In my opinion, A Doll's House is a realistic work because of the way the characters are portrayed and interact with each other. Although I find that some of the character's actions can be considered irrational and many times unrealistic, the major themes of the text overall is by no means a stretch of the imagination.
Qualities that most of the characters share in A Doll's House is insecurity and indecisiveness. These two human qualities lead to many issues between characters. At the same time it is apparent that there are true feelings and a sense of caring between many of them including Nora and Helmer, Nora and Dr. Rank, or Krogstad and Mrs. Linde; whether that affection is reciprocated or not. These qualities also show the human characteristics and the realism of each character. Nora is not satisfied with her marriage and decides to take action. In doing so she displays bravery and is also very real with herself and her husband.
Although there are many true emotions and life-like situations portrayed in A Doll's House, like when Dr. Rank professes his love to Nora or when Mrs. Linde tells Krogstad that shes misses being with him, certain characters overall are not so realistic. In my opinion Nora puts on quite the act in the first few acts of the play if she has really fallen out of love with her husband. I think that she could be seen as somewhat unrealistically devoted to a man she claims to no longer love although I admire her strength in sticking up to him instead of living a merely average life. In addition, I find Torvald's reaction to the circumstances surrounding Krogstad's letter to be unrealistic. First he says that he must read his mail, then he decides he rather spend the evening with Nora; he is enraged when he reads the letter, and suddenly all too forgiving when he comes to understand that the problem is solved. Torvald's actions are the main reason Nora leaves him, a decision that is in my opinion VERY realistic and one which he deserves.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Who's To Blame?
After reading the story of Hamlet, it was hard for me to not immediately question who is to blame for the death of basically every character in the play. I mean, it is only human nature to investigate the source or sources of one persons death (take CSI for example), not to mention a case where almost every single person's dies within days of each other. Can it be called murder? And if so, can these murders be traced back to only one person, or are multiple people responsible. In this blog, I will do my best at answering these questions.
Now, of course the answer to whether or not the deaths of so many were more than one person's responsibility is yes; however in my opinion they all have the same single origin: Hamlet's father's ghost. Yes, it is true that Hamlet did stab Polonius by mistake and the king could have let the queen know that she was drinking poison, but in the end none of these events would have taken place if Hamlet's father's ghost had not placed such a burden to put an end to his own unfinished business on his son.
I think that because such a large burden was placed on Hamlet, (seeking revenge for his dead father's ghost) he ended up starting a chain reaction of deaths. Hamlet was not even sure that helping his father seek revenge was a task he morally agreed with, but he went along with it anyway because he is a loyal character and takes the importance of family very seriously. In turn, because he did not fully agree with what he was doing himself, he made the mistake of killing the wrong person because he was so nervous and busy concentrating on minor details of his plan such as the right time for murder. Polonius's death then leads to Ophelia's death. In addition, I believe that Laetes and the Queen would not have died if it wasn't for Hamlet's father's ghost because the King would not have had such a reason to want to murder Hamlet and start a fencing duel and consequently the accidental deaths would also not have occurred.
Although I am aware that the story of Hamlet is a tragic one and death is a crucial part to any tragedy, I think that many fictional lives could have been saved if it were not for the ghost of Hamlet's father.
Now, of course the answer to whether or not the deaths of so many were more than one person's responsibility is yes; however in my opinion they all have the same single origin: Hamlet's father's ghost. Yes, it is true that Hamlet did stab Polonius by mistake and the king could have let the queen know that she was drinking poison, but in the end none of these events would have taken place if Hamlet's father's ghost had not placed such a burden to put an end to his own unfinished business on his son.
I think that because such a large burden was placed on Hamlet, (seeking revenge for his dead father's ghost) he ended up starting a chain reaction of deaths. Hamlet was not even sure that helping his father seek revenge was a task he morally agreed with, but he went along with it anyway because he is a loyal character and takes the importance of family very seriously. In turn, because he did not fully agree with what he was doing himself, he made the mistake of killing the wrong person because he was so nervous and busy concentrating on minor details of his plan such as the right time for murder. Polonius's death then leads to Ophelia's death. In addition, I believe that Laetes and the Queen would not have died if it wasn't for Hamlet's father's ghost because the King would not have had such a reason to want to murder Hamlet and start a fencing duel and consequently the accidental deaths would also not have occurred.
Although I am aware that the story of Hamlet is a tragic one and death is a crucial part to any tragedy, I think that many fictional lives could have been saved if it were not for the ghost of Hamlet's father.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)