9 January 2013

My journal for A DOLL'S HOUSE



  • I loved Ibsen’s style and the solution to the problem. Although he presented the problem and found a solution, he also left it open for a discussion as to whether the character’s action was right or wrong. To illustrate, Nora left Helmer at the end of the play when she opened her eyes and recognized some realities about her life. The action she did might not be right, according to some people. Some women choose to stay with their husbands whatever happens. This is a debatable action.


  •             I found an interesting point that women could not borrow money in Ibsen’s times. I knew women were under control of their husbands or their fathers, but I did not know this borrowing situation. I searched from the internet that what the women’s rights in those times were. Then, I found “Married Women’s Property Act”. The reason of the act’s start is that a woman could not sell or transfer any freehold and make contracts. This male dominated society has changed since Ibsen’s times, but not completely. Even now, this dominance can be felt by a lot of women. In the lesson, one of my friends defended that women want this system. According to him, we, as women, do not want to join parliament or any government stuff. On the contrary, Esra said men were controlling the written things, so women did not have equal right with men. I agree with her. For example, in the play, Nora said :“… a wife has no right to save her husband’s life? I don’t know much about the law..”. Nora did not know the law because her father and her husband did not think that it was necessary for Nora. Nora was perceived just as a doll.


  •             After I read A Doll’s House, I wanted to find out in this play what the similarity differences from Death of Salesman were. I learned in the lesson, Ibsen’s play was realistic. Therefore, everything in the play was related to the real life. I mentioned about male dominated situations. These events, like not being considered as an individual may happen to anyone in Ibsen’s times. In Death of Salesman,  Willy had “American Dream” and in those times, a lot of people had these thoughts which means working hard help you to have a better life. To talk about the differences, while reading A Doll’s House, we forget that it is a play. I found myself into the play because it goes chronologically like TV serials. However, in Death of Salesman, there are flashbacks. That is, Willy lost himself in his memories and the scene immediately turned to past. It was hard to follow while reading it. The other difference is related to the importance in the plays. For example, while in A Doll’s House, presenting and solving the problem was important, expressing feelings, sorrows or hopes was the important thing in Death of Salesman.


  •             One of the lies in the play is about eating macaroons. Can these macaroons be a sign of something ? I think they can be some taboos which were related to woman’s rights. Torvald did not want her to have them. I searched on the internet to find out what else these macaroons may represents. I found it can be a symbol of rebellion. I agreed with this statement. It was to be rebellious against her husband.


  •             Everybody could recognize that Torvald called Nora as a little, cute animal. This was very annoying for me because Torvald treats Nora as a father likes his daughter. For example, on page 8, Helmer called Nora: “… the squirrel…my lark…” all the time. Moreover, on the same page, Torvald did an action like a father got angry with his daughter. It was written that “[ He goes up to her and takes her playfully by the ear]”.


  •             Do Nora has any similarity with other characters in the plays which we read during the semester? The answer is yes. I think Nora resembles Jocasta and Linda. They were loyal to their husbands and they loved their husbands so much that these women could do anything no matter what it took. For example, Jocasta and Linda gave up their kids to protect their husbands. Additionally, Nora committed a big crime by imitating her death father’s signature and borrowing money as a woman for her husband. All of these actions were only for their husbands.


  • Through the play, Nora was changing in terms of her character and her thought. In the first act, Nora was acting childishly and believed that the law might forgive her for her crime which was about imitating the signature and borrowing money. Also, she thought when Torvald learned the truth; he would pay Nora’s debt money. She said : “ If my husband gets to know about it, he will of course pay you off at once …” on page 26. In the second act, Nora used Dr. Rank’s love for her own benefits. She asked him to keep Torvald in the room while she was dealing with Krogstad. Although Nora told Dr. Rank about her past memory which was to love her father and her servants in two different ways (One of love which she had for her servants was because of their talking. Nora’s love for Dr. Rank looked like this.), Dr. Rank did not care and helped her.  In the final act, Nora turned to an adult and she gave up her childish behaviors. After Torvald captured Krogstad’ letter, Nora realized Torvald was not her husband she had known for years.On page 63, Torvald said: “ You have destroyed my whole happiness. You have ruined my future…”  She did not expect this reaction from her husband. While leaving from her husband, she said she did not believe in miracles anymore. I mean, she opened her eyes now. Therefore, I concluded that Nora changed totally.


  •             Briefly, I wanted to see differences between Nora and Linden. Therefore, I wrote their similar features on a piece of paper. I found that Nora was more energetic than Linden. As I mentioned before, Nora, like a kid, did some actions without thinking about their consequences. However, Linden was more thoughtful and believed that a marriage should have honesty. Also at the end of the play, their roles changed. Nora destroyed her marriage while Linden was finding her happiness with Krogstad.


  •             When I finished to read the play at first, I thought the end was a bit disappointing from the point of Torvald’s view . After Nora decided to leave her husband, she said “.. I take nothing from strangers.” on page 71. Nora spent her years with her husband, but she called her husband now as a stranger. Although Torvald begged her, Nora’s decision was to make herself happy. These thoughts came to my mind just one minute while thinking. Then I strongly agreed with Nora’s decision. Torvald deserved loneliness. In the end, I thought he was selfish. When Helene brought a letter which was from Krogstad and about withdrawing his threat, Torvald became happy because He would not fall into disgrace in front of the society. He did not think Nora saved his life by borrowing money before he took this letter.