SIR SYED COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL TRAINING

CAMPUS-X

B. English (Hons) 4 Years Degree Program, Semester-II

Assignment
Subject:
Literary and Practical Criticism
Topic:
Marxist Analysis of Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House
Submitted to:
Ma’am Aiman Rehman
Submitted by:
Irsa Naz
Bisma Kiran
Sidra Tul Muntaha
Due Date:
21st June, 2022
Submission Date:
21st June,2022
Karl Marx was born on 5 May, 1818, in Trier, a small, originally Roman, city on the river Moselle. He was a
German philosopher, critic of political economy, economist, historian, sociologist, political theorist, journalist
and socialist revolutionary. His best-known works includes the 1848 pamphlet The Communist Manifesto and
the three-volume Das Kapital (1867–1883). Marx's political and philosophical thought had a great influence on
succeeding intellectual, economic, and political history.

Marx and Engels founded Marxist theory and they have published The Condition of Working Class, about what
they were experiencing in England, based on personal observations and research in Manchester, England. In
1848 they co-authored The Communist Manifesto. Engels then also supported him financially to do his research
work and while writing Das Kapital.

In Das Kapital, Marx argues that society is composed of two main classes: Bourgeoisie (capitalists), who
control the means of production, and Proletariat (labor), transforms raw commodities into valuable economic
goods.

Marx wrote that the power relationships between capitalists and workers were inherently exploitative and would
inevitably create class conflict. It will inevitably lead to revolutionary communism. He believed that this
conflict between them would ultimately result into a revolution in which the working class would overthrow the
capitalist class and has the power to seize control of the economy.

His theory has three main elements:

1. a materialist conception of history;

2. a critique of capitalism and its inner workings; and

3. an account of the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism and its eventual replacement by communism.

Socialism, for Marx, is a society which permits the actualization of man’s essence, by overcoming his
alienation. It believes in equality; everyone should get equal rights. It actually creates the conditions for men to
live in truly free state, rational, active and become independent man; it is the fulfillment of the prophetic aim
and also the destruction of the idols.

Thus, Marx thought that the capitalist system inherently causes destruction. The alienation and exploitation of
the proletariat or labor (working class) that are fundamental or important to capitalist relations, can make them
both rebellions against the bourgeoisie, and by seizing the control of the means of production. The enlightened
leaders would have led this revolution, known as “the vanguard of the proletariat,” who understood the class
structure of society and who would have the power to unite the working class by giving them awareness and
class consciousness.
Marxism is mainly concerned with the difference and fight between the working class and the bourgeoisie and it
favors communism and socialism over capitalism.

The final three sentences of the Communist Manifesto states that;

“The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Proletarians of All Countries,
Unite!”

Marxism a revolutionary theory of social change and a radical philosophy authored by Karl Marx, is considered
a fusion of German philosophy in which the dialectics of Hegel is of greater importance. “Marxism is based on
materialistic understanding of social development which includes social relation, political and legal
system, morality and ideology” Rani (2018). Hegel’s dialectics claim that the world, is progression of two
opposing elements, one is thesis and the other is the anti-thesis, which results in the rise of synthesis. He
explained that it is a contradictory process with opposing elements and is mainly viewed as unity of opposites.
In Hegel’s point of view, history is that contradictory progression which passes through several ‘stages’ and
then reach the truth or Absolute idea. Marx took that dialectic theory but rejected the conclusion as idealistic
saying that the theory was “standing on its head” rather than its feet. According to Marx’s materialist theory,
history is a continuous series of struggle between different classes, and revolutionary revolt which leads to
freedom ultimately. In contrast to the historical idealism of Hegel, Marx concluded that history is driven by the
economic condition of that age. “Before men can do anything else,” Marx wrote, “they must first produce
the means of their subsistence.” According to Marx, the material production is crucial for living and requires
two things; “material forces of production” or the rough or raw material needed for production and “social
relation of production” or the division of labor through which the material is processed. In prior societies, the
material production was easy and less complex but with the advancement of technology, a massive revolution
occurred in both elements. In Marx’s point of view, industrialist capitalism is an economic system in which two
contradictory classes are there. One class, the bourgeoisie owns the means of production and is the privileged
class while the other ones, the proletariats, loose their independence as a mere “appendage of the machine”
and are the deprived ones.

In his book ‘Communist Manifesto’ (1848), Marx argued that ‘The history of all hitherto society is the history
of the class struggles’. Class struggle happens when the rich business owners (called bourgeoisie) pay everyday
workers (called proletariat), to make things for them to sell. The workers have no say in their pay or what things
they make, since they cannot live without a job or money. Marx claimed that the main reason of the class
struggle is the difference between relation and means of production and is emerged on the basis of ‘class in
itself’ and ‘class for itself’.

The second main aspect of Marx’s theory was Critique of Capitalism. Marx argued that the human history is
composed of several stages of progress, from ancient feudalism to capitalism and in each stage a dominant class
was overpowering the deprived ones by using them as labors. But the upheavals lead to the replacement of the
ruling class by its successors. Thus, Marx predicted that the bourgeoisie will be overthrown by the proletariat
and capitalism will be replaced by the communism. “Political Economy regards the proletarian ... like a
horse, he must receive enough to enable him to work. It does not consider him, during the time when he is
not working, as a human being. It leaves this to criminal law, doctors, religion, statistical tables, politics,
and the beadle.” Marx, Wages of Labor (1844). The labor theory of value was another major pillar of Marxist
theory which simply states that; “The values of commodities are directly as the times of labor employed in
their production, and are inversely as the productive powers of the labor employed.” The theory was not
unique to Marx but he tried to turn the tables against the champions of capitalism through this theory. He
claimed that the theory implies on all the commodities, including the “Labor Power”. Marx was then asked a
question that if all the wages will depend upon the working hours, how do capitalists manage to squeeze out a
residual between total revenue and total costs? To which Marx answered that the capitalists must enjoy a
powerful place and are therefore able to ruthlessly exploit workers. Marx was vague at this point, as if one
working hour is equal to one dollar, so what if a product costing five dollars takes twelve hours for the
production, thus, the economics profession rejected the labor theory of value.

Marx also introduced his notion of alienation which argues that people can successfully demolish an advanced
and developed market-based society and replace it with a comprehensively planned democratic society.
According to Marx, the system of production of capitalist creates the alienation of entire working class. He gave
four different ways that are used to alienate the workers. 1) They are alienated from their product as it benefits
the capitalists instead of the worker, on a wage-labor agreement. 2)They are alienated from the production work
itself. 3) They are alienated from their true inner-self 4) They are alienated by their co-workers. Marx begins his
analysis of alienated labor by noting what happens to workers under capitalism. As the worker creates wealth,
this wealth is created for the capitalist and not for the worker or direct producer, and the condition of the worker
deteriorates. The worker produces commodities, out of these commodities’ capital is created, and capital comes
to dominate the worker. The worker him or herself becomes devalued (worth less – lower wages) as a result.

“We shall begin from a contemporary economic fact. The worker becomes poorer the more wealth he
produces and the more his production increases in power and extent. The worker becomes an ever-
cheaper commodity the more goods he creates. The devaluation of the human world increases in direct
relation to the increase in value of the world of things. Labor does not only create goods; it also produces
itself and the worker as a commodity, and indeed in the same proportion as it produces goods.”
(Manuscripts, p. 13)
Marx gave the idea of communist society as the last solution to the class struggle and capitalism. He argued that
when the communist society will establish, no class struggle will exist and every individual will be equally
privileged. ‘From each according to his capacity, to each according to his needs’ (1848).

According to Karl Marx in his work “Communist Manifesto” which introduced the concept of socialism,
published in 1848, society is organized according to social classes, among which are oppressors and oppressed
bourgeois and proletariats. In the 19th century, husband-wife relationships were influenced by these competing
forces of tyranny. The relationship between Torvald and Nora in Henrik Ibsen's play Doll’s house, published in
1879, is reflected in the relationship between bourgeoisie and proletariat. As a result of the Industrial
Revolution, a new socio-economic class emerged during Ibsen's life. This new class sought to dismantle the
aristocrats and their former order, but in support of the Victorian ideas and morals that became known as the
bourgeois respect. This way of life emphasized morality, purity, a debt-free life, and strict adherence to social
customs and laws.

Ibsen wants to reveal the social hypocrisy of this concept and promote the noble character that he believed
would ultimately come from women, working-class men, and those who "get true freedom”. Marxist theory is
applicable on The Dolls House because Nora was a member of the bourgeoisie at the beginning of the play, but
Nora's rebellion against Torvald leads her to become a member of the proletarian at the end. Karl Marx calls on
the proletariat to stand up against their oppressors, and Nora does so towards the end of the play. All characters
are affected by a lack of money and are coordinating and thinking about their entire life. As a result, Marxist
themes are predominantly pervasive throughout the drama.

Materialism, according to Marx, is that the material world, as perceived by the sensations, has objective reality
separate from mind and spirit. He did not deny the existence of mental or spiritual processes, but he did assert
that ideals could only develop as products and reflections of economic situations. All the characters in the play
are influenced by the need for money and the acquisition, and their overall outlook for life is directed to it. As a
result, the Marxist theme pervades much of the drama and can be seen from the perspective of the main
character. As protagonist Nora has been obsessed with money since her husband Torvalds announced her
promotion and her salary increase in three months. After she returns from her shopping, she joins the play with
"arms load of packages". Nora has a perspective on life that is mostly based on material success and financial
stability. Nora has accepted that she now belongs to a higher class as a result of Torvalds' success.

The Christmas tree possibly represents Nora's concern with money because she used to hand-craft ornaments,
but now that she's become wealthy, she thinks that doing so would make her "think poor." Because they can
afford to "let themselves go for a bit," she thus overspends on gifts and décor. She maintains that they may
"borrow till then" even though Torvald's increase has not yet been applied, when in the past she and Torvald
would have saved every penny they could to survive by. When her friend Kristine visits, she immediately brings
up her husband's new job, declaring that she feels "so light and happy" (49) since they now "have stacks of
money and not a care in the world" (49). When Kristine responds that it would be wonderful "to have
enough for the necessities,"

Torvald seems to be more careful with his money, but he, too, based his view on life and relationships
exclusively on money and the position it provides. When he hears Nora return from shopping, he wonders
whether "his little spendthrift has been out throwing money around again," (44) and warns her that they
"can't go squandering" (44) Torvald is concerned not just with his financial situation, but also with his social
standing. His love for Nora is utterly eradicated when he discovers she borrowed money from Krogstad with a
fake signature, and he claims she's "ruined all his happiness" (106). He only worries about his reputation
because “it’s got to seem like everything is the same between us-to the outside world, at least” (106). At the
end of the play, suddenly he was able to love her again after Krogstad hands them the message and swears he
won't tell anybody about it. “I’m saved, I’m saved! Oh, and you too” (107) Torvald's perspective of view on
accomplishment, whether in marriage or business, is centered on financial independence and prosperity.

Both Kristine and Krogstad also have a Marxist theme running through them. Kristine married another person
despite her feelings for Krogstad because "his prospects seemed hopeless back then," (95), and she needed to
be able to care for her mother and brothers. Despite the fact that their love was restored in the end, it was almost
doomed “simple for money" (95). She won't even give up the job she stole from him when she returns to
Krogstad, since she needs to care for herself she tells Nora that in her situation, "you have to live, and so you
grow selfish" (52). Because her entire life and mindset is a product of her economic condition at the time of her
actions, this is a Marxist viewpoint.

To maintain his family, Krogstad committed a crime, and when his employment was endangered, he attempted
all he could to save it, including blackmail, claiming he would fight for it "like life itself" (64) if needed. "It
was your husband who forced me to revert to my old ways," (88), but in reality, it was his financial
condition that pressed his hand and made him blackmail Nora, just as it was the reason he committed a crime
years before.

Torvald and Nora's whole relationship was based on materialistic values. This was only a mask for her, one she
couldn't bear in the end. She is completely submissive to her husband on the surface, but she desperately wants
for recognition and affection that Torvald is unable to provide. She was expected to be satisfied with her
existence, despite the fact that it was neither fair nor equitable. When Nora expresses her want for Torvald to
bear responsibility for her crime, Torvald responds that "no man would ever forsake his honor for the one he
loves," to which Nora responds that "millions of women have done just that." (70)

Nora: "No, I have never been happy. I thought I was, but it has never really been so."
Torvald: "Not - not happy!"

Nora: "No, only merry. And you have always been so kind to me. But our home has been nothing but a
playroom. I have been your doll wife, just as at home I was Papa's doll child; and here the children have
been my dolls. I thought it great fun when you played with me, just as they thought it great fun when I
played with them. That is what our marriage has been, Torvald."(Ibsen 67).

By using a Marxist lens to the above sentence, we can argue that Torvald reflects the bourgeoisie, or the person
with power who controls the proletariat (Nora), who has less power in their relationship. Torvald can reflect the
bourgeoisie because he is the one who provides Nora money and controls what occurs in their relationship,
whilst Nora is the lower figure who receives the money and is subservient to Torvald's wishes. This parallel
may lead to a conclusion that Nora is preparing and/or wishing to initiate a rebellion against the "bourgeoisie"
after understanding Torvald has been using her as a "doll" (like her father did as well). This is seen when Nora
chooses to leave Torvald and continue living on her own, indicating Nora's ability to overcome Torvald's
oppression. Nora's actions are supported by Karl Marx's principles since she would no longer be subjugated by
a higher authority, and the critique allows us to perceive their connection in this light (which is in terms of
social classes and struggles)

‘A Doll’s House’ by Henrik Ibsen portrays a Marxist view of society in which the privileged class or the
‘bourgeoisie’ oppresses the lower class or the ‘proletariat’. Marxist view of class struggle can be clearly traced
in the text as most of the characters struggle to become a part of higher class. All the characters were striving
and were affected by the needs of money. Nora, the protagonist of the play was a major example. In past, she
used to do odd jobs in order to make money.

Nora: yes; odds and ends, needlework, crochet-work, embroidery and that kind of thing.

Except Nora, her Husband Torvald Helmer also faced the oppression and struggled hard to reach the higher
status. He also had to take on more then one job which was all due to the class struggle. . But at the end, as
Marx said that the class struggle leads to the proletariat revolution we can see, how Torvald who at first
belonged to a lower class become a part of bourgeoisie.

Nora: ….. he overworked himself dreadfully. You see, he had to make money every way he could, and he
worked early and late….

For Example, In the beginning of the play, Krogstad was a major example of Marxist view of class struggle in
the play as due to his dark past, he was unable to get a reasonable job for his living. Nils Krogstad tried to get
the job in the bank by threatening Nora to convince her husband to consider him for the job. Krogstad used
dishonest way to reach his goal and to be a part of rich community.
Krogstad: Besides, it would be very foolish. Just one domestic storm, and it's all over. I have a letter in my
pocket for your husband-

Nora: Telling him everything?

Krogstad: Sparing you as much as possible.

Nora: [Quickly.] He must never read that letter. Tear it up. I will manage to get the money somehow-

Krogstad: Pardon me, Mrs. Helmer, but I believe I told you-

Nora: Oh, I'm not talking about the money I owe you. Tell me how much you demand from my husband- I will
get it.

Krogstad: I demand no money from your husband.

Nora: What do you demand then?

Krogstad: I will tell you. I want to regain my footing in the world. I want to rise; and your husband shall help
me to do it. For the last eighteen months my record has been spotless; I have been in bitter need all the time; but
I was content to fight my way up, step by step. Now, I've been thrust down again, and I will not be satisfied
with merely being reinstated as a matter of grace. I want to rise, I tell you. I must get into the Bank again, in a
higher position than before. Your husband shall create a place on purpose for me-.

Nora: He will never do that!

Krogstad: He will do it; I know him- he won't dare to show fight! And when he and I are together there, you
shall soon see! Before a year is out, I shall be the manager's right hand. It won't be Torvald Helmer, but Nils
Krogstad, that manages the Joint Stock Bank. (Ibsen 44-45)

The scene shows how Krogstad wanted to ‘rise’ to a ‘higher position’ then before. His life was not ‘spotless’
from the beginning but he wanted to rise to a higher position as of Torvald who belonged to the upper class. Just
as said in the theory of Marxism that class struggle occurs when the poor are not given the equal wages as of the
rich, for which he introduced the concept of communist society.

The theme of Alienation is prominent throughout the novel A Dolls House, Henrik Ibsen demonstrates how
family, and the pressure and expectations presented by society are a determining factor in alienation.

Tolvard is the breadwinner of his family, a husband to Nora who is a former lawyer and a banker who also
responsible to control the means of production. This is because he is responsible to hire workers at the bank
where he gave a position to Mrs Linde. He was stuck in a system where he is being controlled and able to
control other people as well. He cares for his status as the higher class where he is concerned about Nora’s
appearance to maintain his good name.
From the start of the play, he refers to her as his “little squirrel” or “little skylark,” talking to her as if she was
a child rather than his wife. He even tries to limit her diet by not permitting her to consume sweets, though she
does not listen, as she eats multiple macaroons in Act I. Being in such a relationship is restricting to Nora;
although, she has not yet realized it at this point in the story. When her husband’s true colors are revealed,
however, she recognizes that he sees her a doll rather than an actual human worthy of his respect. She parallels
her relationship with Torvald to her relationship with her children and explains to him, “But our home has
been nothing but a playroom. I have been your doll wife, just as at home I was Papa’s doll child; and here
the children have been my dolls. I thought it great fun when you played with me, just as they thought it
great fun when I played with them”

Torvald also recently received a promotion to bank manager and is in a higher position than Nora. Therefore,
since he has a senior status over Nora, Torvald feels as if he can treat her as a little creature

Nora starts to understand what is really going on when she says, “we have been married now for eight years.
Does it not occur to you that this is the first time we two, you and I, husband and wife, have had a serious
conversation?”

In the play A Doll’s House, playwright Henrik Ibsen depicts the character Nora, a young lady who chooses to
exile herself from her home and her family, creating both an alienating and enriching experience in which she
attempts to find her own identity. Her decision to leave her husband and children reveals the lengths women had
to take to become independent.

Nora saved her husbands life, although Helmer cares more about his honor and about what people will think
about him than his own life. Helmer would rather be dead than lose his honor and keep on living. He is so
obsessed with keeping up to societal views and expectations that he says, "No religion, no morality, no sense
of duty. How am I punished for having winked at what he did! I did it for your sake, and this is how you
repay me"

Given the historical context of the era in which the play takes place, women were expected to fulfill the
stereotypical housewife role and take care of their families. Torvald recognizes this when he says to Nora, “You
blind, foolish woman! To desert your home, your husband, and your children! And you don’t consider
what people will say! It’s shocking. This is how you would neglect your most sacred duties”. Her decision
to abandon all that she knows will most definitely lead to her isolation from not only her family but also society
if she were ever to return to the city with Torvald; it was unheard of for women to merely pack up their
belongings and leave their home as Nora did.

Torvald cares not only about money, but also about his social status and reputation as well. When he finds out
that Nora borrowed money from Krogstad with a forged signature, his love for her is suddenly completely gone,
and he accuses her of destroying all of his happiness. Even though he is absolutely appalled by his wife's act, he
insists that "it must appear as if everything between us were just as before—but naturally only in the eyes
of the world”. Later, however, when Krogstad returns the bond with the forged signature and promises not to
tell a soul about what happened, Trovald is suddenly able to love his wife again! He still only cares about
himself, and this is portrayed when he jumps for joy exclaiming “I’m saved, I’m saved!” Nora is only an
afterthought when it comes to his reputation.

Nora was always doing what was best for Helmer and never what was best for herself. The only time that she
actually did what was best for herself was at the very end when Nora says, “I must stand quite alone, if I am
to understand myself and everything about me”. The importance of what Nora says here is that she has been
alienated from even herself. The first time in her marriage that Nora finds out who she really is occurs when
Nora really speaks her own mind for once. Nora also figures out that the eight years she had been married to
Torvald, there was never any love between them, and it was completely artificial. Nora proves this when she
says, “You have never loved me. You have only thought it pleasant to be in love with me.”

Henrik Ibsen wrote A Dolls House during an era when men had a much higher rank in society than women. He
tried to show this difference when he wrote A Dolls House because in the end Nora leaves Helmer. The kind of
ending that Ibsen used is very unique because it disproved the common societal views. It also showed that in the
end society can alienate everyone. Henrik Ibsen's theme of alienation is very apparent throughout A Dolls
House, because of family roles, relationships, and societal views and expectations..