The ultimate goal of drama is believed to be the audience's suspension of disbelief for the brief time that they are watching the play. That said, it does not follow that works of drama do not have other purposes as well. They are meant to make the audience think about the world beyond the stage, about society, and about the minds of individuals. Such is the case with Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House. Ibsen uses minor characters and subplot in order to reinforce the issues among the major characters in the play. Here, we will discuss such a relation. It seems apparent that Krogstad and his own situation is being used as a foil for the plot of Nora and her crime.
In A Doll's House, we are given the story of Nora who has forged her father's signature in order to save her husband's health when he is sick. Like Nora, Krogstad has also been wronged by society, and has also forged signatures. Ibsen has set up this foil characterization so that we might compare the two, and better understand how they would each act in similar situations.
First, in a brief examination of why each committed their crime, we see that Nora was doing what she had to do in order to save her husband. Thus hers is a truly brave and altruistic act. Krogstad, on the other hand has forged the signature because Mrs. Linde left him for a rich man. This reason is more apparently self-interested than Nora's. Through the juxtaposition of the two characters, we come to see more clearly that Nora has done right by her family, though it was necessary to break the law in order to do this.
In looking at how they handle the consequences of their actions, we immediately see that Nora has worked extremely hard at repaying her debt. In act I, she explains all that she has sacrificed in order to repay the debt and keep the incident from Torvald at the same time.
aI made money in other ways. Last winter I was so lucky·I got a heap of copying to do. I shut myself up every...