- Published: September 9, 2022
- Updated: September 9, 2022
- University / College: Purdue University
- Language: English
- Downloads: 3
Both Nora of A doll’s House and Mathilda of The Necklace, has been portrayed as dramatic characters that possess the “ freedom pf incongruity”. This inappropriateness in their characters enables them to become extra-ordinary characters.
Their incongruity lies in the fact that both aspire an upward mobility i. e. a move into the higher societies.
They are prey to their circumstances as Mathilda ” suffered ceaselessly, feeling herself born for all the delicacies and all the luxuries. She suffered from thepovertyof her dwelling, from the wretched look of the walls, from the worn-out chairs, from the ugliness of the curtains”.
(Maupassant) Mathilda only lets herself experience suffering only due to the fact that she thinks she deserves more in life than what she has. Nora too wants the luxuries of life.
Both are victims of Victorian socio-cultural milieu and morality. Mathilda had to suffer from the burden of gratitude that she owes to her friend. Maupassant depicts the values of Victorian moral consciousness as Mathilda had ruined her life to replace the necklace.
Ibsen has depicted a typical Victorian wife who is servile. She submits to her husbands harsh and normally acquiesces his will on mundane decision-making. She has no objection on her servility as Victorian has socialized her so but her domestic unrest agonizes her.
Both Maupassant and Ibsen have depicted the characters that have an air of immaturity about them as they are running behind illusions. Nora is depicted as a childish wife whereas Mathilda’s over-ambitiousness has blindfolded her to indulge in silly acts. This immaturity brings their ruination.
