Henrik Ibsens A Dolls House Essays

Henrik Ibsens A Dolls House Essays Henrik Ibsens A Dolls House Essay Henrik Ibsens A Dolls House Essay A play serves as the authors tool for critiquing society. It is rare that a person encounters the ability to rise above accepted social beliefs. Some plays help to reflect controversial issues that the audience can relate to because they interact in the same situations every day.  Henrik Ibsen was a Norwegian writer who was known for his critical view upon society. A Dolls House was written in the late 19th Century, this era and its traits are echoed in his play in many ways. Ibsen provides unique analysis and reflection on issues his culture never thought as wrong. In the play he tackles womens rights as a matter of importance being neglected, acknowledging the fact that in 19th Century European life the role of the women to stay home, raise the children, and attend to her husband was unfair. Ibsen shows us this in A Dolls House constantly when Nora is being dominated and controlled by Helmer. Nora is called a number of names by Helmer throughout the play. These include little songbird, squirrel, lark, little featherhead, little skylark, little person, and little woman. Helmer seems to be particularly consistent about using the modifier little before the names he calls Nora. These are all usually followed by the possessive my, signalling Helmers belief that Nora belongs only to him. Analysing this type of language you could say that not only is it slightly insulting, the references to small animals, physically refer to Nora as something weak and helpless making her inferior to him. Ibsen has again shown us this accepted part of society on page 25 when Helmer directly says Oh Nora, Nora, how like a woman! Ibsen shows us the insolence and discourtesy women were expected to accept because despite these comments Nora, throughout the play, does not question or even comment until the play is coming to a close. At this point Nora decides to challenge her husband and the idea that he controls her thoughts and actions. This kind of rebellion was extremely rare and unusual at this time, But it is unheard of for so young a woman to behave like this! . Ibsen, you could say, was slightly ahead of his time with his opinions on women because later in the century there was the womans movement and their long and complex journey to liberation, freedom and equality. Being a playwright on a particularly social level, Ibsens work imitated and questioned recognized contemporary culture and their ethics and views. Another recognised expectation of society during the 19th Century was the need to hold out an appearance that you are the ideal family, living in others eyes as kind, wealthy and happy. This is shown in the play through the Helmers family life and their need to hold themselves to others expectations. One of the first things, although minor, to happen in the play is Nora giving the Porter a pound after he asks for a shilling, our first impressions are of her generosity, but we soon after discover that Nora knows she cannot afford this with her threatening financial situation. Therefore to a certain extent this was not an act of kind-heartedness but more of the realisation of the probable neglect from society if they did not portray themselves as the ideal family to others. Ibsen shows us a second example of social acceptance with Krogstad and his fear of unemployment. Krogstad is obviously desperate not to experience this, most likely due to the fact that he would be exiled from society and thought of as unsuccessful if he could not acquire work. Ibsen was able to write about this situation extremely accurately because in 1836 his father, who had been prosperous until that  time, went bankrupt, in that culture and at that time it proved as a disgrace profound enough to affect him and his children for the rest of their lives. Ibsen had a slightly alternative style of writing, compared to other play writes at the time, trying to be as realistic and precise as possible. After the 1848 revolution, a new modern perspective was starting to appear in the literary and dramatic world, challenging the romantic tradition. Ibsen was mastering and popularising the realist drama derived from this new perspective, A Dolls House could easily have been just another modern play with another comfortable moral lesson. However, when Nora tells Helmer that they must sit down and discuss all this that has been happening between us, the play diverges from the traditional form. Ibsen raises issues which have not previously been considered, but not in a point blank way, instead he manages to make A Dolls House interesting and thought provoking. Ibsens major target audience was the middle class, as he was brought up in similar circumstances he was able to portray the thoughts and feelings of middle class life accurately. Ibsen chose to use colloquial language to emphasize this style of realism and to help relate to his audience. Despite this Ibsen also managed to tactfully reveal that the middle class did in fact have some flaws, his realist drama disregarded a number of things, for example the tradition of the older male moral figure.

How to Amend the Constitutionâ€About the Process

How to Amend the Constitution- About the Process Amending the Constitution was never meant to be simple. Although thousands of amendments have been discussed since the original document was approved in 1788, there are now only 27 amendments in the Constitution. Though its framers knew the Constitution would have to be amended, they also knew it should never be amended frivolously or haphazardly. Clearly, their process for amending the Constitution has succeeded in meeting that goal. Constitutional amendments are intended to improve, correct, or otherwise revise the original document. The framers knew it would be impossible for the Constitution they were writing to address every situation that might come along in the future. Ratified in December 1791, the first 10 amendments- The Bill of Rights- list and vow to protect certain rights and freedoms granted to the American people and speak to the demands of the Anti-Federalists among the Founding Fathers by limiting the power of the national government. Ratified 201 years later, in May 1992, the most recent amendment- the 27th Amendment- prohibited members of Congress from raising their own salaries.   The Two Methods for Amending the Constitution Article V of the Constitution itself establishes the two ways in which it may be amended: The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. In simple terms, Article V prescribes that amendments may be proposed either by the U.S. Congress or by a constitutional convention when and if demanded by two-thirds of the legislatures of the states. Method 1: Congress Proposes an Amendment An amendment to the Constitution may be proposed by any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate and will be considered under the standard legislative process in the form of a joint resolution.  In addition, as ensured by the First Amendment, all American citizens are free to petition Congress or their state legislatures to amend the Constitution. To be approved, the amending resolution must be passed by a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House and the Senate. Given no official role in the amendment process by Article V, the President of the United States is not required to sign or otherwise approve the amending resolution. Presidents, however, typically express their opinion of proposed amendments and may attempt to persuade Congress to vote for or against them. States Ratify the Amendment If approved by Congress, the proposed amendment is sent to the governors of all 50 states for their approval, called â€Å"ratification.† Congress will have specified one of two ways by which the states should consider ratification: The governor submits the amendment to the state legislature for its consideration; orThe governor convenes a state ratifying convention. If the amendment is ratified by three-fourths (currently 38) of the state legislatures or ratifying conventions, it becomes part of the Constitution. Resurrecting ERA? Clearly, this method of amending the Constitution can be lengthy and time-consuming.  However, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that ratification must be completed within â€Å"some reasonable time after the proposal.† Beginning with the 18th Amendment granting women the right to vote, it has been customary for Congress to set a maximum time period for ratification. This is why many have felt the Equal Rights Amendment is dead, even though it now needs only one more state to ratify it to achieve the required 38 states. The ERA amendment was passed by Congress in 1972; 35 had ratified it by its extended deadline of 1985. However, in 2017 and 2018, two more states ratified it, concerned about the constitutionality of setting those deadlines. If Virginia would ratify it in 2019, people expected a battle to ensue in Congress over whether to accept the late ratifications. Method 2: The States Demand a Constitutional Convention Under the second method of amending the Constitution prescribed by Article V, if two-thirds (currently 34) of the state legislatures vote to demand it, Congress is required to convene a full constitutional convention. Just as in the Constitutional Convention of 1787, delegates from every state would attend this so-called â€Å"Article V Convention† for the purpose of proposing one or more amendments. Though this more momentous method has never been used, the number of states voting to demand a constitutional amending convention has come close to the required two-thirds on several occasions. Indeed, the mere threat of being forced to surrender its control of the constitutional amendment process to the states has often prompted Congress to preemptively propose amendments itself. Although not specifically mentioned in the document, there are five unofficial yet legal ways of changing the Constitution  used more often- and sometimes even more controversially- than the Article V amendment process. These include legislation, presidential actions, federal court rulings, actions of the political parties, and simple custom. Can Amendments Be Repealed? Any existing constitutional amendment can be repealed but only by the ratification of another amendment. Because repealing amendments must be proposed and ratified by one of the same two methods of regular amendments, they are very rare. In the history of the United States, only one constitutional amendment has been repealed. In 1933, the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment- better known as â€Å"prohibition†- banning the manufacture and sale of alcohol in the United States. Though neither has ever come close to happening, two other amendments have been the subject of repeal discussion over the years: the 16th Amendment establishing the federal income tax and the 22nd Amendment limiting the president to serving only two terms. Most recently, the 2nd Amendment has come under critical scrutiny. In his editorial appearing in the New York Times on March 27, 2018, former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens controversially called for the repeal of the Bill of Rights amendment, which guarantees â€Å"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.† He argues that it would give more power to peoples desire to stop gun violence than the National Rifle Association. Sources The Constitutional Amendment Process. The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. November 17, 2015.Huckabee, David C. .Ratification of Amendments to the U.S. Constitution  Congressional Research Service reports. Washington D.C.: Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress.Neale, Thomas H. .The Article V Convention to Propose Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary Issues for Congress  Congressional Research Service.