# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Henrik Ibsen's "A Doll's House": An Illustration of Symbolism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An essay on the symbolism in Henrik Ibsen's A DOLL'S HOUSE.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why A Doll's House is More Relevant  Than Ever 

# data[].attributes.subject
Why A Doll's House is More Relevant  Than Ever 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
hen, next Wednesday evening, Hattie Morahan picks up an armful of Christmas shopping and steps on stage to open a run of Ibsen's A Doll's House, it will be for the third time in just over a year. Morahan first starred as Nora, the 1870s Norwegian wife and mother who realises her life is a sham, at the Young Vic last July, but such is the production's popularity that this is its second revival. Moreover, two other, brand new productions have been seen in recent months: in May an adaptation by Bryony Lavery received rave reviews at the Royal Exchange in Manchester, and in April Zinnie Harris's version, set in Edwardian London and first seen at the Donmar Warehouse in London with Gillian Anderson in the lead role, was staged by the National Theatre of Scotland in Edinburgh.

Three such high-profile productions in the space of a few months is unusual. Morahan has already won the Evening Standard and Critics' Circle awards for her performance and was unlucky to miss out to Helen Mirren at the Oliviers. But the combination of the play's brisk and thriller-like plotting, and the sense shared by everyone involved that the play still speaks to audiences in ways that feel fresh and interesting, means there is no fear of overkill.

In fact, Morahan, speaking to me just before Thursday's dress rehearsal, says she feels "liberated" to be occupying the role again, while director Carrie Cracknell says that even the last few days of rehearsals have thrown up new insights into Ibsen's endlessly complex characters. "There is something timeless about it," Morahan says, "which is what's so shocking. You try to keep it in its box of 19th-century Scandinavia, but the things Ibsen writes mean it ceases to be about a particular milieu and becomes about marriage (or partnership) and money. These are universal anxieties, and it seems from talking to people that it resonates in the most visceral way, especially if they are or have been in a difficult relationship. Someone said to me the other night, 'That's the play that broke my parents' marriage up.' It shines a very harsh light on the messy heart of relationships, and how difficult it can be to be honest with another human being even if you love them."

The play, hugely controversial when first published and performed in Copenhagen in 1879, is about the unravelling of a family. Nora and Torvald Helmer believe they are happily married and on the brink of a blissful new phase of life: Torvald has been promoted to bank manager and their money worries are over. But Nora has a secret debt, incurred with good intentions and a forged signature, and with her husband's new power comes the threat of blackmail.

Over three acts the illusion of bourgeois contentment unravels, and the play culminates in a spectacular scene between the couple as Nora's lie is exposed and Torvald first blames, then forgives her - and is finally abandoned as Nora recognises the truth of her situation. She accuses her husband, and her father before him, of having used her as a doll, and declares herself unfit to be a wife or mother until she has learned to be herself. Ibsen's final stage direction, of the door closing behind her, is one of the most famous ever written.

Unsurprisingly, feminist contemporaries of Ibsen welcomed the play, although, as theatre critic Caroline McGinn points out, when he was invited to speak at a women's congress, he told them he wasn't a feminist himself. The first German production notoriously altered the ending so that Nora did not leave home, when leading woman Hedwig Niemann-Raabe refused to act the part as written, an amendment Ibsen later described as "a barbaric outrage". In the century and more since, the play and the role of Nora have taken on iconic status; Unesco's Memory of the World register calls Nora "a symbol throughout the world, for women fighting for liberation and equality".

David Sturzaker and Cush Jumbo as Nora Helmer in A Doll's House at the Royal Exchange in Manchester. Photograph: Jonathan Keenan

She is also a symbol for female actors, both of what is possible and of how much they still have to fight for, when most plays and films still feature more male than female characters and work famously dries up for older women unless they are among a lucky handful of national treasures. Cush Jumbo, star of the Royal Exchange's production, says "it's a role a lot of actresses have on their list - if they have a wish list - because it's a very challenging part. It's Ibsen's Rosalind [the heroine of Shakespeare's As You Like It], I suppose. You never leave the stage and the journey she goes on is epic."

"I would compare it to Hamlet," says Morahan, whose interpretation has been described as a career-changing breakthrough - in the way that Hamlet and now Iago have been for her exact contemporary Rory Kinnear (both are 35). Janet McTeer experienced a similar effect two decades ago when her tempestuous, 6ft Nora, deeply in love with her husband and completely broken by his betrayal, won plaudits in London and then on Broadway, where the New York Times theatre critic Ben Brantley called McTeer's "the single most compelling performance I have ever seen".

McTeer's take on the play was to sweep away some of the feminist baggage it carried - it doesn't work for Torvald's "sweet little skylark" to suddenly turn into Emily Pankhurst, she decided - and to treat it as the story not of a woman, but of a marriage. Anthony Page, who directed, says "she was very unexpected casting, being tall and strong-looking, but it heightened the idiocy of the false identity she was living under. She had a wonderful way of playing it very naturalistically, and she and Owen Teale [as Torvald] were playing off each other. Sometimes it got a bit out of hand. They were throwing chairs at each other, which had to be stopped, but they were remarkable."

But it is hard to ignore the play's strong feminist resonances in a culture where it is blindingly obvious that any woman who puts herself in the public eye will become a target for abuse. Some complain that social media have given misogynists - such as those who have been in the news this week after threatening the MP Stella Creasy, or sending death threats to female journalists - a platform they don't deserve. Others argue they have simply revealed a woman-hating streak that has always been with us. Either way, it seems difficult to deny that virulent prejudice against women and the pressure on them to behave in certain ways still exist. Ibsen himself wrote in a note on his work-in-progress that women can't be themselves in an "exclusively male society, with laws made by men and with prosecutors and judges who assess feminine conduct from a masculine standpoint" - which felt startlingly pertinent when I read it shortly after learning of the male prosecutor and judge who this week labelled a 13-year-old child a sexual predator and suspended the prison sentence of the 41-year-old man convicted of abusing her.

Which is why some of the current generation of women acting, directing and adapting A Doll's House have sought to reassert its feminist credentials. Director Carrie Cracknell made a short film that imagined Nora as an overstretched modern mother, her life a nightmare of spilled porridge, missed appointments and hurriedly applied makeup. She says working on the play made her acutely aware of the ideas about gender that shaped her parenting of her two young children. "We live in a culture in which the way we represent women is becoming narrower. I think we have a generation of women growing up who understand that power is linked to how we look."

But all those I spoke to agree that the central dilemma the play presents, of how to be yourself and true to yourself, while being married and being a parent, is not exclusive to women. "In a sense," says Caroline McGinn, "Nora's famous dramatic exit [leaving home and children to work and pursue self-fulfilment] is something many parents do five days a week."

And perhaps this is the play's most radical aspect: that it presents a woman's dilemma as a human dilemma, relevant to both sexes, when so often women's stories are treated as a special subject of concern only to women (evidence of which can be seen everywhere in culture, from the small number of men who read books by and about women to the girl-heavy audience for the RSC's smash-hit musical Matilda, when there is no equivalent gender bias at Charlie and the Chocolate Factory down the road).

"I feel really strongly that we still obsess around male protagonists," Cracknell says. "There's a thousands-of-years-long legacy of storytelling in which men have been the protagonists - we go back to telling their stories over and over." McGinn says A Doll's House remains thrilling as a critic because "you go to new plays all the time where the ratio of men to women is 80/20".

Jumbo, who is currently starring in her own play about the singer Josephine Baker at the Bush Theatre in London, also acted in Phyllida Lloyd's all-female production of Julius Caesar earlier this year and found "it opened people's minds to the idea that it's not that there aren't any roles for us, it's that plays aren't produced in that way. Quite a lot of the time you are the minority sex in a cast, because most stories that are told are male-driven. So it's a case of telling more women-driven stories, or being open to being casting things in different ways."

Or, as Zinnie Harris puts it: "Nora's departure started a journey, and it's incumbent on us to keep going."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen is more relevant than ever

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Three major productions in just over a year, one to be revived for the second time next week - why is this play about a Norwegian housewife so enduringly popular? asks Susanna Rustin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Academia.edu is a platform for academics to share research papers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
is a famous and controversial play by Henrik Ibsen. Here are a few quotes from A Doll's House.

"Is that my little lark, twittering out there?...When did my squirrel get home?"
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"It's a sweet little bird, but it gets through a terrible amount of money. You wouldn't believe how much it costs a man when he's got a little song-bird like you!"
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"Yes - some day, perhaps, after many years, when I am no longer as pretty as I am now. Don't laugh at me! I mean, of course, when Torvald is no longer as devoted to me as he is now; when my dancing and dressing-up and reciting have palled on him then it may be a good thing to have something in reserve."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"Still it was really tremendous fun sitting there working and earning money. It was almost like being a man."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"I should just love to say - 'Well, I'm damned!"
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"Hasn't a daughter the right to protect her dying father from worry and anxiety? Hasn't a wife the right to save her husband's life? I don't know much about the law, but I'm quite certain that it must say somewhere that things like that are allowed."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"Many a man can save himself if he admits he's done wrong and takes his punishment."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act I

"An atmosphere of lies like that infects and poisons the whole life of a home. In a house like that, every breath that the children take is filled with the germs of evil."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"Almost everyone who has gone to the bad early in life has had a deceitful mother."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"To be able to be free from care, quite free from care; to be able to play and romp with the children; to be able to keep the house beautifully and have everything just as Torvald likes it!"
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1

"Your squirrel would run about and do all her tricks if you would be nice, and do as she wants ... Your skylark would chirp about in every room, with her song rising and falling."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 2

"It is no use lying to one's self."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 2

"A wonderful thing is going to happen!"
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 2

"Nora, darling, you're dancing as if your life depended on it!"
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 2

"When I lost you, it was as if all the solid ground went from under my feet. Look at me now-I am a shipwrecked man clinging to a bit of wreckage."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"When you've sold yourself once for the sake of others, you don't do it a second time."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"Someone to work for and live for - a home to bring comfort into. That I will do, indeed."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"Why shouldn't I look at my dearest treasure? - at all the beauty that is mine, all my very own."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"One can't have anything in this life without paying for it."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"At the next fancy-dress ball I shall be invisible. There is a big black hat - have you never heard of hats that make you invisible? If you put one on, no one can see you."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3.

"Do you know, Nora, I have often wished that you might be threatened by some great danger, so that I might risk my life's blood, and everything, for your sake."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"The black, cold, icy water. Down and down, without end - if it would only end."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"From this moment happiness is not the question; all that concerns us is to save the remains, the fragments, the appearance."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"I have existed merely to perform tricks for you, Torvald. But you would have it so. You and papa have committed a great sin against me. It is your fault that I have made nothing of my life. Our home has been nothing but a playroom. I have been your doll-wife, just as at home I was papa's doll-child; and here the children have been my dolls. I thought it great fun when you played with me, just as they thought it great fun when I played with them. That is what our marriage has been, Torvald."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"If I'm ever to reach any understanding of myself and the things around me, I must learn to stand alone. That's why I can't stay here with you any longer."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"I have another duty equally sacred ... My duty to myself."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"That I don't believe any more. I believe that first and foremost I am an individual, just as you are."
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 3

"You don't talk or think like the man I could bind myself to. When your first panic was over - not about what threatened me, but about what might happen to you - and when there was no more danger, then, as far as you were concerned, it was just as if nothing had happened at all. I was simply your little songbird, your doll, and from now on you would handle it more gently than ever because it was so delicate and fragile. At that moment, Torvald, I realized that for eight years I'd been living her with a strange man and that I'd borne him three children. Oh, I can't bear to think of it - I could tear myself to little pieces!"
- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Famous Quotes From Ibsen's Controversial Classic, 'A Doll's House'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
is a famous and controversial play by Henrik Ibsen. Here are a few quotes from A Doll's House. "Is that my little lark, twittering out there?...When did my squirrel get home?"- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1 "There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt."- Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House, Act 1 "It's a sweet little bird, but it gets through a terrible amount of money.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Developments in drama: Naturalism and realism from Crossref-it.info

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Russian playwrights followed the lead of other European writers in producing plays that took the everyday lives of the middle-class and the poor as subject matter for serious realistic dramas, while the first serious steps to codify realism in acting were made by Konstantin Stanislavsky for his productions at the Moscow Art Theatre.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the most complex characters of 19th-century drama, Nora Helmer prances about in the first act, behaves desperately in the second, and gains a stark sense of reality during the finale of Henrik Ibsen's " A Doll's House".

In the beginning, Nora exhibits many childish qualities. The audience first sees her when she returns from a seemingly extravagant Christmas shopping excursion. She eats a few desserts which she has secretly purchased.

When her condescending husband, Torvald Helmer, asks if she has been sneaking macaroons, she denies it wholeheartedly. With this minor act of deception, the audience learns that Nora is quite capable of lying.

She is most child-like when she interacts with her husband. She behaves playfully yet obediently in his presence, always coaxing favors from him instead of communicating as equals. Torvald gently chides Nora throughout the play, and Nora good-naturedly responds to his critics as though she were some loyal pet.

Nora Helmer's Clever Side

However, Nora has been leading a double life. She has not been thoughtlessly spending their money. Rather, she has been scrimping and saving to pay off a secret debt. Years ago, when her husband became ill, Nora forged her father's signature to receive a loan to save Torvald's life. The fact that she never told Torvald about this arrangement reveals several aspects of her character.

For one, the audience no longer sees Nora as the sheltered, care-free wife of an attorney. She knows what it means to struggle and take risks. In addition, the act of concealing the ill-gotten loan signifies Nora's independent streak. She is proud of the sacrifice she has made. Although she says nothing to Torvald, she brags about her actions with her old friend, Mrs. Linde, the first chance she gets.

Basically, she believes that her husband would undergo just as many hardships, if not more, for her sake. However, her perception of her husband's devotion is quite misplaced.

Desperation Sets In

When the disgruntled Nils Krogstad threatens to reveal the truth about her forgery, Nora realizes that she has potentially scandalized Torvald Helmer's good name. She begins to question her own morality, something she has never done before. Did she do something wrong? Were her actions appropriate, under the circumstances? Will the courts convict her? Is she an improper wife? Is she a terrible mother?

Nora contemplates suicide in order to eliminate the dishonor she has wrought upon her family. She also hopes to prevent Torvald from sacrificing himself and going to prison in order to save her from persecution. Yet, it remains debatable as to whether or not she would truly follow through and jump into the icy river. Krogstad doubts her ability. Also, during the climactic scene in Act Three, Nora seems to stall before running out into the night to end her life. Torvald stops her all too easily, perhaps because she knows that, deep down, she wants to be saved.

Nora Helmer's Transformation

Nora's epiphany occurs when the truth is finally revealed.

As Torvald unleashes his disgust towards Nora and her crime of forgery, the protagonist realizes that her husband is a very different person than she once believed. Torvald has no intention of taking the blame for Nora's crime. She thought for certain that he would selflessly give up everything for her. When he fails to do this, she accepts the fact that their marriage has been an illusion. Their false devotion has been merely play acting. She has been his "child-wife" and his "doll." The monologue in which she calmly confronts Torvald serves as one of Ibsen's finest literary moments.

The Controversial Ending of "A Doll's House"

Since the premiere of Ibsen's "A Doll's House", much has been discussed regarding the final controversial scene. Why does Nora leave not only Torvald but her children as well?

Many critics and theater-goers questioned the morality of the play's resolution. In fact, some productions in Germany refused to produce the original ending. Ibsen acquiesced and grudgingly wrote an alternate ending in which Nora breaks down and cries, deciding to stay, but only for her children's sake.

Some argue that Nora leaves her home purely because she is selfish. She does not want to forgive Torvald. She would rather start another life than try to fix her existing one. Or perhaps she feels that Torvald was right, that she is a child who knows nothing of the world. Since she knows so little about herself or society, she feels that she is an inadequate mother and wife. She leaves the children because she feels it is for their benefit, painful as it may be to her.

Nora Helmer's last words are hopeful, yet her final action is less optimistic. She leaves Torvald explaining that there is a slight chance they could become man and wife once again, but only if a "Miracle of miracles" occurred. This gives Torvald a brief ray of hope. However, just as he repeats Nora's notion of miracles, his wife exits and slams the door, symbolizing the finality of their relationship.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What to Know About Nora Helmer, the Protagonist of "A Doll's House"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the most complex characters of 19th-century drama, Nora Helmer prances about in the first act, behaves desperately in the second, and gains a stark sense of reality during the finale of Henrik Ibsen's " A Doll's House". In the beginning, Nora exhibits many childish qualities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Realism and Naturalism Theatre Conventions 

# data[].attributes.subject
Realism and Naturalism Theatre Conventions 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the more confusing aspects of theatre history and performance styles for teachers and students is the differences between realism and naturalism.

The two schools of thought and subsequent movements in the theatre were distinct and separate, though blurred with historical time lines and similarities in style. As a result, the move towards a more authentic form of drama on the stage in the mid to late 19th century is often considered one period. If realism and naturalism in the theatre were two movements, which one came first? Well, that depends on who you read. One thing is for sure though; the over-the-top melodramas full of spectacle in the early to mid-19th century were to be no more.

In terms of style, the words realism and naturalism are frustratingly used interchangeably to mean the same, yet they are not. They are similar, yes, but have many differences. Some scholars refer to Stanislavski's system as the premise for naturalistic acting, while others refer to this as a system for realistic acting. Naturalistic acting in naturalistic dramas is different to realistic acting in realistic plays. They have different demands on the actor with characterisation, the designers with sets, properties and costumes, and the subject matter often differs, too.

Realism

characters are believable, everyday types

costumes are authentic

the realist movement in the theatre and subsequent performance style have greatly influenced 20th century theatre and cinema and its effects are still being felt today

triggered by Stanislavski's system of realistic acting at the turn of the 20th century, America grabbed hold of its own brand of this performance style (American realism) and acting (method acting) in the 1930s, 40s and 50s (The Group Theatre, The Actors Studio)

stage settings (locations) and props are often indoors and believable

the 'box set' is normally used for realistic dramas on stage, consisting of three walls and an invisible 'fourth wall' facing the audience

settings for realistic plays are often bland (deliberately ordinary), dialogue is not heightened for effect, but that of everyday speech (vernacular)

the drama is typically psychologically driven, where the plot is secondary and primary focus is placed on the interior lives of characters, their motives, the reactions of others etc.

realistic plays often see the protagonist (main character) rise up against the odds to assert him/herself against an injustice of some kind (eg. Nora in Ibsen's A Doll's House)

realistic dramas quickly gained popularity because the everyday person in the audience could identify with the situations and characters on stage

Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen (A Doll's House, Hedda Gabler) is considered the father of modern realism in the theatre

Naturalism

in terms of style, naturalism is an extreme or heightened form of realism

as a theatrical movement and performance style, naturalism was short-lived

stage time equals real time - eg. three hours in the theatre equals three hours for the characters in the world of the play

costumes, sets and props are historically accurate and very detailed, attempting to offer a photographic reproduction of reality ('slice of life')

as with realism, settings for naturalistic dramas are often bland and ordinary

naturalistic dramas normally follow rules set out by the Greek philosopher Aristotle, known as 'the three unities' (of time, place and action)

the action of the play takes place in a single location over the time frame of a single day

jumps in time and/or place between acts or scenes is not allowed

playwrights were influenced by naturalist manifestos written by French novelist and playwright Emile Zola in the preface to Therese Raquin (1867 novel, 1873 play) and Swedish playwright August Strindberg in the preface to Miss Julie (1888)

naturalism explores the concept of scientific determinism (spawning from Charles Darwin's theory of evolution) - characters in the play are shaped by their circumstances and controlled by external forces such as hereditary or their social and economic environment

often characters in naturalistic plays are considered victims of their own circumstance and this is why they behave in certain ways (they are seen as helpless products of their environment)

characters are often working class/lower class (as opposed to the mostly middle class characters of realistic dramas)

naturalistic plays regularly explore sordid subject matter previously considered taboo on the stage in any serious manner (eg suicide, poverty, prostitution)

Sources

Burton, B., Living Drama 4E

Crawford, J., L., Acting in Person and in Style

Dobson, W., and Neelands, J., Theatre Directions

Styan, J., L., Modern Drama in Theory and Practice 1: Realism and Naturalism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Realism and Naturalism Theatre Conventions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the more confusing aspects of theatre history and performance styles for teachers and students is the differences between realism and naturalism. The two schools of thought and subsequent movements in the theatre were distinct and separate, though blurred with historical time lines and similarities in style. As

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dr. Rank, a minor character in the Ibsen drama "A Doll's House," appears to be an extraneous supporting character. He does not further the plot the same way Krogstad or Mrs. Linde do: Krogstad initiates the conflict by attempting to blackmail Nora Helmer, while Mrs. Linde gives Nora an excuse to leap into the exposition in Act One and tames the heart of the antagonistic Krogstad.

The fact is that Dr. Rank does not have much to do with the play's narrative. On different occasions throughout Henrik Ibsen's play, Dr. Rank visits with Torvald Helmer in his office. He flirts with a married woman. And he is slowly dying of an unnamed illness (he does hint at his disintegrating spine, and most scholars suggest he is plagued with tuberculosis). Even Dr. Rank believes himself to be easily replaceable:

"The thought of having to leave it all...without being able to leave behind even the slightest token of gratitude, hardly a fleeting regret even...nothing but an empty place to be fulfilled by the first person that comes along." (Act Two)

Dr. Rank does add to the somber mood of the play, even if he is not essential to the conflict, climax, or resolution. He chats with the other characters, admiring them, all the while knowing he will never be important to any of them and expresses that.

Many scholars give Dr. Rank a stronger role by seeing him as a symbol of moral corruption within society. However, because of the many sincere aspects of his character, that view is debatable.

Dr. Rank's Relationship With Torvald and Nora

When the Helmers find Dr. Rank's letter that indicates he has gone home to await death, Torvald says:

"His suffering and his loneliness seemed almost to provide a background of ​dark cloud to the sunshine of our lives. Well, perhaps it's all for the best. For him at any rate. And maybe for us as well, Nora. Now there's just the two of us." (Act Three)

It doesn't sound like they will miss him too much. Believe it or not, Torvald is the doctor's closest friend.

When students first read the play, some feel immense sympathy for Dr. Rank. Other students are disgusted by him-they believe that he fits his name, which is defined as "highly offensive, disgusting, vulgar, or indecent."

But does Dr. Rank really fit those negative descriptions? That depends on how the reader interprets Dr. Rank's affection for Nora. He says:

"Nora...Do you think he's the only one who...? Who wouldn't gladly give his life for your sake. I swore to myself you would know before I went. I'll never have a better opportunity. Well, Nora! Now you know. And now you know too that you can confide in me as in nobody else." (Act Two)

One could view this as an honorable love-from-afar, but it is also an uncomfortable situation for Nora. Most actors portray Dr. Rank as soft-spoken and well-meaning-he does not mean to be vulgar but instead confesses his feelings for Nora mainly because he only has a few days left to live.

Sadly, Nora responds to his forwardness by summoning her maid, turning up the lights, stepping away from him, and quickly dismissing the conversation. When Dr. Rank suggests that his love is just as strong as Torvald's, Nora recoils from him. She never again looks to him as a possible solution to her problem. The fact that she would consider suicide before accepting Dr. Rank's endearments speaks volumes about the way the poor doctor is perceived by others.

An Example of Early Realism in Theater

More than any other character in the play, Dr. Rank reflects the dawning of Modern drama. (Consider that Torvald and Krogstad could just as easily appear in a sappy melodrama.) However, Dr. Rank might well fit into one of Anton Chekhov's plays.

Before Ibsen's time, many plays focused on characters facing and solving problems. Then, as plays became more realistic, characters began spending more time being reflective than getting caught up in convoluted plot lines. Dr. Rank, like characters found in the works of Chekhov, Brecht, and other modern dramatists, ponders aloud about his inner misgivings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Who Is the Character of Dr. Rank in Ibsen's "A Doll's House?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Analyze the fascinating nuances of this often overlooked character from Ibsen's masterpiece, "A Doll's House."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Symbolism is literacy device used by prominent playwrights in history of English literature. Keats, Blake, Shelly, O'Neil and Henrik Ibsen used symbolic representation of subject in conventional or unconventional forms. Poet explores mysties through symbolic representation. In this context " Symbolism Manifesto" was written by (Moreas,1986). Furthermore symbolism, Jane Austin's pride and prejudice, T.S Eliot's "The Wast Land" and Ulysses 1992 by James Joyce are the best symbolic works.

Ibsen significantly uses the symbols (symbolism) to represent the identities and ideologies of 19th century. He uses different symbols that relate to not only culture, religion,politics but also that bears the psychological effects indeed. It is unique developed myth of literature that illuminate the hidden facts un utterly. Symbols like door, macron, embroidered dress, tree, and even the title itself is symbolic and influence at the society.

"in theatre image and object, pretense and pretender, sign-vehicle and content, draw usually close"(Bert 1996: 20).

Symbols are the portraits of the illusions and bonds of society, here Ibsen is constructing in form of 'NORA' in A Doll's House. Though Shakespeare plays are beyond to Ibsen age but both uses theatrical symbols even one is Norwegian and other is Englishmen.

IBSEN'S VIEW ABOUT SYMBOLISM

Ibsen himself says'

"to try and give the reader the impression of experiencing a piece of reality"(Ibsen qtd in homer :p.72).

The language, setting and even dress, parties are realistic features shown in symbols. Ibsen portrays the bourgeois features and finedfemininities, ideologies and identities in this drama and believes in the freedom and equality of woman.

Following are the symbols used by the Ibsen

Door's Symbolism

Play open with door in setting, Nora walks towards door is sign of imprisonment of woman of 19th century under the bond of marriage. She seems to be happy but in fact critics peep inside the door and find the femininity (ies) and identities of domesticate woman.

"A room furnished comfortably and tastefully, but not extravagantly. At the back, a door to the right leads to the entrance-hall, an other to the left leads to HELMER:'s study. Between the doors stands a piano. In the middle of the left-hand wall is a door, and beyond it a window. Near the window are a round table, arm-chairs and a small sofa. In the right-hand wall, at the farther end, another door; and on the same side, nearer the footlights, a stove, two easy chairs and a rocking-chair; between the stove and the door, a small table".(Ibsen, A doll' s House: 2)

The whole drama is performed inside the room. That also brings the capitalistic perspective of the society. The door opening is actually view of the domestic situation in patriarchal society we find at the dismissal of the relations again the door is in front of Nora to celebrate freedom as earlier she entered in cage created by men
MACRONS' Symbolism
Ibsen provides non verbal feminists clues as Nora's shawl, macron, tree etc..

"Just now. [Puts the bag of macaroons into her pocket and wipes her mouth.] Come in here, Torvald, and see what I have bought".(Ibsen, A Dolls House:4)

The self independence is governed by Torveld is depicted by Ibsen. Suffrage movement was one of the central reaction against this male monopoly. Woman was not free physically and oppressed psychologically too. That is why Nora is subordinate creature to Helmer. "She shut the door, she continues to laugh, she takes off her things, she takes a bag of macrons out of her pocket and eats one or two"

In the male dominance the issue of identities and femininities is at the verge of collapse and the gradual intensity of this tyranny make persuade to other sex to rebel and snatch the freedom that was got by Nora at the end of play. She transgendered her identity.
CHRISTMAS TREE's Symbolism
Christmas tree is symbolic representation of the Nora's personality. It is decorated as Nora would be on Christmas day and there is a star twinkle top of the tree that represent the hope and ambitions of Nora. The new year that starts from Christmas is symbolic to the feminists movements that give liberty to Nora against the male dominance. Nora is as attractive in multidimensional identity, a mother a daughter , a wife hence she is a pleasing object constructed by Ibsen as religion refers to Christmas.

John Northon argues that,

"the symbols is for the first time, a physical reality on the stage, a mere enough to it suggest actual presence. It is therefore both fact and symbol and from that fusion emerges the closure union of symbolism and reality which makes the play so complexly significant (the wild duck 1884, p.105-06)

SQUIRREL SKYLARK's Symbolism

"Is that my little lark twittering out there"?(Ibsen, A Doll's House:5)

Ibsen uses the animated and in animated choices and refers Nora to innocent bird like skylark. The linguistic choices in symbolic representation are patriarchal in nature has Sapirwhorf hypothesis languages is determined by thought and that thought gives strength to male to manipulate and enjoy the power of language Nora is inhibited in Helmer's house and she is praised by him in metaphoric speech pattern but at the end the same skylark is ready to fly for freedom autonomy
TITLE as Symbolism
The title is in itself a symbolic note describing the femininity and identity of the Victorian society doll is a playful object for everyone and even that is a decoration piece feeling less and emotionless she is a puppet in the hand of Torveld who want to push the strings according to his wish. Nora also apparently functions as commanded doll but in the end of the play writer is succeeded to awake her from subordination and rebel from the male dominance. She is now independent and making her decision according to her will and choice. The last line she uttered is sign of change bringing the equal rights without gender segregation. The whole drama is full with linguistic lexical and symbolic references representing the female of Ibsen's "A Doll's house".
TOYS' Symbolism
"Yes, yes, it will. But come here and let me show you what I have bought. And all so cheap! Look, here is a new suit for Ivar, and a sword; and a horse and a trumpet for Bob; a doll and dolly's bedstead for Emmy,-"(Ibsen, A Doll's House:5)

Toys are the clear picture of thee development of ideology and identity. Nora has bought "a horse and a sword" for her earlier son so that male is initially represented as holder of power and authority while the gifts for Emmy are dolls that is the significant example to build femininity (ies) and masculinity (ies) culturally that is why Emma is gifted by a doll. Ibsen says that a woman of his century is much advanced and womanhood is a socially constructed phenomenon created by men and female writers as symbolism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Symbolism is literacy device used by prominent playwrights in history of English literature. Keats, Blake, Shelly, O'Neil and Henrik Ibsen used symbolic representation of subject in conventional or unconventional forms. Poet explores mysties through symbolic representation. In this context " Symbolism Manifesto" was written by (Moreas,1986).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Of all the characters in Ibsen's classic drama "A Doll's House", Mrs. Kristine Linde serves as the most functional in terms of plot development. It is as though Henrik Ibsen was writing Act One and wondering, "How will I let the audience know the inner thoughts of my protagonist? I know! I'll introduce an old friend, and Nora Helmer can then reveal everything!" Because of her function, any actress playing the role of Mrs. Linde will be doing a great deal of attentive listening.

At times, Mrs. Linde functions as a convenient device for exposition. She enters Act One as an almost forgotten friend, a lonely widow seeking a job from Nora's husband. Nora does not spend much time listening to Mrs. Linde's troubles; rather selfishly, Nora discusses how excited she is about Torvald Helmer's recent success.

Mrs. Linde says to Nora, "You haven't known much trouble or hardship in your own life." Nora tosses her head defiantly and struts to the other side of the room. Then, she launches into a dramatic explanation of all her secret activities (obtaining a loan, saving Torvald's life, paying off her debt).

Mrs. Linde is more than a sounding board; she offers opinions about Nora's questionable actions. She warns Nora of her flirtation with Dr. Rank. She also raises questions about Nora's lengthy speeches.

Changing the Outcome of the Story

In Act Three, Mrs. Linde becomes more pivotal. It turns out that she long ago had a romantic tryst with Nils Krogstad, the man attempting to blackmail Nora. She rekindles their relationship and inspires Krogstad to amend his wicked ways.

It could be argued that this happy coincidence is not terribly realistic. However, Ibsen's third act is not about Nora's conflict with Krogstad. It is about the dismantling of illusions between a husband and wife. Therefore, Mrs. Linde conveniently removes Krogstad from the role of villain.

Yet, she still decides to meddle. She insists that "Helmer must know everything. This unhappy secret must come out!" Even though she has the power to change Krogstad's mind, she uses her influence to make certain that Nora's secret is discovered.

Ideas for Discussion

When teachers discuss Mrs. Linde in class, it is interesting to gauge the students' reactions to Mrs. Linde. Many believe that she should mind her own business, while others feel that a true friend will intervene in the same way Mrs. Linde does.

Despite some of the perfunctory qualities of Mrs. Linde, she does provide a striking thematic contrast. Many view Ibsen's play as an assault on the traditional institution of marriage. Yet, in Act Three Mrs. Linde happily celebrates her return to domesticity:

Mrs. Linde: (Tidies the room a little and gets her hat and coat ready.) How things changes! How things change! Somebody to work for... to live for. A home to bring happiness into. Just let me get down to it.

Notice how, ever the caretaker, she cleans up while daydreaming about her new life as Krogstad's wife. She is ecstatic about her newly revived love. In the end, perhaps Mrs. Kristine Linde balances Nora's impetuous and ultimately independent nature.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How the Character of Mrs. Linde Functions in Ibsen's "A Doll's House"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In "A Doll's House", Mrs. Kristine Linde, Nora's somber, lonely friend, seems like a minor character at first, yet helps to shift the play's conflict.

# data[].attributes.body
A poem that heavily influenced Ibsen's creation of Nora

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
[This Victorian Web version of The Angel in the House is based on the Project Gutenberg e-text, which was produced by David Price (e-mail ccx074@coventry.ac.uk), from the 1891 Cassell & Company edition. GPL created the html, added links, and made corrections in the text after comparing it with other editions.]
The Text of the Poem

Introduction and Prologue

Book I, Canto I. The Cathedral Close

Book I, Canto II. Mary and Mildred

Book I, Canto III. Honoria

Book I, Canto IV. The Morning

Book I, Canto V. The Violets

Book I, Canto VI. The Dean

Book I, Canto VII. Aetna and the Moon

Book I, Canto VIII. Sarum Plain

Book I, Canto IX. The Sahara

Book I, Canto X. Church to Church

Book I, Canto XI. The Dance

Book I, Canto XII. The Abdication

Book II. The Prologue

Book II, Canto I. Accepted

Book II, Canto V. The Course of True Love

Book II, Canto VI. The Country Ball

Book II, Canto VII. Love In Idleness

Book II, Canto VIII. The Queen's Room

Book II, Canto IX. The Love Letters

Book II, Canto X. The Revulsion

Book II, Canto XI. The Koh-I-Noor

Book II, Canto XII. The Friends

Book II, Canto X. The Epitaph

Book II, Canto XI.The Wedding

Book II, Canto XII. Husband and Wife

Book II. Epilogue

Critical Commentary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"The Angel in the House" by Coventry Patmore. Text and Commentart

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This Victorian Web version of The Angel in the House is based on the Project Gutenberg e-text, which was produced by David Price (e-mail ccx074@coventry.ac.uk), from the 1891 Cassell & Company edition. GPL created the html, added links, and made corrections in the text after comparing it with other editions.]

# data[].attributes.body
"coddled subjugation"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I have never forgotten the first time that I saw A Doll's House by Ibsen. I was 22, I had never read the play, and I had no idea of the plot. When, in the last act, the babyish Nora finally realises that her pleasant life is actually one of coddled subjugation, and roars, "I have a duty TO MYSELF!" before walking out on her astonished husband and slamming the door behind her, I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I felt as if I'd had a bucket of ice-water thrown in my face-it was astonishing, invigorating and unforgettable. In my recent novel, Old Baggage, I wrote about a former suffragette, Mattie Simpkin, a woman who has never conformed-a woman who scarcely knows what conformity is-and as I explored Mattie's world, I felt the same blast of energizing joy that Nora's epiphany had given to me.

The novels I've chosen all evoke aspects of that feeling: they all feature women (and in one case a small girl) from other eras who don't do what they're supposed to do-women who have decided to grab the tiller and steer the course of their own lives. Every one of them makes me want to stand up and cheer.

This is an extraordinary book. Lolly, a maiden aunt, has always been dependent: first on her father, then on her brother and his family. She is middle-aged, unremarkable, loved in a low-key way, but also taken for granted. And then, one autumn, Lolly finds that a different life is calling to her; she consolidates her small savings, moves to a cottage in the country, acquires a cat and becomes a witch (yes, you read that last sentence correctly). Hers is not the spell-based magic of Harry Potter's world, but that of a woman finding a subversive and hidden part of herself and glorying in the discovery. All women are witches, says Lolly, even "if they never do anything with their witchcraft, they know it's there-ready!"

Semi-autobiographical, and set at the start of the 1970s, this novel is narrated by nine-year-old Meena, daughter of Punjabi immigrants, and the only non-white child in a working-class village in the industrial English Midlands. She is perceptive and critical, not only of the narrow lives and prejudices of her neighbours, but of the eccentricities of her own, highly-educated parents. Caught between two cultures, and with no one to follow, she squares her shoulders and chooses a route of her own. The author is not just a superb writer, but an actor and comedian, and the book is shot through with her sharp wit.

Jane Carter is a shopgirl in a town in the north of England in the years prior to the First World War. She has no money but she is astute, ambitious, and a fast learner, and she knows her own worth. Defying snobbery and class, she takes a daring leap and opens a dress shop of her own. This is a rags-to-riches story, but rooted completely in real life; Dorothy Whipple wrote eight novels and they are all utterly gripping, her characters presented with extraordinary insight and sympathy, her plots always domestic, but never taking a predictable course. And Jane Carter is the finest of heroines.

Agnis Hamm, known throughout most of the book as The Aunt, is not the main character in this novel, but instead the steady sidekick, the battery that drives the plot. Born into poverty in Newfoundland and suffering an unspeakable childhood, she has carved out a life in which she has made all her own choices, finding both a skilled career and true love. When her adored partner dies, The Aunt decides to return to the place where she spent her childhood, taking her nephew and his broken family with her. She is dry, fierce and magnificent, and is one of my favourite characters in 20th century fiction.

It's 1912, and Carol Kennicott, a city girl bursting with high ideals, marries for love and goes to live in a small town, where the opinions of the inhabitants are as narrow and dusty as the main street. Her brave attempts to introduce tolerance, beauty, and progressive views to the smug middle classes of Gopher Prairie are both funny and painful ("They were staggered to learn that a real tangible person, living in Minnesota, could apparently believe that illegitimate children do not bear any special and guaranteed form of curse, that some poets do not have long hair; and that Jews are not always peddlers or pants-makers"). She is patronized and dismissed and she discovers that there is sometimes cruelty behind the smugness. Only when she leaves and finds independence and a job in the city can she achieve a perspective on the small world she has left behind.

The author was very young when she wrote this novel, and the experiences on which it was based were only just behind her; as part of a female crew of three, and after the briefest of training, she piloted a narrow boat along the wartime canals of England, delivering steel to the Midlands, and bringing coal back to London again. The job was skilled and physically tough, the girls were entirely unsupervised, and they were wholly aware of their extraordinary freedom and independence. Most of their friends were in the forces, being shouted at or fired upon; Emma and her companions were in charge of their own little world. The book has the freshness of an April breeze, full of grit and blossom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ahead of Their Time: A Reading List of Nonconformist Women

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I have never forgotten the first time that I saw A Doll's House by Ibsen. I was 22, I had never read the play, and I had no idea of the plot. When, in the last act, the babyish Nora finally realise...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the two main characters in the play, Torvald is the husband whose "doll's house" is torn apart at the end of the show. His character is far from ideal - but upon seeing a production of Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House, audiences are left with an important question: Should we feel sorry for Torvald Helmer?

At the play's end his wife, Nora Helmer, abandons him, leaving behind her three young children.

She claims that she does not love him. She can no longer be his wife. He begs her to stay, yet Nora denies him, walking off in the middle of the winter night, slamming the door behind her.

When the curtain closes upon a pathetic, defeated husband, some viewers find that Torvald has received his comeuppance. Torvald's demeaning personality and his hypocritical actions justify Nora's harsh decision to leave.

Examining Torvald's Character Flaws

Torvald Helmer possesses many obvious character flaws. For one, he constantly talks down to his wife. Here is a list of his pet names for Nora:

"My little skylark"

"My little squirrel"

"My little singing bird"

"My pretty little pet"

"My little sweet-tooth"

"My poor little Nora"

With every term of endearment, the word "little" is always included. Torvald views himself as the emotional and intellectual superior of the household. To him, Nora is a "child-wife," someone to watch over, to instruct, nurture and censure.

He never considers her an equal partner in the relationship. Of course, their marriage is one typical of 1800s Europe, and Ibsen uses his play to challenge this status quo.

Perhaps Torvald's most dislikeable quality is his blatant hypocrisy. Many times throughout the play, Torvald criticizes the morality of other characters.

He trashes the reputation of Krogstad, one of his lesser employees (and ironically the loan shark that Nora is indebted to). He speculates that Krogstad 's corruption probably started in the home. Torvald believes that if the mother of a household is dishonest, then surely the children will become morally infected. Torvald also complains about Nora's late father. When Torvald learns that Nora has committed forgery, he blames her crime on her father's weak morals.

Yet, for all his self-righteousness, Torvald is a hypocrite. In the beginning of Act Three, after dancing and having a merry time at a holiday party, Torvald tells Nora how much he cares for her. He claims to be absolutely devoted her. He even wishes that some calamity would befall them so that he could demonstrate his steadfast, heroic nature.

Of course, a moment later, that wished-for conflict arises. Torvald finds the letter revealing how Nora has brought scandal and blackmail into his household. Nora is in trouble, but Torvald, the supposedly shining white knight, fails to come to her rescue. Instead, here is what he yells at her:

"Now you have ruined my entire happiness!"

"And it's all the fault of a featherbrained woman!"

"You will not be allowed to bring up the children, I can't trust you with them."

So much for being Nora's dependable knight in shining armor!

Examining Nora's Complicity

To Torvald's credit, Nora is a willing participant in their dysfunctional relationship. She understands that her husband sees her as an innocent, child-like persona, and she struggles to maintain the façade. Nora uses the pet names whenever she tries to persuade her husband: "If a little squirrel were to ask every so nicely?"

Nora also carefully hides her activities from her husband. She puts away her sewing needles and unfinished dress because she knows that her husband does not wish to see a woman toiling away. He wishes to see only the final, beautiful product. In addition, Nora keeps secrets from her husband. She goes behind his back to obtain her ill-gotten loan.

Torvald is too stubborn to ever borrow money, even at the cost of his own life. Essentially, Nora saves Torvald by borrowing the money so that they can travel to Italy until her husband's health improves.

Throughout the play, Torvald is oblivious to his wife's craftiness and her compassion. When he discovers the truth at the end, he is outraged when he should be humbled.

Should We Pity Torvald?

Despite his many flaws, some readers and audience members still feel tremendous sympathy for Torvald. In fact, when the play was first performed in Germany and America, the ending was changed. It was believed by some producers that theater-goers would not want to see a mother walk out on her husband and children. So, in several revised versions, " A Doll's House " ends with Nora reluctantly deciding to stay. However, in the original, classic version, Ibsen does not spare poor Torvald from humiliation.

When Nora calmly says, "We two have a lot to talk about," Torvald learns that Nora will no longer be his doll or "child-wife." He is astounded by her choice. He asks for a chance to reconcile their differences; he even suggests that they live as "brother and sister." Nora refuses. She feels as though Torvald is now a stranger. Desperate, he asks if there is the smallest hope that they might be husband and wife once again.

She responds:

Nora: Both you and I would have to change to the point where... Oh, Torvald, I don't believe in miracles any more.
Torvald: But I will believe. Name it! Change to the point where...?

Nora: Where we could make a real marriage of our lives together. Goodbye!

Then she promptly leaves. Grief-stricken, Torvald hides his face in his hands. In the next moment, he lifts his head up, somewhat hopeful. "The miracle of miracles?" he asks himself. His longing to redeem their marriage seems sincere. So perhaps, despite his hypocrisy, self-righteousness, and his demeaning attitude, the audience may feel sympathy for Torvald as the door slams shut on his tear-stained hopes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What to Know About Torvald Helmer in "A Doll's House" by Henrik Ibsen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the two main characters in the play, Torvald is the husband whose "doll's house" is torn apart at the end of the show. His character is far from ideal - but upon seeing a production of Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House, audiences are left with an important question: Should we feel sorry for Torvald Helmer?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Dolls House to go (Ibsen in 9 minutes)

# data[].attributes.body
Bachelor & Master

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Doll's House is popular for displaying the theme of the collapse of the parental ideal. Nora, at first, idealizes her father. To her, father was the very embodiment of masculinity or a flawless symbol of perfect ideals. As time elapsed, she was jolted into the awakening that her father was not what she had thought.

# data[].attributes.body
Shakespeare's Theatre

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The New Woman was a feminist ideal that emerged in the late nineteenth century and had a profound influence on feminism well into the twentieth century. The term "New Woman" was coined by writer Charles Reade in his novel "A Woman Hater", originally published serially in Blackwood's Magazine and in three volumes in 1877.

# data[].attributes.body
Fin-de-seicle

# data[].attributes.headline
Contemporary Reviews & Critical Writings

# data[].attributes.subject
Contemporary Reviews & Critical Writings

# data[].attributes.body
Catalyst? False Villain?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In melodramas of the 1800s, villains wore black capes and laughed menacingly while they curled their long mustaches. Oftentimes, these sinister men would tie damsels to railroad tracks or threaten to kick old ladies out of their soon-to-be-foreclosed homes.

Although on the diabolic side, Nils Krogstad from " A Doll's House" does not have the same passion for evil as your typical bad guy. He seems ruthless at first but experiences a change of heart early in Act Three. The audience is then left to wonder: is Krogstad a villain? Or is he ultimately a decent guy?

Krogstad the Catalyst

At first, it may seem that Krogstad is the play's main antagonist. After all, Nora Helmer is a happy-go-lucky wife. She's been out Christmas shopping for her lovely children. Her husband is just about to receive a raise and a promotion. Everything is going well for her until Krogstad enters the story.

Then the audience learns that Krogstad, a co-worker of her husband Torvald, has the power to blackmail Nora. She forged the signature of her dead father when she obtained a loan from him, unbeknownst to her husband. Now, Krogstad wants to secure his position at the bank. If Nora fails to prevent Krogstad from being fired, he will reveal her criminal actions and desecrate Torvald's good name.

When Nora is unable to persuade her husband, Krogstad grows angry and impatient. Throughout the first two acts, Krogstad serves as a catalyst. Basically, he initiates the action of the play. He sparks the flames of conflict. With each unpleasant visit to the Helmer residence, Nora's troubles escalate. In fact, she even contemplates suicide as a means of escaping her woes. Krogstad senses her plan and counters it in Act Two:

Krogstad: So if you are thinking of trying any desperate measures... if you happen to be thinking of running away...
Nora: Which I am!

Krogstad: ...or anything worse...

Nora: How did you know I was thinking of that?!

Krogstad: Most of us think of that, to begin with. I did, too; but I didn't have the courage...

Nora: I haven't either.

Krogstad: So you haven't the courage either, eh? It would also be very stupid.

Criminal on the Rebound?

The more we learn of Krogstad, the more we understand that he shares a great deal with Nora Helmer. First of all, both have committed the crime of forgery. Moreover, their motives were out of a desperate desire to save their loved ones. Also like Nora, Krogstad has contemplated ending his life to eliminate his troubles but was ultimately too scared to follow through.

Despite being labeled as corrupt and "morally sick," Krogstad has been trying to lead a legitimate life. He complains, "For the last 18 months I've gone straight; all the time it's been hard going. I was content to work my way up, step by step." Then he angrily explains to Nora, "Don't forget: it's him who is forcing me off the straight and narrow again, your own husband! That's something I'll never forgive him for." Although at times Krogstad is vicious, his motivation is for his motherless children, thus casting a slightly sympathetic light on his otherwise cruel character.

A Sudden Change of Heart

One of the surprises of this play is that Krogstad is not really the central antagonist. In the end, that prestige belongs to Torvald Helmer. So, how does this transition occur?

Near the beginning of Act Three, Krogstad has an earnest conversation with his lost love, the widow Mrs. Linde. They reconcile, and once their romance (or at least their amiable feelings) are reignited, Krogstad no longer wants to deal with blackmail and extortion. He is a changed man!

He asks Mrs. Linde if he should tear up the revealing letter that was intended for Torvald's eyes. Surprisingly, Mrs. Linde decides that he should leave it in the mailbox so that Nora and Torvald can finally have an honest discussion about things. He agrees to this, but minutes later he chooses to drop off a second letter explaining that their secret is safe and that the IOU is theirs to dispose of.

Now, is this sudden change of heart realistic? Perhaps the redemptive action is too convenient. Perhaps Krogstad's change does not ring true to human nature. However, Krogstad occasionally lets his compassion shine through his bitterness. So perhaps playwright Henrik Ibsen provides enough hints in the first two acts to convince us that all Krogstad really needed was someone like Mrs. Linde to love and admire him.

In the end, Nora and Torvald's relationship is severed. Yet, Krogstad begins a new life with a woman he believed had left him forever.

Ibsen, Henrik. "A Doll's House." Paperback, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, October 25, 2018.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is a character study of Nils Krosgstad, who can be downright diabolical, in Henrik Ibsen's 19th-century tragedy "A Doll's House".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Struggling with the themes of Henrik Ibsenâ€™s A Doll's House? Weâ€™ve got the quick and easy lowdown on them here.

# data[].attributes.headline
The New Woman in the Victorian Fin de Siecle 

# data[].attributes.subject
The New Woman in the Victorian Fin de Siecle 

# data[].attributes.headline
The Social Significance of the Modern Drama

# data[].attributes.subject
The Social Significance of the Modern Drama

# data[].attributes.body
Emma Goldman

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Torvald Helmer, the male lead in A Doll's House, can be interpreted in several ways. Many readers view him as a domineering, self-righteous control freak. Yet, Torvald can also be seen as a cowardly, misguided but sympathetic husband who fails to live up to his own ideal. In either case, one thing is for certain: He does not understand his wife.

In this scene, Torvald reveals his ignorance. Moments before this monolog he declared he no longer loved his wife because she had brought shame and legal calamity to his good name.

When that conflict suddenly evaporates, Torvald recants all of his hurtful words and expects the marriage to go back to "normal."

Unbeknownst to Torvald, his wife Nora is packing up her things during his speech. As he speaks these lines, he believes he is repairing her wounded feelings. In truth, she has outgrown him and plans to leave their home forever.

Torvald:(Standing at Nora's doorway.) Try and calm yourself, and make your mind easy again, my frightened little singing-bird. Be at rest, and feel secure; I have broad wings to shelter you under. (Walks up and down by the door.) How warm and cozy our home is, Nora. Here is a shelter for you; here I will protect you like a hunted dove that I have saved from a hawk's claws; I will bring peace to your poor beating heart. It will come, little by little, Nora, believe me. Tomorrow morning you will look upon it all quite differently; soon everything will be just as it was before.

Very soon you won't need me to assure you that I have forgiven you; you will yourself feel the certainty that I have done so. Can you suppose I should ever think of such a thing as repudiating you or even reproaching you? You have no idea what a true man's heart is like, Nora. There is something so indescribably sweet and satisfying, to a man, in the knowledge that he has forgiven his wife-forgiven her freely, and with all his heart.

It seems as if that had made her, as it were, doubly his own; he has given her a new life, so to speak, and she is in a way become both wife and child to him.

So you shall be for me after this, my little scared, helpless darling. Have no anxiety about anything, Nora; only be frank and open with me, and I will serve as will and conscience both to you-. What is this? Not gone to bed? Have you changed your things?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Torvald Helmer's Dramatic Monologue from A Doll's House

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Torvald Helmer, the male lead in A Doll's House , can be interpreted in several ways. Many readers view him as a domineering, self-righteous control freak. Yet, Torvald can also be seen as a cowardly, misguided but sympathetic husband who fails to live up to his own ideal.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A DOLL'S HOUSE BY HENRIK IBSEN // ANIMATED BOOK SUMMARY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A summary of Themes in Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House. Learn exactly what happened in this chapter, scene, or section of A Doll's House and what it means. Perfect for acing essays, tests, and quizzes, as well as for writing lesson plans.

# data[].attributes.body
Victorian Web

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

The final two decades of the Victorian era witnessed the beginning of a shift in social attitudes regarding gender relations, which is marked by a steady move away from the pattern of patriarchal male supremacy and female dependence towards the modern pattern of gender equality. One of the manifestations of this movement is the emergence of the New Woman fiction.

The Woman Question

The Woman Question, raised by Mary Wollstonecraft in her pamphlet, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792), influenced the mid- and late-Victorian feminists. In the 1850s, Harriet Martineau continued vigorously the Woman Question debate in her polemical writings. She urged upper-class women to obtain a proper education and profession in order to make themselves financially independent. Charlotte Elizabeth Tonna dealt with the Woman Question in her book The Wrongs of Woman. She condemned women's industrial employment and propagated domestic feminism. Frances Trollope and Elizabeth Gaskell urged upper-class women to become active in the public sphere. Charlotte Brontë and George Eliot criticised social marginalisation of women.

A number of Victorian feminists, including Emily Davies, Frances Power Cobbe, Josephine Butler, Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon and Millicent Garrett Fawcett, revived the Woman Question debate in their campaign for women's rights, including the right to higher education, property, employment and suffrage. The effects of the campaign were positive although gradual and delayed in time. In 1857, the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act permitted women limited divorce, and an act of 1891 denied men conjugal rights to their wives' bodies without their wives' consent. The Married Women's Property Acts of 1870 allowed married women to retain and control their earned income, and in 1882 they gained the right to own and control their property. In 1878, the University of London began to grant B.A. to women and in the next two years the first women colleges were established at Oxford: Lady Margaret Hall and Somerville. In the 1880s and 1890s, the Woman Question became a vital issue in British newspapers and periodicals. Militant female activists (suffragists), writers, artists and educators expressed their polemical views on the condition of women.

The Odd Women

Single women at marriageable age were perceived as a growing social problem in mid- and late-Victorian England. The phenomenon was noticed and described by William Rathbone Greg, who published in 1862 an essay "Why Are Women Redundant?". The author argued with genuine concern that according to statistics "[t]here were, in England and Wales, in 1851, 1,248,00 women in the prime of their life, i.e. between the ages of twenty and forty years, who were unmarried, out of a total number of rather less than 3,000,000." (12). Greg predicted a miserable life of "celibacy, struggle and privation" to those women and, as a remedy, he proposed their massive shipment to the British colonies, where single men supposedly waited for wives.

To transport the half million from where they are redundant to where they are wanted, at an average rate of fifty passengers in each ship, would require 10,000 vessels, or at least 10,000 voyages. Still, as 350,000 emigrants have left our shores in a single year before now, and as we do not need and do not wish to expatriate the whole number at once, or with any great rapidity, the undertaking, though difficult, would seem to be quite possible. [15]

However, Greg signalled a serious obstacle to his plan. The colonies mostly needed marriageable women from the working-class and the lower ranks of the middle class, but the majority of "redundant" women in England who would not find husbands were from the middle- and upper-class. Greg remarked with dismay that an increasing number of young upper-class English women "really and deliberately prefer the unsatisfying pleasures of luxury and splendour to the possible sacrifices of married life." (21)

One cause of female celibacy was that the rate of marriage declined steadily in the second half of the nineteenth century while the age of newly married women was continually rising. Besides, a growing number of educated and liberated women, who were later to be called "New Women", began to question the foundations of paternalistic society and the supposed bliss of the traditional Victorian marriage.

The New Woman

The term "New Woman" was coined by the writer and public speaker Sarah Grand in 1894 (271). It soon became a popular catch-phrase in newspapers and books. The New Woman, a significant cultural icon of the of the fin de siècle, departed from the stereotypical Victorian woman. She was intelligent, educated, emancipated, independent and self-supporting. The New Women were not only middle-class female radicals, but also factory and office workers. As Sally Ledger wrote:

The New Woman was a very fin-de-siecle phenomenon. Contemporary with the new socialism, the new imperialism, the new fiction and the new journalism, she was part of cultural novelties which manifested itself in the 1880s and 1890s. [1]

At the end of the nineteenth century, New Woman ideology began to play a significant part in complex social changes that led to the redefining gender roles, consolidating women's rights, and overcoming masculine supremacy. The discourse on gender relations took place alongside developments in labour relations (increased feminisation of the labour force), divorce legislature, education for women, single motherhood, sanitation and epidemiology as well as female consumer culture. The New Woman soon found advocates among the aesthetes and decadents.

The New Woman, a tempting object of ridicule in the press and popular fiction, was generally middle-class, and New Women included social reformers, popular novelists, suffragists, female students and professional women. The contemporary satirical representations of the New Woman usually pictured her riding a bicycle in bloomers and smoking a cigarette. Lyn Pykett has observed the ambivalent representations of the New Woman in the late-Victorian discourse:

The New Woman was by turns: a mannish amazon and a Womanly woman; she was oversexed, undersexed, or same sex identified; she was anti-maternal, or a racial supermother; she was male-identified, or manhating and/or man-eating or self-appointed saviour of benighted masculinity; she was anti-domestic or she sought to make domestic values prevail; she was radical, socialist or revolutionary, or she was reactionary and conservative; she was the agent of social and/or racial regeneration, or symptom and agent of decline. [Richardson and Willis, xii]

The New Woman phenomenon found an interesting representation in late Victorian fiction and anticipated various discourses of a new womanhood in the twentieth century.

The New Woman in Late Victorian Fiction

The New Woman fiction that appeared in the 1880s and 1890s, does not constitute a single literary genre but rather multiple ones with a woman as a central character. According to Lyn Pykett's definition, the New Woman fiction consists mainly of works which fit W. T. Stead's (1894) description of the 'novel of the modern woman'; they are novels 'by a woman about women from the standpoint of Woman' (5).

New Woman novels often expressed dissatisfaction with the contemporary position of women in marriage and in society. The novels about nonconformist or rebellious women became a springboard for a public debate about gender relations that had previously been taboo. The New Woman novels represented female heroines who fought against the traditional Victorian male perception of woman as ' angel in the house ' and challenged the old codes of conduct and morality. The late Victorian New Woman fiction anticipated feminist writing of the twentiethth century. Contemporary critics attacked the sexual content of the New Woman novels, and twentieth-century feminist criticism has identified undercurrent of innovative views on gender and society in many New Woman novels. According to Lyn Pykett,

The New Woman novels [...] were much more directly linked to contemporary controversies surrounding the Woman Question, and to the various discourses within which they were produced and mediated. Many of the New Woman novelists were also prominent contributors to the debates on 'woman' in the newspaper and periodical press, and the New Woman fiction was sometimes reviewed alongside sociological and other polemical works, as if it were part of a seamless discourse on the Woman Question. [7]

New Woman fiction dealt frankly with sex and marriage as well as women's desires for independence and fulfilment. Many New Woman novels strongly opposed the idea that home is woman's only proper sphere. The female authors revealed the traps of conventional Victorian marriage, including the condition of marriage which tolerated marital rape, compulsory or enforced motherhood, and the double standard of sexual morality. Many female protagonists of the New Woman fiction experienced conventional marriage as a degrading and oppressive institution because women suffered inferior status and were often victims of domestic violence and other threats. As Barbara Caine has pointed out,

In their novels, innocent and ignorant women faced the terrible suffering which came from venereal disease and which was a result both of their own sexual ignorance and of the past sexual excesses of their husbands. Constant ill health for themselves - and the even greater horror of giving birth to children with congenital syphilis - served for them, as for many others in the course of the 1890s, to show why existing marriage was impossible and why masculine sexual privilege and female sexual ignorance had to stop. [136]

The New Woman writers indicated three major areas in which women felt oppressed: marriage, labour market and suffrage. Some female writers ( Olive Schreiner) advocated free love. Others proposed celibacy for strong-willed and independent women who wanted to enter the public sphere ( Gissing). A. R. Cunningham has distinguished two main types of the New Woman novels: the "purity school" novels and the Sue Bridehead type novels. (179, 180) The former were less radical and emulated bold and independent women characters, like Benjamin Disraeli's Sybil, Charlotte Brontë's Shirley and Elizabeth Gaskell's Margaret Hale. The latter presented the intellectual, emancipated, and androgynous women with a number of modern neuroses, like Sue Bridehead in Thomas Hardy's Jude the Obscure.

Both types of novels exposed the victimisation of women in marriage and society, the major difference between them being the attitude to a monogamous relationship. The "purity school" novels did not reject the value of matrimony although its novels strongly criticised the traditional Victorian marriage as being oppressive to women. The second type of the New Woman fiction depicted the traditional Victorian marriage as repugnant and emphasised the sexual double standard and male degeneration.

The New Woman Novelists

The New Woman novelists were mostly women, although a few male authors also contributed to the genre. They all called for a redefinition of women's roles in marriage and society, and opposed the social norms imposed on women. In literature, they criticised the representation of the Ideal Womanhood epitomised at mid-century by William Makepeace Thackeray's Amelia Sedley in Vanity Fair (1847) and Charles Dickens's Esther Summerson in The Bleak House (1852-53) (Mangum, 2). They also challenged the traditional patriarchal society and the view that marriage and motherhood were the most suitable occupations for women. The New Woman novelists tried to redefine the relations between the sexes and called for honesty in sexual matters. They also supported professional aspirations of women.

Some of the most prominent female New Woman novelists, now almost forgotten, include Olive Schreiner, Sarah Grand, and George Egerton, who were violently criticised and praised by both female and male readers.

Olive Schreiner (1855-1920) is regarded as a pioneer of the New Woman fiction. Her feminist bildungsroman, Story of an African Farm (1883), which inspired other New Woman writers, criticises the traditional gender roles and promotes an assertive heroine who can shape her life. The novel also deals with sexual initiation, premarital sex, freethinking, transvestitism and gender identity, rejection of marriage, women's inequality and search for personal freedom.

Sarah Grand (pseudonym of Frances Elizabeth Clarke, 1854-1943) was a member of the Woman Writer's Suffrage League and an active feminist. Her novels, Ideala (1888), The Heavenly Twins (1893) and The Beth Book (1897), tell the stories of women who have been trapped into a bad marriage. In principle, Grand supported the institution of marriage, but she deplored women's sexual ignorance and men's hypocrisy. She argued that venereal diseases in marriage were mainly due to men's unbridled promiscuity and licentiousness.

Mona Caird (Mona Alison, 1854?-1932) exposed the failure of mismatched marriage and criticised the patriarchal ideal of male dominance and female submission in an article "Marriage" published in the Westminster Review in 1888. Her novel, The Wing of Azrael (1889), dealt with a husband's cruelty and marital rape.

George Egerton (Mary Chavelita Dunne, 1859-1945) is called by Elaine Showalter "the paradigmatic figure among the New Woman writers" (xii). In 1893, she published a collections of impressionistic short stories, Keynotes, which challenged the Victorian views of female sexuality. Her second collection of short stories, Discords, deals with the themes of motherhood, women's autonomy and sexual freedom. Strangely enough, although Mary Chavelita Dunne believed in female moral superiority, she opposed women's suffrage.

The male authors who dealt with the New Woman theme include George Meredith, George Gissing, Grant Allen and Thomas Hardy.

George Meredith wrote a significant New Woman novel, Diana of Crossways (1885) about a passionate and intelligent upper-class young woman who is trapped into an abusive and degrading marriage. The novel became an inspiration for a number of New Women in their struggle for emancipation at the turn of the century.

George Gissing's (1857-1903) Odd Women (1893) takes up the theme of redundant women in the 1880s. The novel focuses on the fates of single women and demonstrates that the patriarchal and male dominated society is unable to accept the increasing presence of new independent women in the public sphere.

Grant Allen (1848-1899) wrote one of the most hotly discussed novels, The Woman Who Did (1895), which combines the free-love theme with an anti-marriage message. The Cambridge-educated heroine of the novel refuses to marry her lover, but gives birth to her illegitimate daughter. The novel prompted Lucas Cleeve (Adelina G. I. Kingscote, 1868-1908) to write The Woman Who Wouldn't, and Victoria Cross(e) (Annie Sophie Cory, 1868-1952), The Woman Who Didn't.

Thomas Hardy, who praised some of the New Woman writers (Sarah Grand, George Egerton and Grant Allen), created a memorable and tragic female character in his last novel, Jude the Obscure (1896). Sue Bridehead, an enlightened liberal New Woman, is a victim of oppressive Victorian double moral standard. Like the New Woman female authors, Hardy objects to the Victorian view of the sacredness of the institution of marriage. In Jude he proposes the abolition of conventional marriage because it is not in harmony with human nature.

Conclusion

The New Woman fiction emerged out of Victorian feminist rebellion and boosted debates on such issues as women's education, women's suffrage, sex and women's autonomy. It disappeared with the first-wave feminism after World War One. However, it made a lasting impact on popular imagination and perhaps on the lives of many women in England and elsewhere. The New Woman fiction contributed to major changes in women's lives, including their increased mobility away from family scrutiny (riding a bicycle, travelling alone), shorter and lighter clothing and interest in gynecology, resistance to enforced marital sex, insistence on the availability of birth control information, and the right to vote. One of the most important values of the New Woman fiction was an attempt to renegotiate sexual relations between the sexes, and gendered behaviour. The weakness of many New Woman novels was the representation of one-dimensional characters and melodramatic plots.

Related Material

Bibliography

References

Caine, Barbara. English Feminism, 1780-1980. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Cunningham, Gail. The New Woman and the Victorian Novel. London: Macmillan Press, 1978.

Grand, Sarah. "The New Aspect of the Woman Question", North American Review, 158 ( Mar. 1894), 271.

Greg, William Rathbone. Why Are Women Redundant? London: Trübner, 1869.

Helsinger, Elizabeth, Robin Lauterbach Sheets, and William Veeder. The Woman Question: Society and Literature in Britain and America, 1837-1883. 3 vols. New York: Garland, 1983.

Ledger, Sally and Scott McCracken, eds. Cultural politics at the fin de siecle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Ledger, Sally and Alison C. Ledger. The New Woman: Fiction and Feminism at the Fin de Siecle. Manchester: Manchester University Press,1997.

Mangum, Teresa. Married, Middlebrow, and Militant: Sarah Grand and the New Woman Novel. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1998.

Pykett, Lyn. The "Improper" Feminine: The Women's Sensation Novel and the New Woman Writing. London: Routledge,1992.

Richardson, Angélique, Chris Willis, eds. The New Woman in Fiction and in Fact: Fin-de-siecle Feminisms. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001.

Showalter, Elaine, ed. Daughters of Decadence: Women Writers of the Fin-de-Siecle. Rutgers University Press, 1993.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The final two decades of the Victorian era witnessed the beginning of a shift in social attitudes regarding gender relations, which is marked by a steady move away from the pattern of patriarchal male supremacy and female dependence towards the modern pattern of gender equality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The V&A's Theatre and Performance collections chart the fascinating history of theatre in Britain from the middle ages to today. From early dramatic forms, such as mystery plays and court masques, to the alternative and 'in yer face' drama of the late 20th century, via the patriotic wartime entertainment of the 1940s, and the foundation of institutions such as the Arts Council and the National Theatre.

Most early theatre in England evolved out of church services of the 10th and 11th centuries. It became a truly popular form around 1350 when religious leaders encouraged the staging of mystery cycles (stories from the Bible) and miracle plays (stories of the lives of saints). These were written and performed in the language of ordinary people rather than latin in order to teach the mainly illiterate masses about Christianity and the bible.

Each play was staged on pageant wagons that processed through the streets and stopped to perform at pre-arranged sites. By the end of medieval times, many towns had specific spaces dedicated to public theatre.
The rise of secular drama
Following the Reformation in the 16th century - a movement that opposed the authority of the Roman Catholic Church - all religious drama in England was suppressed. Licences were issued to theatre companies allowing them to rehearse and perform in public, providing they had the approval and patronage of a nobleman.

Britain's first playhouse 'The Theatre' was built in Finsbury Fields, London in 1576. It was constructed by Leicester's Men - an acting company formed in 1559 from members of the Earl of Leicester's household. Over the next 16 years, 17 new open-air, public theatres were constructed. Most of these theatres were circular, surrounding an open courtyard where members of the audience would stand around the three sides of the stage. New companies flourished and writers were expected to produce a number of new plays every year to satisfy demand. Companies became known by the title of the patron's household. The two most famous companies and fierce rivals were the Admiral's Men and the Lord Chamberlain's Men.

William Shakespeare (1564 - 1616)
William Shakespeare, born 1564 in Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire, is England's most famous playwright. He wrote 38 plays and numerous sonnets. It is not just the breadth of his work that makes Shakespeare the greatest British dramatist but the beauty and inventiveness of his language and the universal nature of his writing.

In 1594 Shakespeare joined the Lord Chamberlain's Men as an actor and their principal playwright. He wrote on average two new plays a year for the company. His earliest plays included The Comedy of Errors (first performed in 1594) and his first published work was the poem Venus and Adonis (1593). Shakespeare wrote many of his most famous plays for the Globe Theatre, which was erected in 1599 by the Lord Chamberlain's Men. When the lease on the land at their playhouse, The Theatre, in Shoreditch ran out, the company decided to dismantle the timber frame building and rebuild it on the south bank of the River Thames, renaming it The Globe.

The masque was a form of festive courtly entertainment that flourished in 16th- and early 17th-century Europe. The English architect and designer, Inigo Jones (1573 - 1652), collaborated with the playwright and poet Ben Jonson (1572 - 1637) to produce a series of elaborate masques for both James I (reigned 1603 - 25) and Charles I (reigned 1625 - 49). One production, The Masque of Oberon (1611) cost over £2,000 to stage, with costumes alone costing over £1,000.

Inigo Jones is credited with introducing into British theatre the proscenium arch - the space which framed the actors on stage - and moveable scenery arranged in perspective. Inspired by stage machinery he had seen whilst travelling in France and Italy, Jones' scenery used a series of shutters that slid in and out using grooves in the floor. He even flew in scenery from above and introduced coloured lighting by placing candles behind tinted glass.
The closure of the theatres
In 1642 civil war broke out in England between supporters of King Charles I and the Parliamentarians led by Oliver Cromwell. Theatres were closed to prevent public disorder and remained closed for 18 years, causing considerable hardship to professional theatre performers, managers and writers. Illegal performances were only sporadic and many public theatres were demolished.

In 1656, the poet and playwright William Davenant succeeded in producing an all-sung version of the play The Siege of Rhodes in his home. This is widely considered to be the first English opera. After Charles II was restored to the throne in 1660, Davenant and the dramatist Thomas Killigrew were granted royal patents, which gave them virtual monopoly over presenting drama in London. These monopolies were not revoked until the 19th century.

The introduction of scenery and elaborate stage machinery to the English public stage in the 1660s gave rise to blockbuster semi-operas. Many of these were adaptations of other plays, often by Shakespeare. These had episodes of music, singing, dancing and special effects. The grandest theatre at this time, which included one of the first proscenium arches, was The Duke's Theatre in Dorset Gardens. Planned by William Davenant and designed by Christopher Wren (architect of St Paul's Cathedral), it cost £9,000 (about £600,000 today). It stood by the River Thames and steps led up from the river for those patrons arriving by boat.

For the first time women were recognised as professional actresses and playwrights. The most famous playwright was Aphra Behn (1640 - 89), who had previously been employed as a spy for Charles II and spent a brief stay in a debtors' prison. A group of women writers known as 'The Female Wits' produced many works for the stage. They included Mary Pix (1666 - 1709), Catherine Trotter (1679 - 1749) and the prolific Susannah Centlivre (about 1670 - 1723), who wrote 19 plays, including the satirical A Bold Stroke for a Wife, first performed in 1718.

The first woman to appear on the professional stage in England is generally considered to be Margaret Hughes (1645 - 1719), who performed in a production of Othello at the Vere Street Theatre, London in 1660. Other notable actresses at this time included Elizabeth Barry (1658 - 1713) , also known as the "queen of tragedy", and Nell Gwyn (1650 - 87), who was reputed to have been painted nude for Charles II and bore him two children.

The 18th century saw the flourishing of theatre as a popular pastime and many theatres were enlarged and new playhouses built in London and throughout the country. One of the most successful shows on the London stage in the early part of the 18th century was John Gay's ballad opera The Beggar's Opera. Gay recycled popular songs of the day and wrote new lyrics that were humorous and satirical.

Shakespeare's plays became increasingly popular during the 18th century but were reworked to suit the tastes of the day. His style was still felt to be too erratic and poets such as Alexander Pope carefully tidied up any uneven verse lines. Shakespeare's ending to King Lear was felt to be too distressing and Nahum Tate's revised version (where Cordelia and the King survive) was preferred to the original. David Garrick rewrote the end of Romeo and Juliet so that the lovers speak to each other before dying in the tomb and turned the Taming of the Shrew into a farce.

Garrick was one of Britain's greatest actors and the first to be called a star. From 1741 until his retirement in 1776, he was a highly successful actor, producer and theatre manager. He wrote more than 20 plays and adapted many more, including plays by Shakespeare. In 1742, the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane hired him and he began a triumphant career that would last for over 30 years. Within five years, he was also managing the theatre.

Garrick changed the whole style of acting. He rejected the fashion for declamation, where actors would strike a pose and speak their lines formally, and instead preferred a more easy, natural manner of speech and movement. The effect was a more subtle, less mannered style of acting and a move towards realism.

The Licensing Act of 1737 had a huge impact on the development of theatre in Britain. It restricted the production of plays to the two patent theatres at Drury Lane and Covent Garden in London and tightened up the censorship of drama, stating that the Lord Chamberlain with his Examiners of Plays must vet any script before a performance was allowed.

The act was put in place by the then Prime Minister Robert Walpole (1676 - 1745), who was concerned that political satire on the stage was undermining him and the authority of the government. A production of The Golden Rump, afarcical play of unknown authorship, was the chief trigger for Walpole pushing the case for banning obscene drama from the public arena. The play scandalously suggested that the Queen administered enemas to the King. Henry Fielding, author of a number of successful satires, and others were suspicious that this play had in fact been engineered by Walpole himself.

To get around the restrictions of the 1737 Licensing Act, non-patent theatres interspersed dramatic scenes with musical interludes. Melodrama and burlesque, with their short scenes and musical accompaniment, became extremely popular at this time. Eventually, the huge growth in demand for theatrical entertainment in the early 19th century made the patent theatres' system unworkable. Theatres had sprung up across London and the boundaries between what was allowed in the patent theatres (legitimate drama) and what was presented in other theatres (illegitimate theatre) had become blurred. In 1843 the Licensing Act was dropped, enabling other theatres to present drama, although Lord Chamberlain's censorship of plays remained in place until 1968.

After the Covent Garden theatre burnt down in 1808, the management decided to raise prices to cover the cost of rebuilding. To increase revenue, the management reconfigured the upper gallery to squeeze in more of the one shilling seats, creating what angry patrons described as 'pigeon holes'. The price for a seat in the pit was raised from three shilling and six pence to four shillings, and the admission to the public boxes went up from six to seven shillings. A whole tier of boxes became 'private' and could only be hired for an entire season. Audiences were furious and turned their anger on the theatre's manager, the actor John Philip Kemble.

On 18 September 1809 Kemble stepped on stage in the costume of Macbeth to welcome the audience to the first production in the new theatre, and was met with a barrage of shouting, hissing and hooting which continued throughout the performance. Although magistrates were summoned, and some protesters arrested, the disturbance did not end until two in the morning. This was the start of what were known as the Old Price (or O.P.) Riots. For the next ten weeks every performance at Covent Garden was disrupted. The principal objective of the protesters was to force the management to restore the old system of pricing. By December 1809 the cost of legal fees, wages for bouncers, and free passes for allies who were paid to chant "N.P." ( 'New prices') meant that the theatre was losing £300 per night. Kemble accepted the demands of the rioters and made a public apology from the stage.

At the turn of the 19th century the Kemble family dominated the London stage. Actor John Philip Kemble (1757 - 1823) was said to be the finest actor in England and his sister, Sarah Siddons (1755 - 1831), was regarded as one of the greatest ever tragedians. In her first season, she performed 80 times in seven different roles, inducing faintings and hysterics amongst her audiences. John Philip Kemble made his debut on the London stage in 1783 as Hamlet. His acting style was static and declamatory, with long sweeping lines and a detached grandeur.

The popular actor Edmund Kean (1787 - 1833) replaced Kemble as the darling of the London stage after making his Drury Lane debut as Shylock in The Merchant of Venice in 1814. Kean was one of the few actors who could fill the vast Drury Lane theatre to its capacity of 3,000. His natural passion and fiery spirit suited a melodramatic style of acting. He was said to be at his best in death scenes and those that required intensity of feeling or violent transitions from one mood to another.

Melodrama became popular from the 1780s and lasted until the early 20th century. The first drama in Britain to be labelled a melodrama was Thomas Holcroft's A Tale of Mystery (1802). Melodrama consisted of short scenes interspersed with musical accompaniment and was characterised by simple moral stories with stereotypical characters - there was always a villain, a wronged maiden and a hero acting in an overblown style.

From the middle of the 19th century theatre began to take on a new respectability and draw in more middle-class audiences. They were enthralled by the historical accuracy and attention to detail that was becoming increasingly influential in stage design. Pictorial drama placed great emphasis on costume and reflected a fashionable interest in archaeology and history. The inevitable long and complex scene changes meant that plays, especially those by Shakespeare had to be cut. One of the main exponents of pictorial drama was Charles Kean (1811 - 68), son of Edmund Kean. Charles Kean was known for his painstaking research into historic dress and settings for his productions at the Princess's Theatre in London's Oxford Street during the 1850s.

19th century theatre was dominated by actor-managers who ran the theatres and played the lead roles in productions. Henry Irving (1838 - 1905), Charles Kean and Beerbohm Tree (1852 - 1917) all created productions in which they were the star. Henry Irving dominated the London stage for over 25 years and was hero-worshipped by his audiences. When he died King Edward VII and the President of the United States sent their condolences.

Shakespeare was the most popular writer for these actor-managers. It became fashionable to give Shakespeare's plays detailed and historically realistic sets and costumes. The stage spectacle was often more important than the play itself and texts were cut to allow time to change the massive sets and give maximum exposure to the leading role.

The first woman actor-manager in London was Eliza Vestris (1797 - 1856), a singer and dancer who also managed the Olympic Theatre from 1830. There she presented a programme of Burlesques, many starring herself. Other women managers in the 19th century included Madge Kendal (1848 - 1935) and Sarah Lane (about 1822 - 99) at the Brittania Theatre, Hoxton.

The greatest English actress of the late 19th and early 20th century was Ellen Terry (1847 - 1928). She joined the legendary actor-manager Henry Irving at the Lyceum Theatre from 1878 to 190 as his leading lady, and for more than the next two decades she was considered the leading Shakespearean and comic actress in Britain. Two of her most famous roles were Portia in The Merchant of Venice (1875) and Beatrice in Much Ado About Nothing (1882). In 1903 Terry took over management of London's Imperial Theatre where she focused on the plays of Bernard Shaw and Henrik Ibsen. However financial failure meant she returned to acting there years later.

The V&A holds The Ellen Terry Collection, which contains a vast quantity of correspondence, including letters written by Terry to her daughter, costume designer Edith Craig, and letters written from her stage co-star Henry Irving. The archive also contains a notebook of Terry's thoughts on Irving.

The sophisticated technology and machinery of the late 19th century stage produced a succession of 'sensation' dramas in which special effects became the principal attraction. Scene painters, working with expert technicians, produced realistic reproductions of the natural world. Using ropes, flats, bridges, treadmills and revolves, they could produce anything from a chariot race in Ben Hur to a rail crash in The Whip.

One of the greatest designers of 'sensation' scenes was Bruce 'Sensation' Smith. He worked at Drury Lane Theatre, which became the acknowledged home of such drama following the introduction of hydraulic stage machinery at the theatre in 1894.

The playwright Tom William Robertson (1829 - 71) introduced a new kind of play onto the 19th century theatre scene. His pioneering 'problem plays' dealt with serious and sensitive issues of the day. Robertson's work was considered so revolutionary in style and subject that no established management would produce his plays. "Danger", said Effie Bancroft, "is better than dullness" and she went on to produce a string of successful and profitable hits by Robertson, such as Ours (1866), Caste (1867), Play (1868) and School (1869). Caste was about marriage across the class barrier and explored prejudices towards social mobility. People talked in normal language and dealt with 'ordinary' situations and the performers didn't 'act' but 'behaved' like their audience - they spoke, they didn't declaim.

New drama in the early 20th century
The turn of the 20th century saw the emergence of two dominate trends in theatre: the dramatisation of contemporary, moral and social issues, and an interest in a simpler and more abstract staging of plays. Innovative work from abroad, particularly playwrights such as Henrik Ibsen and Anton Chekhov, was also influential in the shaping of this new drama.

Harley Granville-Barker's management of the Royal Court between 1903 and 1907 saw the popularisation of the work of George Bernard Shaw. Bernard Shaw was one of the most successful writers of the early 20th century and an outspoken member of the Fabian Society, an organisation committed to social reform and considered by many at the time to be subversive. He challenged the morality of his bourgeois audiences with his satirical and often humorous writing that included uncomfortable topics such as religion and prostitution. Many of his plays were censored by the Lord Chamberlain, including Mrs Warren's Profession (1893, first public performance in England 1925), which centred on a former prostitute and her attempt to come to terms with her disapproving daughter.

At a more grass roots level, theatre groups aimed at promoting the socialist cause and the Labour Party sprang up across the country.

Between 1926 and 1935 the Workers' Theatre Movement (WTM), which was allied with the Communists, used theatre to agitate for social change. WTM developed an 'agit-prop' style that took songs and sketches onto the streets in an attempt to incite change.

Unity Theatre grew out of the WTM. It's aim was 'to foster and further the art of drama in accordance with the principle that true art, by effectively presenting and truthfully interpreting life as experienced by the majority of people, can move the people to work for the betterment of society'. Unity pioneered new forms of theatre, presenting factual information on current events to audiences, as well as satirical pantomimes that challenged the Lord Chamberlain's censorship.

Other influential political companies included the Salford-based Red Megaphones and the Hackney People's Players. Committed to removing the bourgeois trappings of theatre, they wanted to create a more physical theatre that reflected the machine age. Popular plays were Ernst Toller's Masses and Men (1923)and The Machine Wreckers (1922) and Karel Capek's futuristic nightmare RUR (1920) where machines and robots are used to replace the working class.

Founded in 1908, the Actresses' Franchise League supported the suffrage movement by staging events and readings. By 1914, membership numbered 900 and there were groups in all major UK cities. Plays included Cecily Hamilton and Christopher St John's How the Vote Was Won (1909), and Hamilton's most famous work Diana of Dobson's (1908).

The Pioneer Players was founded by Edith Craig, daughter of Ellen Terry, the renowned English actress of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The company aimed to present plays of 'interest and ideas' and particularly those which dealt with current social, political and moral issues, including suffrage. The Pioneer Players performed at the Little Theatre which operated as a club theatre to avoid the censorship of the Lord Chamberlain. Productions included Margaret Wynn Nevinson's In the Workhouse (1911) and Christopher St John's The First Actress (1911).

The repertory theatre movement was forged out of the passion and conviction of Barry Jackson and Annie Horniman, who believed that a wide variety of theatrical experience should be made available to people at a price they could afford. Horniman believed that by subsidising theatres you could both raise the standards of performance and broaden the programme a theatre could offer to its community.

Horniman was the daughter of a wealthy tea merchant with no family connections to the theatre but she recognised the cultural value of the state-subsidised repertory companies in Germany. In 1903, Horniman put up the money to open the Abbey Theatre in Dublin and the Gaiety Theatre in Manchester in 1907. In just ten years they produced over 200 plays at the Gaiety but were forced to close in 1917 because of financial difficulties.

Birmingham Repertory Theatre opened on 15 February 1913 with a production of Shakespeare's Twelfth Night. Its founder Barry Jackson, like Horniman, was passionate about the need to offer the people of Birmingham a wide variety of theatrical experience, and personally subsidised the building of the Rep Theatre as a base for his company.
Club Theatres in the early 20th century
In 1899 the Stage Society was founded with the aim of supporting a theatre of ideas. Frustrated with the conservative nature of more commercial theatres, it presented private Sunday performances of experimental plays that had not been granted licences by the Lord Chamberlain. After a police raid on their first production (Bernard Shaw's You Never Can Tell) it was argued that because these were private performances, the Lord Chamberlain's restrictions on Sunday performances and licensed plays were not applicable. The Stage Society won the case and other 'club' theatres opened with members paying a small subscription rather than an entrance fee. These theatres became the home of unlicensed, experimental and controversial plays - a situation that lasted until 1968 when censorship was finally overturned.

The Arts Theatre opened as a club theatre in 1927 and quickly developed a reputation for innovative and exciting work. Plays by French and German writers such as Racine and Goethe were staged there, as well as new writing from British playwrights. Actors such as John Gielgud and Sybil Thorndike worked at the Arts Theatre even when they were well known in the West End - such was their commitment to presenting more experimental work.
West End theatre between the wars
West End theatre between the wars was a strange mixture. For the most part theatres were impoverished by the Depression and remained conservative both in the content of their work and the staging.

The plays of George Bernard Shaw, Somerset Maugham, Terence Rattigan, Noël Coward and J B Priestley dominated the scene. Whilst Priestley and Shaw had a strong left-wing agenda, the plays were essentially conservative in form. Shakespeare's plays virtually vanished from the West End. His home now was the Old Vic Theatre and the regional repertory theatres which experimented with contemporary dress productions. It was John Gielgud who brought Shakespeare back to the West End in 1935 with his productions of Romeo and Juliet, Richard III and The Merchant of Venice.

Commercial theatre thrived and at Drury Lane large budget musicals by Ivor Novello and Noël Coward used huge sets, extravagant costumes and large casts to create spectacular productions. Coward's Cavalcade (first production in 1931) was an epic play which traced the history of the early years of the 20th century through the lives of one family. Coward remained one of the popular writers of this period with comedies such as The Vortex (1924), Fallen Angels (1925) and Present Laughter (1942).

The Second World War saw a surge of interest in the arts with many civilian and military audiences experiencing drama, opera and ballet for the first time. This interest led to the establishment of the Arts Council by the government in 1946 with an annual grant to distribute among the arts. This grant ensured the survival of companies like the Sadler's Wells Ballet and Opera and the eventual establishment of the Royal Opera, the Royal Shakespeare Company and the National Theatre, as well as supporting theatre in the regions and the work of individual artists and companies. By 1956 the Arts Council was subsidising 40 companies across the country and between 1958 and 1970 15 new theatres had been constructed with public money.
Post-war West End theatre
After the end of the Second World War, the West End was dominated by the commercial sector. Farces and 'who-dunnits' became popular, the most famous being The Mousetrap, an adaptation of an Agatha Christie novel that opened in 1952 and is still going today. The glamorous productions of the 1950s, produced by Binkie Beaumont and H M Tennent, soon became economically unviable. Actors moved into TV to make more money and West End productions shrank in size.

This period also saw an explosion of new writing with John Osborne's Look Back in Anger (1956) seen as the landmark for a new generation of young writers who included Arnold Wesker, Tom Stoppard, Edward Bond and Harold Pinter. Small venues continued to promote and support new writing as more experimental productions moved into the mainstream theatres, including George Devine's Royal Court. The phrase 'In yer face theatre' has been applied to many of the young writers who were produced by the Royal Court in the 1990s. This aggressive and confrontational style was designed to assault the audience's sensibilities. It explored the gut-wrenching extremes of the human condition and rammed the excesses of contemporary society down its throat. One of the most successful 'In yer face' productions was Mark Ravenhill's Shopping and Fucking, which opened at the Royal Court in 1996. "A shocker in every sense of the word", declared The Daily Mail.

The National Theatre Company was formed in 1963 at the Old Vic under Laurence Olivier and moved to its new home on London's South Bank in 1976, directed by Peter Hall. Peter Hall had also directed the first years of the Royal Shakespeare Company at Stratford-upon-Avon.

Political theatre also flourished at this time - notably the work of Joan Littlewood and the Portable Theatre Company, who produced young political writers such as John McGrath, David Edgar, Trevor Griffiths, David Hare and Howard Brenton. The company Joint Stock pioneered a process of collaborative working, with writers workshopping their ideas with the company to develop a script. Joint Stock was responsible for developing many of Caryl Churchill's early plays.

The end of theatre censorship in 1968 saw a surge in the alternative theatre movement in Britain. No longer restricted by the Lord Chamberlain's censorious eye, companies were free to express any agenda they chose. Feminist theatre companies like Red Ladder and the Women's Theatre Group (now the Sphinx) began to put on plays that expressed the political agenda of the feminist movement and questioned the male dominance of writers and directors in British theatre. Women writers like Caryl Churchill and Pam Gems wrote for companies like Joint Stock before moving onto success in mainstream theatre.

Companies also explored new ways of creating theatre, devising work which aimed to be more democratic by involving the whole company in all aspects of the creative process from initial concept to final performances.

In the funding crisis of the 1980s many 'alternative' companies had their (meagre) subsidy cut and could no longer afford to continue. However, others successfully developed into the mainstream like Hull Truck and Mike Leigh who later moved successfully into film and television.
Physical and visual theatre
Throughout the 1980s and 90s companies began to experiment with a more physical type of theatre. They wanted to get away from the restraints of realistic and naturalistic drama and create an energetic visual theatre that combined strong design with choreography and physical imagery. Influenced by the work of Philippe Gaulier and Jacques Lecoq, companies such as Theatre de Complicite applied their style to the reworking of classic texts and created new work in collaboration with writers.

This departure was not completely new - in the 1960s Peter Brook had become interested in a more physical and visual theatre. He had been inspired by Japanese Noh theatre and influenced by the work of Adrienne Mnouchkine's Theatre du Soleil in Paris. Earlier innovators in this area included Bauhaus, Dadaist and surrealist performers, choreographer Rudolf Laban and directors Meyerhold and Jerzy Grotowski and Richard Schechozer.

Today, theatre companies and groups are producing ever-more experimental works that explore social and political questions and challenge conventions of what a performance is and how it should be presented.

Blast Theory describe their work as collaborative and interdisciplinary. Works such as Can You See Me Now? (2001) - a chase game played online and on the streets mixed video games and performance, whilst I'd Hide You (2012), My Neck Of The Woods (2013) and Too Much Information (2015) engaged diverse audiences through different media. Similarily, Punchdrunk, a British theatre company, produces work that eliminates the boundaries between stage and audience by creating immersive presentations in which the audience is free to choose what to watch and where to go.

The National Video Archive of Performance
The V&A holds the National Video Archive of Performance (NVAP), archive of over 300 high quality live theatre performance recordings made since 1992. This unique collection is available for free to all whether you are a researcher, an actor preparing for an audition, a stage designer reviewing past interpretations, or someone who missed the opportunity to attend a production during its run.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The V&A's Theatre and Performance collections chart the fascinating history of theatre in Britain from the middle ages to today. From early dramatic forms, such as mystery plays and court masques, to the alternative and 'in yer face' drama of the late 20th century, via the patriotic wartime entertainment of the 1940s, and the foundation of institutions such as the Arts Council and the National Theatre.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Doll's House as A Play of Social Criticism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Doll's House is a play of social criticism in the sense that it has criticized the traditional marriage, man-woman relationship and the domination of the female by the male in the name of love or family.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Doll's House is an 1879 play by Norwegian writer Henrik Ibsen, which tells the story of a discontented wife and mother. It was highly controversial at the time of its release, as it raised questions and criticism about the societal expectations of marriage, especially the subservient role women were expected to play. Nora Helmer is desperate to keep her husband Torvald from discovering that she forged loan documents, and thinks if she is revealed, he will sacrifice his honor for hers. She even contemplates killing herself to spare him this indignity.

Nora's being threatened by Nils Krogstad, who knows her secret and wants to reveal it if Nora doesn't help him. He's about to be fired by Torvald, and wants Nora to intervene. Her attempts are unsuccessful, however. She asks Kristine, a long-lost love of Krogstad's, to help her, but Kristine decides Torvald should know the truth, for the good of the Helmers' marriage.

When the truth comes out, Torvald disappoints Nora with his self-centered reaction. It's at this point Nora realizes she has never truly discovered who she is, but has lived her life as a plaything for the use of first her father, and now her husband. At the end of the play, Nora Helmer leaves her husband and children in order to be herself, which she is unable to do as part of the family unit.

The play is based on a true story, of Laura Kieler, a friend of Ibsen's who went through many of the same things Nora did. Kieler's story had a less happy ending; Her husband divorced her and had her committed to an asylum.

What is important about the title? Who is the "doll" Ibsen refers to?

Who is the more significant female character in terms of plot development, Nora or Kristine? Explain your answer.

Do you think Kristine's decision not to prevent Krogstad from revealing the truth to Torvald is a betrayal of Nora? Does this act ultimately hurt or benefit Nora?

How does Henrik Ibsen reveal character in A Doll's House? Is Nora a sympathetic character? Did your opinion of Nora change from the beginning of the play to its conclusion?

Does the play end the way you expected? Do you think this was a happy ending?

A Doll's House is generally considered a feminist work. Do you agree with this characterization? Why or why not?

How essential is the setting, both in terms of time period and location? Could the play have taken place anywhere else? Would the final outcome have had the same impact if A Doll's House had been set in the present day? Why or why not?

Knowing that the plot is based on a series of events that happened to a female friend of Ibsen's, did it bother you that he used Laura Kieler's story without it benefiting her?

Which actress would you cast as Nora if you were to stage a production of A Doll's House? Who would play Torvald? Why is the choice of actor important to the role? Explain your choices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'A Doll's House' Questions for Study and Discussion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Doll's House is an 1879 play by Norwegian writer Henrik Ibsen, which tells the story of a discontented wife and mother. It was highly controversial at the time of its release, as it raised questions and criticism about the societal expectations of marriage, especially the subservient role women were expected to play.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Written in 1879 by Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House is a three act play about a seemingly typical housewife who becomes disillusioned and dissatisfied with her condescending husband.

Set around Christmas time, Nora Helmer enters her home, truly enjoying life. An old widow friend from her past, Mrs. Linde, stops by hoping to find a job. Nora's husband Torvald recently earned a promotion, so she happily finds employment for Mrs. Linde. When her friend complains how hard the years have been, Nora replies that her life has been filled with challenges too.

Nora discreetly explains that several years ago, when Torvald Helmer was very ill, she forged her dead father's signature in order to illegally obtain a loan. Since then, she has been paying back the loan in secret. She has never told her husband because she knows it would upset him.

Unfortunately, a bitter bank employee named Nils Krogstad is the man who collects the debt payments. Knowing that Torvald is soon to be promoted, he tries using his knowledge of her forgery to blackmail Nora. He wants to insure his position at the bank; otherwise he will reveal the truth to Torvald and perhaps even the police.

This turn of events greatly upsets Nora. However, she keeps the truth concealed from her husband, as well as Dr. Rank, a kind yet sickly old friend of the Helmers. She tries to distract herself by playing with her three children. However, by the ending of Act One she begins to feel trapped and desperate.

Throughout the second act, Nora tries to concoct ways to prevent Krogstad from revealing the truth. She has tried to coerce her husband, asking him to let Krogstad keep his job. However, Helmer believes the man possesses criminal tendencies. Therefore, he is bent on removing Krogstad from his post.

Nora tries asking Dr. Rank for help, but she is put off when Dr. Rank becomes too flirtatious with her and claims that he cares for her just as much, if not more, than her husband.

Later, the Helmers prepare for a holiday ball. Torvald watches Nora perform a traditional folk dance. He is disappointed that she has forgotten much of what he has taught her. Here, the audience witnesses one of the many scenes in which Torvald patronizes his wife as though she were a child, or his play-thing. (Hence, Ibsen titled the play: A Doll's House). Torvald constantly calls her pet names such as "my song bird" and "my little squirrel." Yet, he never speaks to her with any degree of mutual respect.

Eventually, Mrs. Linde tells Nora that she had a romantic attachment to Krogstad in the past, and that she can perhaps persuade him to relent. However, Krogstad does not sway in his position. By the end of Act Two, it seems that Torvald is bound to discover the truth. Nora is ashamed of this possibility. She contemplates jumping into an icy river. She believes that if she does not commit suicide, Torvald will bravely assume responsibility for her crimes. She believes that he would go to jail instead of her. Therefore, she wants to sacrifice herself for his benefit.

Mrs. Linde and Krogstad meet for the first time in years. At first Krogstad is bitter towards her, but she soon rekindles their romantic interest towards one another. Krogstad even has a change of heart and considers tearing up Nora's IOU. However, Mrs. Linde believes it would be best if Torvald and Nora finally confront the truth.

After returning from the party, Nora and Torvald unwind at home. Torvald discusses how he enjoys watching her at parties, pretending that he is encountering her for the first time. Dr. Rank knocks on the door, interrupting the conversation. He says goodbye to them, hinting that he will be shutting himself up in his room until his sickness finally wins.

After Dr. Rank's departure, Torvald discovers Krogstad's incriminating note. When he realizes the criminal act that Nora has committed, Torvald becomes enraged. He fumes about how Krogstad can now make any demand he wishes. He declares that Nora is immoral, unfit as a wife and mother. Even worse, Torvald says that he will continue to be married to her in name alone. He wants to have no romantic connection to her whatsoever.

The irony of this scene is that moments before, Torvald was discussing how he wished that Nora faced some sort of peril, so that he could prove his love for her. Yet, once that peril is actually presented, he has no intention of saving her, only condemning her actions.

Moments after Torvald raves like a madman, Krogstad drops another note saying that he has rediscovered love, and that he no longer wants to blackmail the Helmer family. Torvald rejoices, declaring that they are saved. He then, in a moment of sheer hypocrisy, states that he forgives Nora, and that he still loves her as his little "caged song bird."

This is a startling wake-up call for Nora Helmer. In a flash, she realizes that Torvald is not the loving, selfless husband she had once envisioned. With that epiphany, she also comes to understand that their marriage has been a lie, and that she herself has been an active part in the deception. She then decides to leave her husband and her children in order to find out who she truly is.

Torvald desperately begs her to stay. He claims that he will change. She says that perhaps if a "miracle of miracles" happens they might one day become suitable companions. However, when she leaves, slamming the door behind her, Torvald is left with very little hope.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Henrik Ibsen's 'A Doll's House' in 5 Minutes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Written in 1879 by Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen, A Doll's House is a three act play about a seemingly typical housewife who becomes disillusioned and dissatisfied with her condescending husband. Set around Christmas time, Nora Helmer enters her home, truly enjoying life. An old widow friend from her past, Mrs.

# data[].attributes.body
Iona College, New York

# data[].attributes.body
Claire Bloom and Anthony Hopkins

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This treatment of Henrik Ibsen's play, A Doll's House, by director Patrick Garland and actors Claire Bloom and Anthony Hopkins, is especially strong. Garland manages to transcend the plot contrivances which I found, on reading Henrik Ibsen's play, to make the story almost unbelievable, and instead, create characters and a story that seem real. A surprisingly hopeful film to enjoy for itself, this would also make an interesting film to use in high school, college, or adult classes to explore issues of gender roles and expectations.

both Claire Bloom and Anthony Hopkins create sympathetic characters

depicts "woman on a pedestal" in its positives and negatives

emotional depth of Nora's transformation -- and her husband's reaction -- ring true

fictionalized and historical settings may make discussion of feminist issues feel safer to some

makes a somewhat-contrived plot seem believable

some plot coincidences a bit too contrived

historical and fictional settings may, for some, make the feminist issue easy to dismiss

for some women, that this is written by a man might be a negative

Henrik Ibsen's depiction of 19th century men and women -- in marriage and friendship

Depicts Nora Helmar's attempt to find her identity, beyond the constricting pedestal

Also depicts her husband Torvald Helmer's attempt to salvage his own identity at work and home

1973 production directed by Patrick Garland, screenwriter Christopher Hampton

Claire Bloom and Anthony Hopkins star as Nora and Torvald Helmer

Denholm Elliott, Ralph Richardson, Edith Evans,and Helen Blatch play supporting roles

The basic plot is this: a woman of the 19th century, pampered first by her father and then by her husband, acts out of caring -- and that act then subjects her and her husband to blackmail, threatening their security and future. How Nora, her husband, and Nora's friends attempt to deal with the threat depict different kinds of love. Some loves transform people and bring out their best and the best in their loved ones -- others make the lover and loved one smaller.

I remember the first time I read Henrik Ibsen's play, A Doll's House, in the late 1960s, just when the feminist movement was rediscovering past literary treatments of gender roles. Betty Friedan's more straightforward treatment of the ultimately-unsatisfying constrictions of women's traditional role seemed to ring more true.

In reading A Doll's House then, I was disturbed by what I read as contrived characters -- Nora always seemed quite the silly doll, even after her transformation. And her husband! What a shallow man! He didn't evoke the least bit of sympathy in me. But Claire Bloom and Anthony Hopkins, in director Patrick Garland's 1973 treatment, show how good acting and direction can add to a play what a dry reading cannot.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Doll's House - 1973 Production with Claire Bloom and Anthony Hopkins

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This treatment of Henrik Ibsen's play, A Doll's House, by director Patrick Garland and actors Claire Bloom and Anthony Hopkins, is especially strong. Garland manages to transcend the plot contrivances which I found, on reading Henrik Ibsen's play, to make the story almost unbelievable, and instead, create characters and a story that seem real.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"A Doll's House" is a play by renowned Norwegian playwright, Henrik Ibsen. Challenging marital norms and featuring strong feminist themes, the play was widely celebrated as well as criticized when it was first performed in 1879. Here is a breakdown of Nora's revealing monologue near the end of the play.

For the complete script, there are many translations of "A Doll's House." The edition by Oxford University is recommended; it comes complete with "A Doll's House" and three other plays by Henrik Ibsen.

Setting the Scene

In this definitive scene, the naïve yet often contriving Nora has a startling epiphany. She once believed that her husband, Torvald, was a proverbial knight in shining armor and that she was an equally devoted wife.

Through a series of emotionally draining events, she realizes that their relationship and their feelings were more make-believe than real.

In her monologue from Henrik Ibsen's play, she opens up to her husband with stunning frankness as she realizes that she has been living in "A Doll's House."

Doll as Metaphor

Throughout the monologue, Nora compares herself to a doll. Like how a little girl plays with lifeless dolls that move in whichever way the girl wishes, Nora likens herself to a doll in the hands of the men in her life.

Referring to her father, Nora recalls:

"He called me his doll-child, and he played with me just as I used to play with my dolls."

In using the doll as a metaphor, she realizes her role as a woman in a man's society is ornamental, something cute to look at like a doll-child. Further, a doll is meant to be used by the user. Thus this comparison also refers to how women are expected to be molded by the men in their lives in terms of tastes, interests, and what they do with their lives.

Nora continues in her monologue. In thinking of her life with her husband, she realizes in retrospect:

"I was your little skylark, your doll, which you would in future treat with doubly gentle care, because it was so brittle and fragile."

In describing a doll as "brittle and fragile," Nora means that these are the character traits of women through the male gaze. From that perspective, because women are so dainty, it necessitates that men like Torvald need to protect and take care of women like Nora.

Role of Women

By describing how she has been treated, Nora reveals the way women are treated in society at that time (and perhaps still resonates with women today).

Again referring to her father, Nora mentions:

"When I was at home with papa, he told me his opinion about everything, and so I had the same opinions; and if I differed from him I concealed the fact, because he would not have liked it."

Similarly, she addresses Torvald by saying:

"You arranged everything according to your own taste, and so I got the same tastes as you--or else I pretended to."

Both of these short anecdotes show that Nora feels that her opinions have been disregarded or suppressed in order to please her father or to mold her tastes according to those of her husband's.

Self-Realization

In the monologue, Nora reaches self-realization in a fit of existential fervor as she exclaims:

"When I look back on it, it seems to me as if I had been living here like a poor woman--just from hand to mouth. I have existed merely to perform tricks for you...You and papa have committed a great sin against me. It is your fault that I have made nothing of my life...Oh! I can't bear to think of it! I could tear myself into little bits!"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Feminist Themes in Nora's Monologue from "A Doll's House"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Challenging marital norms and featuring strong feminist themes, A Doll's House was widely celebrated and criticized when it was first performed.