Help anyone?

Hey guyss

At the moment, I'm doing English Literature coursework on the plays of 'A Woman Of No Importance' by Oscar Wilde and 'A Dolls House' by Henrik Ibsen.

I've searched every inch of the internet and cannot find anything about how Oscar Wilde presents womens freedom of speech optimistically as oppose to Henrik Ibsen, who supposedly presents womens freedom of speech more pessimistically.

Anyone got any useful ideas?

Massively appreciated. Thank youusss

I love both of these plays!


So your question is about Wilde presenting female freedom of speech optimistically, and Ibsen pessimistically?


Well, the first thing to talk about will always be the context. When Wilde was writing, it was actually a popular theme in theatre that women were the ones who undermined society (Hamlet for example). Wilde flips this when the women are in charge of the men, the comic relationship between the Ladies and their husbands. Consider the opening scene for example, between Lady Caroline and her husband (the mufflers). This comedy would have been ridiculous to the audience of Wilde's time, the idea of women ordering men around. This could easily be construed to say that women being in charge of men is ridiculous.

I don't agree with that however. The resolution of the play comes about because Mrs Arbuthnot finally tells Illingsworth his place. Think about the dramatic placement in the scene in Act IV between Illingsworth and Arbuthnot, him sitting down, her standing and having the longer and more important dialogue. She tells him what to do - 'look into the garden', and he does so, all adding up to allow Gerald and Hester to move on into the bright future. So whilst Wilde uses comedy with the other women, he only does so to sort of 'cover up' his true message at the end of the play. Comedy lets him get away with the serious stuff later on.

On to A Doll's house. I think Ibsen portrays the protagonist having a voice as a positive if I'm honest, the male voice from the opening scene is irritating and boring, the audience is made to want her to speak and the man to be silent. Whilst there are lingering elements of the free woman destroying society, she actually protects the male patriarchal society (Embodied by the bank) through her classical theatrical feminine trait of lying (this trait has roots as far back as Medea). This means that Ibsen could more be hinting that women uphold society. Of course the ending caused a massive shock at the time too, so you can tie the essay together nicely between Wilde and Ibsen using unexpected gender roles to vehicle their message.


I hope some of that is helpful!