M'ama

“I did it for love, didn’t I?”(50). Nora considers these words to herself. It’s a rationalization, but one hidden behind a veil of genuine love. On the surface, Nora seems to be manipulative. While she honestly finds pleasure in telling the lie to Torvald, the reason she’s in her situation is because of “love”. She hides the information from Torvald to protect him. Well. . . this is all fine and dandy, except Nora ends up leaving Torvald. Her reasons behind her actions are revealed through conversation with Rank. Rank, who’s another victim of Nora’s manipulations asks why she leads him on. She replies, “Well, you see, there are some people whom one loves, and others whom it’s almost more fun to be with”(69). It’s sad to think that it isn’t fun to be with someone you love, but it’s important to first analyze Nora’s definition of love. She borrows money because of love. She stays with Torvald and amuses him for love. Love is merely an obligation, a duty. Nora mistakes love for her duties required by her marriage. Love is simple. It isn’t a game to be played between two individuals. Nora believes that love and pleasure seeking are mutually exclusive, but they can go hand-in-hand.This is similar to Archer in The Age of Innocence. He pursues Ellen, when his marriage to May should fulfill his needs for enjoyment with another partner. Archer however is robbed of any confrontation with May. He “loses” and is forced to fantasize about his life with Ellen. Instead, Nora reaches an end when she decides that  “I don’t love you anymore”(101). On the surface, this is one of the most hurtful things one can say to another. It reminds the person that the love they once had, the love that brought them happiness is now absent, and cannot return. This is all controlled by the one word “anymore”. Love needs to be reciprocated. No matter how Torvald still feels towards Nora, their abyss remains unbridged. . . This is aggravating because I’m having trouble assembling gnostic arguments for or against Nora. I’m not going to pretend that I  comprehend what “love” is. Nora - She’s incredibly unlikeable. She knows that everything that she is doing is wrong, and yet she’s able to leave her life with a clear conscious. She thinks that leaving her family behind so that she can work on herself is positive. The problem is that marriage confuses these two characters’ definition of love. To Archer, the worshipped virgin gives him the disillusion that “love” is the chance to teach an innocent girl the wonders of the world. It’s the ability to make a mark on someone else. It’s power. Property. It’s the ability to look at a person and think to oneself “I’ve imposed so much of my own philosophies, characteristics, and physical mark on this human that they are now an extension of me. They belong to me because I’ve created the persona sitting right in front of me”. Torvald is guilty of the same treatment. He often speaks of how he wants his marriage to Nora be like their very first night. He also idolizes virginity. To Nora, love makes people keep secrets and having a hand in the financial stability of the household. Once she exclaims that she doesn’t love Torvald anymore, she has no interest in investing herself in the stability of the life they’ve built. No matter how fake it is, it was still their life. It’s the end of their life. Her reasons for leaving the household can be interchanged with the reason she gives for loaning the money. She’s leaving Torvald for love. Love and respect she has for herself. That’s the only optimistic view I can give to the end of Doll’s House. I take what I said back. Love is extremely complicated, especially when it’s built on something as ephemeral and extreme as emotions.