Kundera's intentions as he develops Sabina's character (Chapter 4)

Through the definitions of ‘misunderstood words’ between Sabina and Franz, Kundera is able to introduce his own perceptions of the human condition of ‘being’ through the development of Sabina. Sabina is an important character in the novel, who is used to portray the ‘lightness’ of being, through her attributes and lifestyle. However through the passage, Kundera is able to explore the complexity of the concept of the human condition, through the conflicting ‘weight’, which is present in Sabina’s character.

In the passage following the ‘dictionary of misunderstood words’, Kundera focuses on Sabina’s life outside of Prague.

After her breakaway from Prague and the communist oppression, Sabina still maintains her connection to her home country through the ‘émigré’ meetings which she attends in Zurich. This depicts a ‘weighty’ influence. This depicts a ‘weight’ in her character, through her attempt to retain her ‘past life’ in Czechoslovakie and remember experiences, giving them significance. This is also reflected through Sabina’s betrayal of her country and fellow emigres during the meeting. The ‘long road of betrayals’ which define her life, are essential in depicting the fundamental ‘lightness’ of her character. However the reoccurance of these betrayals creates a motif to Sabina, which she sees as being the freedom of self to define the individual and escape from the conformism and oppression, ‘she would not keep ranks! she refused”.

This creates a paradox, as she discovers that ‘she would have to out an end to her betrayals’.

This creates a paradox, as her ‘betrayals’ are her rebellion agains society the complete rejection of ‘weight’ and ‘heaviness’, giving a lack of meaning in life, although the concept of ending her ‘road of betrayls’ is sorrowful, as her betrayal is recurring and has meaning, creating ‘weight’ and significance. This shows that the human condition is complex, as there is no single term which defines a persons psyche, and that despite ‘lightness’ of character, the idea of motifs in defining individuality in life, and the subjective meaning which they are associated to, showing a connection and importance, in concepts, in creating an indicidual. Also shown by their reoccurance which creates new meanings, introduces the concept of ‘weight’ in all life, emphesized by Nitschers theorem of eternal return.

However through the discussions at the meeting, Sabina realizes that the ‘essence of being Czech vanished into thin air’ due to the conflicting opinions of the emigres regarding their perceptions of their nation and their culture. This is explored by Kundera throught he repetition of the theme of ‘weakness’ and the concept of ‘vertigo’. The ‘only things that held them together were their defeats and the reproaches they addressed to one another’. This shows that the bond which connects all of the emigres outside of their country is the weakness of their contry and their own weaknesses, which forced them to leave. This concept of weakness is reflected by the character of Tereza who desires to be ‘among the weak’ and to be able to help ‘those weaker than herself’. Therefore drawing a parallel between the characters and nation, highlighting the fundamental weakness of human ‘being’.

·       

The motif of the bowler hat

‘The bowler hat was a motif in the musical composition that was Sabina’s life. It returned again and again, each time with a different meaning, and all the meanings flowed through a riverbed’

·      post –modernism, use of metaphor to understand ideas, comparison is used widely to develop a deeper understanding

·      Kundera uses the metaphor of a ‘musical composition’ to describe the life of the characters in the text, to show the sense of progression and movement in the rhythm, however there is the idea of repetition in the melody. This can be used to show the repetition in the characters lives which adds weight and meaning through their experiences. He explains through the voice of the narrator what Sabina is. Expresses the idea of repetition shown through the constant return to the motif of the bowler hat.

·      During life, we acquire different motifs which gain meaning to us through past experiences. These motifs are used to develop the essence of our ‘being’ by defining our perspectives of different ideas. Kundera uses the motif of the bowler hat and its ‘constant return’ through the novel to show the meaning which it acquires through Sabina’s relationship with other characters. The bowler hat becomes a major motif in defining the charater of Sabina and the different ideas which depict her ‘light character’. However this concept of the continues return of the bowler hat contrasts Sabina’s essentially ‘light’ character, as it adds weight and the concept of return to her ‘meaningless’ ideals. The bowler had adds ‘weight’ both physically and mentally, through its ‘bulky and impractical’ nature, and the concept of eternal return, through which it acquires different meanings which ‘flow[ed] through [the] riverbed’ of her life.

·      These metaphors assist the in exploring thematic concerns as it conveys the wider qualities of being and the repetition in life which occurs through the return of different motifs, which then acquire meaning. During our lives we acquire and associate different meanings to objects which are used to define our own lives, they become part of the ‘musical composition’ of our lives. This is shown through the symbol of the bowler hat, which has 5 different meanings associated with I, however they all relate and help in the creation of Sabina’s unique identity. The metaphor of the ‘riverbed’ and ‘musical compesition’ in depicting Sabina’s life show the flow and progressive nature of life, which also contains a degree of repetiion, much like a song. Kundera uses music to describe the life of many of the character, introducing the wider idea of life as being both ‘light’ and ‘heavy’, both repetitive and continuous. This emphesizes the complex nature of all of the characters which are used to portray Kundera’s own ideas on the fundementals of human existence. 

Linkages between Zamyatin's 'We' and Kundera's 'Unbearable Lightness of Being'

Struggle of the Individual within society:

One of the major comparisons between these texts, written in such diverse periods and contexts, is the idea of the struggle of the individual to define itself in the midst of the collective society.

In ‘We’ this is expressed through the character of D-503 who is awakened to his own individuality, separated from the ‘collective’ ciphers, who make up the society of OneState.’I was walking with them, yet I was sepearated’. This discovery of his inner self causes a conflict in D-503’s mental state, as it opposes the values of the totaliatarian society of OneState, in which the I is defined by the collective. The ‘‘I’ being satanic and the ‘we’ being godly’. This conflict is manipulated by the cipher I-330, who influences D-503’s shift into discovering his inner humanity and realizing his individuality. D-503 discovers his individuality when looking in the mirror in the apartment, he ‘sees himself for the first time’. This idea is reflected in ‘The Unbearable Lightness of Being’ in which the main character of Tereza tries to ‘see herself through her body’ to try and define herself as an individual.  She uses the mirror to see her soul reflected into through her face, trying to maintain a separation from the rest of the ‘world of immodesty… a vast concentration camp of bodies, one like the next, with soul invisible’. The motif of the mirror is used by Kundera to emphesize her search to define herself and try to protect the weight of her ‘soul’, ‘It was not vanity that drew her to the mirror; it was the amazement at seeing her own ‘I’. 

The idea of the body as a ‘machine’ and the face as ‘nothing but an instrument panel regestring all the body mechanics’ is depicted in both ‘We’ and ‘The Unbearable lightness of being’. This shows the idea of the body being collectively indentical, which creates the conflict between the ‘soul’ and the ‘body’, which is reflected through the struggle of the ‘individual’ against ‘the collective’. This idea is shown through the identical yonnies in ‘We’, and I-330’s different ‘costumes’ to separate her from the other bodies. The character of Tereza depicts this idea through her desire for her soul to be seen through her face. She constantly ‘stand[s] before the mirror’ hoping to ‘see her own ‘I’’ of her soul through her features.

Idea of conflicting character:

Both Kundera and Zamytain to show contrasting ideas in the novels use the idea of conflicting characters. These contrasts in the novel are used to show the different ways of being which the authors express.

In ‘We’, D-503s conflicted personality is used to show the struggle between his inner humanity the mechanic accuracy which is imposed on the ciphers by the state. D-503’s conflicting mental states show the different influences of the mechanized and ‘logical’ life of the state to become a ’humanized machine’ and his essentially human nature. Kundera introduces the idea of contrasting ways of ‘being’ through the characters of Tomas and Tereza and their opposing mindsets. The character of Tomas is used to convey the idea of ‘lightness; in being, which influences his views on life and relationship. Through his depiction of Tomas, Kundera is able to explore the complications and insignificance, which accompanies his existence. This is contrasted with the character of Tereza, who is depicted at the outset as a ‘heavy’ or ‘weighted’ character through her attributes. She is initially depicted through the metaphor of a suitcase, which shows the ‘extremely heavy’ traits of her personality. This emphasizes Tomas’s initial view of her as being a ‘burden; to him, which results in him being confused as to whether he wants her as part of his life. Through the joining of these two characters, Kundera shows the complexity of human nature, as each of the characters isn’t simply ‘light’ or ‘heavy’ but combines to show the mixing of characteristics. Through their relationship, Tereza imposes her ideas of heaviness on Tomas, weighing him down and dragging him away from his initial light mindset. His character becomes confused, as he hasn’t experienced these contrasting ideas, which don’t comply with ‘his principles’. Tomas seems attracted to the contrast in Tereza, which is a new experience, she “Doesn’t remind [him] of anyone in his past life”, which creates a more powerful relationship between them. The confusion of his character and the merging of the lightness and the heavy depict the attraction of opposites between Tereza and Tomas, and are used to convey Kundera’s ideas on human ‘being’, which is essentially neither light nor heavy.

Context/society around them reflects the personal world:

Mirroring of the personal world to the political world

Micro vs. macro

In both of these novels, the context and society in which the characters are set, reflects the important and often turbulent thoughts of the characters, to convey different ideas. In ‘We’ the society of OneState changes with the introduction of the Mephi, which shows the essentially human nature of all the ciphers and the clash, which it has with the desire to become ‘mechanized beings’. The minor characters in the novel show different aspects, which defy the state on an unconscious level, which reflects D-503’s own struggle between his human emotions and the requirements of the state. This idea of conflict is also shown through the ‘OneState Vote’ in which some ciphers defy the state to become their own individuals, this reflects the major influence of I-330 on D-503’s mental state due to her obsession with her, “there was no saving me, I didn’t want to be saved’. The confusion and unrest, which this ‘uncalculated’ defiance causes among the ciphers, emphasizes the confused nature of D-503s mind as he struggles between the two major influences over his life. Kundera uses this technique of the setting to depict ideas in ‘The Unbearable lightness of being’ and to highlight the inner life of the characters through its reflection. The ‘heaviness’ of the ‘tons of Russian tanks’, which invade Czechoslovakia during the Prague Spring of 1968, depict the invasion of Tereza into Tomas’ life and the ‘burden’ of her ‘heavy suitcase’ which contains ‘her whole life’ which she places upon him. The idea of ‘invasion’ shows the coincidences, which occurred to bring both the characters together, and the contrast of their opposing mindsets. Tereza appears to ‘force’ herself into Tomas’s life as his wife, making him denounce his former idea of ‘erotic friendship’. The initial ‘carnival’ of the invasion depicts Tomas’s initial confusion as to her place in his life, as he hasn’t experienced these contrasting ideas of ‘heaviness; which don’t comply with ‘his principles’. Although each of the novels uses different settings to show the various themes and ideas of their novels. They both use the same technique of setting to highlight the major themes of the characters to convey different textual ideas, which allows us to draw a comparison between the two works.

These ideas are only introduced in this chapter, beginning of comparison between the texts. However as the novel progresses they begin to ‘gain weight’ through their repetition and through the depth of Kundera’s exploration of the human condition through his characters.

What themes emerge in the text as Kundera links the private world with the wider public world

Consider connection with ‘We’

Lack of privacy- listening to conversations:

The concept of lack of privacy and invading a person’s private space to defy the individual and create a collective society is used in both ‘We’ and ‘The unbearable lightness of being’. Kundera uses the socio-cultural setting of the novel to highlight and reflect the inner and more personal lives of his characters in an attempt to convey different ideas and perceptions. Kundera uses the setting of the Russian invasion of Czechoslovakia which reflects Tereza’s lifestyle with her mother, in order to convey the idea of lack of privacy which results in conformation to the collective.

The setting of Czechoslovakia with the secret police recording conversation in houses shows  the invasion of a persons private space in order to inspire a conforming in society. They ‘steal’ the ‘words’ which are then manipulated and used as a weapon on the people with the intention to shame them and undermine the trust that community has. This is reflected in Tereza’s own personal life with her mother, who acts as the soviet police and broadcasts Tereza’s diary to her friends in order to shame her and rid her off her own privacy and individuality by divulging her personal life to her friends. The taking away of privacy and free thought to reveal the individuality of the soul destroys its uniqueness and speciality as it is known by the rest of the community, it becomes common knowledge opposed to the mystery of her inner-self. This is shown on a macro scale by the invasion of Czechoslovakie in which the soviets try to rid the Czech population of their orignonal identity to transform them into a  conformed collective under the regime of the USSR.

Idea of humility and shame which rids an individual of their orignionality due to the rejection from the community to the private and personal ideas of an individual. Renders the inner mentality to collapse and conform to the society and collective in order to be accepted by the community. Shown through Terezas mother’s attempts to humiliate her infront of the public in order to defy her own belief in the ‘soul’ and to solidify the notion of the world as simply a ‘concentration camp of bodies’. This is also shown by Kundera through the capture of Dubcek, and his speech to his ‘humiliated nation’. The concept of humiliation and shame reduces the power of an individual and therefore his own origionalitym conforming him to the collective. The Czech people listening to his speech are described as being ‘humiliated by his humiliation’, emphesizing the idea of loss of power of the people which is inspired by the exchange of power from the Czech government to the soviet police.

This concept is also reflected in ‘We’ with the community of OneState, which maintains complete control over the Ciphers through controlling communication and ways of living. The ciphers live in glass houses which destroys the concept of private life and individuality as it is seen by all of the others in the state. This creates the concept of conformitism and the collective, which is the essential grounds of their society. The lack of the individual’s thoughts and emotions creates a more compact and efficient machine of power, as it destroys the concept of a ‘soul’ and the search for inner desires and diverse opinion, which is an essential part of individual mindsets.

Conentration camp:

The motif of the ‘concentration camp’ is depicted through both ‘If this is a man’ and ‘The unbearable lightness of being’ in order to emphesize the loss of individuality to the conformed  collective. Kundera uses the inner life of Tereza and the reflection of the bugging of Prochazka’s study in order to introduce his own perceptions regarding ‘concentration camp’. Tereza uses the term tto ‘expresshow she felt about life with her family’, which shows that this concept doesn’t purley relate to the ‘brutality and voilence’ which accompanied it in the death camps during the second world war. It also depicts Kundera’s own idea that a concentration camp can be seen on both macro and micro levels, which is emphesized through Tereza’s concept of the concentration camp as being the ‘complete obliteration of privacy’, which is caused by her mother destroying her ‘right of shame’ and who expresses her diary and privacy to the micro-public. In the novel they are robbed of the divine spark of their ‘soul’ which defines their individual nature. This portrayal of a concentration camp, shows that the loss of individuality and privacy to a collective which is identical is the main concept which inspires fear. The fear of being unrecognizable, being stripped of every possession which creates the individual. Primo Levi also discusses this idea in his novel ‘If this is a man’, in which the setting depicts this idea of the concentration camp and the loss of the individual. In the novel he is ‘stripped of every possesion’ which  defines him as different from the others and which allows him to consider himself ‘a man’. This can be seen through the loss of the name, of clothes and even of hair, rendering each man like the next. Loss of identity and privacy discourages hope in the prisoners and allows them to be treated as a lower race by the Germans. This loss of identity and of diverse personality is what creates the depressing and fear inspiring nature of the camps as one ‘loss[es] himself’ through being unable to express his own nature. He is not defined by his own personal self but by the collective and therefore fails to retain personal thought and conduct, creating this loss of self.

Body is not a necessarily a representation of the soul:

This idea of the body not necessarily being a representation of the soul is shown by Terezza’s desire for her body to be a ‘poster for her soul’, which contrasts that of her mother, who sees everyone a being ‘soulless’ and being largely similar. Kundera uses the character of Tereza to portray his own perception on the soul in regard to the body, as she tries to observe her ‘soul’ through her body, which she believes is a representation. However when in the Sauna with the other women, she is introduced to a woman who she describes as being ‘four pouches’, and therefore admits that the soul is not always conveyed through the appearance, otherwise she would have a ‘monstrous soul’. This is also shown through Terezas desire to ‘dismiss her body’, and to ‘stay with Tomas only as a soul’. This shows her jealousy and displeasure at her body in being unable satisfy Tomas fully without the use of his mistresses. Tomas sees every woman physically in the same light with the same physical desires, which causes conflict with Tereza’s ideology as she wishes for him to see her soul through her body, making her body individual and unique. Therefore creating her desire to remain as a ‘’soul’, which shows the individuality of her nature and allows her ignore his infidelities and desires of the flesh, which ‘can be extended to any woman’ as the body becomes simply a transport and ‘cage’ for the soul.

This idea is also depicted in ‘We’ as all of the ciphers are dressed in Yunnies and are forced to shave their heads in order to convey the idea of a complete identical collective. This concept of the collective in which the individual is not identified shows the idea that the soul is not depicted through the body, as all bodies are believed to be equal. However in ‘We’ this concept of equality and similarity is taken to the extreme and used both physically and mentally on the ciphers, resulting in the mechanical aspects of the ciphers, who are controlled to the extreme. This idea of the body not reflecting the soul is also used to create the ‘dehumanized’ nature of the ciphers, who act simply as ‘functions’ who are all simply part of the whole, instead of human beings, separated by their thoughts and lifestyles.

Body as a servant to the soul- body essentially light whereas the soul is the weight

Another idea which is expressed in both texts is the concept of the body being simply a ‘machine’ which is a transport for the ‘soul’. In ‘The Unbearable Lightness of Being’ the body is depicted as being essentially ‘light’, which is shown through Toma’s numerous erotic friendships and mistresses. Tomas ‘desires’ women sexually however he initially tries to escape all mental connection and ‘compassion’ for women mentally. Kundera also emphesizes this idea by showing the materialistic quality of bodies and their similaritoies, making the world simply a ‘concentratiom camp of bodies’. This is contrasted with the idea of the soul which is described as the ‘anchor of the body’ and which is used in defining the individual. This idea of the body being simply a ‘pannel to display inner emotions’ is also used in ‘We’, where the ciphers are portrayed as ‘humanized machines’. This concept is imposed on them through the totalitarian regime of the OneState society, which strips the ciphers of their individual thought, appearance and lifestyle, making each like the next. This idea of the conformation of the collective and the rejection of the ‘I’, emphesizes the idea of the body being simply a tool as the ciphers are used as ‘functions’ of the state rather than humans. With the apex of their considered humanity as having a mechanic mentality free of all human emotion and reasoning. The importance of the soul in defining the individual is portrayed through the charater of D-503 and the discovery of his inner humanity. D-503 is claimed to have the ‘sickness of a soul’, which is reflected through his actions and thoughts regarding himself and the society around him, and which creates a barrier separating him from the rest of the ciphers, ‘there was a thick curtain separating my life from theirs’. Both texts depict this concept which shows the importance of the soul in creating the individual and reflecting the inner humanity of people which differs within each person. It also conveys the significance of the ‘heaviness’ and impotance of the soul in creating an individual person, which is made up of both mind and body. Whereas the body is simply a ‘machine’, similar to the collective, which is defined by the soul. In both novels, Kundera and Zamyatin depict their perception of the human body through the main characters struggle for individuality against the collective in society.

The Symbol of letters in "A Doll's House"

The letter is a symbol used by Ibsen in ”A Doll’s house” for irreversible truths which occur in the play; as at first Helmer sends a letter to Krogstad, revealing the harsh reality of his notice, which in turn triggers Krogstad’s own letter which depicts Nora’s crime and secret life which is hidden from HelmerThe symbol of the letter is used to emphesize the reality of these truths which ,once stated cannot be retracted or controlled, much like sending letters. Showing the effect of the information on the characters lifestyle as it is ireverable.

In the scene we see Nora’s hope that there is “still time” for Helmer to recall the letter from Krogstad, and therefore she will escape the discovery of her secret and crime by Helmer. Nora’s fate seems to be connected to her husband and families “for my sake, for your own sake, [and] for the children’s sake”, this triad emphesises the the deep anxiety has over the effect that the unveiling of her secret will cause on their family life.

This also highlights Helmers control over the communication as he has the power to  “call…back” the letter, even though he doesn’t have the full knowledge of the consequences, while Nora does, as she borrowed the money from Krogstad, which creates dramatic irony.  As even though Helmer has power, he doesn’t understand his acts. This is shown through Helmer’s diologue as he sends the letter fire Krogstad due to his “moral failings”, however the letter triggers the revealing of Nora’s own crime and the release of her true immoral self.

The letter seems to become a major issue for Nora, she becomes paranoid and anxious about Helmer’s discovery of it “Theres no hope for us now-the letter is in the box”. She becomes completely obsessed with the idea, and we see the contrast as at first her secret life gave her power and confidence, but now it gives her constant doubt and worry “He must never see it”. Nora seems to relate her life to the length of time she has before the discovery of her secret, suggesting her loss of control of it, and emphesizing how it begins to determine how she acts around characters, “The letter! No, Torvald, no!”.

We see another dramatic shift in Nora’s character at the end of Act 3 when she tells Helmer that “[he] must read [his] letters”. Nora finally understands the importance of a life of honestly, and cant continue containing her secret which may be revealed at any moment “oh if only it were all over”. She wishes Helmer to read the letter to release her from her secret and to start a new life separate from him and from his confining personality.

When Helmer discovers the second letter from Krogstad which frees them of their debt, he “[tears] the two letters in pieces”, highlighting the end of its control over Nora and their freedom from debt and deceit, as everything is finally revealed. The symbol of letters is also used in the last lines of the play, to contrast the previous function of letters as Helmer asks whether “[he can] write to [Nora]” to maintain the connection between them. This contrasts the previous letters which were feared and which were used for unveiling truths, to simple communication between the two characters as Nora leaves his household. 

Irony of Nora and Krogstad's similarities & effect on Nora's personality in Act Two

Through Nora and Helmer’s discussion we learn that Krogstad, even though perceived as the villain in a doll’s house, has a connection with Nora and her past as they have both committed the same crime in society- to forge a signature. This shows the restricted and moral laws of society, which limit the characters in their actions, and creates a conflict between what they perceive as morally correct opposed to breaking the law. “I call him a moral outcast”. This is highlighted through Nora’s deception, as she borrows money and forges her father’s signature out of love for her husband and their lifestyle as she wishes to save his life, even though it is against the law to do so. “The journey was to save my husbands life-how could I give it up?” Her love for Helmer and moral sense of right and wrong overrules her duty to society and laws.

Helmer is associated with law and rules in the play, due to his position in society as a former lawyer and banker, therefore having encountered the dilemma between justice and injustice. However Helmer is also linked to the idea of law due to his status in their family society. Where Helmer is the head of the household and maintains power over the rest of the family- allowing him to create and control laws which he imposes on the rest of his family “no borrowing, no debt”.

The irony of Nora’s deception to Helmer is revealed through dramatic irony in their discussion, as Helmer judges and condemns the actions of Krogstad, unknowingly passing judgment on Nora by association, due to her performing the same offense. “When I’m near people like him I actually feel physically ill”. This is ironic as we know that Nora has committed the same crime as Krogstad, and that she is lying to Helmer, however he still imagines her as his “little songbird” that he loves dearly. This encourages Nora’s fear that Helmer’s perception of her will change if she reveals her secrete and that he will abandon her and stop loving her if he discovers her deception from him, as it goes against his laws of the household and her duty to him as a wife. Which is shown through past experience of the macaroons. “I would never do anything you wouldn’t like”.  However Nora is given hope that Helmer might not be so harsh with his conviction, when he says “I’m not so hard-hearted that id condemn a man outright for a single slip”. Nora clings to this opportunity that Helmer wouldn’t completely fault her for her actions and that he may understand the real reason for her action. Which leads to her idea of the “miracle” of Helmer sacrificing himself for her, as she has done with her debt. “No you wouldn’t, would you, Torvald?”

Nora seems to finally realize the gravity of her actions through their conversation, and continues to get more distressed, due to her similarity with Krogstad. Helmer describes Krogstad as “a guilty man” and “hypocrite”, since Helmer believes that one “Can redeem his character is he freely confesses his guilt and takes his punishment”. Frightening Nora as she hasn’t fully understood the ensuing consequences and hasn’t given consideration to how others would view her deed. Emphasizing her lack of knowledge of the world and laws around her as her father and Helmer have sheltered her, leading to her disregarding the rules of society. She believes that they would understand that it was all to save her husband, rather than simply as moral injustice. We see the connection between Krogstad and Nora as they both “must lie and cheat and play the hypocrite with everyone”, which is shown through Nora’s deception to Helmer and her double personality, since she cant tell Helmer of her borrowing of money.

Nora gets more flustered when the idea of her impurity of soul would “poison” and “infect” their children, her most loved possessions in the household. She discovers that by being “immoral” and deceitful she “infects and poisons the whole life of a home”. Giving her an anxiety as she blindly listens to Helmer’s advice without contradiction and applies all of his accusations to her and the life she leads. Allowing her to believe that through playing with the children, she infects them with her own “lies and deceit”, therefore causing them to become like her and ‘evil’ in their actions and thoughts.

The irony is shown in the last section of their discussion, when Helmer asks Nora to shake hands with him to “not plead his (Krogstad’s) cause”. Nora’s growing awareness of her exploits leads to her not wanting to shake, as she is similar to Krogstad and doesn’t wish to continue being a “hypocrite”. Although Helmer, oblivious to this, encourages her to do so, maintaining his perception of her as his “sweet little skylark”.

The discussion between Helmer and Nora has an effect on Nora’s appearance in Act Two of “A Doll’s House”, she appears flustered and disorganized as she believes all of which Helmer has told her, and applies it to herself, both have performed similar ‘crimes’ against society. Nora’s secrete seems to take control of her, she becomes paranoid of Krogstad and the revealing of her secrete, which she constantly considers, rather than her previous serenity and joy of the independence which it gave her. “[walks about restlessly]” . Nora is unable concentrate on her current life, the danger of her secrete and its consequences completely overpowering her. “don’t think about it- don’t think! One… two...three…four… five…six-[she screams] Ah, they’re coming!”. Throughout the scene, Nora constantly alludes to her fate in her converstation with other characters, “There are worse things then that”. Emphesizing her obsession with her secrete and the major role it plays in her life.

In the beginning of act two we also learn that Nora has isolated herself from her children as she doesn’t wish her “immorality” to  effect them and the life they lead, as she sees herself as a bad role model for them.  “I can’t be with them like I used to”.  When talking to the maid, we see that Nora plays with the idea of leaving her children, asking her that “If my babies hadn’t any other mother, I kno you’d…” showing her concern on her effects on them. “Do you think they’d forget their mamma altogether if she went away?” highlighting her flustered thoughts about her previous conversation with Helmer. 

The character of Mrs Linde

Mrs Linde:

The character of Mrs Linde is used by Isben as a foil character to highlight different aspects of the main protagonist, Nora. Through her discussion with Mrs Linde we understand the other side of Noras bi-polar character which cherishes the independence which she is thrust by borrowing money from the bank when Helmer fell ill, and who is kind and self-less as she tries to help an old college acquire work at the bank. This side of Nora is hidden from Torvald, as in their relationship he exercises his control over her, allowing Nora to seek to please him by doing “tricks” for him, emphasising their patriarchal relationship.Therefore Mrs Linde is used to convey the dramatic irony, as we understand the other side of Nora’s character and her deception, which Helmer appears to have knowledge of. Mrs Linde is also used to show underlying theme of women’s rights in the play, as she is a widower she follows different laws from the rest of society and is able to work and travel and support her family financially on her own, without the constraints of a marriage. This emphasises that although men were perceived as having higher status and controlling education in society, women were still able to receive important jobs. Represented through Mrs Linde acquiring the high standing job at the bank. This shows that although women’s rights were not established at this time period in Europe, women are still able to hold the same status and positions as men, highlighting Isbens personal views on women’s rights through his depiction of Mrs Linde as a strong confident individual.

The character of Mrs Linde is rather subdued and wise as she seems to 'know' and have experienced all of the hardships of life "subdued", "dear Nora, i do understand" she knows the complications and distractions of life due to her working to support her family and brothers without a husband to support her


Travels alone, is able to have the freedoms of a lifestyle unsubjected or controlled by a husband


The character of mrs linde is used by Ibsen to highlight the other personailty of Nora, of an understanding and caring individual, more sober and sensible, which is hidden from Helmer. We understand that she isnt selfish and that she wishes to hear about Mrs Linde life.


"Yes it must be pleasant to have everything you need" she doesnt know the luxary as she has been striving hard in order to support her family with no comforts for herself.


"It happens like that sometimes, Nora" she seems superior due to her experiences and treats Nora as a child, we learn that Nora has not been subjected to any of the hardships of working class, as her only experience of work has been " odds and ends of needle work" in order to repay her debt to the bank, "your a terrible spendrift", "wagging her finger at her" this condescending manner of adressing Nora is imitated in Mrs Linde as at first she percieves Nora as Helmer does, as an innocent and unknowing house wife who has no knowledge of greater troubles. "Your only a baby Nora!" She wants to prove herself and gain respect in the eyes of her college, trying to create her own individual identity. "You know your simply dying of curiosity" She cherishes this new found freedom as sje discovers a personality who isnt connected to the financial gains of her husband and she wishes to keep it hidden from Helmer, as she fears upsetting him. "Well one day, perhaps, but not for a long time"


Nora starts to realize her status of being a lower educated person, controlled as her husband through talking to Mrs Linde. "You're like all the others,- you none of you think i could do anything worth while" She is proud to announce that she has some independance from her husband and his finance as it was her decision to borrow the money to pay for the holiday, she begins to 'see clearly' and wants to become more like the character of Mrs Linde and create her own identity seperate from Helmer. She confesses to Mrs Linde how she has secretley borrowed the money from the bank and reveals a hidden aspect of her personality- of a women struggling to pay of debt but who is still proud, as it was completley her idea. She wants to be strong and independent like her friend, who comes seeking a high-rate job at the bank and who is free of all of the constraints of a marriage so that she is able to find herself and build her place in society.

Research Project on "A Doll's House" and the life of Henrik Ibsen

Research Project on "A Doll's House" and the life of Henrik Ibsen

By Elise and Alice

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1flP4kRCz2hOtr-qrWSJOP3VhDkO5Xjd1DkdyQtlwm_U/edit?hl=en&authkey=CNn1tc8H#

Messages conveyed in the stage directions Act One (p149-151)

What information do the stage directions give the audience?

Setting:

Object Correlative ( When the setting symbolizes character/s) The setting of the play is "a comfortable room, furnished inexpensively, but with taste" showing that the room is in a middle classes home which is nicely designed, for a number of functions and for everyday use and comfort, with things placed beautifully, although it is inexpensive, which shows that no money is wasted on decoration. This highlights the character of Helmer, as he doesn't wish to waste money, but wants to save it for other uses. Empathizing Helmers control over the family lifestyle as even the house is designed to his taste and ideals, rather than Nora who as the wife is supposed to decorate the house and appears to spend money on the household setting. This is used to symbolize Nora and Helmers conflicting personalities, as the room is inexpensive yet it has taste and design. 

Nora and Torvald's duties to the family are very separate. The space beyond the main setting is Helmers study, showing his education, professionalism and power advantage over the rest of the family. Represents a Private space for himself where he can do as he pleases, no one can interrupt as they have respect for his status in the family"goes to the door and listens" rather than knocking. 

"handsomely bound books" educated and sophisticated, the rest of the house is described as inexpensive showing an investment in knowledge and education/learning. Although he books appear as untouched and beautiful as Nora doesn't read them. Emphasizing the gender discourse, that man controls education, through Helmers thinking and learning status in the family. This is subtly hinted as 'handsome' is a male adjective. The class system is based on gender. "Nora! Just like a woman" helmet sees her as incomprehensive and unknowing about the important aspects of life, showing how men have more powerful status as they 'know' more than women, this highlights the time period at the time of the play, as women were not given rights in Europe, and were classed as lower then men. 

Ibsen is very detailed and precise in his writing, he mentions small, seemingly insignificant details systematically which are used to represent the different ideas and characteristics throughout the play. He is re owned for his modernist and realistic drama and attempts to convince the reader that the play is real, by giving very detailed descriptions which leave no room for the director to use artistic license. All of his plays are based on his life experiences and he tries to replicate them in the play. Allowing aspects of Isbens life to show through the storyline. This is also shown in the status of the family. Isben appears preoccupied with class in "A Dolls house", in his lifetime he experienced a drop in class from middle to poor which is shown in the first discussion between Nora and Helmer about their rise into class. 

Symbolism:

The Christmas tree represents life, as Jesus was born on Christmas while the winter setting symbolizes death and decay. These two conflicting themes of life and death occur throughout the play to show the death or Dr Rank and Nora's married life with Helmer to the last scene where she leaves to begin a new life and to find herself in the world. 

Nora seems to have a bipolar character; she spends unknowingly on presents for her children and the household. She seems to not care about the cost saying "we can loan" and no keep the change" verses her image of saving frantically in order to pay off the debt she owes to the bank, in order to pay for the trip to Italy which saved Helmer's life. "Locked up him her room every evening… staying up past midnight" trying to earn money. "Money!" she is excited by the prospect of money as a child is by toys. At first she appears as greedy as their relationship seems to be based on her impressing and "doing tricks" for Helmer for money. However we learn later on that it is just part of her attempt to save her family from the social embarrassment of being under debt. 

Themes:

The theme of money is introduced to us in the first scene through Nora and Hemlers discussion on the spending of money and their ideas on borrowing money. Already we see the conflicting opinions of their personalities which are highlighted and shown through aspect of money constantly throughout the play. Nora believes that borrowing is not a ad idea as it would mean more money straight away, while Helmer disagrees "no debts, no borrowing" which he enforces on Nora. 

Another theme which is established at the start of the play is deception. Helmer's controlling relationship with Nora leaves no room for her to express herself and her own opinions as an individual, and she therefore decides to hide information which will not impress him rather than consulting him. This theme is represented at the start "Slips the bag of macaroons and wipes her mouth". Nora hides the fact that she has been eating sweets from Helmer and when he asks she replies " I promise i haven't, i wouldn't do anything you didn't like". Showing straight away that there is a gap in their relationship, and sets the grounds for the secret of her owing debt to the bank even though she knows Torvald is against it. 

The depiction of Nora and Torvald's relationship through actions and diologue in Act One (p147-151)

The relationship between the two main characters of Nora and Helmer in "A Dolls House" are established through the diologue and stage directions which take place in Act One. The relationship between the characters is quite simplistic, derived from the 1870s time period in which it is set. Helmer, the husband is the head of the household and is the most important in the family status, he controls the families lifestyle according to his own views. This is depicted through Helmer's actions and diologue towards Nora.Nora has respect for her husband and "goes cautiously to her husbands door and listens" rather than disturb him to find out if he his home. She also listens to his advice and tries to include him in her everyday chores "Come see what vie bought".  Helmer treats her as  a child calling her "scatter brain" and "my lost squirrel" giving the impression of ownership, and that she is in 'his' household for his enjoyment. Throughout the scene Helmer continues to use  pet names such as "feather brain" and "sulking squirrel" which undermine Nora's authority in their relationship and emphasis his power over her. When Nora arrives home from shopping in town Helmer asks "has featherbrain been out wasting money again", making Nora appear as a foolish girl who has no knowledge of money and that she spends it unknowingly, which shows Hemler's perception of her. Helmer's controlling relationship is also shown through their discussion of money early on in Act 1. Although both have conflicting ideas on spending money at christmas time, Nora eventually gives in to his opinion "very well if you say so". This emphasizes how she adapts to suit his point of view even though she disagrees with the idea herself. She obeys and changes her own opinions to match Helmer's showing that she has no way to stand up to defend her own beliefs in the relationship, meaning that her own views are forgotten and ignored. Helmer believes he is superior and that he must "protect her" as she is so delicate and unexperienced that he must decide all of the aspects of her life without consulting her, he appears to dictate his opinions to her "no debts, no borrowing", his views soon become the reality and laws of the household as Nora  replies to him that she "would never do anything you didn't like" . Helmer's protective and controlling nature lead to his ideas being imposed on Nora through their relationship despite her beliefs, leaving no room for confliction. Which causes Noras' deception from Helmer, rather than telling him the truth which he will not accept, she decides to hide information from him. This means that although they are married, their relationship is not very deep and meaningful, since Helmer doesn't consult the details of their lifestyle with Nora, which means she cannot express her ideas and show her traits through their lifestyle and therefore she has no knowledge of law or the world around her. This is highlighted when Helmer asks Nora what she wants as a present, rather than giving her a surprise. Showing that he has no knowledge of her interests as their duties to the family are completely separate. However Helmer seems to be infatuated by her in the play as he "follows her" around the kitchen and talks to her, showing that he is in love with her. Helmer depicts her as a lover and yet he is unable to consult with her the issues of their married life, leaving her no concerns and no knowledge of law or the world around her. Which leads to the deterioration of their relationship as Nora discovers she needs to express herself and therefore seeks to escape the stifling confines of his opinions. 

'A Dolls House' by Henrik Ibsen First thoughts

The play 'A dolls house' by Henrik Ibsen, has the underlying theme of women's rights,

 as the main character, Nora, seeks to become herself at the end of the story by seeking 

freedom from the constraining lifestyle created by her husband. At the start of the novel Nora is depicted as an immature  self-centered house wife, who understands nothing of the toil and strife of working or the pains of poverty as she spends her days playing with her children and shopping " Especially from you who know so little about the troubles and hardships of life".  Nora also seems to be very greedy and decried as a "terrible spend drift", when her husband asks her what she wants for christmas she replies "money". Although as the play progresses we discover that Nora needs the money to repay a debt to the bank, as she borrowed money to save her fiancees life by taking him to Italy. She also shows that she can be kind and caring, as she tries to help her old friend find a job, even though they haven't seen each other in 10 years.  The setting is in a middle class home in Norway, which is decribed as "A comfortable room furnished inexpensivley". This shows that although the family has taste in designing a comfortable house for everyday comfort, no money is wasted on excess decoration. This reflects the character of Helmer, the husband, in the play, as he is constantly trying to save money as he doesn't want to become in-debt. Emphesizing that Helmer controls the family's lifestyle in the play and their spending.Helmer treats her as  a child calling her "scatter brain" and "my lost squirrel" and constantly telling her that "he will teach her" and that he is "always right in everything he does". He believes he is superior and that he must "protect her" as she is so delicate and unexperienced that he must decide all of the aspects of her life without consulting her. Helmer depicts her as a lover and yet he is unable to consult with her the issues of their married life, leaving her no concerns and no knowledge of law or the world around her. However at the end of the play, when Helmer receives the letter discussing Noras breaking of the law, she quickly discovers that he is not the man that she believed he was, and that they both had no knowledge of each other, he appears as a 'stranger' to her, as the miracle of him saving her doesn't infect come true and that all of their marriage has been based on his decisions. Nora realizes that she is just like a doll 'playing' in her husbands house and that her life revolves around performing 'tricks' for her husband, such as singing and dancing to please him, and that her role in their lifestyle has no importance as Helmer decides  what happens in their life and she simply follows. "i went straight from playing in my fathers house to playing in your house". She has never been able to speak her own mind and has adapted to the decisions and beliefs of both her father and her husband, so that she has no understanding of her own life. The play ends with her leaving his house as she tries to discover herself and the life taking place around her without the constraints of her marriage and stifling confines of being dictated to and adapting to her husbands views.

How can we start to understand 'A dolls house"?


What were his influences?
- Born in Skien, Norway in 1823
- his family was bankrupt when he was a child and therefore struggled with poverty for many years
-he abandoned his initial dream of medicine to work in the theatre
-A Scholarship enabled him to traveled to Rome in 1864 where he wrote 'Brand' (1866) and 'Peer Gynt" (1876) - which established his reputation as a writer/play write
-He lived manly in Germany and Italy until 1891
-In 1896 he renounced poetry and began writing prose drama
- Experience of repertory theatres
- He had become interested in women's Independence he commented on the theme of his work: "There are two kinds of spiritual law, one for men and quite a different one for women. [Men and women] do not understand each another; but women are always judged in practical matters by men's law, as though they were not women but men."
-Impressed by a book by his friend 'Camilla Collett' on the status of women
-Sponsored a proposal that the women members of the Scandinavian Club in Rome should be allowed to vote in club meetings
- Isben speaks of working on a play of 'modern life'
- Had a visit in Munich from an old friend who wrote the sequel to 'Brand' called 'Brand's daughters'- influenced the characters in 'A Doll's House'
-Drew heavily on continental European cultural resources in his work
- Devoted himself exclusively to his writing
- studied art, history, literature and architecture in Rome


What is he renowned for as a dramatic?


-Founder of modern theatre
- He supported many crucial causes of his day in his plays
- Always visualised his characters and their movements
-Tries to capture 'modern life' in his poetry
-Broke away from the romantic tradition of 19th century theater with realistic portrayals of individuals
- Doesn't draw the line between good and evil- but explores the complexities of of human behaviour and reality
- Focuses on psychological concerns
- Ibsen was interested in the possibilities of presenting a new kind of human being- possessing both pagan and christian beliefs
- His drama begins and ends with a formula
- His plays are derived from his time period
-His plays 'belong to yesterday' of an older time period and the issues regarding them
-Used his plays to try to discover the 'unknowable'
-Ibsen uses dialogue, events and symbolism to explore self knowledge and traditional morality
-Tried to build his life around art
- Investigates the role of the artist in society
- warned against the danger of renouncing love in the name of duty
- posed such questions as the search for truth in his plays
- Ibsen is a path breaking dramatist
- His work is generally divided into 3 categories: dramas written in verse ( modeled after romantic historical tragedy), concerning social realism, later on he continued working on modern realistic themes but increasing the use of metaphors and symbolism, in his final stage he dealt with the conflict between art and life- he shifted his focus from the individual in society to the individual alone and isolated
-He seems to pass judgment on himself as a writer
-His dramas were considered highly contraversal during his lifetime due to his treatment of social problems
- His work is classical and universal in implication and yet capable of endless transformation
-He explores the role of illusion and self-deception in everyday life
-Values the play itself above everything and permits the play to speak for itself
-His characters 'unload their souls' in his writing




Bibliography: " A dolls house and other plays" Henrik Ibsen, Clays Ltd. 1965


Dickinson, Thomas H. "The Drama of Intellectualism." The Drama: A Quarterly Review 7 (Aug. 1912): 148-162. Rpt. in Nineteenth-Century Literature Criticism. Ed. Joann Cerrito. Vol. 44. Detroit: Gale Research, 1994. Literature Resource Center. Web. 11 Feb. 2011.


"Henrik Ibsen." Contemporary Authors Online. Detroit: Gale, 2007. Literature Resource Center. Web. 11 Feb. 2011.


Sæther, Astrid. "Henrik Ibsen." Norwegian Writers, 1500 to 1900. Ed. Lanae H. Isaacson. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Dictionary of Literary Biography Vol. 354. Literature Resource Center. Web. 11 Feb. 2011.