A Doll’s House

Learning Stations

Station 1: Background Information

Probable passage: A dollhouse may be about a husband and a wife, the husband may be a con artist
who masqueraded around forging fake checks and turning them in in banks. However, when he was
caught, he was sent to prison, destroying his and his wife’s reputation. Following this, the husband was
helped by the black cross in prison, however, when he got out, the husband immediately became a
thief. One night, he was at a tarantella party with his wife when he decided to rob the host, slipping in
the door and leaving his wife outside, the husband went about trying to silently rob the house.
Someone heard him and called the police, when the man tried to escape he was shot while fleeing past
the mailbox, leading to his mortality.

Station 2: Contemporary Reviews

1. The audience left the performance feeling joyful and happy in a confused way because they
didn’t realise what the situation in the play was meant to be, funny or sad.
2. I would say that based on the author’s account, the wife is seeking to hide a secret from her
husband while keeping a happy facade while the husband is openly very materialistic and treats
her like a doll.
3. The secret the wife is trying to hide from her husband is that she is a criminal and that she broke
the law through forging her father’s, who died shortly after this, in order to gain wealth for her
husband.
4. I would say that Nora is a stressed out woman who wants to make sure that she is able to help
fix her own mistakes rather than her husband handling them in his own potentially careless and
heavy handed way.
5. He had made it up to look like an arrangement that was never meant to be long lasting, but only
until the couple realizes the inevitable truth that they would not do well together, in which case
they should not hesitate to arrange a divorce either immediately or in stages because there can
be no improvements on the marriage after their are difficulties encountered.
6. They wanted to dissolve the marriage because they believed that they thought that they were
never meant to be together anyway and because they are both viewed as morally reprehensible
and irresponsible people.
7. The critic is angry because he thinks that the author would rather have the dramatic effect of
the ending rather than having a moral ending that might actually happen.
8. Houses in which husbands treat their wives as inferiors and like the only purpose of their wife is
to amuse them.
9. The second critic is significantly more pleased with the play and encourages people to see it
while the first critic clearly did not like the play’s ending and the author’s apparent ignorance of
real life morals and situations.

Station 3: Defining Identity

Step 1: Rank and explain
● Sexual orientation: This is one of the most determining factors of your life, your sex will
determine some of your abilities and your social expectations.
● Education level: Your education determines your abilities to get a job and make a living, it will
determine the course of four life and in most cases the success level of your life.
● Behavior: Your behavior is how you choose to live your life and what will determine what other
people will think of you as a person.
● Beliefs and morality: These will determine your core values and what your goal in life may be.
● Country of origin: This determines the stability of your situation, if you were born in Syria, you
would clearly be worse off in most accounts than you would be having been born in America.
● Race or ethnicity: In humanity in general, all races will have someone against them or for them,
for example, some people are and will forever be convinced that black people are inferior while
some people will go the extra mile to help black people more than other races through things
like affirmative action.
● Religion: Religion or the absence of a religion is important, but it mainly stems from the
category of beliefs and morality.
● Social class: This is important, but not as determining as other factors of identity because it
holds a lower position in determining how happy your life will be than the other factors.
● Occupation: This will determine your income and ability to make a living.
● Gender: Stereotypical gender roles create social expectations, this is as far as I will go for want
of not getting into personal beliefs.

Step 2: Group definition of identity

My personal definition of identity because I was absent is the situations in life both that your have been
given that determine who you are as a person and will influence the actions you take in your daily life.

Station 4: Heinz Dilemma

Individual Reaction:
Yes, I believe that the druggist is morally corrupt and a thousand dollars would be more than enough to
pay for the medicine that cost $800 less to produce than what the man has, therefore the man has an
option to break into the lab and steal the medicine. He could then use the money he got to legally
defend himself. I think this is a clear option because the man
Group Discussion:
1. Their morals mainly and maybe some religious factors (Since I am doing this independently and
I was absent, I am just going off of myself).
2. He might face prison and maybe a bad reputation, but I think the potential reward of saving his
wife outweighs the risk or potential consequences.
3. No? I’m not sure whether or not Heinz should go for stealing the drug or try and get the woman
herself to get a loan.
 4. If his wife is completely awful to him, no. However, if she is still a decent human being, I think
that the husband would almost have a moral obligation to break in and get the drug.
5. I don’t think so. Of course they have feelings and would be hurt, but it would be a lie to say that
an animal life matters more than a human life unless the animal was a pet with immense
emotional value to the man and the man deemed it worth it to take that chance.
Consequences:
- The husband might go to jail
- The druggist would definitely be mad at the husband and would probably take legal action
against the husband
- The husband has a chance of keeping his money
- His wife might be saved from the cancer

Station 5: Essential Questions

1. They should never impede on your fundamental rights, I think that with the Heinz dilemma he
should do it, but under no circumstance should he be forced to do this. I think that if someone
wants to sacrifice their rights of even life for others, that is a choice that they are able to make,
but it should not be a requirement unless it was an extreme circumstance like an entire nation
or all of humanity depending on that one person sacrificing their life or rights.
2. I feel like there is to some extent a social construct made in the past that mothers are meant to
be loving and nurturing and a father should be a provider. I feel like it is the choice of a family in
general who plays what role or if it is a mix or roles between parents. Fundamentally, however, I
think that whether social construct or not, the parents should be obligated to be good parents
that do not abuse their children.
3. Of course, if a mother is a provider and the father is the one who stays at home more and
watches kids that wouldn’t make them any less of a good parent as long as they are treating
their children well.
4. No, although there is a societal construct, it is up to the parents how much they let the
construct influence their decisions, they have a clear right to say no and ignore the stereotypical
gender roles as long as they are being caring and responsible parents.
5. Yes and no, parents should play the roles of the societal construct combined. No matter who
plays what role, parents should make sure that between the mother and the father the kids are
provided for and cared for. In the question of what type of care children should get, I don’t think
that the ideas are outdated. In the respect of who plays what role I think the social construct is
outdated, as long as the roles are played, it doesn't matter who played what role in my opinion.
6. I think it does and should, people in a relationship, no matter what kind it is, should sacrifice
things for each other to show their affection and dedication to each other. I think that the level
of sacrifice would depend on the relationship. Furthermore, I think that sacrifice does not mean
that someone should be made to sacrifice their rights, I think that this would be a sign of abuse
if someone in a relationship ever impeded on the rights of the other person.

Station 6: Opening Scene

1. The house seems comfortable with a few elaborate decorations; these do not make the whole
house elegant though, I think.
2. This scene tells the reader that Nora is cheerful, at least in this scene. It also tells the reader that
the family has a maid and therefore would seem to be doing well for itself. Furthermore, it tells
us that the family has bought a christmas tree, telling the audience that it is christmas time.
3. Helmer calls Nora his “little lark twittering” and his “little bustling squirrel”. Although these
could just be nicknames, it is more likely that Helmer views his wife as inferior and as almost his
property given that he says “little” in each pet name and “my” before each of them as well.
4. She seems to not care and even tries to show that she likes them. Whether this is ture or not,
I’m not exactly sure at this point, but the way that she cheerfully replies to each name, it is clear
that she at least puts up a facade that she likes them.
5. Nora would not get his salary, the money would not come, and Nora would be left fifty pounds
in debt.
6. Helmer clearly wants to avoid debt because he thinks that there is no freedom when you are in
debt and have things that were paid for with debt.
7. Money means freedom and beauty to Helmer.
8. I think the fact that Helmer gives money to Nora means that Nora herself has no economic
power and relies on her husband to give her money in order to buy anything.
9. I think that, by what I have read so far, Nora and Torvid seem to be in a relationship where Nora
is intentionally playing to Torvid’s wants and Torvid in turn clearly views her as something of a
toy or his doll, thus the name of the play a “doll’s house”. Furthermore, the fact that Torvid
Helmer is the only one with the money and Nora relies on him to give her money means that
Nora herself has no financial power in the family.
10. I think that when we see that Nora clearly has a want to be care free with money when she talks
to Torvid and also gives the chance of a sixpence purchase to the porter and we see the
contrasting character of Helmer, who is very frugal because he keeps all the money he can, I
think that it is clear from these two characters that Nora and Helmer will face a financial conflict
between their two spending habits.