Skip to main content

What is the significance of Nora representing a songbird in Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House?

At the opening of Act I of Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, Nora is introduced to the audience “humming contentedly.” Nora does, as will be evident, hum regularly, a habit that, to her controlling and demeaning husband Torvald, prompts him to compare his wife to a songbird. Throughout Act I of Ibsen’s play, the theme of Nora as songbird is repeated, as in the following exchange in which Torvald has established a pattern of comparing his wife to a series of innocent, harmless animals, specifically, a lark and a squirrel and, finally, to a songbird:



 Nora: I wish I had inherited many of papa's qualities.


 Torvald: And I don't wish you anything but just what you are — my own, sweet little song-bird. But I say — it strikes me you look so — so — what shall I call it ? — so suspicious to-day.



Torvald, the audience comes to understand, is using the animal monikers or comparison to emphasize his superiority over his wife. As noted, he is a controlling husband whose attitude towards his wife is disrespectful and demeaning. Note, for example, in the following comment by Torvald his continued practice of demeaning Nora and his use of the songbird metaphor to emphasize Nora’s seemingly innocent, helpless persona:



Torvald: Didn't you say that nobody had been here ? (Threatens with his finger.) My little bird must never do that again ! A song-bird must sing clear and true ; no false notes. 



The significance of Torvald’s comparison of his wife to a songbird is in its condescending approach toward the individual who is supposed, under more ideal conditions, to be his partner in life. Despite his best efforts, he has not yet destroyed Nora’s desire to be upbeat and considerate despite the secret regarding her financial status she seeks to maintain from her controlling, critical husband. Nora’s humming reminds Torvald of a songbird, but the animal metaphor is maintained to institutionalize her subservience to him.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.