Realizations regarding individual and collective truths permit characters in The Plague and A Doll's House to attain freedom through rejecting past perceptions of their reality.

Authors Avatar

Tim Flynn

English 4 Honors

Comparative Essay

Period 7

Realizations regarding individual and collective truths permit characters in The Plague and A Doll’s House to attain freedom through rejecting past perceptions of their reality. Camus and Ibsen, in their respective works, address the discovery of truth and actuality as being a catalyst to bring forth freedom to their imprisoned characters. The delayed realizations exhibited by characters in each work regarding the reality of their situation and the necessity for personal growth through their roles in life allow them to break free from outlooks that have previously restrained them.

The consciousness that there is an unreliability in appearances is seen in both works and serves to liberate the characters from their present reality. Over the course of A Doll’s House, appearances prove to be misleading facades that mask the reality of the play’s situations. Several instances of situational misinterpretation exist between the characters. The seeming hatred or revulsion between Mrs. Linde and Krogstad turns out to be love, Nora’s creditor turns out to be Krogstad and not, as inferred by Mrs. Linde, Dr. Rank. Additionally, Dr. Rank, to Nora’s surprise, confesses that he is in love with her and the blackmailer, Krogstad repents and returns Nora’s contract to her, while the seemingly kindhearted Mrs. Linde ceases to help Nora and forces Torvald’s discovery of Nora’s secret. The instability of appearances within the Helmer household at the play’s end results from Torvald’s devotion to an image at the expense of the creation of true happiness. By play’s end, it is seen that Torvald’s obsession with controlling his home’s appearance and his repeated suppression and denial of reality have harmed his family and his happiness irreparably. This of course, the recognition for what Torvald and Nora’s marriage really is, proves to be the greatest realization of the play, most notably for Nora.  It is clear throughout the play that Torvald’s fatherly treatment of Nora such as when addressing her by childish animal nicknames like “my little skylark” and “my squirrel,” that not only does he assert his power over her but he also dehumanizes her to a degree. When he implies that Nora is comparable to the “little birds that like to fritter money,” Torvald suggests that Nora lacks some fundamental male ability to deal properly with financial matters. Though Torvald accuses Nora of being a “spendthrift”, he gives her more money in order to elicit a happy reaction, almost as a parent placates a complaining child to calm him down. However, as Nora’s childish innocence and faith in Torvald fade, so too do all of her illusions. She sees that Torvald does not see her as a person, but rather as a beautiful thing. She comes to realize that Torvald never really loved her but “thought it pleasant to be in love with [her].” (66) Nora’s realization that her marriage is not what she thought it to be, that in actuality she is Torvald’s doll which he uses to decorate his home but whom he does not ultimately have true care for her, is what grants her freedom. Interpretation of a situation’s reality serves either to free an individual or further imprison them. As in A Doll’s House, the same is true in The Plague as when the epidemic first begins to take shape in the novel’s opening. From the novel’s outset it is made clear that habits are “precisely what [Oran] encourages” (5) and any disruption to those habits or lifestyles is greatly unappreciated. As a result, no one gives a great deal of concern to the phenomenon of the exponential number of dead rats and almost everyone interprets the situation as something vastly different than what it is; they do not wish  to acknowledge that something will disrupt their routines. Several perceptions such as M.Michel’s belief that “some youngster trying to be funny” (8) was responsible for the placement of dead rats in the apartment building, or Rieux’s asthma patient believing that hunger led the rats to die in droves, are rationalizations for an irrational phenomena and they continually inhibit the people of Oran to deal with the ensuing problem and free themselves. Oran’s citizens essentially imprison themselves in that they are all too ready to deny that a collective problem should concern them at all, the hotel manager where Tarrou is staying is more upset that “everyone is in the same boat” than he is with the dire implications of so many dead rats. Furthermore, when the plague eventually starts spreading to humans, everyone else deems it another’s responsibility to deal with the mysterious illness. The government officials and medical community (with the exception of Rieux and Castel) do not want to disrupt the status quo, so they waste time discussing whether the disease is definitely contagious and whether it is definitely the bubonic plague. They misinterpret the situation however in that they shouldn’t be concerned with what the disease is so much as their collective duty to prevent its spreading throughout Oran. It is only when self-centered interests are put aside, such as in the formation of anti-plague efforts and Rambert’s eventual decision to stay in Oran acknowledging the plague affects him too, that freedom is granted to each citizen in their recognition of the situation and the need to address it. It is only when each work’s main characters truly grasp the reality of their plight that they free themselves from their past beliefs.

Join now!

Moreover, realizations made by characters in each work regarding their personal and collective responsibilities, as well as their need to grow, frees them from a static and meaningless life. Though initially the marriage between Nora and Torvald seems blissful, almost ideal, it becomes apparent that such is clearly not the case. Therefore, though Nora’s position as Torvald’s wife allots her certain indemnities in the form of money and, unrealized by her, a fraud happiness, her existence is without a personal meaning or drive. Nora’s only discernible function throughout the majority of the play is to be the trophy wife of ...

This is a preview of the whole essay