Compare and contrast the ways in which Henrik Ibsen and Khaled Hosseini present marriage in "A
Doll’s House" (1879) and "A Thousand Splendid Suns" (2007).
Examine the view that in patriarchal societies, women are presented as "angels or demons."
In A Doll’s House and A Thousand Splendid Suns, both Ibsen and Hosseini present their female
protagonists as inferior recipients of a patriarchal culture, which results in the demonization of
female individuality. Written in a context where women were oppressed by misogynistic
expectations of domesticity, Ibsen and Hosseini explores the consequences of women subverting
traditional gender norms. Ibsen’s "well-made play" set in the Victorian era, explores the illusion of
marital ecstasy before diminishing it. Similarly, Hosseini’s historical novel presents its characters
resenting the Taliban’s authoritative regime on women. However, whilst adopting a feminist
perspective, I will analyse how although both women abscond from their oppression, they are
viewed as demonic by some readers but heroic by others.
Both Hosseini and Ibsen convey the oppressive nature of patriarchal marriage through the portrayal
of men asserting their superiority to subjugate their wives' from expressing their individuality.
Through zoomorphic depictions, Ibsen conveys Nora as constantly being dehumanised by her
husband, Torvald, who possesses her as "my little squirrel" and "little lark". Ibsen’s use of the
semantic field of animals suggests that Nora does not possess the same capabilities as men or even
humans. This was a common prejudice against women in the Victorian era, as women were viewed
as being physically and psychologically inferior to men, leading to discriminatory laws such as being
unable to borrow money without their "husband‘s consent". The use of minuscule animals such as
squirrels and skylarks, which struggle for survival, conveys Torvalds’s superiority over Nora.
Ironically, skylarks symbolise self-discovery. Perhaps Ibsen is alluding to the idea that women cannot
be domesticated. Moreover, the proprietorial pronoun "my" emphasises the objectification that
women endeavour which Nora, unlike modern readers, fails to regard as alarming. In both texts,
men’s controlling behaviour is portrayed with Torvald restricting Nora’s clothing, dancing, and eating
preferences. Likewise, Rasheed controls who Mariam talks to and forces her to wear a burqa as "a
woman’s face is her husband’s business only" conveying both Ibsen and Hosseini’s disapproval of
patriarchal structures. Some critics in the 19 th century failed to oppose Torvalds’s misogynistic
actions, such as Clement Scott, demanding "how Torvald Helmer could by any possibility have
treated his restless, illogical, fractious, and babyish little wife otherwise than he did" conveying the
prejudices against women at the time (1). Contrastingly, feminists would argue that men place
unrealistic expectations on women’s appearance so much that "Torvald had forbidden" Nora from
eating macaroons as he was "afraid they will spoil (her) teeth". The verb "forbidden" conveys that
Nora dismisses Torvalds’s possessive behaviour, which was often ratified on women by men. This is
highlighted through the title of the play, "A Doll’s House" which is used as an extended metaphor to
portray Torvalds’s infatuation with his façade of Nora being a "doll" thereby objectifying her as
something controllable without restraints. Therefore, I interpret Ibsen as upholding the idea that
Nora is an obedient wife due to the presentation of her passively seeking to act accordingly to
Torvalds’s façade of her, which is being an unintelligent, "perfect" housewife.
Similarly, in the novel A Thousand Splendid Suns, Mariam fails to liberate herself from patriarchy, at
times even enjoying pleasing her violent, controlling husband. In response to Mariam's undercooked
rice, Rasheed used "his powerful hands" to shove his "two fingers into her mouth and pried it open,
then forced the cold, hard pebbles into it" as "Mariam struggled against him, mumbling, but he kept
pushing the pebbles in, his upper lip curled in a sneer". The use of the semantic field of violence
through the brutal verbs "pried" and "forced" emphasises the excruciating pain Mariam
, endeavoured which left her with broken teeth. This creates sympathy for Mariam, which is
heightened through the sociopathic verb "sneer," highlighting Rasheed’s psychotic, cold-hearted
nature, conveying that these events are likely to reoccur. Although Rasheed continuously abuses
Mariam, she felt "a flare of pride" that "caught her off guard" when Rasheed complimented her,
conveying her as a subservient woman conforming to her abusive husband's desires. Therefore, I
interpret both Nora and Mariam as being the "angel in the house" due to their subservience to
misogynistic attitudes and failure to explicitly reject patriarchal notions. Although this conformity
may be due to the harsh, violent punishments that would occur, which were prominently used
against Afghan women at the time, unlike in the Norwegian setting of A Doll’s House.
In both texts, in the political sphere, such laws can be seen as having an oppressing effect on women
by reinforcing women’s inferiority. Although most western modern readers would view Mariam’s
obsession with pleasing her abusive husband as anomalous, when considering the cultural and social
differences between the texts, it is evident that Mariam had no choice but to obey due to the
Taliban’s oppressive rule. Many extreme constraints were forced upon women, such as "that men
and women would be seen in different hospitals" portraying the inequalities between genders,
leaving many women to suffer. Rasheed uses the Taliban’s regime to increase his power over
Mariam and Laila, threatening them with the Taliban as he has "(his) suspicions. That's all it would
take. Whose word do you think they would believe?” Here, the rhetorical question conveys the ease
for the Taliban to believe a man’s word over a woman, thus highlighting female inferiority and
creating sympathy towards women in Afghan society. This sympathy is furthered through Hosseini’s
use of the polar opposite brides, Mariam and Laila. Natasha Walter argues that "by putting Mariam
and Laila in contrast like this, (Hosseini is) trying to explain the complexities of Afghan society" by
highlighting that abuse by husbands can be exerted on anyone, young or old, poor or rich (2). This
idea correlates to Nana’s telling Mariam that "like a compass needle that points to the north, a
man’s accusing finger always finds a woman," demonstrating through the simile that even if women
are the victims of abuse, men's superiority in society leads to the criminalisation of women. Perhaps
Hosseini was challenging both Afghan society as well as the 21 st century culture whereby women are
often blamed for their mistreatment, such as sexual abuse.
In contrast to Mariam, Nora Helmer’s understanding of her husband also keeps her in her
subordinate condition. Although, similarly to A Thousand Splendid Suns, laws are utilised by men to
reinforce female inferiority. Ibsen expresses that he wrote "A Doll’s House" as "a woman cannot be
herself in modern society... with laws framed by men," which is conveyed as Nora couldn’t take
credit for saving her husband as it would break her role as an expressive housewife (3). Therefore,
Nora doesn’t tell Torvald that she borrowed money to fund their trip to Italy for his recovery, as it
would be "painful and humiliating for... his manly independence, to know he owed me anything."
Here, the hyperbolic adjectives "painful and humiliating" highlights the condemnation of the 19th-
century audience due to the belief that women should be subservient, which was outlined by laws
making it illegal for women to take out loans without permission from a man. These laws and
prejudices affect how Nora is perceived by other characters, such as Krogstad, who uses Nora’s
forgery against her as it would undermine her and her husband’s reputation, which was very
important at the time. This leads Nora to contemplate suicide, emphasising that women don’t have
a chance of surviving in a patriarchal society. Perhaps Ibsen intended to challenge the misogynistic
views in Victorian society that would condemn Nora’s behaviour as menacing and evil. However,
although both Torvald and Rasheed control their wives, readers are more inclined to sympathise
with Torvald due to his desire to be seen as an alpha male by others, rather than to subjugate his
wife to impose his physical superiority. Ibsen conveys Victorian society’s patriarchal prejudices
through presenting Torvald as a symbol of toxic masculinity thus, society's acknowledgement that
