Torvald feels that society holds husbands responsible for their women’s actions, since women are not allowed to have any power and the men must posses it all. Torvald cites this argument to Nora by telling her that, “[It is] Very likely people will think I was behind it all – that it was I who prompted you” (Ibsen 60). It is this predicament that causes Torvald to get angry at Nora, and thereby appearing as if he is apathetic towards her plight. The expectation built up throughout the play that Torvald will understand all that Nora has undergone, is shattered. Moreover, the play only provides the argument from Nora’s view, as a result the audience supports her in her dilemma. Nora even tells Torvald,
I have existed merely to perform tricks for you, Torvald. But you would have it so. You and papa have committed a great sin against me. It is your fault that I have made nothing of my life. (Ibsen 63)
Nora is blaming Torvald, and his power hold on her for making her waste her life just for him. Torvald responds by saying how ungrateful she is. Torvald’s apparent apathy toward, caused by Torvald’s placement in society, moves the audience to feel the utmost sympathy for Nora, as Torvald does not understand, from Nora’s point of view, every thing she has gone through.
Jason’s reputation in Corinth places him in one of the highest circles of Greek society, the heroes. The nurse cites all his accomplishments at the beginning of the play, and says that they are to blame for the situation that exists. In Greece, heroes are supposed to be honorable men who keep to their promises, however, the nurse explains, “Jason has betrayed/ His own sons, and my mistress, for a royal bed” (Euripides 17). Jason’s high placement in society is connected to trust, nevertheless Jason betrayed Medea, which increases the pathos for Medea more than twice than if it was a just regular man.
Secondly, Jason states to Medea that his motives to marry Glauce are, “that we should live well / And not be poor… Next that I could bring up my sons / In a manner worthy of my decent”. (Euripides 33) However this plan is not known by the audience so they assume that Jason has only mal-intentions in mind. Therefore his plan, which leads to Medea’s sorrow, makes the audience feel pathos towards Medea.
Finally Jason’s new position as the son-in-law of the king puts him on par with a prince. In being the husband of the princess, there is no way that Medea would allow for it, thus Creon must banish her from the land. Jason tries to justify the situation by saying, “If you had quietly accepted the decisions/ of those in power” (Euripides 30). This disregard for Medea, because of his newly found power, places Medea even lower down in the power hierarchy, as she is no longer connected to Jason. The audience, which usually sympathizes the most with the protagonist when she lacks influence and power compared to the other main characters, sides with Medea and sympathizes with her.
In both plays the husband’s power is directly related to the pathos for the protagonist. In general the husband’s position causes him to carry out actions which negatively affect the protagonist emotionally. Whenever a protagonist is hurt emotionally the audience has the utmost pathos toward her. Nevertheless, the husband is more directly connected to the protagonist than just through actions. He is also a contrast for the protagonist’s power in society, and it is that reduction of power that motivates the protagonist to gain it back. The protagonist gaining power is part of character development, which also changes the attitude of the audience, and they come to respect the protagonist for everything she has been through. In a tragedy, it is the husband which triggers the catharsis, as in Medea where the audience starts to feel sorry for Jason and all that has befallen him. In a drama like A Doll’s House, the husband is the character who must fall in order for the audience to feel something similar to catharsis. At the end of the play, Torvald’s loss of his family and honor has left him in a dire situation, similar to Medea, therefore causing the audience to sympathize with him as well. Each of these scenarios is based on the movement of power of the husband, based on society.
In summary, the position that the husband posses in society, not only affects the pathos invoked towards the character, but is directly related to the catharsis. Each husband is used to contrast with his wife, thereby highlighting all the qualities needed in a strong heroine. Many of the husband’s actions, which are based on his position in society, creates and drives the conflict. However, in doing so, the conflict always resolves in a victorious heroine, or at least a miserable husband. The effects of this goes against the norms of their respective society, resulting a play that provokes thought as well as demonstrates the intricacies of society and marriage.
Works Cited
Euripides. Medea and other Plays. trans. Vellacott, Philip London: Penguin Books Ltd, 1963.
Ibsen, Henrik. Four Great Plays (1879). trans. R. Farquharson Sharp. New York:
Bantam Books, 1984.
