A Doll House By Henrik Ibsen

A “Dolled-Up” World
In everyday life, we are bombarded with information whether we are aware of it or not. By indulging in our senses, we are unconsciously processing data and responding appropriately to our environment. The nature of our environment is also known as society. As humans, we biologically crave connection with one another. It is the reason why we seek intimacy and reproduce, and why we socialize. Our numbers grow to create a social group also known as a society. Everything we see or do is shaped by our interactions, and our interactions happen socially. I am going to argue that playwright Henrik Ibsen was socially influenced by the 19th century feminist movement in Europe to write A Doll’s House. His work is socially produced

First, the dramatic text is socially produced because it was inspired by women's lack of political rights in the 19th century. In the past, Europe was mainly a male-dominant society. Males worked a fulltime job while females were house-bound. A Doll’s House quite clearly reflects this in the way that the husband, Torvald, holds a job as a bank manager while his wife, Nora, has duties stuck to the maintenance of the household. In this period, women were expected to obey commands from their spouse; we see this when Torvald asserts his male dominance and commands to Nora, “I won’t allow it! I forbid you!” (Ibsen 67). In the end, when she realized she was used like a “doll” by Torvald (as all wives were to their husbands at the time), she defiantly replies, “There is no use forbidding me…”. The

The controversial ending of the play caused an uproar of critics, stating that Nora’s transformation from a naïve child in acts 1 and 2 to a cold feminist in act 3 is far-fetched and unrealistic. Some even argue that the prideful slam of the door at the end is not unlike a child throwing a tantrum. It was actually meant to be comedic and “…leave us laughing heartily, for there is no doubt that she will return home…” (Weigand, 68). Norwegian scholar Else Hest states, “The charming ‘lark’ could never have become the ‘newly fledged feminist’…it is the childish, ecstatic broken-hearted Nora who makes A Doll House immortal; the other one, the unfeeling women of act 3 who coldly analyzes the flaws in her marriage, is psychologically unconvincing and wholly unsympathetic.” (28). In the 19th century, much of the European audience did not appreciate the way marriage was being portrayed in the play, namely, the male critics. They depicted the validation of her reason to leave her family for the sake of her own wellbeing. The controversy had such a large influence on his work that Ibsen was prodded to write an alternative ending, thinking not only would it be more favorited at the box office but also gain approval among people. Ibsen did write an alternative ending in which, instead of Nora leaving, she collapses in front of the children’s