One of the major differences between reading Henrik Ibsen’s play ‘A Doll’s House’ and viewing the third act of The Young Vic’s ‘A Doll’s House’ is the essences of the characters.
When I read the play, I tried to picture Torvald and Nora in the best possible light while still being reasonable with the subtext. At least, I tried to withhold judgment and give the characters a fair chance at understanding why they might act the way they do. For example, I thought perhaps the reason Torvald opposes liars so vehemently is because as a lawyer he’s encountered so many cases of dishonesty among crime (he refers to helping Nora’s, presumably, unlawful father) and thereby witnessed its harmful effects on others; or in addition to that perhaps he himself had been betrayed through disingenuity. In both the written and the adapted version it’s agreeable that Torvald clearly doesn’t respect Nora as an equal individual, but as I read it I pictured him in a way that I could still understand him as having some redemption if he recognized his faults. In the reading there's room for that when we see how desperately he tries to appeal to Nora to get a second chance. The difference between depictions comes for me in that, in the production, Torvald appears much more callous and it’s more instinctive to dismiss him as a bad person. His callousness reaches a tipping point especially when he throws Nora’s ring on the ground, signifying that he isn’t completely trying to win her back. In reading the play I actually believed Torvald wanted to do anything to keep Nora from leaving and a slight amount of solace could be taken in all this anguish in that he seemed to have learned that his way of thinking was wrong, and if he really did love her, after this moment, he would try to become a better man. When reading the play I felt there was a stronger sympathy for both of the characters (rather than just Nora) especially when we see Torvald realize how much he's screwed up and that he wants to change. The stage interpretation depicts Torvald not having anxiousness as Nora leaves, and he doesn’t plead with her to know what the only way to save their marriage is; instead he is more bitter (as he punctuates it by throwing the ring) and doesn’t show as much desperation in the fact that his wife is leaving him, and there’s nothing he can do about it. Nora was obviously the person to sympathize with, but it felt like a stronger story to me when I saw the sadness from both sides. The most compelling story can be when you want both sides of a conflict to overcome their problems and become better people. It feels more tragic when you find yourself feeling sorry for the antagonist too, because there is a sad realization that really no one wins. If you can find a piece of yourself in a character, or at least remember sadness you’ve felt when you see their hardship there is more to lose when you can feel their loss too. And when everyone loses it only makes the hope stronger, in the end.
It's been awhile since I read the play so I forgot about how Torvald was more anxious and desperate to keep Nora, whereas in the performance he kind of let her leave. I think both Nora and Torvald had personal complications to overcome and maybe Nora leaving was a good thing for both of them to focus on what matters most in life.
ReplyDeleteAubin, glad you found "Nora." I think it's an interesting companion piece to A Doll House. I considered showing it in class but there never seems to be enough time to explore all the rich themes in this play.
ReplyDelete