Nora began by confusing me. It took several 'scenes' for the key figures and their basic roles to be identified and it was not until I began this critique that I began to see anything in this play other than the much mentioned woman versus society theme. However, I did eventually discover something a bit more subtle and realized that this meaning was reflected in various aspects of the play. The set, the acting, and various other facets of this production of Nora all point to a critique of society. Not for suppressing women, but for repressing individuality and freedom and confining all people to set roles. Before exploring that further, I will examine the technicalities of the play.
In the very first scene we witness unstable equilibrium. Nora is alone and appears concerned and melancholy. Then, the music stops and she is suddenly happy and carefree in the company of Torvald. The antecedent action is established by the talk of Torvald's recent promotion and Nora's conversation with Linde, which revealed much about Nora's current situation while leaving mysteries for both Linde and the audience to ponder. The final aspect of exposition, details of the immediate situation, is conveyed though both setting and dialogue. It is Christmas time in 1885 (according to the program) and the action takes place in the Helmer's house.
Nora and Linde's conversation not only provides background information, but is also the classical point of attack. It is here that key questions are raised: Why does Dr. Rank frequent the Helmer household? and how does Linde know Krogstad? More importantly, the major dramatic question is asked. Just what did Nora do to obtain enough money for a trip to Italy? This cues the audience onto the conflict of the play, a conflict that could be filed under 'man versus society.' Nora and her desire to live life, to 'not be as silly' as we think she is, and to prove herself capable of 'getting down to anything serious' come face to face with the roles society has cast for her as a wife, mother, and woman.
Throughout the play various complications present themselves. Among the more important and most developed are Krogstad's being both the holder of Nora's promissory note and an about-to-be-fired employee of Torvald, Dr. Rank's infatuation with Nora, Linde's history with Krogstad, and Torvald's hatred of Krogstad because of the latter's history of forgery.
Nora has a rather well acknowledged climax in the last scene. As Nora leaves Torvald it dawns on the audience that it was not suicide the heroine was contemplating. Instead, she sideswipes society with an option of her own invention. Emerging victorious from her conflict with society, Nora abandons her role as a mother and wife -- her role as a doll -- and sets out on her own. As Nora herself puts it, for the first time in her life she becomes 'quite free.'
The conclusion of this production was rather undeveloped. It consisted mostly of a discussion between Nora and Torvald about Nora's leaving. The fates of Linde, Krogstad, and Dr. Rank were left largely unsettled.
While some may view Nora as a play about women's liberation, there is more to it than that. Nora's struggle for freedom is definitely the major conflict of the play, but the essence of the play is not merely women versus society, but the individual versus society. I do not mean this in the general categorical sense. Rather, I mean to say that Ibsen is writing about the struggle between individuals seeking to make lives for themselves, to carve their own identities and achieve success, in a society that does not acknowledge individuals. A society that sees only roles and rules, that confuses love and duty, and that values morality more than common kindness is inherently repressive. It is just such a society that Ibsen creates and its repressive nature is reflected throughout the production.
When the actors first came out they crisscrossed the stage in a maneuver that could have many meanings. Such a ploy brings to the fore the interconnectedness of all the characters and symbolizes their dependence upon each other -- upon society. The characters also appear to be props because even those who have no part in a particular scene are still seated at the edge of the stage. In this way it appears that no matter how alone and private the participating characters think they are, society is still watching over them. If memory serves, the other characters were not present when Nora abandoned Torvald, which is significant because it means that for the first time Nora does not care about society, she is concerned only with herself.
That huge wall looming over the back of the stage, while beautiful, is by its very nature confining. It physically constrains the characters just as society emotionally represses them. And again, all the scenes but the last take place in the same living room. The last scene brings with it not only a change in Nora's attitude, but a change in scenery. I don't think that is coincidence.
Krogstad and Nora are perhaps the two characters most constrained by society. From the very beginning of the play Nora has two personalities. One is melancholy and thoughtful and the other, which manifests itself in the presence of Torvald, is what I would term chipper. This cheerfulness is something she must maintain because it is demanded of her by society and the production did an excellent job of demonstrating this. The doll-like aspect in Nora's life is extreme, but present only when her husband is concerned. He dresses her, forces her to practice, and even picks a costume for her. But he does each of these things at her request. Nora knows her place in society. But this society contradicts itself. For as a wife she should do all she can for her husband. But she should never assume his role. And when Nora does, and breaks a law, society does recognize mitigating circumstances.
Krogstad is the other doll (if you notice, there were two on the set) in Nora. He is plagued by his past, by a mistake society won't forgive and Torvald won't forget. Although he has a certain amount of freedom, perhaps even more freedom than any of the other characters, he falls prey to society just as everyone else must. Unable to succeed because of past mistakes, Krogstad is forced to resort to those same tactics in another attempt to make something of himself. Krogstad is only freed of this cycle by Linde, who is also the catalyst for Nora's redemption.
Throughout the play I couldn't decide whether or not I was disappointed with the acting. Looking back and analyzing it with this theme in mind, it seems fairly good. When Nora and Torvald were together, the dialogue was rather predictable, but that dovetails nicely with the theory that it was constrained by society. Linde's lines were soft and almost monotonous, totally lacking in expression. But Linde also had no reason to have expression because there was no role placed on her by society. Only when she has a cause does she begin to live and break out of her monotony and her attempts to dissuade Krogstad from his nefarious deeds reflect this change.
Dr. Rank, who I have ignored in most of this analysis, provided comic relief but had a definite purpose. He too is held back by society. Rank wants to help Nora desperately, but because it would be unseemly for him to give her money, despite all his jesting, he does not. And his love for Nora, which might have been a true love, will never be consummated because he is confined by society to the short solitary life of an invalid.
Overall, I was not impressed by this production of Nora. While it had a captivating plot and a deep meaning, the production itself seemed flawed. Perhaps I need to see it again to catch more imagery and symbolism, but it all seemed Spartan. The actors did a credible job with the dialogue and mannerisms, but the lack of a full set and even a bigger cast (which seems rather petty) left me with the feeling that something was missing. I watched the play, but I was not drawn into it.