Trova il tuo prossimo libro preferito

Abbonati oggi e leggi gratis per 30 giorni
A Dolls House

A Dolls House

Leggi anteprima

A Dolls House

3/5 (1,128 valutazioni)
105 pagine
1 ora
Apr 15, 2015


A Doll's House by Henrick Ibsen tells the story of Nora, a woman who is treated like a doll in her own home. Set in Victorian Norway, Nora eventually flees her marriage and children in an attempt to discover herself despite being confined by patriarchal society.

Xist Publishing is a digital-first publisher. Xist Publishing creates books for the touchscreen generation and is dedicated to helping everyone develop a lifetime love of reading, no matter what form it takes

Apr 15, 2015

Informazioni sull'autore

Henrik Ibsen (1828–1906) is the Norwegian playwright deemed the “father of realism.” Born in Skien, Norway, Ibsen was exiled in 1862 to Italy, where he wrote the tragedy Brand. After moving to Germany in 1868, he wrote A Doll’s House (1879), one of his most famous works; Hedda Gabler (1890), the title character of which is one of theater’s most notorious roles; and many other plays. In 1891, Ibsen returned to Norway, where he remained until his death.

Correlato a A Dolls House

Leggi altro di Henrik Ibsen
Libri correlati

Categorie correlate

Anteprima del libro

A Dolls House - Henrik Ibsen

A Doll's House

Henrik Ibsen

Xist Publishing


ISBN: 978-1-62395-944-9

This edition published in 2015 by Xist Publishing

PO Box 61593

Irvine, CA 92602


Ordering Information:

Quantity sales. Special discounts are available on quantity purchases by corporations, associations, and others. For details, contact the Special Sales Department at the address above.

A Doll’s House/ Henrik Ibsen

ISBN 978-1-62395-944-9






(SCENE.—A room furnished comfortably and tastefully, but not extravagantly. At the back, a door to the right leads to the entrance-hall, another to the left leads to Helmer's study. Between the doors stands a piano. In the middle of the left-hand wall is a door, and beyond it a window. Near the window are a round table, armchairs and a small sofa. In the right-hand wall, at the farther end, another door; and on the same side, nearer the footlights, a stove, two easy chairs and a rocking-chair; between the stove and the door, a small table. Engravings on the wall; a cabinet with china and other small objects; a small book-case with well-bound books. The floors are carpeted, and a fire burns in the stove. It is winter.

A bell rings in the hall; shortly afterwards the door is heard to open. Enter NORA, humming a tune and in high spirits. She is in out-door dress and carries a number of parcels; these she lays on the table to the right. She leaves the outer door open after her, and through it is seen a PORTER who is carrying a Christmas Tree and a basket, which he gives to the MAID who has opened the door.)

Nora. Hide the Christmas Tree carefully, Helen. Be sure the children do not see it till this evening, when it is dressed. (To the PORTER, taking out her purse.) How much?

Porter. Sixpence.

Nora. There is a shilling. No, keep the change. (The PORTER thanks her, and goes out. NORA shuts the door. She is laughing to herself, as she takes off her hat and coat. She takes a packet of macaroons from her pocket and eats one or two; then goes cautiously to her husband's door and listens.) Yes, he is in. (Still humming, she goes to the table on the right.)

Helmer (calls out from his room). Is that my little lark twittering out there?

Nora (busy opening some of the parcels). Yes, it is!

Helmer. Is it my little squirrel bustling about?

Nora. Yes!

Helmer. When did my squirrel come home?

Nora. Just now. (Puts the bag of macaroons into her pocket and wipes her mouth.) Come in here, Torvald, and see what I have bought.

Helmer. Don't disturb me. (A little later, he opens the door and looks into the room, pen in hand.) Bought, did you say? All these things? Has my little spendthrift been wasting money again?

Nora. Yes, but, Torvald, this year we really can let ourselves go a little. This is the first Christmas that we have not needed to economize.

Helmer. Still, you know, we can't spend money recklessly.

Nora. Yes, Torvald, we may be a wee bit more reckless now, mayn't we? Just a tiny wee bit! You are going to have a big salary and earn lots and lots of money.

Helmer. Yes, after the New Year; but then it will be a whole quarter before the salary is due.

Nora. Pooh! we can borrow till then.

Helmer. Nora! (Goes up to her and takes her playfully by the ear.) The same little featherhead! Suppose, now, that I borrowed fifty pounds today, and you spent it all in the Christmas week, and then on New Year's Eve a slate fell on my head and killed me, and—

Nora (putting her hands over his mouth). Oh! don't say such horrid things.

Helmer. Still, suppose that happened,—what then?

Nora. If that were to happen, I don't suppose I should care whether I owed money or not.

Helmer. Yes, but what about the people who had lent it?

Nora. They? Who would bother about them? I should not know who they were.

Helmer. That is like a woman! But seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. We two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle.

Nora (moving towards the stove). As you please, Torvald.

Helmer (following her). Come, come, my little skylark must not droop her wings. What is this! Is my little squirrel out of temper? (Taking out his purse.) Nora, what do you think I have got here?

Nora (turning round quickly). Money!

Helmer. There you are. (Gives her some money.) Do you think I don't know what a lot is wanted for housekeeping at Christmas-time?

Nora (counting). Ten shillings—a pound—two pounds! Thank you, thank you, Torvald; that will keep me going for a long time.

Helmer. Indeed it must.

Nora. Yes, yes, it will. But come here and let me show you what I have bought. And ah so cheap! Look, here is a new suit for Ivar, and a sword; and a horse and a trumpet for Bob; and a doll and dolly's bedstead for Emmy.—they are very plain, but anyway she will soon break them in pieces. And here are dress-lengths and handkerchiefs for the maids; old Anne ought really to have something better.

Helmer. And what is in this parcel?

Nora (crying out). No, no! you mustn't see that till this evening.

Helmer. Very well. But now tell me, you extravagant little person, what would you like for yourself?

Nora. For myself? Oh, I am sure I don't want anything.

Helmer. Yes, but you must. Tell me something reasonable that you would particularly like to have.

Nora. No, I really can't think of anything—unless, Torvald—

Helmer. Well?

Nora (playing with his coat buttons, and without raising her eyes to his). If you really want to give me something, you might—you might—

Helmer. Well, out with it!

Nora (speaking quickly). You might give me money, Torvald. Only just as much as you can afford; and then one of these days I will buy something with it.

Helmer. But, Nora—

Nora. Oh, do! dear Torvald; please, please do! Then I will wrap it up in beautiful gilt paper and hang it on the Christmas Tree. Wouldn't that be fun?

Helmer. What are little people called that are always wasting money?

Nora. Spendthrifts—I know. Let us do as you suggest, Torvald, and then I shall have time to think what I am most in want of. That is a very sensible plan, isn't it?

Helmer (smiling). Indeed it is—that is to say, if you were really to save out of the money I give you, and then really buy something for yourself. But if you spend it all on the housekeeping and any number of unnecessary things, then I merely have to pay up again.

Nora. Oh but, Torvald—

Helmer. You can't deny it, my dear, little Nora. (Puts his arm round her waist.) It's a sweet little spendthrift, but she uses up a deal of money. One would hardly believe how expensive such little persons are!

Nora. It's a shame to say that. I do really save all I can.

Helmer (laughing). That's very true,—all you can. But you can't save anything!

Nora (smiling quietly and happily). You haven't any idea how many expenses we skylarks and squirrels have, Torvald.

Helmer. You are an odd little soul. Very like your father. You always find some new way of wheedling money out of me, and, as soon as you have got it, it seems to melt in your hands.

Hai raggiunto la fine di questa anteprima. Registrati per continuare a leggere!
Pagina 1 di 1


Cosa pensano gli utenti di A Dolls House

1128 valutazioni / 39 Recensioni
Cosa ne pensi?
Valutazione: 0 su 5 stelle

Recensioni dei lettori

  • (5/5)
    Our home has been nothing but a playroom.

    What a wonderful surprise! I didn't expect to be so moved. The honesty is scalding. My reading as of late has focused on language: an exploration of poetics and the resonance of such. Ibsen acted as a sort of antithesis to that approach and the experience was all the more satisfying. Remarkably modern, We find Nora a wife and mother—who out of interest for her husband she has blurred the lines of propriety. This incident bobs to the surface the trials involved afford her an unexpected perspective.
  • (4/5)
    Somehow, I never read this when I was in school. It seems the sort of book that teachers make you read.

    All of the characters in the play are flawed. The way Helmer is so quick to condemn Nora, and then a few minutes later tells her he forgives her. Why would he think she would forgive him for saying so many horrible things? And for so much of the play, Nora seems to delight as being seen as a silly, flighty woman. This makes her speech at the end a little confusing. If she resents being treated that way, why act that way?

    This was a quick read. I read it all in about one hour. I enjoyed reading it. The play gave me a lot to think about.
  • (2/5)
     This book was alright. I had to read this while studying English for undergrad. It was a required text for my American Lit class that I hated more than anything that year. I was happy that it was short (ha!) and that it was soon over. We got the point that the main character was a spendthrift and after that, I was bored and ready for it to all end.
  • (3/5)
    This is a very interesting drama about the needs of the individual versus the needs of society or family.
  • (5/5)
    one of the first plays that ever really spoke to me as a modern person. a master work.
  • (3/5)
    short, deals with inner questioning vs. outward conformity. understandable how hugely controversial this was when it was released. still enjoyable today.
  • (3/5)
    Verhaal van Nora Helmer die heimelijk een grote som geld heeft geleend toen haar man ziek was. Ze vervalste daarbij de handtekening van haar vader. Haar man Torvald is intussen hersteld en is bevorderd tot bankdirecteur. Hij wil de bankbediende Nils Krogstad ontslaan wegens wangedrag; maar dat is uitgerekend de persoon bij wie ze geld heeft geleend. Nils chanteert Nora. Na veel omwegen komt de waarheid aan het licht. Torvald laat zijn vrouw onmiddellijk vallen, maar draait plots weer bij als er een uitweg wordt bedacht zodat er niets openbaar komt. In een vurig slotpleidooi neemt Nora afstand van haar liefdeloze man.
  • (3/5)
    I was surprised by this: it was a lot more readable and interesting than I expected it to be. It's also very thought-provoking: I can't decide whether Nora's actions are completely convincing, but I've been thinking about the play ever since I finished it, which must be a sign of an excellent piece of writing.
  • (2/5)
    I'm not sure if this is a commentary on women, or how women are treated by society at that time, or just the fact that this particular woman is a dingbat and her husband is a condescending twat.
    Basically she took out a loan (in order to fund a holiday for her husband who was working himself to death) and forged her father's signature on the document (as a woman she could not apply for a loan by herself) she is repaying it fine but the guy who gave her the loan is threatening to expose her lie (pretty dumb move dating the document 3 days AFTER her dad died! - she isn't the sharpest of minds).
    Now her hubby is becoming manager of the bank that gave the loan and wants to fire the guy who gave the loan to her because sometime in the past he did something dodgy along similar lines(the husband even says he does his job fine and if this was done today it would totally be grounds for unfair dismissal lawsuit). She tries to convince hubby to not fire him but hubby goes on a rant of how evil people breed more evil people and it is always because the mother was lacking in morals. She then decides the only option she has left is to kill herself (no overly dramatic of anything - she has the decision making skills of a hysterical 12 year old).
    In the end hubby finds out what she has done and tells her that while he will permit her to live in the house she will no longer be trusted and will not be allowed access to her own children because of the whole moral corruption she will cause them!
    The guy bribing her has a change of heart and gives her the incriminating document. Hubby is happy and suddenly everything is fine! Because NO ONE WILL EVER KNOW and therefore he's suddenly fine with everything.
    Then in the last page she grows a spine and tells hubby to shove it and announces she will be moving into her dad's old house so she can learn to be an adult rather than the child she has always been treated as - the only time I could start to respect her and then it ends!
    I am left confused as to what the point of the whole thing was...
  • (4/5)
    A good play, fun to imagine as a play instead of how I usually handle books.
  • (4/5)
    One of the best-known, most frequently performed of modern plays, displaying Ibsen’s genius for realistic prose drama. A classic expression of women’s rights, the play builds to a climax in which the central character, Nora, rejects a smothering marriage and life in "a doll’s house."
  • (4/5)
    It's a pretty good play, I totally get the mixed feelings people get from this play, the people who tend to dislike it are the ones who felt Norah didn't grow in the play, that the ending was a cop-out and she was still being immature. While the people who liked it tend to see that she grew and was able to leave. Either way I think because the ending is so open and not told completely it leaves room for a lot of interpretation and to me that's a good play because it makes you think. It's well written and very dynamic, but not in a obvious way.
  • (5/5)
    A very subtle, complex play that begins with ordinary everyday events, but slowly secrets are revealed from the past that turns out to threaten the marriage between Thorvald and Nora Helmer. This play have been endlessly analysed and discussed and one can understand why. It challenges the norms and roles of marriage (at least in that day and age) - there are no easy “solutions” and no heroes or villains in this story. Who is right and who is wrong.The main character Nora is “trapped” in a marriage with a husband who doesn’t love and support her the way he should. Yet, Nora herself is a problematic character - her secretive and thoughtless forgery of the signature - the way she pretends all the time - what should we say about her role as a mother? She doesn’t seem to be that connected to her children. How can she leave them - and yet, how can she stay? What will/should Nora do? And are Thorvald really beyond reach? Can we detect a change in him in the last part of the play?
  • (4/5)
    Maybe 3½... I found the second act dragged a bit, but the third and final act was amazing. Nora's revolt was tremendously satisfying to me, in particular after Torvald goes into his self-righteous rant.
  • (4/5)
    Nora, a stereotypical housewife, is faced with her past secrets being exposed. This forces her to choose between living her same sheltered life, or growing up and becoming strong and independent. Henrik Ibsen's play is full of metaphors that describe Nora's marriage. He uses a variety of characters to contrast the relationship between Nora and her husband. He also does an excellent job of raising moral questions for the reader to contemplate. This book would be well used in a high school English class, because it is simple to read and understand, but it raises a very important debate on gender roles and marriage.
  • (4/5)
    I could not believe two things after I read this play. I could not believe that a 19th century male playwright wrote this play with the kind of ending he did and that this play is actually based on a true story. This just confirms that nothing is original (and nothing really is original; when you pick a pen and start using language to communicate your thoughts, you're not being original because other people have used that word before, but I digress). That is not to say I did not enjoy this play. I actually enjoyed it during my second read during my sophomore year of college as opposed to my first year when I had nearly no background on analyzing literature because I can hardly give credit to my English teachers in high school for teaching me how to analyze literature. (Who actually learns anything in high school anyway? But I digress again.)Ibsen wrote this play and various other plays to criticize the Norwegian middle class people who were hypocrites. He addressed social issues, such as women's role in society, as well as Darwin's theories about the passing of genetics from parents to children. This play covers those theories a lot, as you can see with Dr. Rank who genetically inherited a disease from his father because of his own sinful nature. That sub-plot emphasizes Nora's decision to leave her children for fear of them inheriting her bad nature, which is completely understandable.One thing that needs to be understood here is Ibsen was not a feminist, but a realist. Just because he ended the play with Nora leaving her husband, her duty to her husband, and her duty to her children behind does not mean he thought every woman should behave as such if they do not get what they want. Ibsen was also observing social issues of men and women in general, which is why I like that guy. This play sparked so much controversy, and it remains one of his highly known plays, but I think more people should start analyzing other things besides the feminist issues that are obviously noted in this play.
  • (4/5)
    Well-written dialogue, and a speedy read. I find it cliche because I have been usurped by classic literature with the same theme (or even more modern literature such as [Revolutionary Road].) But, I am sure it was great for its era. I find the main characters a bit dull- though something really intrigues me about the Doctor. A classic for everyone to read.
  • (3/5)
    A play better worth seeing.

    This was one of those books/plays that I was told was on a top 100 list, and so I decided to finally give it a try this time. Plus, it's been so long since I read a play, I figured, "Why not?" It's a short read, and I probably would have been finished with it in less than a day if I had the time. The characters are easily introduced, and the plot speeds along and thickens at a moment's pace. Needless to say, you'll go through the whole roller coaster of emotions that the characters go through at a much quicker pace than them.

    Plays sometimes read well, but I felt that this one could have been much more enjoyable if I were to watch a stage adaptation of it. There are many more nuances that can be expressed by the actor, and simple stage directions simply don't do it for me when reading. I'll try to add my own artistic interpretations of what the actors would do in my head, but then I'm preoccupied with that instead of focusing on the story at hand. Alas, it wasn't meant to be.

    There are great themes within the play, but the most obvious was the focus on feminism and our character's struggle for identity, and the disillusionment of marriage on both parties. Should I desire, I could write a lot more about the themes, provide some quotes, and have an essay ready for a future class. But instead I will end my review here.

    An easy yet in-depth read, best for lovers of plays.
  • (4/5)
    I'm currently working my way through a good deal of the theatrical canon and this play was up next. An intriguing study, still at times rooted in the melodramatic. I wasn't too impressed with the character of Nora, even after extensive discussion. She confused and baffled me the majority of the time, and not in a particularly good way.
  • (4/5)
    We read this sophomore year of high school, and I very much enjoyed it. We had a debate over whether Nora was good or bad in my class- all the girls sided with her, and all the boys but one against. I'm with her! I felt like she wasn't really a person while she was with her husband and she had to leave to become one. Never stay with a man who won't let you eat cookies!
  • (1/5)
    The good thing was VERY quick to read, other than that...who cares about the story. It was lame. I can't believe people paid money to sit through that on Broadway. There was no excitement what so ever. It was like watching what goes on in many households on stage. Evidently the big deal was that it happened in an earlier time period when it was less socially exceptable...big deal.
  • (5/5)
    When I was a student at BYU in my last semester I took an American Lit class. Looking back, I should have taken almost any other class available. I was a newlywed when the semester started, and by the end I was expecting my first baby. So what did we study that would go along with my life's lessons I was learning at the time? Kate Chopin's The Awakening. Charlotte Perkins Gilman's The Yellow Wallpaper. Edith Wharton. Sarah Orne Jewett. Just about any depressing story written by American women, we read it. That class was not a lot of laughs.The play, A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen, would have fit right in with those writers if only he had been American. It's got all the right elements. Restricted setting - check. Slice of middle class family life - check. Deceptively innocuous beginning - check. Desperate woman struggling with her own identity against a tightly ordered society and family life - double check. The difference is that for me, 18 years after the first class, is that now instead of making me depressed, it made me angry to read this. Angry with Nora, and the way it took her so long to protest the way she was treated. Angry with Helmet, for treating his wife as an inferior creature he had to humor. Angry with Christine, for putting up with years of unhappiness just so she could devote her entire self to taking care of someone. And then going after what she really wanted only because she was helping her friend, and further, because she set up the expectation that she would again be 'taking care' of someone. Most of all, angry with society, that this was accepted as normal. I read that when this play was first performed, the audience was shocked. But not because of any of the reasons I mentioned. No, because women were generally supposed to be perfectly content to be treated in such a way.Looking back at that class, I am not a bit surprised that I found it so troubling. There I was, just barely started on this marriage thing and shortly about to take on motherhood. And what did I get to read about? Any healthy models of what family life could be like? No. Literally, everything we read that dealt with marriage or motherhood was telling me how restrictive it was, how demanding, how degrading to my personhood, how I would have to sacrifice my very self to be successful in my new roles. No wonder I had a hard time!So a little perspective is valuable now that I read this play. I know from my own experience that marriage does not have to be like that, and that motherhood is a source of great joy and fulfillment, as well as a challenge. Yes, I know that society was different 100 years ago, but I have to believe that even then, not every marriage was one of dominant/submissive. There must, even then, have been relationships that were based on a more equal footing. There must have been women who ENJOYED being a wife and a mother, and didn't just do it because they needed security.And maybe I'm just a little spoiled, because I am living in the 21st century, when women are busy in so many different things. Maybe. But to say that I can't judge people from that era means that I'm supposed to accept that they are not as capable as I am of fixing things that don't work, and that they are not as bright at seeing what makes them unhappy. I don't believe that. Yes, it must have been more difficult for women of that time to express their true selves, but that doesn't mean that I shouldn't get angry when I read about a woman who is a doormat, and ask myself why she put up with that.What did I think of this play? I can't say I loved it. But it sure brought out a strong reaction in me. On that basis alone, I have to give it 5 stars. I think that every couple ought to read this play, or even better, see it together. And so should every therapist or clergyman. Single people too should read this and learn from it to set up some solid boundaries before they form a partnership.I think that so far this year, this is the book that got me the most emotionally involved with what I was reading. So I have to give it 5 stars. However, read or see this with the knowledge I didn't have as a newlywed. Not every relationship demands this self sacrifice from the woman. This is how it is NOT supposed to be. Once you know that, you can ask yourself if you need to adjust anything in your relationships so this doesn't happen.
  • (5/5)
    A woman, Nora, borrows money to save her husband's life without his knowledge. Later, the man she borrowed from blackmails her and she is terrified that her husband will discover what she's done. Nora is a fascinating character. She is clever and resourceful and at the same time she seems desperate to please her husband, no matter what it takes. She hides her unhappiness from everyone, even herself. She likes to encourage his believe that's she's a frivolous creature. Her husband, Helmer, is condescending and pious. He has fury inducing lines like, "I should not be a man if this womanly helplessness did not just give you a double attractiveness in my eyes." There marriage is more a playful charade than a partnership. When circumstances push her to step out of her comfort one she finds a strength she didn't realize she had.
  • (4/5)
    Read for school in my World Lit class. But I remember loving it from my high school drama class. I loved Ibsen even then. Coming back to to this play years later was wonderful, because I got to examine it from an adult perspective. I will always defend Nora and her decision. She is a victim of her time period, yet she is not to be pitied.
  • (4/5)
    Ibsen's novel is a critique of the 19th century marriage norms. Nora lives to serve her husband, Helmer, however, she resorts to deceit in order to help him and then lives in fear of Torvald's negative judgment of her actions. Torvald controls every aspect of Nora's life; what she eats, what she buys, how she raises the children, what she thinks, and what she does. Nora dutifully complies and denies her own desires. Torvald uses demeaning nicknames for his wife, and treats her as if she were a child. Nora seems disinterested in her children who are cared for by a nanny. Through the characterization and dramatic action, Ibsen creates a picture of the Helmer household as one of dolls in a doll's house. Torvald views his wife and children as possessions that serve to elevate his ego and reputation. Christine serves as a foil for Nora and Christine becomes Nora's model modern woman. Throughout the drama, Nora is blackmailed by Krogstad so that she will convince Torvald to keep Krogstad employed at the bank. When Krogstad is fired, he reveals that he will send Torvald a letter that explains the loan that Nora took out in order to pay for a trip to Italy. Eventually, Torvald reads the letter and harshly admonishes Nora. Nora prepares to leave the house and Torvald immediately forgives her and explains that a man forgives when he truly loves a woman. Nora maintains her resolve to leave and find out her own identity. Torvald and some readers cannot fathom why Nora would not take her children along with her. This resolution makes the drama controversial in Ibsen's day and still in modern society. Nora can be compared and contrasted to Chopin's characters Mrs. Summers in "A Pair of Silk Stockings" and Mrs. Mallard in "The Story of an Hour." I also like to discuss how a marital relationship can confining for men. Both Rip Van Winkle and Walter Mitty are husbands who have much in common with Nora Helmer.
  • (5/5)
    I really, really enjoyed this play. Though it does border on the melodramatic at times (understandable, given that the world was just beginning to move out of the romantic period and realism still hadn't fully taken off), the heartbreaking realizations Nora makes and her ultimate decision regarding her future mark a change in the Western canon from the generic 'wife/mother' archetype to living, breathing, viable characters. Her journey from inactive doll to a decisive thinker is just startling, even when read now without the proper repressive context.
  • (4/5)
    I actually read an online version of this text provided by my teacher as part of my Introduction to Drama course, so this is not the same version I'm writing about, but is the same work. This is probably the most famous Problem Play ever written, and is a rather fun read as well. It definitely deals heavily with the position of women in society at the time, and offers a great glimpse of society in general at the time the play was written.
  • (2/5)
    Well that was ugly.
  • (3/5)
    Nora a woman who comes to understand that her marriage wasnt as she supposed it to be , an illusion, and that her husband is a very different person from she once believed him to be..when he cant undergo one of the hardships in their life for her sake ....

    She leaves her husband and her children because she feels it is for their benefit..
    her husband accused her of being a "child-wife"she feels that he was right, that she is a child who knows nothing of the world. Since she knows so little about herself or society, she feels that she is an inadequate mother and wife.....

    her last words was that they could become a man and wife once again, but only if a miracle occurred.......

    i liked the last scene....
  • (5/5)
    I read this with interest as a bachelor. After 22 years of marriage rereading it convinces me that it is an inspired masterpiece. I hope my children will read it at some point- preferably before they marry!