In the first ending of the play, Nora realizes that her husband is treating her badly and she leaves. She does not fear telling him that he treats her just like her father did. She wants to have her own freedom to work and look after herself. She also wants to discover who she really is. Her husband is fond of comparing her to a child and calling her funny names.

Henrik Ibsen was however forced to write a second ending where Nora sacrifices her freedom and identity for her children. In my view, the second ending reflects the realities of the nineteenth century. In the nineteenth century, men and women were expected to fill different sphere in the society. Men were expected to live a public working life and meet with other men in places like bars and clubs. However, women were expected to socialize rather they were to stay home cleaning, cooking and rearing children. Women had no freedom; they were to obey the husband no matter what.

I think Ibsen was forced to write another ending because the first ending was portraying a deviance in the society. The ending was portraying that women can also have a public working life with their own freedom. However, that was against the social structures and spheres of life. Women had no freedom and no identity. Leaving their husbands was not an option. They were to undergo all the mistreatments and abuses directed to them by their husbands.

Response to Sitri Aquino

Hi Sitri, great line of thought there, the play would have incited women to seek freedom and identity which was against the social structures. Men were expected to live a public working life and meet with other men in places like bars and clubs. However, women were expected to socialize rather they were to stay home cleaning, cooking and rearing children. Women had no freedom; they were to obey the husband no matter what. Ibsen portrayed in the first ending that women can also have a public life with all the freedoms associated with it. Though the social structures and roles have changed in this new century, things were different at the nineteenth century. The gender roles were well defined. Ibsen’s first ending was portraying something different from the norm. The norm was the husband took care of the family financially while the wife stayed home rearing children and obeying the husband.

Response to Marcela Allen

Hi Marcela, great thinking there, in the first ending, Nora stands for what she thinks is right but the social structures in the nineteenth century could not allow that. Women were expected to stay home and do what they are told and not what they think is right. Nora has the courage to leave her husband. She compare s her husband treatment to the treatment of her father. She wants to be free and she tells him she can even educate herself. This portrays the woman of the twentieth century and not the nineteenth century. The nineteenth century woman has no freedom and only follows husband’s instructions with pout any questions. Ibsen was forced to rewrite the ending since it was portraying that women also have a right to be free. The women in the nineteenth century were to stay home rearing children without socializing. Ibsen thus had to change the ending to portray something different.

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?