An Analysis Of Feminist Themes And Communication In Henrik Ibsen’s Play A Doll’s House

Conflict and Communication Analysis

Discuss About The Journal Scientific Research And Development.

The different conflicts taking place in the society are affected by the different aspects relating to the situation and the communication between the people. Conflict is defined as the clash in the understanding between two ideologies which help in the understanding of conflict of the individual understanding relating to the individual topics (Johnstone, 2018). The conflict situation analyzed in the report is the Henrik Ibsen’s play A Doll’s House. The discourse of the play is studied in the light of the different feminist theories to understand the communication. The communication in the different situational scenarios in this aspects are to be analyzed in the light of the situation and the scenarios the  female protagonist Nora faces and Mrs. Linden who is a friend of Nora.  The feminist theories shows the different situations that the women go through and how it affects their life as a whole. The conflict in the mind Nora and in her family life due to her action have been studied in the feministic perspective to understand the different scenarios of their lives (Daly, 2016). On the other hand the different situations faced by the characters in the play helps in establishing the supremacy of the different genders in the society.

In the play the main character Nora is presented to be almost powerless and a wife of an influential person her own identity in the play is very much negated in the presence of her husband in the play. One of the most important part to be understood in his context is the role of the women in the society. As a woman she was supposed to take care of her family and provide for the needs of her husband. She was treated no more than an accessory to her husband. The various terms said by Torvald in the discourse such ‘my pet’ and ‘my property’ to address Nora establishes her secondary situation in the eyes of her husband. The animal imagery has long been used in the different aspects in the situational scenarios to establish the different situations in the society are used to shoe the male supremacy and the dominant attitude of Torvald (Alexander, 2003). She is treated as a child by almost everyone in the society as Mrs. Linden also addresses her as immature and a child. There are pieces of information that she isn't completely content with the restricted position she has as a lady. When uncovering the mystery of how she obtained cash to fund the outing to Italy, she alludes to it as her "pride" and says it was amusing to be responsible for cash, clarifying that it was "relatively like being a man." Although she comes to lament her choice to acquire cash, Nora's disappointment with her status as a lady heightens through the span of the play (Azam, 2014). The lack of abilities of a woman to work and earn for herself in society is affected by the different situational aspects in the case of Nora who is constantly dissatisfied with her position in the life of Torvald. Her radical answer for this issue is to desert local life, regardless of Torvalds’s presentation that he will change. Nora's choice proposes that she, and the play, see the issue as just somewhat with Torvald.

Feminist Themes

The more principal issue is with residential life as it was considered and inhabited the time, in the way it legitimately and socially infantilized ladies and made it unimaginable for them to be perceived or regarded as full people. The treatment of Torvald towards Nora greatly affects her behaviours in the play. Her constant treatment as the second by almost everyone in the play is affected by the various aspects such as her taking the responsibilities in dire need. One of the important aspects of the play is the way that the different characters behave in the paly in relations to the different situations. One of the most important issues in the treatment is the gross dissimilarity in the treatment of Mrs Linden and Nora in the play (Baseer,  Alvi & Zafran, 2013). While Mrs Linden works and treated as coarse and she is given to be more experienced more than Nora as she works and Nora does not get that due respect since she is not apparently working despite having her own hardships and crisis.

The conflict begins after Torvald has read the letter and calls out his wife.

HELMER. Nora!

NORA. [Shrieks.] Ah-!

HELMER. What is this? Do you know what is in this letter?

NORA. Yes, I know. Let me go! Let me pass!

In the above communication it is seen that Torvald is apparently agitated at the contents of the letter that he just got from Krogstad. From the way that Torvald calls out Nora he seems agitated and in disbelief with the contents of the letter. Nora reactions on the other hand is of fear and is subdued. The disbelief in Torvald is very evident in the conversation where he asks her about the truth of the letter. Nora on the other hand wants to avoid this confrontation and wants to leave after accepting the truth.

HELMER. [Holds her back.] Where do you want to go?

 NORA. [Tries to break away from him.] You shall not save me, Torvald.

HELMER. [Falling back.] True! Is what he writes true? No, no, it is impossible that this can be true.

NORA. It is true. I have loved you beyond all else in the world.

HELMER. Pshaw- no silly evasions!

In the given context one of the important things that Torvald’s expression shows is the fact that he thinks that she is extremely dependent on her as he thinks she cannot sustain herself. She on the other hand shows hopelessness which shows in her comment that he shall not save her. Torvald in this context is still in disbelief that she can do something like that. On the other hand that she tries to show that she did it for her love for him. Torvald rejects her by saying that she is trying to evade the topic.

Male Supremacy and Dominant Attitude of Torvald

NORA. [A step nearer him.] Torvald-!

HELMER. Wretched woman- what have you done!

NORA. Let me go- you shall not save me! You shall not take my guilt upon yourself!

HELMER. I don't want any melodramatic airs. [Locks the outer door.] Here you shall stay and give an account of yourself. Do you understand what you have done? Answer! Do you understand it?

NORA. [Looks at him fixedly, and says with a stiffening expression.] Yes; now I begin fully to understand it.

In the above conversation Nora tries to go near him and tries to find comfort in him by going near him but he rejects her advances. On the other hand Torvald degrades her by calling her wretched which shows his disgust towards her and her actions. Nora conversely has given up hope on his help on the topic of getting help from him in saving herself.  Torvald on the other hand fails to understand the causes behind her actions and still thinks that she had done it without understanding the repercussion of her actions. Nora’s next statement and her language shows the disappointment she feels by not getting the acceptance she deserved for her efforts in the due course. The sense of realization leading to the climax is also evident in the play.

HELMER. [Walking up and down.] Oh! what an awful awakening! During all these eight years- she who was my pride and my joy- a hypocrite, a liar- worse, worse- a criminal. Oh, the unfathomable hideousness of it all! Ugh! Ugh! [NORA says nothing, and continues to look fixedly at him.] HELMER. I ought to have known how it would be. I ought to have foreseen it. All your father's want of principle- be silent!- all your father's want of principle you have inherited- no religion, no morality, no sense of duty. How I am punished for screening him! I did it for your sake; and you reward me like this.

HELMER. You have destroyed my whole happiness. You have ruined my future. Oh, it's frightful to think of! I am in the power of a scoundrel; he can do whatever he pleases with me, demand whatever he chooses; he can domineer over me as much as he likes, and I must submit. And all this disaster and ruin is brought upon me by an unprincipled woman!

In the given scenario in the conversation Torvald instead of supporting her starts blaming her to a extent of taking her father’s side. She is called names and blamed a number of ways by Torvald for being fickle and weak. It is seen that he calls her a criminal and it shows his hatred towards her and his prime thought of saving himself and his reputation. He thinks that his reputation would be tarnished and he implicates of not having morals. Nora on the other hand has given up hope of help from Torvald. From the communication of Torvald it is evident that he is more concerned about being blackmailed by Krogstad rather than a voice that wants to reassure Nora. At this point Nora wants to leave but it not evident she is talking about death or leaving the city.

The Treatment of Mrs. Linden and Nora

HELMER. Oh, no fine phrases. Your father, too, was always ready with them. What good would it do me, if you were "out of the world," as you say? No good whatever! He can publish the story all the same; I might even be suspected of collusion. People will think I was at the bottom of it all and egged you on. And for all this I have you to thank- you whom I have done nothing but pet and spoil during our whole married life. Do you understand now what you have done to me?

HELMER. The thing is so incredible, I can't grasp it. But we must come to an understanding. Take that shawl off. Take it off, I say! I must try to pacify him in one way or another- the matter must be hushed up, cost what it may.- As for you and me, we must make no outward change in our way of life- no outward change, you understand. Of course, you will continue to live here. But the children cannot be left in your care. I dare not trust them to you.- Oh, to have to say this to one I have loved so tenderly- whom I still-! But that must be a thing of the past. Henceforward there can be no question of happiness, but merely of saving the ruins, the shreds, the show- [A ring; HELMER starts.] What's that? So late! Can it be the worst? Can he-? Hide yourself, Nora; say you are ill.

In this context it is seen that he compares her to her father in making things up and hiding things from him. He seems more concerned of being implicated as a co-conspirator rather than trying to save his wife from the situation she got into to save him. He thinks that him always trying to spoil her by meeting the needs of her wife, which helped her to gain the confidence to do the crime. Nora on the other hand in a state of mental turmoil and is disappointed by the reaction ad is really calm in accepting the blames. Torvald on the contrary to helping her, is trying to plan for the situation in future that might come up rather than trying to console her failing wife. He still is trying to control and command her.

At this moment he receives a letter from Krogstad where he takes back the attempt to blackmail him and he avoids conflict.

The Conflict begins after Torvald has read the letter and calls out his wife

The difference in heart obviously rings empty. Nora changes not into bed attire but rather into regular garments. She clarifies that she won't rest today around evening time, and she requests that he take a seat with her so as to "confront realities." She discloses to him that he has never comprehended her and that, before this evening, she has never comprehended him. She brings up that, more than eight long periods of marriage, they have at no other time sat down to have a genuine exchange. Torvald challenges that such discussions would not have appeared well and good, given Nora's interests (Holledge et al, 2016).

Nora discloses to him that she has been incredibly wronged by both her dad and her better half. Torvald dissents that they are the men who have adored her the most. Shaking her head, Nora redresses him, disclosing to him that he has never cherished her for herself yet has just idea it wonderful to be infatuated with her. She discloses to him that, similarly as her dad did, Torvald has regarded her as a doll to be played with, organizing everything to however him whims may dictate and constraining her to live just to engage him. Therefore, she has not made anything of her life and has never been really cheerful (Hossain, 2015).

Torvald concurs with this examination, however he qualifies it as misrepresented and stressed. He vows that, starting now and into the foreseeable future, he will quit playing with her and begin instructing her. Nora rejects the offer, watching that he isn't the man to instruct her. Just a couple of minutes prior, he had revealed to her that she was unfit to bring up her own particular youngsters. She concurs with him about her failure at exhibit; she should first teach herself before she can instruct the youngsters. This is the reason, she finishes up, she will abandon him.

Torvald is stunned and hops out of his seat, calling her frantic and attempting to keep her from clearing out. He blames her for disregarding her "most holy obligations" as spouse and mother, declining to recognize Nora's supposition that her obligation to herself as a sensible individual is in any event as sacrosanct. He bids to her feeling of religion and after that profound quality, both of which Nora sceptically rejects by clarifying that she has never had an opportunity to analyse and grasp these things all alone and, therefore, she doesn't know whether she concurs with these standards. He at long last contends that he should reason that she doesn't love him. Sorry, she concurs. He lost her affection before today around evening time, and she can't remain in the house (Karim, Fathema, & Hakim, 2015).

Torvald Blames and Disgusts Nora

Nora clarifies that her adoration was lost in light of the fact that the wonder did not occur: he didn't reject Krogstad's conditions and offer to take up the issue for himself. Rather, he censured her. Torvald answers that, however he would readily work day and night for her, he could never consent to imperilling his respect for a friend or family member. Nora essentially answers that numerous spouses have done recently that. Torvald rejects her words as those of a careless youngster. Conceding the likelihood that he may be correct, Nora changes tack. She depicts his narrow minded point of view and her own awfulness at having understood that she had lived with and borne youngsters with an outsider for a long time. Torvald tragically recognizes the bay between them yet inquires as to whether there is as yet an approach to fill it. Nora repeats that they both will be in an ideal situation separated. She to some degree formally discharges him from all commitments to her. She says that there must be ideal opportunity on the two sides. They restore their wedding bands to each other, and she abandons her keys (Klok, 2015).

Nora includes that a future relationship or some likeness thereof would just be conceivable if "the wonder of supernatural occurrences" were to happen—on the off chance that they both change is such a path, to the point that they could have a genuine marriage. She clears out. Sinking down into a seat with his deliver his face, Torvald groans her name. He at that point turns upward and watches how purge the room has progressed toward becoming without her. The play closes with the expectation of the "supernatural occurrence of marvels" entering Torvald's thoughts and with the sound of the road entryway hammering.

Conclusion

The conflict that is present in this scenarios highlights the different issues that are present in the contemporary society in the play. The condition of Nora in this case highlights the issues she faces in the contemporary society being undervalued by her husband and facing problems at the hands of her husband. The various problems and the conflicts in the play show the lack of Nora being treated as an equal a major issue because of which she faces in the keeping safe and secure of her family. One of the major thing that the conflict does is that it shows the transition of Nora from the average woman to the self-aware person who understands the futility of hopes. The behaviour of Torvald towards her also shows that she comes secondary to every thing in his life. When she is being caught in a criminal offense which she did to raise money for his treatment, instead of forgiving her, he implicates her and refuses to forgive her. This breaks the shell of hope that Nora has been forever living in. this is perhaps the conflict which turned the course of the play by  changing Nora’s outlook towards the situation. The behaviour of your world towards Nora was one of the issue that instigated her into leaving the home. The communication between the two is an example of how lonely Torvald held her in contrast to his own self esteem and social respect. She knows her place when he was only able to forgive her when the blackmail stocked not before that. The awakening of Nora of her own rights and fighting for her own doing, show the development of the feminism in the play as she chooses to fight for what she stands for rather than adhering to the opinion of Torvald. Hence it is seen that in this conflict deterministic perspective and awakening is produced by Ibsen in the conflicting statements made by Torvald and Nora.

References

Alexander, P.C., (2003). Building a Doll's House: A Feminist Analysis of Marital Debt Dischargeability in Bankruptcy. Vill. L. Rev., 48, p.381.

Azam, A., (2014). Nora Helmer in Ibsen’s A Doll’s House: A Feminist concerns in English Literature. Journal of English Language and Literature, 1(1), pp.13-17.

Baseer, A., Alvi, S.D. & Zafran, F., (2013). The Use of Symbolic Language in Ibsen's A Doll's House: A Feministic Perspective. Language in India, 13(3).

Christian, M., (2016). Performing Marriage: A Doll's House and Its Reconstructions in Fin-de-Siècle London. Theatre Survey, 57(1), pp.43-62.

Creamer, S., (2016). Slamming the door on patriarchy. The treatment of transgressive women in Henrik Ibsen's works.

Curtin, J.T., (2015). From Narcissism to Empathy: Ibsen's Plays in the Digital Age.

Daly, M., (2016). Gyn/ecology: The metaethics of radical feminism. Beacon Press.

Dees, A., (2016). Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House: A Marriage Built to Fail.

Eslamie, R. & Mazandarani, H., (2015). An Investigation of Adlerian Psychoanalytic Feminism in ‘A Doll’s House’. Journal of Scientific Research and Development, 2(1), pp.96-104.

Holledge, J., Bollen, J., Helland, F. & Tompkins, J., (2016). A Global Doll's House: Ibsen and Distant Visions. Springer.

Hossain, M.A., (2015). Re-interpreting A Doll’s House through Post-modernist Feminist Projections. IRWLE, 11(1), pp.1-14.

Johnstone, B., (2018). Discourse analysis. John Wiley & Sons.

Karim, S.M.S., Fathema, F. & Hakim, A., (2015). MAN-WOMAN RELATIONSHIP IN HENRIC IBSEN’S “A DOLL’S HOUSE”. International Journal of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, 3(1).

Klok, J., (2015). Ibsen in Dutch theatres and the sustainability of Nora. Nordlit, (34), pp.445-464