The major characters in A Doll’s House are remarkably complex… we have an immediate reaction to them, but it’s tough to pin down why. So, in order both to get a stronger handle on that and to get some practice analyzing the formal features of this text, I want you to think about how both Nora and Helmer speak and how this informs the way we respond to them.
For EACH of the two characters, try to identify patterns in their diction, syntax, and in the kinds of rhetorical figures they use. In order to support your claim that what you identify is a pattern, identify multiple instances in which the patterns appear. You should identify several patterns (at least two for each character) and several instances of each.
After you have identified several patterns, take stock of your reaction to each character. Work with your groups to compose a list of three adjectives that you would apply to each character. Work hard to find vivid, strong adjectives that really give us a sense of who these characters are.
BONUS QUESTION:
If you get done with that activity before our time is up, here’s another question I wanted to address: one of the most important assumptions of this play is that morally reprehensible actions stay with a person, leaving a permanent mark on their characters, and sometimes even affecting the people around them (such as how Rank’s father’s misspent youth is responsible for his own illness). Do you agree with this assumption? Do you think that it’s an assumption that Ibsen personally holds, or merely one that his characters do? If one doesn’t hold this assumption, do Nora’s concerns about herself or Helmer’s concerns about Krogstad still make sense, or are they just reprehensible for not moving on from the past and letting bygones be bygones?
No comments:
Post a Comment