What is the significance of the sub-plot in ‘A Doll’s House’ Essay Example

better chance of a happy and true marriage than the latter, one based on mutual need, an open and truthful relationship, and emotional love. They had been in love once, but it was sacrificed by Kristina through financial necessity.

Made wiser from years of 'shipwrecked'1 lives, Kristina and Krogstad show maturity and now enter a relationship on roughly equal footing, each dependent on the other. In comparison, the Helmers' marriage was founded on the basis of Nora being fully dependent on Torvald. Nora has encouraged him to continue in this belief; the audience is made aware that Torvald is the economic manager, who feels that Nora is incapable and too immature to handle a matter of such importance. Despite their concern and love for each other, Torvald's stance of superiority over Nora is evident throughout most of the play. He treats her like a child rather than a mature woman - "being with Torvald is very like being with Papa"2 and their level of adult conversation is clearly conveyed when Nora finally stated "We've never exchanged a serious word on any serious subject"

Torvald has charge in all matters, even seemingly unimportant domestic arrangements such as his always keeping the key to the letterbox.Nora, meanwhile, is not fully honest with Torvald, in both words and deeds.

Her forgery, her secret job and her eating of the forbidden macaroons thus reveal her capability for deception of her husband. These negative aspects of their relationship further allow the audience to draw a contrast with those positive ones of Krogstad and Kristina's. Besides serving as a foil to the Helmers as a couple, Kristina and Krogstad also contribute to the audience's

understanding by individually contrasting with their respective counterparts. There is a striking contrast between Kristina and Nora in that Kristina has a sensible worldview compared to Nora's somewhat childlike outlook on life.

Kristina's experience here is important because, when we first meet her, she has what Nora chooses at the end of the play - independence from any immediate social responsibility. Kristina, widowed, also represents the hollowness of the role of mother and wife, acting as a foil for Nora's belief in the importance of motherhood and marriage. Using Kristina in a supporting role, Ibsen has opened the opportunity for Nora to reveal the secret that she has been keeping from Torvald.She is a confidante for Nora and witnesses that Nora is not a child, but just acting to fit into the role Torvald has made for her. The conversation leading up to Nora's revelation offers us a noteworthy clue as to why she reveals her deepest secret to Kristina, whom she has not been in contact for nearly a decade.

Nora's appearance and surroundings seem to define her as a winner in the game of life compared to Kristina, and she shows off to Kristina, inviting her guest's admiration of her and the life she has.But Kristina speaks slightingly of Nora, reminding her of her childishness, spendthrift ways and how little she has had to worry about in life, in effect, challenging her, "You're only a baby, Nora! "

That remark challenges Nora's ego and sets her talking about her forgery to prove how much she has been through and that other people's perception of her childishness is mistaken, subsequently allowing her the only chance to be

openly proud of saving Torvald's life. Kristina's insistence that Krogstad does not request the return of the letter is the play's turning point.Although he offers to take it back and avert any disclosure of the forgery, Kristina ceases to help Nora and instead forces Torvald's discovery of the secret. She is much more intelligently aware than Nora is of the consequences of Torvald receiving the news of his wife's forgery, displayed in Nora's attempts to stall Torvald from reading it. This also signifies her continued denial of the true nature of her marriage.

Kristina wants Torvald to find out the truth, "this wretched secret must be brought into the open so that there's complete understanding between them. That'd be impossible while there's so much concealment and subterfuge"

Kristina may have advocated revealing all to Torvald because, as her union with Krogstad suggests, she believes that it is possible to build a relationship of mutual dependence of unformed characters as long as both parties are fully aware of each other's motives. Kristina observes the inherent unfairness and dishonesty in the relationship.

Torvald, in her view, must face the reality of what he owes to his wife. Meanwhile, Krogstad is employed by Ibsen to elevate the tension leading up to the play's climax.He initially appears unfavourable to the audience as a selfish and pitiless man, described by Dr Rank as 'rotten to the core. '6 His arrival by the back-stairs, further establishes a sinister tone and approach.

Krogstad's two letters become an important aspect of the play; his first letter of blackmail, representing the truth about Nora's past, initiating the climax and the inevitable breakdown of her marriage. While his second

letter is a means through which Ibsen stages the anti-climax where the tension is released, representing her release from her obligation to Torvald. This results in the dissolution of the Helmers' relationship.Through the tension delivered by the letters, Torvald reveals a side of his character, a denial of reality, which ultimately led to Nora leaving him. Torvald and Krogstad have undergone role reversals, the former now the antagonist while the latter has completely turned over a new leaf, no longer caring only about money or position.

Abhorrent or rational, Krogstad's antagonising manners are necessary in his mind to assert his position and future. It makes it possible for the audience to understand that Krogstad is a victim of circumstances as society has stamped him with a criminal image that prohibits him from moving beyond his past.Although this does not justify his actions, it aligns him more closely with Nora, both committing the crime of forgery and being wronged by society. When Nora expresses her tension from the circumstance and her thought of suicide, Krogstad understands her condition, discourages her and empathises.

Therefore it lightens our perception of him as a loathsome character. Ibsen ensures that the audience sees only a compilation of Torvald's negative points: his entrenched views of male superiority, him brusquely dismissing his children rather than showing parental affection, and immaturity in facing life's reality; with little redeeming features.The negative impression developed towards Torvald further places Krogstad in a positive outlook; he therefore serves as a foil for Torvald. Krogstad reveals the truth, reforms, and becomes a better man. He tries to clean up his reputation and improve his social standing so that he can

be a better father to his children. Although Krogstad is a manipulator, this deception develops into the truth.

All the immoral actions he attempts involving Nora end up actually helping her. The position he placed her in made her realize that she needs a change in her life.We can therefore see the importance of the contribution that Krogstad and Kristina make to the play. They provide the audience with a contrasting perspective to that of Nora and Torvald's.

There are certainly similarities between the characters, but there are also differences. Both couples face similar problems, especially the need to face the truth in personal relationships. Their problems illustrate the basic theme of social conformity and bring out aspects of Nora's character that are essential to understanding her more fully.