‘Poor little Nora.’
(Torvald Helmer speaking to his wife, Nora, in A Doll’s House, page 6)
When this volume, Four Major Plays by the Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen (1828 to 1906), was published by Oxford University Press as a World’s Classic paperback back in 1981, the translator and editor James McFarlane was able to claim that Ibsen was the most frequently performed dramatist in the world after Shakespeare; and that, in the early 20th century, ‘A Doll’s House’ was the world’s most performed play.
What lay behind Ibsen’s extraordinary success and dominance? Between 1850 and 1899 Ibsen wrote a staggering 27 plays but it is the run of 12 issue-led plays he wrote in the last quarter of the century which made him the father of a certain kind of earnest social realism and A Doll’s House is widely considered one of the first and best of his mature plays.
Plot summary
We are in the house of a bourgeois couple with two children. It is just before Christmas (a Christmas tree is delivered and decorated during the play) presumably to highlight bourgeois hypocrisy, because Christmas should be when a happy nuclear family celebrates itself, whereas here, of course, it is used to highlight the secrets and lies hidden behind the respectable facade.
Torvald Helmer and his wife Nora Helmer are happy because he has just been given a new job as manager of the local bank. Torvald treats his wife, Nora, with extraordinary condescension, referring to her as various types of harmless little animal – my little squirrel, my little singing bird, my pretty little pet, my pretty little songbird, the pretty little skylark, little frightened dove – and continually demeaning her. ‘helpless little thing that you are’ etc.
And Nora does indeed come across as an empty-headed noodle, given to casual fibs, pleasing herself without thought of the consequences, thinking that if she means well all will end well. Several characters refer to her as a ‘child’:
- MRS LINDE: Nora! In lots of ways you are still a child. (p.38)
- HELMER: The child must have her way. (p.60)
But the husband’s pet names and these references all go to beg the question, Who has kept Nora silly and childlike? And how much has she gone along with her own infantilisation?
The core of the play, the central storyline, is that some years earlier Torvald was very ill. Doctors advised him to travel to the South for his health (so was it tuberculosis?). Nora’s father was dying at the time and so Nora told Torvald that her father had given her the money necessary to go on an all-expenses-paid holiday to Italy, which they duly did, had a wonderful time, and Torvald made a complete recovery.
But she didn’t get the money from her father. She got a loan from a disgruntled employee at the bank, one Nils Krogstad, signing a document promising to make repayments with interest. During the second of the play’s three acts, this Krogstad comes calling at the Helmer family house and confronts Nora with the need to repay the money. Nora is morbidly concerned that her husband doesn’t find out her secret because she only did it for the best, for his health etc. She has been trying to pay back the loan instalments, continually asking Torvald for extra bits of housekeeping money which she then, mostly, passes on to Krogstad.
She has also been doing some work, ‘a bit of copying’ which she did late at night. In a thought which echoes through the play about the lack of rights and freedom for women, she tells Mrs Linde ‘it was almost like being a man’ (p.16).
What’s impressive about the play is the way all aspects and characters are focused on this central issue, of money and Nora’s honesty. Right at the very start Nora returns from a shopping trip where she’s been buying stuff for Christmas, and this includes her favourite treat to herself, macaroons. But when Torvald enters and they immediately go into pat-name-calling mode, she hides them from him and lies about buying any. The issue of truth and lies is made the dominant theme from the start.
This is all helped by the two other main characters, Mrs Linde and Dr Rank.
Mrs Kristine Linde pays a visit. Nora doesn’t at first recognise her, they were at school together years ago, Kristine married a man and moved away from town. Now she reveals that a) her husband has died b) his business, always shaky, collapsed and so c) she has scrimped and saved. She worked to support her mother and brothers but when her brothers grew up and moved away she felt her life was ‘unspeakable empty’ so now she has come to the capital looking for work. She is paying Nora a visit to ask if she can help.
It’s in Mrs Linde’s first visit that Nora (rashly, on impulse) admits that she didn’t use her father’s money to pay for the trip to Italy, but borrowed it – $1,200, 4,800 kronar. Obviously Mrs Linde wants to know who Nora borrowed this huge sum from but Nora is childishly mysterious about it. So this sets one plotline or theme running, with is Mrs Linde’s attempts to guess who lent Nora the money, which includes speculation that Nora might have had an affair with a man to get it, or wondering if it was off the other main character, Dr Rank.
The plot thickens in two directly connected ways. First, Nora works on Torvald and is delighted when he announces that he can find a role for Mrs Linde at the bank where he’s just been appointed manager. Second, Torvald announces that he is going to sack Krogstad. This is for a number of reasons: one is that they were both at school together which makes Krogstad believe he can act on equal terms with Torvald and refer to him casually in front of the bank’s staff and clients (p.43).
But it’s also because Krogstad, at some unspecified point in the past, was discovered to have committed fraud – forged a document – and ruined his reputation. The bank job was by way of being a second chance. To twist the knife, Krogstad’s wife has died leaving him to look after a (unspecified) number of children.
So these are all the facts which lead up to Krogstad paying Nora a visit and, while her husband is busy off in his study, being quite brutally frank with Nora. Krogstad explains that he needs the job at the bank to support his children, but also, psychologically, because he was kicked out of decent employment once, has clawed his way back ‘in’ and will not let it happen again. Therefore he blackmails Nora. He says he will tell Torvald everything about the loan he made to her and how she lied to Torvald back then (about the source of the money which paid for the Italy trip) and has lied about the money she’s been paying back ever since.
But, again, Ibsen twists the knife and takes the situation to a new level of fraughtness buy having Krogstad tell Nora that he knows she lied to him. Specifically, the IOU he drew up required a (male) guarantor and Nora swore she got her (dying) father to sign it. Krogstad has worked out that it wasn’t Nora’s father who signed it, from the simple fact (now he’s looked into it in detail) that the signature was dated three days after Nora’s father died. Conclusion: Nora faked her father’s signature on a legal document. This is fraud. She could be taken to court and, potentially, sent to prison.
So it’s no longer an issue of taking out a loan behind her husband’s back and then sustained lying about it. That would be enough to wreck Torvald’s trust in, and love for, his little squirrel. It’s now about breaking the law and plunging the whole household into ruin, destroying the family reputation and blighting her children’s lives.
So Krogstad presents his ultimatum: if he’s going to be sacked from the bank (as Torvald intends), if he’s going to be kicked out of respectable employed society for a second time, then he’s going to take Nora with him. He tells Nora that she must work on Torvald to let him keep his job, then stalks out.
With every development you admire how streamlined and focused the play is. Because a few moments after Krogstad leaves, Torvald comes in through the front door, having been out on business, and asks Nora if anyone called. She, anxious to cover everything up, lies and says ‘no-one’. But Torvald says that’s odd because he just saw Krogstad leaving. In other words, he catches her out in a lie and proceeds to deliver a pompous lecture about the wickedness of lying, in the context of Krogstad’s act of forgery and how it spread a web of lies and deceit in his own household.
HELMER: Just think how a man with a thing like that on his conscience will always be having to lie and cheat and dissemble…A fog of lies like that in a household and it spread disease and infection to every part of it. Every breath the children take in that kind of house is reeking with evil germs. (p.33)
So it’s because of Krogstad’s lies and deceit, and his over-familiarity with Torvald, that the latter wants to sack him. Obviously this powerful sermon against lies and forgery, and the ruinous impact it has on a family and on the children raised in a household of lies, has a shattering impact on impressionable, simple Nora, who tries to hide how shaken she is.
When Nora suggests that Krogstad keep his job, Torvald mistakenly thinks that from kind-heartedness, hence his lecture about Krogstad’s moral corruption, and how he could never accept that in an employee of the bank he’s just taken over.
The fifth character is Dr Rank. He visits the Helmer household almost every day, ostensibly to have a chat with his friend Torval but – you’ve guessed it – mostly because, as he reveals in the second act, he is in love with Nora. She, in that Victorian way, says, Oh I wish you hadn’t told me (p.49). Turns out he is unhappily married and has been ill and depressed but, the new thing revealed in this act is that he has had the diagnosis that he’s dying. He only has a short time to live (a month? p.45), hence his declaration of his love for Nora.
(Incidentally, Rank’s illness is repeatedly attributed to his father’s womanising i.e. we are to take it that his father infected his mother with some kind of sexually transmitted infection (syphilis?) which was passed onto him at birth and is now about to kill him. In other words, he is a walking embodiment of bourgeois sexual hypocrisy, pages 38 and 46.)
Back in the main plot, the Krogstad storyline, Nora tries everything she can to prevent Torvald sending Krogstad written notice of his dismissal, but her insistence only makes Torvald more determined to do it, and so he sends it by messenger boy. Then Rank visits and tells Nora he loves her. This scene is placed here to give enough time for Krogstad to receive the letter of dismissal and walk to the Helmer house and ring at the door. Nora sends Rank into Helmer’s study and receives Krogstad.
Furious at being dismissed, Krogstad is now more aggressive. He tells Nora he’s going to extract everything he can from the situation. It’s not even a matter of the money any more. He’s going to hang on to the IOU as a threat to betray her to the authorities, and he has in his pocket a letter to Torvald explaining the whole situation. What he wants now is not just his old job back but a higher ranking job, he wants to become Torvald’s right hand man. He tells Nora she can’t wriggle out of it now, even if she tries… and neither of them say the word but they have implied suicide as Nora’s only way out.
He leaves but not before popping the letter which reveals everything into ‘the letter box’. This is clearly a box attached to the inside of the front door but which, importantly for the plot, Nora cannot access. Only Torvald has the key to it.
Now Mrs Linde had been in a side room all this time because she had popped round on a social visit and had agreed to help Nora try on costumes for a fancy dress party the Helmers have been invited to attend that evening.
Now Nora is looking so flustered that she admits everything to Mrs Linde – that Krogstad is the man she borrowed the money off, but it’s worse than that, how she forged a signature on a document, how he’s blackmailing her, and how everything is described in the letter he’s just dropped in the (inaccessible) letter box.
Quickly sizing up the situation, Mrs Linde says the only solution is for Krogstad to be called to return and request the letter back from Torvald unread. To carry out this desperate plan, Mrs Linde asks Nora for Krogstad’s address (it’s on a card K gave her) and quickly hurries off to fetch him.
Torvald emerges from his study and goes to look at the fateful letter box but Nora desperately distracts him by saying she has to rehearse her dancing, of the tarantella, for that evening, and persuades him into the living room to play the piano for her.
This turns into the most visually and dramatically vivid thing in the play, as Nora takes up the tambourine which is part of her performance and dances faster and faster, more and more wildly, turning into a Maenad. Her aim is to do it so badly that Torvald has to commit to coaching her all evening, but she is taken over by her genuine despair.
When she finally stops Torvald agrees that he needs to coach her and then takes Rank into the dining room for dinner. During the dance Mrs Linde had arrived back at the house and snuck into the living room and, now the men have gone, tells Nora that Krogstad has left town for 24 hours but she left a note begging him to call (round). When she goes to join the men in the dining room, Nora is left onstage alone to ponder out loud that she only has hours until the game is up, her secret is revealed, her life will be over.
In Act 3 is complicated. It’s the night of the party and the Helmers are attending it. Mrs Linde is in their front room (the set of all three acts). Krogstad enters. 1) We learn that they used to be in a relationship but Mrs Linde threw Krogstad over because he was poor, in order to marry a man with a business, because she had a widowed mother and two brothers to support. But now she reveals she always kept her feelings for him and, astonishingly, proposes that they join forces: she can mother his children, they can work together.
2) Krogstad suddenly has an insight and accuses her of buttering him up solely so he will retrieve the incriminating latter and get her friend Nora off the hook. Again, surprisingly, Mrs L says no, she wants Torvald to read the letter, she wants the truth to come out: ‘These two must have the whole thing out between them’ (p.66). She can’t bear the lies and deceit she’s seen in the Helmer household over the past 24 hours.
Radiant with happiness that he is wanted by his old flame, Krogstad agrees to beat a retreat as the sounds of the tarantella (from the party upstairs) signal that the Helmers are about to return. Barely has he slipped out that Torvald and Nora return.
A married couple alone, he is rather drunk and inflamed by watching her dress and so he comes on to her, embraces her and makes it as plain as someone could in a Victorian play, that he wants to have sex. All backed up by the notion that she is his possession and that, as a husband, he has a right to sex. Nora is repelled and wriggles out of his grasp and puts the table between them.
But then Rank knocks on the door and enters. He is in a merry mood and explains to Nora that he had the final lab results today which were conclusive. He asks for a cigar, has it lit and staggers out the front door.
Torvald now opens the famous letter box, in doing so discovering that someone’s been trying to open it with a hairpin. Nora blames the kids but obviously it was her. There’s also some cards Rank slipped into it on the way out with a black cross against his name. Nora and Torvald discuss how this was always going to be the sign that he (Rank) was going to go home to die. And the shadow of death (and decay) casts a pall over Torvald’s lust and so he agrees they can go to their separate bedrooms.
Torvald goes into his study with the letters leaving Nora in an agony of anticipation and then…He emerges waving Krogstad’s letter and demanding to know if it’s true. He delivers a great long diatribe (pages 75 to 76) calls her a feather-brained woman, a hypocrite, a liar, a criminal, not fit to bring up their children. He says she takes after her father who was feckless and irresponsible. He dwells on how his life is ruined, he will be a failure. People will suspect him of being an accomplice. His reputation will be ruined. He decides he must appease Krogstad, the whole thing must be hushed up. They will go on living as man and wife but in private, the children will be brought up by someone else. All they can do is ‘preserve appearances’.
So you are impressed with the totality of his response, the complete collapse of his love for Nora, his insistence on giving in to Krogstad and hushing it up. But during all this he doesn’t notice Nora’s expression as it hardens.
And then…another dramatic development – a messenger brings a note, the maid brings it in, Torvald tears it open wondering if it’s even worse news but…It’s wonderful news: Kroigstad has sent round the IOU with regrets for what he’s done, Torvald rereads and double checks then throws IOU and letter into the fire.
And this triggers a dramatic volte-face in Torvald. He dances with delight and he reverts to the baby pet name language of earlier times. Let’s forget the whole dreadful thing and promises to teach her how not to be so silly in future:
I shall give you all the advice and guidance you need. I wouldn’t be a proper man if I didn’t find a woman doubly attractive for being so obviously helpless. (p.78)
A theme he then goes on to expand:
For a man, there’s something indescribably moving and very satisfying in knowing that he has forgiven his wife – forgiven her, completely and genuinely, from the depths of his heart. It’s as though it made her his property in a double sense: he has, as it were, given her a new life, and she becomes in a way both his wife and at the same time his child That is how you will seem to me after today, helpless, perplexed little thing that you are. Don’t worry your pretty little head about anything, Nora, just be frank and I’ll make all the decisions for you…’ (p.79)
What he doesn’t realise is that everyone one of these lines is setting up The Author’s Message. For his reaction to the whole thing has killed Nora’s love for him stone dead. Her central point (as I read it) is that she was hoping for a miracle to sort the situation, she was hoping that Torvald would take upon himself the scandal of the IOU, he would own it and stand up to Krogstad.
Instead he did the opposite: in an impassioned two-page rant he blamed Nora for everything, roped her father into his accusation, said he’d do whatever it took to appease Krogstad, and the whole thing had to be hushed up.
Nora realises that her husband is not the strong and gallant man she thought he was and that he truly loves himself more than he does Nora.
And so the scales fell from her eyes and Nora is a woman transformed. She suddenly realises her entire marriage has been a lie. She’s been living with a man who doesn’t understand her at all. And she proceeds to deliver a six-page manifesto of feminist freedom. Key points are:
– her father treated her like a doll, called her his baby doll, played with her like a doll
– in her life with Torvald she has been living hand to mouth, performing whatever tricks will keep him happy
‘I have been your doll wife, just as at home I was Daddy’s doll child.’
‘You and Daddy did me a great wrong. It’s your fault that I’ve never made anything of my life.’
– And so she must strike out on her own. She must educate herself. And not receive lessons in how to be a doll from her husband. And that is why she’s leaving him! She needs to understand herself, she needs to understand society, she needs to find out how she fits in and none of this can she do in the Doll’s House which is her marriage.
So she’s leaving. Now. Taking only her own possessions. ‘I don’t want anything of yours, either now or later.’ This is all incredibly sudden and brutally final. In a set piece passage Torvald accuses her of forgetting her ‘most sacred duty, to her husband and children’. And Nora, in a rebuttal which has had feminists leaping to their feet and cheering for nearly a century and a half, replies:
‘I have another duty equally sacred … My duty to myself!‘ (p.82)
Torvald says she is first and foremost a wife and mother but Nora simply rejects this. These are the roles and labels society has imposed on her. In reality ‘I believe that first and foremost I am an individual’.
Torvald tries to threaten her with religion but, again, Nora says all they hear about religion is the boring sermons of Pastor Hansen. religion, also, is something she has to find for herself.
He says she understands nothing of society. Well all the more reason, she replies, to find out for herself.
Nora says she doesn’t love him any more and never will again. Nothing he says or does can heal the breach. She expected him to take the guilt of the IOU upon himself but he let her down, he blamed her and thought only about himself. He is a complete stranger. Someone else can look after the children, they will do a better job anyway.
‘There must be full freedom on both sides’
Torvald takes off her ring and gives it back. Brutally, she says he may never write to her. He says can’t he even … but she says No before he can even finish the sentence. Only by a miracle of miracles but she doesn’t believe in miracles any more.
And she walks out the living room into the hall. Torvald slumps at the table with his head in his hands, then looks around, then has a wild moment of hope but … The play ends with the loud banging shut of the big front door which, in its way, has become a famous theatrical moment.
Comments
1) The play is superbly focused, assembled and streamlined in order to present its central dilemma unfolding with a horrible inexorable logic and then erupting in the powerful final set-piece speech from Nora. It moves from scene to scene with a grim relentlessness which distantly evokes the unyielding logic of the Greek tragedies. Initially I wasn’t sure I liked that. One of the appeal of novels is their scope for digression, or for the way completely new characters and storylines can just be added to give a new dimension, surprise and variety. Here everything is as focused as a German car design, sleek and immaculately assembled, making you feel horribly trapped and mesmerised.
2) In the same way, I didn’t, initially, warm to the very obvious prominence of the issues. Right from the start when Nora lies to Torvald about buying the macaroons, when he bombards her with animal pet names, when she plays up to him and insists that he knows best and only he can teach her (‘Oh, everything you do is right,’ p.69) etc, it feels like you’re being hit round the head with a male author’s version of Victorian feminism, with the issue of The New Woman, with the legal and cultural oppression of women, the babying and infantilisation of women, the tyranny of the patriarchy. It feels very manipulative the way all the lines of oppression converge on poor Nora who is not capable of bearing the burden.
3) But then, in the final ten pages, it stopped being a drama and became a manifesto, a piece of agit prop worthy of Brecht. Up till then I found it a bit too calculating to move me. But the blistering denouement of the final pages, as Nora makes her staggeringly unforgiving declaration of independence, blows away any reservations I had. It’s a phenomenal tour de force. You can see how it must have been vastly controversial at the time, and has provided a rallying cry to women readers and audiences ever since. Incredibly powerful and unforgiving, of Nora’s husband, of all men.
Credit
Four Major Plays by Henrik Ibsen, translated by James MacFarlane and Jens Arup, was published by Oxford University Press as a World’s Classic paperback in 1981.
Related links
Ibsen reviews
- The Doll’s House (1879)
- Ghosts (1881)
- An Enemy of the People (1882)
- The Wild Duck (1884)
- Rosmersholm (1886)
- Hedda Gabler (1890)
- The Master Builder (1892)
