Introduction
It may seem that the role of money in society is higher than morality — while abstract concept limits life, the material situation allows the owner to gain more influence and resources. That is why the phenomenon of money is reflected in fiction: the central themes of two plays, “Tartuffe” by Moliere and “A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen, explore the problem of the position of money in human life. Both plays are a fantastic example of the fact that finance is just a tool, but how to use it is up to the individual. Thus, the works can be found in the versatility and ambiguity of the author’s relationship to finance. This essay aims to discuss the effect of money on society and individual characters in the plays in particular.
Money as a method of influence
On closer reading, it can be seen that one of the two plays’ central themes is to define money as an instrument of influence. In other words, characters with a higher material status, financial resources, and assets have more power. In “Tartuffe,” it is shown that the estate owner, Orgon, is a hugely influential person who has a social influence not only on his subordinates but also on his relatives, having the right to forbid his daughter from marrying (Moliere 18). Simultaneously, the reader of “A Doll’s House” sees that Krogstad, who lent to the main character, Nora, has a detrimental effect on the borrower (Ibsen 13). Furthermore, it should be noted that the man began to make specific claims only when he realized the poverty of his position, and, using the power of money, decided to blackmail the wife of the employer.
Money as a source of happiness
It is worth pointing out that the two plays track the storylines that tell about money as an element of the demonstration of happiness and care. The play “A Doll’s House” begins with the fact that even with the family’s unstable financial situation, Nora tries to preserve the spirit of Christmas and buys gifts (Ibsen 1). At the same time, she is happy that her husband has received a higher post with a more substantial salary, strengthening a woman’s sense of security and peace of mind. A little differently, money is used as a tool for emotional attachment in “Tartuffe”: by bringing home a stranger, Orgon rapidly redirects parts of his savings to him to show the degree of trust and sympathy for his guest. Over time, however, love becomes too much, just like deductions — intoxicated by the guest’s beliefs, the owner of the house does not even notice family problems (Moliere 10). This subsequently leads to Tartuffe’s attempt to seize the house and Orgon’s power, though to no avail.
Money as a guide for choosing a partner
One can notice that in “Tartuffe” and “A Doll’s House,” money is used as a strategy when choosing a husband for women. Probably, behind the strengthened financial state is a sense of internal security, which can be a factor in the development of sympathy for the richer human. For example, Ibsen writes about Linden, who had a relationship with Krogstad but chose another man because of her greater security (Ibsen 16). Their marriage was childless and barely happy, but the woman’s life was prosperous. Moliere’s work focused on the potential marriage of Orgon’s daughter, Mariana, to Tartuffe (Moliere 19). The couple had nothing in common, and instead, a woman would have been deeply unhappy in such a marriage, but the strengthened status of the man, together with his beliefs and ideas, became crucial to the marriage’s approval by the father.
Conclusion
To sum up, it is necessary to admit that the approach to money is one-sided and superficially wrong. As demonstrated in the plays “Tartuffe” and “A Doll’s House,” money can play both a role of pressure and power and a role of a tool for caring and creating a sense of security. In any case, money is a tool, and the critical question is who uses it and how.
Works Cited
Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll’s House. 2016, Web.
Moliere. Tartuffe. 2018, Web.