Unreliability by Carma Jones

English 101

13 April, 2018

Unreliability

Have you ever wondered why when we meet someone for the first time, our perception of them is usually inaccurate? How misguided our initial assumptions of a person are compared to who they really turn out to be.  I am studying the play “A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen and the unreliability of appearances the characters portray throughout the play. I am arguing that our first impression of a character is usually erroneous (different) from who they evolve into throughout the plot; usually because of some worldly standard that the character feels they need to keep.

The story begins with the opening scene, Nora walks in the room with a christmas tree and a bunch of what her husband Torvald would call “unnecessary” things.  Nora tips the Porter an outrageous amount and goes about her business. She pulls out some macaroons from her pocket and quickly eats two. She hears Torvald in his study room and quietly listens through the door.  As the story progresses Torvald hears Nora in the other room and one of the first things he says to her even before entering the room is “Is that my little lark twittering out there?”, “Is it my little squirrel bustling about?” and “When did my squirrel come home?” Now Torvalds also comments multiple times on how Nora spends too much of his money. All these comments set the stage for the rest of the play. We come to understand that he sees Nora as a “pet” or someone he needs to take care of and can toss around.  Because of Torvalds comments we are misguided to believe that Nora is an incompetent, mousy, almost ignorant person who throws money down the drain. In the article “Pairing adolescent fiction with books from the canon” by Janice Mori Galligher she states “Why shouldn't Nora find her own self-worth and her independence? Why shouldn't Nora question a marriage with a man who treats her like a pet, a doll?” (Gallagher 3). This article supports my claim by telling us how women have always had impossible rolls they are required by society to succumb to.  It explains to us that Nora shouldn’t be married to someone who treats her like a pet or doll. Gallagher sides with Nora leaving Torvald to go find her self worth and independence. This article depicts the absurd standards that women, not only in Noras time but also the 21st century, must follow.

The story continues and goes on to show more of how Torvald treats Nora like an incompetent pest.  Nora replies quickly to Torvalds demeaning questions stated earlier, while shoving the macaroons in her pocket and wiping her mouth, hiding any evidence of having treats.  This lays the foundation of our thoughts toward the relationship of Nora and Torvald. The audience sees that Nora obviously has a tooth for sweets, but has to hide the fact from her husband because it would be “going against his wishes”.  We see how unhealthy this relationship is, with Nora having to walk on eggshells around what is supposed to be not only her husband but best friend. Torvald enters the room and their conversation goes as follows:

“Helmer [wagging his finger at her]. Hasn't Miss Sweet Tooth been breaking rules in town today?

Nora. No; what makes you think that?  

Helmer. Hasn't she paid a visit to the confectioner's?

Nora. No, I assure you, Torvald--  

Helmer. Not been nibbling sweets?  

Nora. No, certainly not.

Helmer. Not even taken a bite at a macaroon or two?

Nora. No, Torvald, I assure you really--  

Helmer. There, there, of course I was only joking.  

Nora [going to the table on the right]. I should not think of going against your wishes.  

Helmer. No, I am sure of that; besides, you gave me your word-- [Going up to her.]” (Ibsen).

In this scene the truth unfolds, we see by all of Torvalds comments that he doesn’t allow Nora to eat sweets, it’s his “wish”.  Now why would he not want her to be eating macaroons? There has to be a less superficial/ more meaningful reason than simply having power over her.  By depicting the text I came to understand that Nora is Torvalds trophy wife. He didn’t marry her for her brain or smarts, it is obvious through this context that Torvald doesn’t think much of her at all.  To Torvald she is a useless pest who spends his money. He does like something about her it seems, one thing, her looks. As the story pans out we come to realize that Torvald does only like Nora because she is nice to look at.  He doesn’t care about her opinions or thoughts, he just cares that she doesn’t eat too many sweets, to make sure she keeps her figure and

doesn’t spend all his money. This is supported in the article “Considering Gender Issues in the Teaching of English”, it states “Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House is invaluable for addressing issues of conformity, individual versus social needs, reality versus illusion, and the difference between false and true idealism. Nora Helmer, the protagonist, offers an excellent example of how a woman must walk the tightrope between what is best for her husband and children and what will give her the necessary identity to fulfill herself”(Hunter 88).  This article shows that women are required to figuratively walk on a tightrope in order to fulfil the society, family and their own needs. Our impressions of Nora are now shifting, we now are looking under the surface and realizing that Nora maybe isn’t the ditsy wife that we originally thought her to be. But instead we come to understand that she is putting on a facade to please the role that she is required to maintain by society.

As the the story plays out and reveals more of the plot it turns out that Nora doesn't spend all the money she says she does.  She is secretly putting the money away to pay back a loan she took out without Torvald knowing. Turns out that months ago Torvald was very sick and was going to die.  The only thing that would cure him would be going to Italy. But they didn’t have the funds to travel to Italy so Torvald was on his deathbed. Nora suggested to take out a loan and stated  “I even hinted that he might raise a loan. That nearly made him angry, Christine. He said I was thoughtless, and that it was his duty as my husband not to indulge me in my whims and caprices--as I believe he called them. Very well, I thought, you must be saved--and that was how I came to devise a way out of the difficulty--” (Ibsen) In the time that this takes place, women are were allowed to take out a loan without a man's consent.  So Nora couldn’t do anything for Torvald no matter how bad she wanted to if he wouldn’t agree to the loan. When she suggested it he told her she was being thoughtless and shuts her down right away, he is too prideful to admit he needs financial help.

Nora takes things into her own hands and takes the loan out without Torvald knowing. They go to Italy and he gets better, she saved his life.  Even after she saves him she knows she can’t tell him, it would strip him of his dignity. So she saves up every penny she can to pay back the massive loan. Which makes Torvald think she spends an abundant amount of money.  Again we are shown the impossible standards women are supposed to live up to. Women weren't allowed to even take out alone without the approval of a man. The article “teaching in tandem” by Alexander and Sullivan states “In the late 1800s, women were labeled deviant for failing to conform to the rigid gender standard of the day. Students then compared and contrasted Nora's behaviors and attitudes with those of contemporary women convicted of crimes. They discovered that even today, among female criminals, socially prescribed gender roles still affect women's lives.” (Alexander and Sullivan 374).  Alexander and Sullivan studied women's roles from the 1800’s and on and have shown that women really have always had socially prescribed roles that they need to conform to. This article supports my claim of how completely wrong our first impression of someone can be; solely because of the role they are required to attain by society.

Nora eventually tells Torvald that she took out a loan to save him and his reaction isn’t what you think it would be.  We would think he would be grateful and forgive her for lying because it was for a his own life. But he isn't grateful and is rude and ridicules her, she then realizes that she isn't and has never been happy in her marriage.  It has taken her 8 years to realize that playing house with Torvald doesn't make her happy, and she doesn't want to waste another minute with him. When she tells him she is leaving him to go find identity and fulfil herself he states

“I will not allow it!”, Nora who would usually listen to his demands and succumb to his every desire states,

“It is no use forbidding me anything any longer. I will take with me what belongs to myself. I will take nothing from you, either now or later.”  

Nora is defying the worldly views on marriage and how a wife should obey every command of her husband.  She is taking her life into her own hands and will no longer balance on a so called “tightrope” to please society and herself.

The reason that our first impression of Nora is wrong is because Nora was putting up an act, or facade.  She was playing a role in order to fulfil the expectations of the society, even though it went against what she wants.  Many women in history have had to put up a facade in order to please everyone but themselves. Now back to my question, why is our first impression of someone usually completely different from who they turn out to be? Based on all this evidence I believe that our impressions on someone are wrong because; in public the demands of how society wants them to act, outweighs the demand of ones self, whether they like it or not.  Alexander and Sullivan state “Tragically, Nora must leave her family and friends in order to find herself, and Ibsen makes the audience confront its own prejudices and social values. The realism of Ibsen's A Doll's House and its slice-of- life look at social mores offer an excellent way to get adolescents to question their own values and what society expects of them.” (Alexander and Sullivan 375). This supports my thesis that our first impression of a character is usually erroneous (different) from who they evolve into throughout the plot; usually because of some worldly standard that the character feels they need to fulfil.  You can never see someones true person in their first impression, you have dig deeper to see their true identity. We see this throughout the story with Nora and how our impressions of her shift based on the deeper we get. Why do people feel the need to put on these facades? It’s because our society is so superficial and shallow. All that matters is making sure that everyone thinks highly of us. No one ever wants to be labeled deviant and that is the motive behind the facade and unreliability of characters.

Works Cited:

Alexander, Susan M, and Katherine Sullivan. “Teaching ‘In Tandem’: Combining Sociology with Theater to Create an Interdisciplinary Classroom.” Teaching Sociology Vol. 24, No. 4, Oct. 1996, pp. 372–377. JSTOR [JSTOR].  

Alyce Hunter, Deborah Regan Howe, Gary Kerley, Dorothy Chegwidden, Kathleen L. New, Carol P. Harrell and Todd W. Taylor. “Considering Gender Issues in the Teaching of English.” The English Journal, Vol. 82, No. 3 (Mar., 1993), Pp. 87-89, National Council of Teachers of English.  

Gallagher, Janice Mori. “ Pairing Adolescent Fiction with Books from the Canon.”Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, Vol. 39, No. 1, Sept. 1995, pp. 8–14.JSTOR [JSTOR].

Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll's House. The Musson Book Company, Limited, 1909.