National University of Study And Research in Law

Book Review of:A Dolls House by Henrik Ibsen

Submitted by:Submitted by:-

Mr. Siddhant Kumar

Name of the author:Henrik Ibsen.

Ms. Akshaya Dubey

National University of Study and Research in Law

Title of the book:A Dolls House.
Publisher of the book:Dover Publications.
Place of premiere:Royal Theatre, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Year of premiere:21st December 1879.
Summary:Its Christmas time and Nora is eagerly getting ready for the holidays with her husband,
Torvald, their children, and their friend Dr. Rank when her old friend, Christine, shows up in
town. Christine is recently widowed and is looking for work. Nora, who appears flighty and
silly at first, informs Christine that she saved her husbands life when they were first married
by taking a loan from, essentially, a loan shark to pay for them to take a trip to Italy. He
remains unaware of both the loan she is working on repaying and the fact that his life was
ever in danger. Unfortunately, things come to a head when the man who loaned her the
money, Krogstad, threatens to reveal all to her husband.
Did you like it ?
Yes I liked the plat because this three act play is regarded as possibly the first ever feminist
play, so I knew I had to read it. I was naturally curious as to what feminist issues the play
would address. Although its difficult to pin down exactly what it is addressing, the content
and the title point toward women being treated as playthings, as mens own versions of dolls
to make do whatever they wish in their perfectly-imagined household.
The three acts are all written so that they may remain in one room. This is convenient for the
actors, of course, but I also personally enjoy seeing a story unfold all in one room. It takes
skill to make that happen, and it makes the whole story feel more personal and urgent.

2 | Page

National University of Study and Research in Law

At first I was annoyed by how Nora allows Torvald to speak to her, addressing her as his
little squirrel and songbird, as well as making it evident he doesnt think she has a
capable brain in her skull. He is painfully selfish, apparently viewing her entire existence as
only for him. Of course, this is all part of the set-up for the ending, and makes the ending
surprisingly enjoyable.
It is a short read, but the play itself takes about three hours to perform, making it an excellent
length. The dialogue and mystery of the debt are intriguing enough to hold ones attention, as
well as not suffering too much from older English dialects. This may partly be because it is
translated from Norwegian of course, but still.
There is one element of the ending that I find confusing, and Im not entirely certain if Im
supposed to be confused or not. This combined with some of the more annoying aspects of
the first act prevent me from loving the play, but it is still highly likeable.
I recommend this 1879 three-act play to those interested in older versions of the theater, as
well as those interested in feminism. It is not only entertaining, but leads one to consider
both gender and marriage roles.
Favourite character:My favourite character is Christine Linde because she is Nora Helmer's
contemporary and she serves as a direct comparison with Ibsen's heroine.
Also by recounting how she denied her rights to love and selfdetermination by marrying for financial security, Christine foreshadows
how Nora will confront a bitter future after learning that her marriage is
based on deception. Christine act of rebuilding her life with Krogstad can
be accepted as a note of hope in Nora's case.
Theme:The awakening of a middle-class wife and mother.
Conclusion:Ibsen's play ends with Nora deciding to break up her marriage, leave her
husband and children, and go off on her own. She hopes to develop an
3 | Page

National University of Study and Research in Law

identity of her own. This decision is the surprising culmination of Nora's
conflicts, both internal and external.
Over the course of the play Nora faces challenges to her honesty, her
willingness to face up to her own actions (moral, immoral, loving and
criminal), and, finally, challenges to her sense of self. The breaking point
for Nora comes when Torvald fails to do the "miraculous thing" that she
expects of him.
When she tells her husband about Krogstad and the loan, Nora expects
that Torvald will offer to take the blame himself. She expects him to be
both noble and loving. If he were to act in this way, Nora's view of her
marriage would be reinforced and she would even be personally
redeemed.
Torvald does not act in this way. To the contrary, Torvald berates Nora and
shouts at her about how she has ruined him. It is this behavior from her
husband that opens Nora's eyes to the truth of her marriage and forces
her to face the difficult truths that A) Torvald has no respect for her and B)
she has no identity of her own.
Her problem is that she is totally dependent upon her husband for all her
needs; or she deceives herself into thinking so until the end of the play.
Nora attributes this fact of her character to the treatment she has
received from both her husband and her father.
Nora's personal crisis leads to a major decision for her future and for the
future of her family. She decides to leave her husband and children.
Torvald tries to convince Nora that he now understands how he should
treat her. He tries to convince her to stay, but she is adamant about
leaving. Her decision to leave is a daring one that indicates the
seriousness of Nora's desire to find and create her own identity.

4 | Page