Within literature, writers often present desires as an uncontrollable impulse which results in behaviour. Both Ibsen in A Doll’s House and Rossetti in her poems explore how strong desires can lead to drastic actions being taken. Rossetti writing as a young woman in a patriarchal Victorian England may be criticising how women’s strong desires where often dismissed as them being ‘hysterical’ by writing female characters with strong desires who also have agency. Similarly, Ibsen writing in an emerging capitalist Norway, may have seen the growing wealth gap between the upper and lower classes, and the constant dismissal of the needs of the lower class by those in power. This may have spurred him to write characters who face injustice and have strong desires and act on them. Overall, both writers explore how the desire to escape oppression and protect family is difficult to control. However, both writers agree that the lustful desires of powerful men can be controlled. Both writers explore how women who have a strong desire to escape injustice are often difficult to control. In From The Antique (FTA) Rossetti’s explores how the drudgery of female life in Victorian England, leads to a strong desire to escape. Rossetti details how life as a woman is “a weary life she said.” The use of the pronoun suggests that the mundane nature of life as a woman is a universal experience, this is true as in Victorian England, most women were not allowed to go to school as they were meant to focus on maintaining the home. Furthermore, Rossetti describes a woman’s lot as “doubly blank” this reinforces the injustice faced by women, as she details the lack of agency women in Victorian England possess. This shows how women were generally restricted in what they could do and were unable to do anything about it. Rossetti’s description of this injustice leads her to “wish she were a man.” Whilst modern views may believe Rossetti is referring to wanting to posses the privileges men had in Victorian England, such as being able to go to school, the critic Spairse suggests Rossetti aims for self annihilation of the female space. This suggests the injustice of society has led Rossetti to want to escape from her position in life. This idea is reinforced as she wants to be “nothing at all in the world” further suggesting she wants to escape from her own life because of the pain that she faces. Rossettii believing that “none would miss her in the world” may be suicidal ideation, suggesting Rossetti wants to escape injustice by taking her own life. Rossetti, a devout Tractarian would have viewed suicide as against her religion, thus Rossetti shows the extremity of the female position, as it leads people to defy religious teachings as a means of escape. This shows how due to the injustice faced by women, they have a strong desire to escape from their society. This idea is also seen in the character of Nora in ADH. Nora is similarly placed in an unjust society. The constant diminishing of her by calling her “a little skylark” and “little Nora” may represent how women were legally viewed as minors in Norwegian marriages. This shows the injustice Norwegian women face as they are totally stripped of any agency and likened to minors. Torvald’s subtle misogynistic views such as calling Nora’s spending “like a woman” reveals the normalisation of viewing women as lesser than – a representation of Norwegian society where women were also unable to work or be educated.. This in tandem shows Nora trapped in an injustice where she is belittled due to being a women, and the people around her view her gender as inferior. Thus, similarly to FTA, Nora describes and intense desire to escape, through suicidal ideation. Nora contemplates drowning “under the ice” where she would be “ugly, hairless.” The gruesome depiction of suicide shows how desperate Nora is to escape her situation, exposing how Nora’s injustice had lead to a strong desire of escape. Ultimately, both writes explore how female injustice can lead to an intense desire to escape, by suicide. As well as an intense desire to escape, both writers show how a strong desire to protect leads to uncontrollable actions. This is seen in ADH through the Character of Krogstad, a representation of the victims of the faltering Norwegian middle class. Krogstad is forced to remove a blemish on his reputation of being caught in a bad loan, in order to be able to save his professional career. This leads to Krogstad threatening to reveal Nora’s IOU if he is not given a job at Torvald’s bank. Ibsen may be mirroring the drastic measure men of lower classes had to take to make enough money to provide. Krogstad reveals his primary motive for revealing is IOU is to. “provide for his children” This shows how a strong desire to protect leads to a willingness to do anything. This is explicitly seen when Krogstad “places the letter in the mailbox” and declaring “it will be Niels Krogstad running the bank.” This shows how spurred by a strong desire to protect him and his family, Krogstad is willing to ruin another family, showing how strong desires can lead to action. Readers may view Krogstad as an antagonistic character, but may have warmed to him after hearing his motive, Ibsen, attempting to write a realist novel, subverts typical expectations by creating an empathetic villain, who’s desire to protect his family is a universal feeling. Similarly in No Thank you John (NTYJ), Rossetti has to challenge the defamation she has been inflicted with by John Brett (a failed ex partner) to protect her family. Within Victorian Society, a fallen women was often seen as a failure of society, leading to them and their family being ostracised. Thus, Rossetti attempts to remove any marks of slander to prevent being called a fallen woman. This is seen in the first line “I never said I loved you John” as well as asking “I have no heart?” This shows how Rossetti attempting to protect herself and her family by defending her own reputation. However, Rossetti takes further action by attempting to mock John, and remove his credibility. This is seen when Rossetti mock’s John Brett’s age by calling him a “day old Ghost” as well as saying other women would “take pity upon [him].” Whilst readers may have viewed this as unnecessarily cruel, Rossetti intentionally insults John Brett to attempt to invalidate all of his calumnious comments and thus not be seen as a fallen woman. This shows how needing to protect reputation can lead to actions being taken. Overall, both writers show how needing to protect family and themselves is an intense desire from which uncontrollable actions often come from. However, whilst both writers believe desires to escape injustice and protect are uncontrollable, they believe the desires of powerful men can be controlled. This is seen in Rossetti’s Maude Clare (MC) where she aims to criticise the double standard within Victorian society where men are allowed sexual freedom whilst women aren’t. In MC, the character of Tom is seen as being romantically involved with two women. Rossetti may be referencing her former partner James Collinson who had recently married Eliza Wheeler, she may have done this to criticise him for have relationships with two woman in quick succession. Within the poem, Tom “gazed upon pale Maude Clare” whilst saying his wedding vows. This shows a portrayal of male lust, as they attempt to have relationships with other women whilst getting married, instantly braking the sacred covenant. However, Maude Clare attempts to control this lustful desire by confronting him, Maude Clare gives him a “the “golden chain” he wore when they “waded ankle deep”. As in Victorian society, revealing ankles were viewed as sexually revealing, Maude Clare reveals how Tom was in a sexual relationship with Maude Clare as well as his wife, showing Tom’s lust. However, Maude Clare is able to make Tom “falter in his place” suggesting he has been beaten by Maude Clare. Furthermore, Maude Clare’s information leads to nell wanting to be Tom’s wife “for better or worse” This shows how Maude Clare can use Tom’s lust to ruin his marriage with Nell, showing how lust can be controlled. Similarly n ADH, Torvalds lustful desires are controlled by Nora. After Nora’s tarantella dance, Torvalds comments on how his “blood was on fire.” This shows how after Nora’s dance Torvalds expects to have sex with Nora. However, when Nora says no, Torvalds shows anger and asks “am I not your husband.” This may be a representation of the institutionalised patriarchy in Norway, where marital rape was legal, showing how male lust was legal. However, Nora is able to control Torvald’s lust by putting on her outside clothes. As the outside clothes are synonymous with the outside male sphere, Nora controls Torvald’s lust by removing herself from the home. After the IOU is revealed, Nora says she “never loved him” and ultimately leaves the home by “slamming the door shut.” Nora defies Torvald’s lustful attitudes and gets to leave him on his own, this shows how lustful actions can be controlled. Both writers show how the lust of powerful men can be defeated by exposing them and threatening to leave. Overall, both writers show how intense desire leads to uncontrollable action if the desire spurs from a form of pain such as injustice or a need to protect. However, if the desire if purely selfish like lust, it is able to be controlled. Despite their literary differences, both writers explore how intense desires can mostly lead to uncontrollable action.