A Doll's House Analytical Essay

Words: 1217
Pages: 5

The play A Doll’s House by Henrik Ibsen details the story of a woman questioning her obligation to her husband and pursuing freedom from the suppressing restraints of her marriage – a controversial theme that stunned and offended audiences of the day and substantiated Ibsen’s name as a playwright beyond his mother nation Norway. The play, being set in the late 1800’s, serves as the perfect platform to debate gender roles in marriage and society. To execute his plan of discussing social change, Ibsen used the supporting character Dr. Rank to establish the underlying subject of social conflicts. Dr. Rank’s role in A Doll’s House is to foreshadow future events, symbolize the decay of Victorian society and Nora’s marriage, and illustrate the actuality …show more content…
Rank in A Doll’s House is to foreshadow future developments in the play. From the time the audience is introduced to Dr. Rank in Act I, they are provided with details into the antagonist Nils Krogstad’s past that hint at his future attempt at blackmailing the Helmer family. When Dr. Rank enters the story, he inquires as to why Nora’s guest is overcome with exhaustion from merely climbing the stairs. Mrs. Linde admits that she is overworked but must find work in order to survive, and Dr. Rank retorts by telling her that he finds continuing to work to be a poor solution to exhaustion from strenuous labor. Mrs. Linde defends her actions by insisting that one must do whatever they can to live and that he, too, must want to live. Rank’s response to Nora and Mrs. Linde is foreboding. He admits that he and all his physically ill patients have the same irrational desire to live, and it is the same for those whose that are morally ill. Dr. Rank then points out that Nora’s husband “talking to just such a moral incurable” (Ibsen 10). The moral incurable that Dr. Rank is referring to is Nils Krogstad, and here he offers the information that Krogstad is an unsavory, morally sick person who should not be trusted nor allowed to keep them company, and most likely comes to the house with sinister intentions. Dr. Rank’s accusations toward Krogstad are later proven to be correct in the play when Krogstad makes his move to procure his job at the bank. Dr. Rank …show more content…
Rank with a third function to the play: reflecting the accurate and honest personalities of his two friends Nora and Torvald. Rank brings out the reality of their personalities due to the fact that his friendships with the two of them are starkly different. Nora feels that she is able to discuss more freely and seriously with Dr. Rank that she is with her own husband. This can be seen when Nora tells Dr. Rank that while she loved her father the most, it always excited her “to steal into the servants’ room,” where “they never lectured” her and that “with Torvald it’s the same as with” her father (26-27). From this disclosure from Nora to Dr. Rank the audience is told that Nora is hiding her real self in order to satisfy her husband. When with Dr. Rank, Nora feels that she no longer has to play the role of a plaything assigned to her by both her father and her husband. Dr. Rank’s close relationship with Torvald is also very informative, as it highlights the incongruity and variance in Torvald’s own personality and moral character. Early on in the play, Torvald relays the repercussions of Nils Krogstad’s dishonesty and immorality, claiming that by being morally corrupt, Krogstad is “poisoning his own children” with “a life of lies and hypocrisy” (18). This bridges with the reality that Dr. Rank himself is the result of a morally ill father, yet Torvald happily remains satisfied in their companionship. Their relationship proves that Torvald