1. Begin to analyze the relationship of the married couple, Torvald and Nora.
OR
2. Of what economic class are Torvald and Nora members? How do we know, based on what we have so far in the text?
OR
3. What pieces of evidence of feminist/sexist issues are there?
OR
2. Of what economic class are Torvald and Nora members? How do we know, based on what we have so far in the text?
OR
3. What pieces of evidence of feminist/sexist issues are there?
26 comments:
3. Although there is much love, affection, and care evident in Torvald and Nora's marriage, there are certainly sexist issues. The amount of comments Helmer makes about Nora's innate intelligence because she's a woman is pretty intense. "Nora, Nora, how like a woman! No, but seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that." Also, although his pet names are sweet, the fact that he calls her his "little squirrel" is somewhat patronizing. His comments about her eating, too, and how she hid the fact that she ate the macaroons is mysterious and disconcerting. She can eat macaroons if she wants!
It's possible that the sexism is on purpose; Ibsen might be making a feminist statement by portraying blatant sexism. We'll have to read more to see.
I agree with all of what Laurel said, while there is much caring and love in the relationship between Torvald and Nora, the power in the relationship is very slanted.
Since Torvald (Helmer) is the man of the house, and the one bringing home the bacon, he tries to control Nora, if not in fact directly. Also, like Laurel said, there are many sexist issues raised. While it's affectionate in a way, the pet names that Torvald has for his wife are somewhat demeaning. It is not as if that is her nickname, or a playful jest (although it may seem that way - perhaps to Torvald), that is the role that Torvald sees his wife in. If someone asked Torvald who wore the pants in the marriage, he would certainly say himself.
In regards to question 2, it seems that the Helmers are upper middle class of society. They are wealthy enough to have expensive and nice things, like the upper class, but they also have that bourgeoisie quality, where they are very careful about spending their money, because in their life style there is just enough money to go around (they can't just throw their money away, as people of the upper class can afford to do).
1. The relationship on the surface is obviously unequal and Torvald has Nora in check. On the other hand Nora is not that intelligent. Nora can be characterized as a little bit of a "ditz." She is very jolly and outgoing, but she kind of flitters around Torvald without any serious power in herself. For example when she asks for money she does not go out and say it immediately, she has to be prodded into it. Then she sort of gives up not because she lacks the want anymore, but she gets distracted. The relationship is one-sided with Torvald having more power because Nora makes it so easy to hold the command.
I agree with what Mike said about the Helmers being in the upper middle class. The description of the house in the very beginning of Act 1, "tastefully but not expensively furnished" shows this very well. There are books on the shelf and little pieces of artwork but they are conscious of how much money is spent. With talk of his raise, Torvald seems much more reserved, whereas Nora is overly confident and wants to spend all of the money before they have it.
I also agree with them being on the upper middle class. It seems to me that they're well off enough for her to go shopping for Christmas presents, and buy a tree, but it looks like they, like most typical middle class families, have some financial troubles/worries when it comes to things like Christmas. Christmas, after all, is a huge time of year financially, and worrisome for many people. They do have a maid, but depending on when the story takes place (not perfectly clear yet) that could be normal. Also, the prospect of a new job is very important to them, but it doesn't exactly appear that they are going to be rich.
The relationship between Helmer and Nora is filled with lies, unhealthy addictions, and false perceptions. Nora is addicted to money or is addicted to spending it. She lies to her husband and purposely hides the macaroons from his sight. "Hasn't nibbled some pastry?
No, not at all.
Not even munched a macaroon or two?
No, Torvald, I assure you, really--
There, there now. Of course I'm joking.
You know I could never think of going against you."
Helmer has either a false perception of Norma or knows what she is really up to but chooses not to believe it. It seems that Nora is manipulating Helmer into giving her money even though she is portrayed as the silly weaker character and Helmer is portrayed as the boss. Their relationship is more like the relationship between a father and a daughter, than two people who are married. Unless Norma resolves her issues with spending, I see a perilous future for her and her husband.
checking in
The pieces of feminist/sexist evidence would be a couple:
* Torvald calls his wife "little lark" and refers to her opening some packages as "twittering" - patronizing and belittling
* "Is that my squirrel rummaging around?" - again referring to Nora
* "Nora, Nora, how like a woman!"
* stage directions "Going toward the stove" - ironic because women were expected to cook
To me, at first, Nora and Torvald's relationship seemed very "young" if that makes sense. Like, so in love and so affectionate, calling each other ridiculous names and being ridiculously sweet. However looking at the sexism (I agree fully with what has been said), although we should probably read a lot more, it seems as though they are more just looking for the comfort of one another. Nora, because she can have money, Torvald, so he can have, so to say, a pet.
I would say Nora and Torvald are in the middle or low-ish class. The description of the home sounds nice and not lowly, but this passage is quite excellent:
"Something of freedom's lost- and something of beauty, too- from a home that's founded on borrowing and debt."
Either they have money and it's just that Nora spends it all, or they just don't have that much money.
Checking in...I really like the way Christine classified the relationship "Nora, because she can have money, Torvald, so he can have, so to say, a pet." Due to the deception and hiding on Nora's part and the belittling words from Torvald I think that this is a completely accurate description of their relationship, it will be interesting to see if this continues.
I think that Torvald's pet names for Nora such as "my little lark" are a good depiction of their relationship. He talks to her in a very condescending and almost degrading way. I think that the Ibsen is making a statement or is at least purposefully portraying sexism. His stage directions for example of [shaking an admonitory finger] when Torvald is asking if Nora has been eating sweets is a fairly blatant way for the author to show the readers that he is in fact portraying a relationship that is degrading to women.
1. The relationship between Torvald and Nora is loving but also slightly fake seeming. Nora depends on Torvald for money and almost seems to be using him to get money. Torvald seems to be in control of Nora financial and also the fact that he has band her from eating sweets. She looks up to him but also hides things from him and does things behind his back. I agree with Kate and Todd that Torvald's pet names for Nora show that he thinks less of her and speaks to her in a degrading slightly sarcastic way.
1.) The married couple Nora and Torvald Helmer at this point in the relationship are very secretive and mysterious to one another, especially Nora to Torvald. The entire scene is Torvald insisting that Nora uses too much money and Nora fighting with Torvald to prove to him that she really doesn't and that she spends everything. Nora may or may not be telling the truth. Either way, Nora has things to say about Torvald that she has left unsaid for this moment in time and he has many things to say about her that he makes sure not to make absolutely and abundantly clear to her. She does know that he understands that she saves money, but he still doesn't approve of how much and that's why he thinks she's spending. Also, is she eating what she shouldn't be according to Torvald. There's so much left unsaid between the two. At this point in time in their realtionship they are not sharing everything with each other. They are keeping things from each other. They may not be so as in love as when they first met, probably more Nora with Torvald than Torvald with Nora.
checking in.
I agree with Laurel because the nickname "little squirrel" also stuck out to me as a very patronizing and belittling thing. It was almost as if she had to look to him for permission. Her actions had to be okayed by his approval.
in regards to the first question, their relationship is based on material things. that fact that he only got her money for christmas says so much. you can tell how much a person loves another by what they give them (example: a card could say much more than a necklace). it might be too early to guess, but i got a vibe that their relationship is loveless.
Checking In.
checking in
checking in
- AH! Almost forgot to check in. Checking in! -
I agree with much of what is being said especially about Nora and Torvalds relationship. While there is much love, there is also much inequality.
Also, it's interesting to take into consideration that this type of relationship between husband and wife, man and woman, was not uncommon in 1879 when the play premiered.
checking in
There was a lot of sexism present in this reading:
"Nora, Nora, how like a woman!"
(pointing out that she's a woman
he also uses "little" and "Squirrel" (little squirrel) which are both belittling and sexist remarks, as to make her seem inferior.
checkin in
This isn't saying much more than anyone else has said, but I agree that the couple on the surface would seem very much in love- and they probably are- but underneath it is Nora's love for money and Torvald, in his role of distributor, really 'wears the pants' in the relationship. Maybe this is where sexism could have come through in this. And I agree with Laurel that maybe he wrote this to make a statement about women in general.
The Helmers seem to be of the middle class. They could spend more than they do, but Torvald doesn't believe in borrowing money- which may be why they're in the middle class now and not the lower class (as so many people have issues with debt, etc.) The stage directions say that the couple own a piano, have maids, and have "china figures and other small art objects; a small bookcase with richly bound books; the floor carpeted..." None of these are things that an impoverished couple could afford to own, as they are not necessities.
sorry I forgot to check in last night as I was waiting for 15 minutes to pass on my bed but then I kinda passed out... sorry!
checking in
Because I'm blogging so late, I don't have much to say that hasn't been said. I think that Torvald and Nora appear very loving and affectionate, almost an iddylic family -- decorating the christmas tree for the children, sharing their wealth, using pet names, etc... The issues are underlying. Nora relies on Torvald for money, she does not have her own funds. As a result, she is constantly in a submissive and dependent role. This is a deep-rooted sexism of the time. Torvald resents his wife for her spending, but she really has no other way to furnish her home or make the holidays nice for the children. The pet names he uses for her are affectionate, but they are inherently sexist in that "lark" and "squirrel" are diminutive forms. I think Nora and Torvald belong to the upper middle class -- bourgeois. They have enough money to afford excess, but are always trying to accrue more. They value possessions, and look forward to raises in salary, but they are not desperate for money. I'm interested in how this subtextual tension plays out.
p.s. The macaroon thing is weird. Why can't she eat macaroons? Is he critical of her weight? odd... I'd be pissed if I were Nora.
Post a Comment