I recently read the selection by Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen. Actually, I pretty much forced myself to read it. You may ask why I chose to use “forced”. Well, I read Ibsen’s mini-biography and it wasn’t all that captivating. Also, I didn’t like the title. I tried to forget it while reading. Don’t get me wrong. I’m for feminism, but the words “A Doll’s House” weren’t appealing. It sounded, how shall I say, narcissistic and cliché. Like a self-indulgent narration falling on my deaf ears. — I know, that’s way too prejudice, but that predisposition set me up for a nice surprise. It was better than I expected. It started out like most fairy tales end. A happily married couple illustrated through flirty dialogue. The setting was the home of Mr. and Mrs. Helmer and their three children. Although their names were mentioned, the children themselves didn’t have any dialogue or make an obvious appearance in the play. I thought that was strange. Upon continued reading, I observed Nora, our protagonist, the systematically employed housewife. She’s a bit of a tortured soul. Past heartfelt attempts to preserve her lifestyle have led to the major conflict of this story. If this play had an antagonist, that character would be Nils Krogstad, I think. I’m unsure if he is supposed to be a tragic villain, but I see him as fickle human being whose actions are entirely dependent on others. Although his resolution has merit, I found it unfitting. While I read Mrs. Linde’s confession to him, I truly thought it was mere deception. The doctor was probably the most interesting character to me. While the best part of the play was Nora’s reaction after being confronted by Torvald, her husband. During his outburst, she had an epiphany I did not see coming. It was like she became aware of the wool pulled over eyes. “You’ve never loved me. You just thought it was pleasant to be in love with me.” (p.1605) captures the brutal truth of her realization of inferiority in the life she’s been trying so restlessly toI recently read the selection by Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen. Actually, I pretty much forced myself to read it. You may ask why I chose to use “forced”. Well, I read Ibsen’s mini-biography and it wasn’t all that captivating. Also, I didn’t like the title. I tried to forget it while reading. Don’t get me wrong. I’m for feminism, but the words “A Doll’s House” weren’t appealing. It sounded, how shall I say, narcissistic and cliché. Like a self-indulgent narration falling on my deaf ears. — I know, that’s way too prejudice, but that predisposition set me up for a nice surprise. It was better than I expected. It started out like most fairy tales end. A happily married couple illustrated through flirty dialogue. The setting was the home of Mr. and Mrs. Helmer and their three children. Although their names were mentioned, the children themselves didn’t have any dialogue or make an obvious appearance in the play. I thought that was strange. Upon continued reading, I observed Nora, our protagonist, the systematically employed housewife. She’s a bit of a tortured soul. Past heartfelt attempts to preserve her lifestyle have led to the major conflict of this story. If this play had an antagonist, that character would be Nils Krogstad, I think. I’m unsure if he is supposed to be a tragic villain, but I see him as fickle human being whose actions are entirely dependent on others. Although his resolution has merit, I found it unfitting. While I read Mrs. Linde’s confession to him, I truly thought it was mere deception. The doctor was probably the most interesting character to me. While the best part of the play was Nora’s reaction after being confronted by Torvald, her husband. During his outburst, she had an epiphany I did not see coming. It was like she became aware of the wool pulled over eyes. “You’ve never loved me. You just thought it was pleasant to be in love with me.” (p.1605) captures the brutal truth of her realization of inferiority in the life she’s been trying so restlessly to protect.
protect.
I recently read the selection by Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen. Actually, I pretty much forced myself to read it. You may ask why I chose to use “forced”. Well, I read Ibsen’s mini-biography and it wasn’t all that captivating. Also, I didn’t like the title. I tried to forget it while reading. Don’t get me wrong. I’m for feminism, but the words “A Doll’s House” weren’t appealing. It sounded, how shall I say, narcissistic and cliché. Like a self-indulgent narration falling on my deaf ears. — I know, that’s way too prejudice, but that predisposition set me up for a nice surprise. It was better than I expected.
It started out like most fairy tales end. A happily married couple illustrated through flirty dialogue. The setting was the home of Mr. and Mrs. Helmer and their three children. Although their names were mentioned, the children themselves didn’t have any dialogue or make an obvious appearance in the play. I thought that was strange. Upon continued reading, I observed Nora, our protagonist, the systematically employed housewife. She’s a bit of a tortured soul. Past heartfelt attempts to preserve her lifestyle have led to the major conflict of this story. If this play had an antagonist, that character would be Nils Krogstad, I think. I’m unsure if he is supposed to be a tragic villain, but I see him as fickle human being whose actions are entirely dependent on others. Although his resolution has merit, I found it unfitting. While I read Mrs. Linde’s confession to him, I truly thought it was mere deception.
The doctor was probably the most interesting character to me. While the best part of the play was Nora’s reaction after being confronted by Torvald, her husband. During his outburst, she had an epiphany I did not see coming. It was like she became aware of the wool pulled over eyes. “You’ve never loved me. You just thought it was pleasant to be in love with me.” (p.1605) captures the brutal truth of her realization of inferiority in the life she’s been trying so restlessly to protect.
Advertisement
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
This entry was posted on 10/11/2009 at 12:31 AM and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
10/12/2009 at 5:24 PM |
Yes I’m with you on this one too… A Doll’s House, was an interestin story even thought the end was not that great, at lest for me but what I did like ws that at he end she realizes that Torvald the husband treated like a puppy and did not realize how much she did love him…because of his possesive actions towards her, and how she always had to hide those so famous macarons from him, and also that other dress she had purshased to take to the ball.
10/12/2009 at 11:22 PM |
I agree. I felt like I had to force myself upon this play too. I think it might have been the title for me as well.
10/26/2009 at 10:59 AM |
I have always been fascinated with your mind Travis. I am most impressed with your analysis of “A Doll’s House.” I have discussed with a lot of people about this one and even read reviews and commentaries online about this and you are one of a very few who actually captures the essence of the play. I agree too that Nora is a very real character, much like anyone else. She portrayed what most people do but which most people don’t like confessing to – agape love. She seem to me to be a woman who would sacrifice even her happiness for the happiness of another. She did everything most people dream of having in their significant other, yet, in all I have read about her, it’s the proof of this love that people attack. Her forgery of the check seem to outshine her selfless sacrifice and enduring love. Yes, she is a tortured soul in that she would always be misunderstood because she chose to repress her feelings and needs for anothers and therein lies the drama.