. Ironically, Torvald rails at the possibility of being blackmailed by Krogstad, saying it is dreadful to think of being in thrall to such a man: ‘he can do what he likes with me, ask anything he likes of me, give me any orders he pleases - I dare not refuse’. It never seems to occur to Torvald that this is exactly the sort of life he has forced Nora to lead.
When Krogstad withdraws his threat of blackmail, Torvald immediately changes his tune. He tells Nora that all is well and that their marriage can continue ‘just as it was before’. There is no real hope or optimism in this, however. Torvald couches his forgiveness in terms that show he only cares about himself, saying, ‘There is something so indescribably sweet and satisfying’ in pardoning her and that it is now as if he has made Nora ‘doubly his own’ so she had ‘become both wife and child to him’. He assures her that he will do all the thinking for her in the future, ostensibly to spare her anxiety but really to ensure that she never disobeys him again. This little speech seems to put paid to any chance of Nora achieving personal fulfilment: she will be even more under Torvald’s control than before if she accepts these terms.
Opening
The opening of A Doll’s House initially appears optimistic. Nora returns home after a Christmas shopping trip, ‘humming a tune and in high spirits’. She generously tips the porter who carries in the Christmas tree and her basket of parcels. Her home is cheerful and welcoming, comfortable but not extravagantly furnished. Once alone in the room, Nora laughs to herself and eats a couple of macaroons she takes from a packet in her pocket. At this stage in the play, the mood is upbeat and positive.
However, the optimism is dampened by the introduction of Nora’s husband. We see the first hint that Torvald may taint the positive mood when Nora ‘goes cautiously’ to her husband’s study door to check if he is in. We may well wonder why a wife would seem slightly anxious about her husband’s presence in the house, and her behaviour seems to indicate that there is less than perfect harmony between them. Torvald’s opening words cement this initial impression. He calls out, ‘Is that my little lark twittering out there?’ and continues to address Nora in this patronising way until she asks him to come out of his study and look at the Christmas presents she has bought. At this Torvald, who initiated the conversation, says, ’Don’t disturb me’. This may seem like a small detail, but if Torvald was so keen not to be interrupted, it is strange that he should have called out to Nora a number of times. It is as if he must always be in control, and therefore will only come and see the purchases when he wants to, not when Nora asks him.
Although he loves his wife and believes himself a good husband and father, Torvald Helmer is nevertheless a negative force in the play. He treats Nora as a possession and addresses her as if she were a small girl rather than an adult woman, calling her ’my little squirrel,’ ‘my little featherhead’ and asking, ‘Has my little spendthrift been wasting money again?’ He lectures her about overspending and even ‘takes her playfully by the ear’ as if she were an errant child. Nora feeds into this attitude, hiding the macaroons in her pocket and wiping her mouth so Torvald won’t know she has been eating sweets.
Torvald cannot bear to be challenged and he is pleased when Nora appears compliant and demure. He asks her if she has been eating sweets, telling her to look straight at him and ‘wagging his finger at her’ as if scolding a naughty child. Nora lies, insisting she has not eaten anything and assuring Torvald that she would never dream of going against his wishes. This does not bode well for the couple’s relationship. Although the incident may seem trivial, it is odd that Nora should feel the need to lie about it, and that Torvald should believe he has the right to determine what Nora may eat. However, for all his faults, Torvald is not deliberately cruel and he is convinced that he is treating his wife well. Later in the play, when Nora expresses her unhappiness, Torvald is stunned.
Torvald is misogynistic, telling Nora that her approach to financial matters is ‘like a woman’ and refusing to countenance spending any more than they already do. Clearly, Torvald keeps a tight hold of the purse strings and Nora is not allowed any real control of the household budget. His belief in his superiority simply because he is the man of the house provides us with a negative general vision and viewpoint.
Despite Torvald’s domineering manner, Nora appears quite happy in the opening moments of the text. She plays along with Torvald and appears to accept her subservient role. However, we soon see that appearance and reality are not the same in the world of the text. Ibsen subtly introduces the idea that there are fractures in this seemingly perfect façade. Nora’s choice of presents for her children is symbolic and meaningful. She says she has bought ‘a doll and dolly’s bedstead’ for her little daughter but ensured that they were cheap, as the child will ‘soon break them in pieces’. This foreshadows the breakdown of the Helmer family and leaves the reader with a pessimistic view of the text as a result.
Ending
At the end of A Doll’s House, Nora makes the difficult decision to leave her husband and family, which presents us with the view of a world in which there is no guarantee of personal fulfilment. The terrible realisation Nora comes to at the end of the text, that she has ‘never been happy’ and that for eight years she has been living with ‘a strange man’ and borne him three children is shocking to both her husband and the audience.
Nora’s epiphany is a result of Torvald learning the truth about the loan. He is furious and cannot believe that his apparently compliant and obedient wife has behaved so irresponsibly. Although Torvald earlier expressed a gallant and romantic wish to save Nora from an imagined danger, he now turns on her savagely and shows that he never really loved her. Reality is too much for him.
Soon after this, a letter arrives from Krogstad and Torvald learns, to his relief, that he has withdrawn his threat of blackmail. Now Torvald tells Nora that all is well and that their marriage can continue as before. He assures her that he has forgiven her and that from now on she can lean on him completely. Torvald does not believe his wife should act on her own in the future and he says that he will be her conscience. She will be ‘both wife and child’ to him and he will control her even more than he did before. This is deeply depressing, as it shows that Torvald has no understanding of his wife’s abilities, desire for independence and her need to feel that she is playing an active rather than a passive role in family life.
This is a turning point for Nora and she finally decides that she must become her own person. Torvald is bewildered by her decision to leave and cannot see why she would be unhappy with his proposal for the future of their relationship. Nora explains that when she lived at home with her father, he told her ‘his opinion about everything’ and so she had the same opinions. She was never allowed to form her own identity. Torvald simply took over this role when he married her. She says that the time has come for her to educate herself and that as she is ‘a reasonable human being’ she now wants the chance to examine the fundamental questions of life and decide for herself what she thinks about them. Torvald is shocked and no amount of explanation can make him see the value in Nora’s idea. His intransigence creates a pessimistic mood at this point in the play, as it is hard to see how this situation will be resolved. Clearly, Torvald is unwilling and unable to allow Nora to live a fulfilling life.
Despite Torvald’s pleas for her to stay, Nora leaves the man she now views as a stranger. She can no longer love her husband after he has shown that he puts himself first and foremost and loves her only when she conforms to his idea of what a perfect wife should be. Nora sees now that she has been living a lie, but she has at least a chance to make something of her life from this moment on and to learn who she really is. Torvald struggles to understand why his wife should feel the need to leave and she tries in vain to explain, saying, ‘I can no longer content myself with what most people say… I must think over things for myself and get to understand them’.
How the reader responds to the ending of A Doll’s House is a matter of personal interpretation. When the play was originally performed, actresses refused to play Nora’s role unless it was rewritten because they felt it unbelievable and immoral that a woman would walk out on her husband and completely shocking that she should leave her children. Some modern readers feel the same way and therefore view the ending of the play as unutterably bleak and depressing. However, others argue that Nora wants to break the cycle that began with her own father treating her as a ‘doll-child’ and is determined to be a better parent to her own children in the fullness of time. Nora’s argument is that she cannot guide her children through life until she has found the right path. She admits that she does not know exactly what she is going to do when she leaves Torvald, but she is ready to face that challenge nonetheless. As the door closes behind her, we feel that for the first time Nora has the chance of a meaningful, fulfilling life and a better future.
A Doll’s House began with the opening of a door and ends with the closing of the same door as Nora leaves her family and embarks on her journey of self-discovery. However, there is a slight note of hope at the end of the text. Again, this is a matter of interpretation, but Torvald’s final words after Nora’s departure seem to indicate that he is at last seeing the light. The stage directions tell us that ‘A hope flashes across his mind’ as he repeats Nora’s earlier comment about ‘The most wonderful thing of all’ needing to happen before they could ever find love again. Although we do not know what the outcome of this thought process will be, it does indicate that all is not necessarily irretrievable lost if Torvald is willing to accept his role in rebuilding their family from scratch.
Relationships
The central relationship between Torvald and Nora in A Doll’s House is unequal and unhappy and contributes to a negative and pessimistic general vision and viewpoint. The difficulty in the marriage in A Doll’s House is based on Torvald’s treating Nora like a child rather than an adult woman. Their union is less like a marriage than a parent-child relationship. Torvald views Nora as a ‘featherhead’ who needs to be directed and guided in every aspect of her life. He tells her she mustn’t eat cakes and, when she eats macaroons, she lies to him about it, much like a child might lie to a parent. It is significant that Torvald refers to Nora’s ‘breaking the rules’ when asking her about the macaroons. A marriage in which one of the partners has to obey laws laid down by the other is deeply flawed and neither nurturing nor constructive.
Torvald’s selfishness contributes to the general feeling of pessimism. He clearly believes that Nora’s life should centre around him. He resents her talking about the days before they met, and Mrs Linde is surprised to find that Torvald had never heard of her even though she and Nora were childhood friends. Torvald’s selfishness means that he treats Nora like a plaything rather than a partner, making her dance in a way that sexually excites him and then reacting with shock when she will not sleep with him: ‘You won’t – you won’t? Am I not your husband?’ Torvald ‘s control of Nora is deeply unpleasant and leaves the reader with a bleak view of relationships in the text.
Lies and deceit taint the relationship between Nora and Torvald and, by extension, the general vision and viewpoint. Although it is love for her family that motivates Nora and drives her to obtain money illegally, her efforts ultimately lead to a series of events that damage the relationship beyond the point of redemption. The breakdown in Nora and Torvald’s marriage occurs when Torvald discovers the truth about the loan she took out to fund their trip to Italy for his health. Despite Torvald’s attack on Nora’s character, she says it is the first time that they have ‘had a serious conversation’ in eight years of marriage. That it should take such a divisive and bitter exchange for the couple to talk as adults provides us with a very pessimistic view of their relationship.
The ending of the Helmer’s marriage is bleak and depressing. When Nora says that she is leaving Torvald accuses her of neglecting her duties and talking ‘like a child’ who does ‘not understand the conditions of the world’ in which she lives. The irony here is that Torvald has treated Nora like a child all throughout their marriage and cannot see that a child will eventually grow up and want to lead an independent life. Torvald is in love with an idea of Nora rather than the reality. As long as she obeys him, behaves prettily and is attractive, then he believes he loves her. He has no time for an independent, free-thinking wife. For her part, Nora is appalled to think that she has spent the last eight years married to a stranger and has borne him three children. Theirs was a union in name only and there was no meeting of minds.
Although the Torvald’s marriage falls apart, there is a note of hope in another pairing in A Doll’s House. The rekindled relationship between Christine and Krogstad provides us with a relatively optimistic view of love and life. Christine and Krogstad talk openly and honestly about their past and this leads us to believe they have a good chance of a happy future together. One of the main reasons Christine and Krogstad’s relationship is likely to prove constructive is that they have no secrets between them, unlike Torvald and Nora. Christine tells Krogstad not to take back his letter about the loan because she feels that Nora and Torvald ‘must have a complete understanding between them, which is impossible with all this concealment and falsehood going on.’ While there is no happy ending for Nora and Torvald at the conclusion of the play, the fact that Christine and Krogstad managed to survive their troubles and reconnect at a later date may lead more optimistic readers to believe that the same could possibly happen for the Helmers at some stage in the future. Therefore, the general vision and viewpoint of the text is less bleak and pessimistic than it might otherwise be.