A Doll's House

Was nora's action to leave justifiable?

is it the right thing for nora to leave her husband and kids?

Asked by
Last updated by Cimk M #567027
Answers 5
Add Yours

For Nora, her action was the right thing. She felt trapped; she felt like a play thing taken down from the shelf when her husband deemed her worth paying attention to; she had no fulfillment, no individuality. Torvald not only doesn't treat her as a wife, he can't even comprehend what she did for him...... he leaves her hanging, no support, no interference. This realization that there isn't and has never been any love between them seals her decision to leave.

"Our home has been nothing but a playroom. I have been your doll-wife, just as at home I was papa's doll-child"

Her exit is a new start.......... and the chance to grow up and be a woman.


A Doll's House

At the end of A Doll’s House, Nora chooses to leave her husband because she believed she was married to a stranger. This brings up the debate whether or not a women, like Nora, is ever justified to walk away from a marriage. Personally I believe it was never okay for her to just walk away from Helmer, her husband, and here is why.

Many things must be taken into account when dealing with this issue. One of the reasons I believe that it was not okay for her to walk away from her marriage was because Nora had already bore 3 kids. “In that moment I realized that for 8 years I had been living here with a complete stranger, and had born him 3 children.” (Ibsen 1122). In my opinion, you should never, ever just walk out on your children. She had no intention of even taking them or seeing them! She says, “I don’t want to see the children. I know they are in better hands than mine.” (1124). The bible says, “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” (2 Tim 5:8). The bible clearly states that you should provide for you family. How can she do that if she is gone?

Nora never gave Torvald a chance to prove himself as a husband after she decided things were not working out. To me, that shows complete immaturity. Helmer said, “I have the strength to change.” Nora replies, “Perhaps - if your doll (Nora) is taken from you” (1124). Helmer in desperation begs her, “No, no Nora. I cant conceive of it happening!” (1124). As you can see, Nora decided that leaving Helmer was the best decision without giving him a chance to prove himself. This was the first and only time throughout the play that she confronts him on a problem and once she does, she leaves.

Although Nora is not justified to leave Helmer and the children, one can also understand why she would. Nora says, “You thought it would be fun to be in love with me.” (1120). Nora said this because Helmer wasn’t really in love with her. She was referred to as a doll as you can see above. He was merely going with the flow and seemingly was playing with her whenever he wanted. Dealing with a man that only loves you only sometimes can lead any women insane.

At the end of the story, I believe Nora wasn’t justified to leave the way she did. She left no room for the marriage to find its cure. Even worse, she left her kids to the man that she called a stranger. Although I can feel Nora’s pain because she spent part of her life with a man that didn’t truly love her, I still think her leaving was premature.


Timothy. Http://www.openbible.info. Crossway Bibles, n.d. Web. 29 Aug. 2013.

Nora’s perplexity, which gives the reader impression, that “there are two kinds of moral laws, two kinds of conscience, one for men and one, quite different, for women” is not tenable. Because it is proven that when Krogstad was accused for forgery he was not spared merely on the basis that he is a man and so deserves the right to be free, and on the other hand Nora is considered culprit being a woman. But, the forgery done either by men (like Krogstad) or women (like Nora) requires same treatment and punishment accordingly. But if Nora still fails to understand the law of the land and if she still thinks that the law is prejudiced on her part (or women’s), she should go and try to change the law, but for that tasks one needs to have clear vision and moral standing which Nora seems naïve at.

Does woman has the right to leave her husband and HER children merely on the basis of her expectations on certain much needed issues and in order to have first-hand experience, instead of resolving the same? If the answer of this question is in affirmation then how come husband is denied such right. And if wife and husband start exercising these rights, with such liberation, how come the bond of family system can be protected and maintained and what would be the end results of such immature decision on part of their children?

Essay At the end of a Doll’s House   A Doll’s House A Doll’s house is a three act play that was written in 1879 by Henrik Ibsen, a Norwegian Playwright. The novel is significantly based on its critical attitude toward 19thcentury marriage norms. In novel of Henrik Ibsen's “A Doll's House”, Nora Helmer, she spends most of her time living as a doll, a vapid, and a very passive character with little known personality of her own. Her entire life was a construct of societal values and norms and the expectations of others. Until and unless she goes to the acknowledgment that her life is a sham, she spends entire life in a fantasy world. In this fantasy world, Nora did not realize importance of her life, an attitude that prompted a large portion of the plot's complications. The Doll's House makes strikingly clear those human rights versus women’s correct aside for the moment. Such a number of ladies have endured as the consequence of prejudicial obligations. In the novel "A Doll's House", the dramatist reflects upon the subject of the 'social falsehood and obligation. The novel ends with the protagonist, Nora who leaves her husband and children because she wants to discover herself. Considering the above decision, it was a really intense decision without a doubt. Some may even call it stupid as she does not have a job, no home, not a ton of attractive abilities, no prospects of any sort. By settling on this decision, she is alienating herself from the general public she has always been a part of.Many people will try to ignore her; despite knowing all this she made decision to leave her husband. Seeing the above situation, I am total agree with the Nora’s decision to leave her husband. Making the arguments that justify Nora's decision, we can point outtwo main reasons that described why she left her husband. First, the demeaning treatment she receives from her husband, Torvald. All through the novel, Torvald disparages his wife, may be affectionately, yet very consistently. He used to allude to her with pet names that associate her with vulnerable forest creatures such as “singing lark” and “little squirrel” and others.He used to get her stay away from taking any responsibility in the house beyond dealing with theirkids only. Despite being his wife, she herself was treated as a child in her own houseby her husband and was forced to follow the rules made by her husband. Significantly, Torvald additionally expects that Nora will concur with him on all matters of significance. His views are to be her views. She had to think whatever he thinks about anything. The other point of the idea is that Nora realizes that there is no other way for her to develop into an individual while living with him. Since the title of novel is “A Doll’s House”, it gives true explanation of what Nora felt living with her husband. She, as an individual personality did not possess sufficient skills to grow further and her husband acted as a hurdle to her self-development. Her Decision of not living with her husband might be wrong for her married life which she is supposed to get dedicated, but as an individual, she was right to look it as an opportunity to boost herself in terms of knowledge, skills and abilities through confidence. Her confidence was the true basis for her decision of leaving her husband that developed her self-sustainability and self-significance that will lead her to self development of her new life. Search for her own recognition must come first to be addressed before she takes care of others. A mother's vicinity and affection is so inestimable and remarkable in that not only does it give us solace, as well as direct us along with the harsh street of life. Since Nora's father and her spouse had wronged her so incredibly, she is totally disconnected from the general public and has no experience of how to deal with it at all. This is all around uncovered by Christine's comment of since Nora knows so minimal about the stresses and hardships of life and Nora's own particular incomprehensibility of her wrongdoing. Concerning Nora's kids, I initially trusted that they might be the ones who endure most in light of the fact that they were never straight forwardly included with the preceding occasions. In any case, as Dan, I feel that Nora's choice to leave is to everyone's greatest advantage in the long haul. If Nora had not left her family members, she would keep on staying in a marriage with a man she does not love and would dependably feel caught and restricted, compelled to assume the part as a glad housewife and mother. After an acknowledgment as significant as Nora's, numerous would not have the capacity to participate in their lives as though nothing had happened. Nora might be no special case. While she may be physically present for her kids, having a parent that should battle to make the most of her life might be as damaging and troubling as a parent who all of a sudden leaves all of a sudden. May be it might be significantly more ruinous on the grounds that the kids would see that something is wrong with their family life however never get any solid clarification in respect to why. One of the best points she pointed out that she is not “fitted to teach her kids" is the thing that Nora sees her present state to be and it is reality. She does not have any important experience to pass onto her kids. Should she stay in her dollhouse, she will never have the capacity to stand on her own feet nor take in reality about herself and about existence. She will keep on regarding her kids as dolls for she does not know generally. Last but not the least; it appears as though Nora had no other choice than to leave her family. Without such a drastic and groundbreaking decision, Torvald would not have ever understood that his meaning of affection with Nora. If she would have stayed, it is conceivable that Torvald would keep viewing her as submissive and dependent. A compromise does not appear to be feasible for Nora and Torvald on the grounds that Torvald genuinely has not adapted much about his marriage or his wife. He can't express what "the most magnificent thing of all" is, even toward the end of the play when his wife exits the entryway. Nora's sudden departure from her house might be the best way to permit and constrain Torvald to see what turned out badly in their marriage and cause him to view others, particularly Women, in a less shallow manner. It appears like Nora has experienced a sort of personal awakening. She has arrived at the decision that she is not a completely realized individual. She needs to invest some energy making sense of who she is as an individual or she will never be much else besides somebody's really little doll. A person won't figure out how to be autonomous in the event that he stays to his usual range of familiarity which is his home. Nora cannot make tracks in an opposite direction from the shadows of her father and her spouse the minute she chooses not to leave and stay only a doll. Thus, A Doll's House can be looked particularly not only as a picture of a 19th century woman attempting to accomplish self-definition additionally as a staggering indictment of a normal marriage in between two common people who need consciousness of themselves and who have varying perspectives of bad and good. Considering this situation, she realized that it is best for the kids if Nora leaves now and tries to satisfy her obligations as a mother later. At the end of the story, I believe she made a justified decision to leave her husband.

I personally believe that Nora had no right to leave her husband and kids. Here is why. First and foremost, she is a wife and a mother. Not under any circumstance should a mother leave her children. When you have kids, you first thought should always rest upon the utmost safety and condition of your children. Nora claimed that Torvald was a stranger, therefore, why is she leaving her kids with him? I think that Nora is unaware of the care Torvald has towards her. He may seem very egotistical and self-centered, which in a way is true, but he does show his care for her numerous times throughout the play. He gives her loving nicknames, and showers her with compliments. He puts up with Nora's disobedience and always ends up forgiving her for whatever it is she does wrong. Nora has no right to leave him. When Torvald found out about the letter, he called Nora a hypocrite and a liar. This is probably due to the shock of finding out that Nora had commited a crime and hadn't told him about it. I'm positive many people would feel as Torvald did if they found out that one of their loved ones had commited a serious crime. It's human nature to react like this sometimes. But just because he got mad for a certain amount of time doesn't make him misogyistic. It is evident that he has actual feeling for Nora when he says he forgives her. I just found it careless that Nora didn't even think of at least talking out the situation rather than just leaving. At the end of the day, a husband needs his wife, and children need their mother.