Gender Roles in a Doll's HouseMost literary works are heavily influenced by the era in which they were written. They are often subject to multiple interpretations based on their historical importance. In A Doll House, written in 1879 by Henrik Ibsen, much of the focus is on the gender roles present at that time. Gender roles have only recently evolved from what they were for several centuries. During the first years of this play's performance, audiences were quite offended by some of the choices Ibsen made. In fact, some directors chose to change the ending so that Nora returns to her husband. This alternative ending better suited the expectations of society at the time (Brunnemer 9). Although Ibsen claims that he did not write this play intentionally as a catalyst for women's rights, it has since become a major theme in discussions surrounding this text. The main character, Nora Helmer, plays a central role in developing theories about gender roles in this play. Commentators generally classify Nora as “(1) a feminist heroine; (2) a courageous, perhaps tragic, human being; (3) [or] a spoiled child whose decision to leave her home and family is only a charade” (Lingard). Ibsen uses each of his characters to describe the zeitgeist of his time; one where women were subject to their husbands and the laws of society. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The theme of feminism seems throughout the piece clear and intentional. Ibsen begins the story with Nora being a stereotypical housewife in the 1800s. In Helmer's first line, he refers to his wife as a "lark". He goes on to give her other nicknames like “squirrel” and “spendthrift” (Ibsen, “A Doll House” 1598-1599). He seems to belittle her in order to exercise his authority over her. By establishing their relationship at the beginning, Ibsen paints a picture of a typical household during this period and allows the ending to be even more dramatic. It is important to establish Nora as a typical wife early on in order to achieve the full effect. that Ibsen wanted with the ending. In the final scene, she realizes that she does not have to remain her husband's "doll"; she can be independent. The courage it would take for a woman to leave her husband at a time when women were so oppressed is what convinces me that feminism is a central and intentional theme in A Doll House. According to Professor Joan Templeton of Long Island University, Ibsen's life serves as a testament to his true motivation in writing A Doll House. The story is based on Ibsen's good friend Laura Petersen Kieler. Laura was married to a man who had an extreme fear of debt. She secretly borrowed money to finance a trip to Italy, hoping that the vacation would help her husband recover from tuberculosis. Although she worked hard to repay the loan, it was not enough. She forged a check and her husband quickly discovered her crime. Her husband left her, claiming she was "an unfit mother" and she was placed in an insane asylum (Templeton, "The 'Doll House' Backlash" 35). Knowing that Ibsen wrote this story about an event close to his heart, it is hard to believe that he was not angry at the injustice his friend had been treated because of her gender. He criticized her husband for allowing her to do “undignified work” and for not caring about her physical well-being. She did everything out of love,but she was treated like a monster (Templeton, “The 'Doll House' Backlash” 35). Critics of the feminist theme in A Doll House often cite Ibsen's own words at a Norwegian women's rights festival in 1898. He says: "I thank you for the toast, but I must renounce the honor of consciously having it for the women's rights movement." Instead, Ibsen goes on to say: “This seemed to me a problem of humanity in general. And if you read my books carefully, you will understand this. It is true that it is desirable to resolve the problem of women's rights with all the others; but that was not the only objective. My task has been to describe humanity” (Ibsen, Discourses and New Letters 65). This statement speaks to the theory that A Doll House is not really a play about feminism, but rather a larger message about humanity in general. In this theory, Nora represents Everyman. Proponents of this view, such as Eric Bentley, assert that "the play would be just as valid if Torvald were the wife and Nora the husband" (qtd. in Brunnemer 10). Templeton makes one of the best arguments for the feminist theme. She spent much of her life studying the text and researching Ibsen's life to develop her argument. One statement that particularly impressed me was his idea of ​​doing away with gender altogether. What would then remain of the story? She says, “Now let’s remove the “women’s question” from A Doll House; let's give Nora Helmer the same rights as Torvald Helmer, and consider her his equal. What remains of the room? The only honest answer is nothing, because if we emancipate Nora, free her from her dollhouse, there is no game; or rather, there is the resolution of the play, the confrontation between husband and wife and the exit which follows, the only crisis and denunciation which could properly conclude the action" (Templeton, "The 'Doll House' Backlash" 32). If A Doll House is about everyone, why is it so important that the main character is a woman? If we didn't give him any gender identity, there would be no story. Her departure is only significant because it was very rare for a woman to leave her husband at that time. If a man had left his wife in this play, critics would still be talking about women and the tragedy of being a single mother at a time when women had so few rights. Regardless, the emphasis is on Nora being a woman; This is the backbone of this story. Other critics find their proof in the play. Comparing the first two acts with the final act, there seems to be a gap between the “two Noras”. Early audiences of the play responded that "A Doll House should not be taken as a serious statement on women's rights because the heroine of Act 3 is an incomprehensible transformation of the heroine of Acts 1 and 2" (quoted in Templeton, “The ‘Doll’s House’ Backlash” 29). With this reasoning, Nora can be completely dismissed and her exit in the last scene becomes simply a "stupid set-up". There are certainly certain qualities in Nora that can be used to discredit her as a feminist heroine. For example, in the first act, she eats macaroons, but when her husband asks her if she ate sweets, she lies. Even when asked several questions, she continually denies eating candy (Ibsen, “A Doll House” 1601). On the one hand, one could say that the fact that she eats whatever she wants despite her husband's orders hints at her future feminist actions. However, others say, "Even Nora's sweet tooth is proof of her unworthiness, as we see her 'surreptitiously devour the.