Animal Characteristics Used in A Dolls House

Animal Characteristics Used in A Dolls House An Analysis of the Significance of Animal Characteristics Used in A Dolls House Reflective Statement Discussion of A Dolls House in class reach me deeply and implored new perspectives on traditional gender roles in different cultures such as Europe in the late 1800s. I relate to Henrik Ibsens humanist work as opposed to A Dolls House being completely feminist. To say A Dolls House is a feminist work would be redundant. Feminism is the fight for the equality of the sexes and Ibsens A Dolls House explores this very theme. Being human is not confined to just being male or female but having characteristics that define an individual. Christines character is a prime example of escapism in the play and the other works weve studied have generally the same motif. In each culture, In this paper, an analysis will be done on Ibsens use of animal characteristics. Throughout the play, the characters Torvald and Nora call to each other and themselves various animals like Lark and Squirrel. On occasion, Ibsens A Dolls House has been referred to as a feminist work and although themes of feminism are present, the overall effect Ibsen makes is a humanist perspective of the characters lives. The significance of animal characteristics shows a development in Noras character and introduces the type of man Torvald is. Ibsen also uses animal characteristics to reveal the deeper relationship between Nora and Torvald. Verbal irony is conveyed through the use of animal characteristics. The play opens with Nora coming upon the stage laden with Christmas gifts for the children, a horse and sword, trumpets and dolls and cradles. Although the items are tiny things, inexpensive and useless it conveys how much love Nora has. She carries also a little bag of macaroons that she hides w hen Torvald questions her about. The initial thought of Nora is she spends exuberant amounts of money and is rightfully called a spendthrift by Torvald. Noras character can be interpreted as charming and dishonest, always flitting, never resting, light-hearted, inconsequent airhead. The entrance of Christines character reveals Noras dark secret and her character no longer seems transparent. Free. To be free, absolutely free. To spend time playing with the children. To have a clean, beautiful house, the way Torvald likes it. Nora tells Christine that she will be free after she has paid off her debt to Krogstad. her anticipated freedom symbolizes her need to be independent of Torvald. Within that, Nora highlights the factors that constrain her. Although she claims that freedom will give her time to be a mother and a traditional wife that maintains a beautiful home as her husband likes it, she leaves her children and Torvald at the end of the play. One main theme of the play is that t rue freedom cannot be found in a traditional domestic lifestyle. Noras character develops intricately and her understanding of the word free is changes clearly. Nora becomes aware of the fact that she must change her life to find true freedom, and Nora recognizes that freedom includes independence from societal constraints and her ability to examine in depth her own personality, goals, and beliefs.The characteristics of a lark signify that Torvald believes that Nora is small compared to the his perspective. That is like a woman!you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. (Ibsen p. 2) To explore the relationship between Nora and all the other characters one must see that not only did Torvald treat women like children, he also treats lesser men in the workplace as expendable and replaceable. But instead of Krogstad, you could dismiss some other clerk.. He exerts his dominance over others, running over the thoughts and feelings of surrounding humans. Its a sweet little bi rd, but it gets through a terrible amount of money. You wouldnt believe how much it costs a man when hes got a little song-bird like you! Nora express the conclusion she draws from the deep reality of their marriage her view of Torvalds character at the end of Act Three. I have existed merely to perform tricks for you, Torvald. But you wanted it like that. You and father have committed a great sin against me. It is your fault that I have made nothing of my life. Our home has been nothing but a playroom. I have been your doll-wife, just as at home I was papas 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. She realizes her life has been a performance and she has acted the part of the happy, child-like wife for Torvald and for her father. Nora sees that her father and Torvald pressured her to behave a certain way and recognizes i t to be great wrong that stifled her development as an adult and as a human being. She has made nothing of her life because she has existed only to please men. Following this realization, Nora leaves Torvald in order to make something of her life and becomes independent of other people. Nora has an underlining care for her husband because she reacts abruptly when Nils tries to blackmail her. She understands how important appearance is for Helmer but she resents the way hes been treating her. How painful and humiliating it would be for Torvald to know that he owed me anything! It would upset our mutual relations altogether. (Ibsen p.9) You dont talk or think like the man I could bind myself to. When your first panic was over not about what threatened me, but about what might happen to you and when there was no more danger, then, as far as you were concerned, it was just as if nothing had happened at all. I was simply your little songbird, your doll, and from now on you would handle it more gently than ever because it was so delicate and fragile. At that moment, Torvald, I realized that for eight years Id been living her with a strange man and that Id borne him three children. Oh, I cant bear to think of it I could tear myself to little pieces! Bibliography A Dolls House Ibsen, Henrik. Global Classics, 1879.

Perspectives on Humanities

I remember a boy named Alexander, a boy who turned out to be my greatest companion. I will justify my master’s life to be the most productive one, although death came along at an early age of 33 he had reached what he wanted in his life and he had surpassed all the battles that came along his way. My master’s life was not an ordinary life, he became of what he is because of his hard work, dedication, wisdom and his will. He was a man of honor and great courage.   Let me tell you how Alexander and I met and became comrade. Alexander was just a young boy at the tender age of twelve when I was brought to his father first for the cost of thirteen talents.I was a wild young stud then but Alexander was wise enough to know why am I not at ease with my rider, he adequately studied me, talked to me softly and rode me into the sun so that I would not be able to see my own shadow; seeing my own shadow caused me to be shy. Alexander named me Bucephalus or Oxhead, he owned there a nd then.  In the early days of my years he was my mentor, he taught me how to be tough and strong enough for any battles that was ahead of us. He trained me how to be a stallion that is worthy of being called a wondrous one. He was my protector during battles; he gave his might during those times and gave what I have to give to protect him also. It was a wonderful life I had with him, I gave everything that I have got for he was my master and I owe everything to him.As a young boy, Alexander learned how to distance himself from the shadow of his father. Alexander and I grew up together, to say the truth; we were like of the same age.   What King Phillip and Alexander had was a competitive relationship; he loved her mother so much though. Because of this, he mends his own ways to be able to surpass what his father had reached and to be able to proudly say that he is Alexander the great conqueror.We have travelled the world together, seen the beauty of each and every track of land we lay our foot upon, and I have been his accomplice when he managed to conquer the world and built his mighty empire. Alexander has learned to do things in his own way even when he was still a child. I was one of the chosen few who have seen how he had managed to rule the world not because he was a descendant of the King of Macedonia, King Phillip but because he was Alexander, a great warrior. I have been a witness to what Alexander had done; I was a witness to his greatness in the battlefield. I was there with him, I’ve seen him do things the smart way or what have become to people the Great way.  Alexander was always a tough leader; he had managed to show this during our restless battles that we have both been through. His troop were always there to assist him whenever he needed them, his people showed loyalty to him and he showed his loyalty to them as well. Although Alexander was hard on the battlefield he was not as hard when it comes to me. He showed me the love tha t I needed; he never pushed me to my limits. Alexander would always know whenever I need caress and he would always give it to me.To my mighty king, Alexander the great, I salute him for the many things he had taught me. I wouldn’t have been who I am if not because of him. I thank you Alexander, my comrade, for I had the opportunity to be with you on your last battle. Life wouldn’t be this meaningful for me if you were not my master, and for that I am thankful. I was lucky to be there with you during your last battle.To my mentor, friend, companion and master, Alexander, thank you and Goodbye. May the fruit of your hardships be recognized by the whole Universe, may your legend be told in the future generations of human race, and may your name become undying and forever living in the hearts of your people (â€Å"The Confessions of Alexander the Great: 33 Lessons in Greatness,†).References The Confessions of Alexander the Great: 33 Lessons in Greatness [Electronic Version] from http://www.watchmojo.com/events/history/alexander_the_great/intro_history_is_subjective.htm.

Questions Essay

1. What political offices were black men elected to – and not elected to –during Reconstruction? federal office,state office and local office 2. What issues most concerned black political leaders during Reconstruction? 3.Why were so many white southerners so opposed to black and white Republications exercising political power? 4. Were black political leaders unqualified to hold office so soon after the end of slavery? 5. What did black political leaders accomplish and fail to accomplish during Reconstruction? What contributed to their successes and failures? 6. Why was the Ku Klux Klan founded, and how effective was it? It was established by anti modernists. They believed that things were better in â€Å"the good old days† before the Civil War, and not only in regard to Blacks; they also felt that a woman’s place was in the home.The Klan was effective in systematically keeping black men away from the polls, so that the ex Confederate gained political control in many states. 7. What was the Fifteenth Amendment enacted? The 15th Amendment to the Constitution granted African American men the right to vote by declaring that the â€Å"right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude 8. How and why did black and white Republicans lose control of every southern state by 1877? The old conservative democrats regained the state governments. Also, blacks, who back then unanimously voted Republican, were beginning to be disenfranchised. 9. Why did the Republican Party fail to maintain control of southern state governments during Reconstruction? 10. How and why did Reconstruction end? Reconstruction ended because of the compromise of 1877. It was an unwritten agreement that stated Hayes would win the presidency, if he were to remove troops from southern states(political).Reconstruction also failed because many people in the south did not want to accept a life different from what they were used to soical. 11. How effective was Reconstruction in assisting black people to move from slavery to freedom? How effective was it in restoring southern states to the Union?

Timeline of Queen Annes War

Queen Anne’s War was known as the War of Spanish Succession in Europe. It raged from 1702 to 1713. During the war, Great Britain, the Netherlands, and several German states fought against France and Spain. Just as with King Williams War before it, border raids and fighting occurred between the French and English in North America. This would not be the last of the fighting between these two colonial powers. Growing Instability in Europe King Charles II of Spain was childless and in ill health, so European leaders began laying claims to succeed him as the King of Spain. King Louis XIV of France wished to place his eldest son on the throne who was a grandson of King Philip IV of Spain. However, England and the Netherlands did not want France and Spain to be unified in this way. Upon his deathbed, Charles II Named Philip, Duke of Anjou, as his heir. Philip also happened to be Louis XIV’s grandson. Worried about France’s growing strength and its ability to control Spanish possessions in the Netherlands, England, the Dutch, and key German states in the Holy Roman Empire joined together to oppose the French. Their goal was to take the throne away from the Bourbon family along with gaining control of certain Spanish held locations in the Netherlands and Italy. Thus, the War of Spanish Succession began in 1702. Queen Anne’s War Begins William III died in 1702 and was succeeded by Queen Anne. She was his sister-in-law and daughter of James II, from whom William had taken the throne. The war consumed most of her reign. In America, the war became known as Queen Annes War and consisted mainly of French privateering in the Atlantic and French and Indian raids on the frontier between England and France. The most notable of these raids occurred at Deerfield, Massachusetts on February 29, 1704. French and Native American forces raided the city, killing 56 including 9 women and 25 children. They captured 109, marching them north to Canada. Taking of Port Royal In 1707, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire made a failed attempted to take Port Royal, French Acadia. However, a new attempt was made with a fleet from England led by Francis Nicholson and troops from New England. It arrived at Port Royal on October 12, 1710, and the city surrendered on October 13th. At this point, the name was changed to Annapolis and French Acadia became Nova Scotia. In 1711, the British and New England forces attempted to conquest Quebec. However, numerous British transports and men were lost heading north on the St. Lawrence River causing Nicholson to stop the assault before it began. Nicholson was named Governor of Nova Scotia in 1712. As a side note, he would later be named the governor of South Carolina in 1720. Treaty of Utrecht The war officially ended on April 11, 1713, with the Treaty of Utrecht. Through this treaty, Great Britain was given Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. Further, Britain received title to the fur-trading posts around Hudson Bay. This peace did little to solve all the issues between France and Great Britain in North America and three years later, they would be fighting again in King George’s War. Sources Ciment, James. Colonial America: An Encyclopedia of Social, Political, Cultural, and Economic History. M.E. Sharpe. 2006. ---. Nicholson, Francis. Dictionary of Candian Biography Online. University of Toronto. 2000.