Krogstad is one of the most complex characters from Ibsen’s A Doll’s House. Initially, Krogstad appears to be the villain of the play. Nora owes Krogstad a great deal of money. Krogstad uses the existence of her debt to blackmail Nora, threatening to inform her husband of her debt and her forgery if she does not use her influence to secure his position at the bank. Krogstad serves at a catalyst which brings about the central conflict of the play. However, Krogstad has other roles as well. Krogstad is a foil to Nora. He had been the exact same situation that Nora is in now. He had forged a signature to save the life of someone dear to him. Krogstad is also a foil to Torvald. Whereas Torvald continues to advance in society, Krogstad is at risk at losing his livelihood and reputation. In an unexpected twist, Krogstad becomes the hero of the play by the end. When love and hope is restored to him, he withdraws his threats against Nora and forgives her debt, saving Nora from suicide or from a life of ignominy. When Krogstad makes his first entrance, the audience senses that he portends evil. Nora “starts” and “trembles” at his voice (Ibsen). Dr. Rank says that Krogstad “suffers from a diseased moral character” (Ibsen). Torvald says that Krogstad has been “persistently poisoning his own children with lies and dissimulation” (Ibsen). It is obvious that Nora and Krogstad have a secret, but uncomfortable, relationship. Nora becomes nervous when she sees him, but pretends that she does not know who he is when speaking to others. Krogstad works at the bank where Torvald has just been appointed as director. Krogstad senses that he will be dismissed when Torvald assumes the supervision of the place. Therefore, he comes to Nora asking her to u... ... middle of paper ... ...t to blackmail to bring about his desires. However, when one learns more about Krogstad, one sees that he is desperately trying to prove himself to his society in order that he may support his children. Krogstad became a social outcast because society was unforgiving. It could not forgive Krogstad for committing a crime for a greater good. Krogstad becomes redeemed by love and learns to forgive. He forgives Christine for forsaking him; he also forgives Nora of her debt. While Torvald is ungrateful of his wife’s love, Krogstad appreciates the new life given to him and is resolved to reform his life. Furthermore, Krogstad serves as the catalyst which prompts the process of Nora’s maturation. In the process, he has also changed into becoming a kinder man. By the end of the play, the future looks bright and promising for Krogstad as he begins a new life with Christine.
Henrik Ibsen was the first to introduce a new realistic mode in theater when he wrote the play A Doll’s House. The ending of the third act of this play was not accepted due to the controversy that it caused during the nineteenth century, because in this era women were not allowed to act the way Nora did, but through women’s movements society slowly started to accept it.
With his question, Krogstad illustrates his more humane characteristics by recognizing human emotion, portraying him with more than simply a base desire for societal destruction, unlike what many other characters believe. Additionally, Krogstad underscores that, while his actions remain immoral, neither Nora nor Torvald “think of [Krogstad’s children],” before Torvald gave him his notice, implying that he possesses at least a partially selfless motivation to keep his job (86). As Krogstad considers more than himself in his negotiations, the play illustrates that his nature remains inherently complex, steadily moving him away from the role of a static antagonist. Furthermore, Krogstad conveys that he “want[s] to recoup” rather than receive any monetary compensation, indicating that he dedicated the previous “year and a half” to heighten his social status in the community
With his question, Krogstad illustrates his humane characteristics, implying that his actions primarily stem from a need for survival rather than a complete desire for the destruction of society. Additionally, Krogstad underscores that, while his actions remain immoral, neither Nora nor Torvald “think of [Krogstad’s children],” before Torvald gave him his notice, implying that he possesses at least a partially selfless motivation to keep his job (86). As Krogstad considers more than himself in his negotiations, the play illustrates that his nature remains inherently complex, steadily moving him away from the role of a static antagonist. Furthermore, Krogstad conveys that he “want[s] to recoup” rather than receive any monetary compensation, indicating that he dedicated the previous “year and a half” to heighten his social status in the community
Weintraub, Stanley. ""Doll's House" Metaphor Foreshadowed in Victorian Fiction." Nineteenth-Century Fiction 13: 67-69. Web. 6 Jan. 2011.
Krogstad is different from Torvald because he is not as well off economically and socially and this leads him to try an extremer form of manipulation. Krogstad is desperate to keep his job at the bank and tries to get Nora to secure the job with her husband through blackmail. Since he was once found to be forging documents, his reputation has been flaky, so in order to regain his reputation for his sons: "For their sake I must win back as much respect as I can in the town" (22), he needs to keep his job at the bank.
Although Krostad’s blackmail does not change Nora’s whimsical nature, it opens her eyes to her underappreciated potential. “I have been performing tricks for you, Torvald,” (Find a different quote perhaps?) she exclaims in her confrontation with Torvald. She realizes that she has been putting on a facade for him throughout their marriage. Acting like someone she is not in order to fill the role that her father, Torvald, and society expected her to have.
...d children. The final mask of Krogstad that is seen is that of love and caring. In the end Kristine goes back to Krogstad stating that she always loved him and only left him because “I had a helpless mother and two small brothers. We couldn’t wait for you” (Ibsen, 1225). In the end it is Krogstad who has changed for the better, not Nora or Helmer. It is the very man that Torvald so easily condemned for his past mistakes.
Lastly, the amount of deception and dishonesty between Nora and Torvald would have broken the marriage even without Krogstad’s extortion plot. Both Nora and Torvald are living in a world of lies, and both of them are not honest with each other and themselves. In the beginning of the play, Torvald and Nora are portrayed to be a perfect couple with a perfect life. Nora is seen returning home after a day of shopping and is greeted lovingly by her husband. Even though they seemed to have had some financial troubles in the past, Torvald just received a new job as a bank manager and everything seemed to be alright, but behind the scenes nothing was alright.
His appearance in the story proves to be the catalyst forcing Nora to examine how happy she is hiding secrets from her husband for fear that he would not love her if he finds out. Because both are the lone ones in A Doll’s House who see every case about morality situationally, they starkly see how those who do not conform to society’s conventions are greatly ostracized. Krogstad has even experienced this isolation when he is shunned from his work place despite being fairly competent at his tasks. This unfair treatment lingers in Nora’s mind as she struggles with her own worries. To aid her toward the direction of self-honesty, Krogstad and Christine decide that the truth of Nora’s actions must be revealed since they have just finished their talk about their feelings and pasts. Ultimately, Nora realizes that no matter her efforts, she is fake for constantly trying to be someone she is not without finding who she really is. She sees that Torvald treats her horribly like how he treats Krogstad because both committed a similar crime, and she decides that if Torvald acts the same way to her as to a coworker for the sake of appearances, she is like a stranger to him. The two must separate to reflect in order to live a life without deceit, even if it means breaking this perfect doll-house life Nora has meticulously crafted for the past eight
A lawyer who has a job at Torvald’s bank. He lent Nora money to pay for the trip to Italy. Krogstad wants to keep his job to spare his children from the hardships of a spoiled reputation. Unlike Torvald, who selfishly seeks respect, Krogstad desires it for his family’s sake. He is willing to let Nora suffer, but claims to sympathize with her because their crimes are similar.
Nora’s life begins to fall apart with the arrival of Krogstad as Nora becomes fearful of him. The life Nora had now begins to slowly change as more people are added to the mix of visitors during the Christmas holid...
Krogstad creates an elaborate plan to blackmail Nora and tell her husband about her forgery if she does not persuade Torvald to keep him employed. This would lead to many legal consequences for Nora and would disrupt the family and Torvald 's business as he would take full blame for her illegal actions. Nora 's secret begins to eat at her as she contemplates what she is going to do to solve the problem. To the audience, Nora 's impression has been completely altered. The secret that Nora possesses, reveals to the audience that her character is much more than just a trophy-wife and an object. In the meantime, Nora begins to look for different ways in order to pay back all of her debts. Nora explains that she, "was lucky enough to get a lot of copying to do... [like] working and earning money" (Ibsen Act 2). Nora begins to deter from that of a traditional wife, and takes on the role of the man and begins working to pay back all of the debt. The audience begins to recognize that Nora is evolving into a determined and brave wife who is willing to protect her secret to support her
an example of the individual’s struggle against society” (Mitchell 136). She was punished severely for something that could be considered a petty crime and the crime ultimately led to her and Torvald’s separation and her leaving the house. In addition, “Christine Linde and Nils Krogstad’s subplot ending in marriage happens at the same time as Nora’s break with Torvald.” (Davies 51) The sharp contrast between the two creates conflict within the audience members because Krogstad is being rewarded for blackmail as Nora is being punished for saving her husband’s life.
Torvald explained to Nora that keeping Krogstad on at the bank would appear to others that he is easily swayed by his wife. Torvald has also complained about Krogstad’s use of his first name at the bank. Of course, Torvald’s true feelings about his appearance come out explicitly during his fit of rage in the end. Torvald is excessively consumed with how others view him and has no moral objections to having his wife perform sultry dances in front of other men.
As the play goes on, Nora seems to transform from her delicate little character into something much more. At the end of act one, Krogstad goes to Nora for the recollection of the money she had borrowed from him. "You don?t mean that you will tell my husband that I owe you money?" (21). Since Nora was wrong in doing so socially, she could not tell Torvald or anyone else about her problem. Not only would that affect their social standard but also Torvald's ego, which inevitably would happen anyway. After Krogstad threatens to expose Nora for forging her father's signature, she realizes that no matter what she does Torvald was going to know the truth. The flaw with...