HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON

“A DOLL’S HOUSE”

Presented by Lia Vaszily, Carly Anderson,

Elizabeth Hewitt, Cameron Corn, & Taylor

Medford

HERIK IBSEN (1828-1906)

Ibsen was a major 19th century

playwright, theatre director, and

poet.

Ibsen is often referred to as the

“father of prose drama,” and is

one of the founders of

Modernism in theatre.

In his era, many of his plays

were considered scandalous

because of their stance toward

issues such as morality and

their depiction of family life.

19TH CENTURY IDEALSThe ideals present in Europe and Norway at the time the play

was written in 1870 are clearly shown in the play.

Torvald represents the “bourgeois respectability” atmosphere

that was rampant during the 19th century. His attitude reflects

what characteristics give respectability to19th century upper and

middle class such as financial success, social mobility,

freedom from debt, a stable and secure family established

under traditional patriarchal values, and the absence of moral

guilt.

Another ideal present in the play is the impact that one’s lineage

has on future generations. Crimes and immoral acts committed

by the father are paid for by the son. For example, Nora’s

children would have been doomed because of her heinous actions.

19TH CENTURY EUROPEAN AND

NORWEGIAN WOMEN

In 19th century Europe and

Norway the rights of women

were virtually non-existent.

It was believed that it was

the “order of nature” for

women to obey men and to

remain dependent on them

their entire lives, first as

daughters and later as

wives. Women were

expected to absorb opinions

and ideas rather than to

have their own.

19T HCENTURY EUROPEAN AND NORWEGIAN

MARRIAGES

Women gave up what rights they did have when they became

married for example the right to control their own earnings.

Married women were not allowed to enter into any contracts, couldn’t

control any earned wages, or take part in any legal transactions.

Women were economically, socially, and psychologically dependent

on their husbands.

Divorce wasn’t socially accepted, in certain places illegal, and if a

divorce was granted, full custodial power was automatically given to

the father.

CONTROVERSY OVER “A DOLL’S HOUSE”

Nora’s actions in the play

spark controversy because of

her actions, motives, and

beliefs. Nora uses Torvald’s

assumptions about women

to control his emotions. She

gets power over him when

she acts as she “should.”

Her secret loan and forgery

aren’t, in the play, attributed

to her moral character, but

to her love for her husband.

It is her departure that is

viewed most unacceptable

to 19th century society.

CONTROVERSY CONTINUED…

However honest her

intentions, Nora commits

the most unthinkable

crime- abandonment of

her husband and

children. However Nora

leaves because she

doesn't’ know who she is

as an individual. In this

century her identity was

previously characterized

by her role as wife and

mother.

CONCLUSION

“A Doll’s House” was a

very accurate

representation of a

middle class marriage.

Torvald and Nora portray

a typical 19th century

lifestyle and her

departure was viewed as

an unacceptable act. So

much that in come

countries, like Germany,

the ending was changed.

In that version Torvald

and Nora live happily

ever after.

Prosecuting Nora in CourtJudge- Thank you for attending this case today. This case involves the possible criminal acts of Nora Helmer. Court is now in session.

Prosecution – I appreciate you taking your time in being here today. It has come to my attention that Nora has committed several crimes including forgery, desertion, breach of contract. Not only did she do these things to her family, she tried to bribe Krogstad.

Defense- Nora has done nothing wrong to her family. If anything, she is the victim here. Could you imagine being trapped in your own home? Being treated like a doll? Nora has lost her identity because of Torvald. He only lets her be a housewife. She did a very unselfish thing when she helped Torvald get the medical help he needed…who else would have saved his life?

Prosecution-Yes, I agree that she was very unselfish, but at the same time she did this behind her husband’s back, without his permission. All this, and she wasn’t even certain she would repay the loan which would mean debt for her family. Nobody should borrow money without certainty that they can pay it back. In addition, she forged her father’s signature…a severe crime, punishable by law.

Defense- Nora made it a priority to pay back Krogstad. She worked long nights during the Christmas holiday to earn money to repay her loan. As a matter of fact, Nora was extremely close to paying off her debt…how many women do you know that can accomplish that ?

Prosecution- It doesn’t matter why she took out the loan or forged the signature..and can you explain the desertion of her family? No, you can’t. The law is the law sir, and Nora Helmer is guilty.

Judge- Now it’s time for the jury to deliberate. JURY….

Verdict-guilty, innocent, guilty, guilty

Judge- The jury has decided. Nora Helmer is guilty of forgery, desertion, and breach of contract. Court adjourned.