V.V. Tsybulskaya
The novel "Hard Times" (1854) is one of Dickens's most topical novels. In it, the writer for the first time directly addressed the problems that worried his contemporary society: the struggle of the working class for their rights, the relationship between entrepreneurs and workers. The relevance of the work was emphasized by the subtitle “For our time.” The problem of education is also central to the novel. The writer saw education and upbringing as a means of overcoming many social problems of our time. For Dickens, ignorance and poverty are the main vices of the 19th century, closely related to each other. Issues of upbringing and education are not only touched upon in novels, but are also the topic of many public speaking Dickens of the 50s. Utilitarianism, subverted in the novel “Hard Times,” has long been hated by the writer. Back in 1850, in the first issue of Domashnye Slovo, rejecting the “spirit of utilitarianism,” he wrote: “In the breasts of young and old, wealthy and poor, we will tenderly cherish that light of Imagination that is characteristic of the human soul.”
Ideological orientation The novel, as a rule, does not cause disagreement among researchers. The moral of the work is clear. The writer directly pointed to the object of his satire. And yet, there was something in the work that alarmed many critics and admirers of Dickens’s work. Hard Times received lukewarm reviews, even though Dickens was at the height of his fame during this period. The authoritative magazine Athenaeum published a negative review of the novel; Dickens was accused of lack of imagination and, which sounded especially unfair, of the illogical ending. In the ninth issue of the magazine " Domestic notes"for 1854 N.G. Chernyshevsky, who introduced Dickens's novel to Russian readers, writes about this review as a misconception of the English magazine and generally praises Hard Times.
The originality of the novel was noticed by Russian readers. ON THE. Nekrasov compares the “excellent” novel “Hard Times” with the “mediocre” novel “Laura” by J. Sand. At the same time, he would not want all literature to consist of such novels, since “such a work will never have an effect on the heart... The impression made by Dickens’s novel, in addition to the artistic pleasure it gives, does not exceed the impression made by an intelligent and honest a treatise of political and economic content." Similar reproaches can be found in many contemporary works: they are determined by the originality of the form of the work.
The novel "Hard Times" differs from other works of the writer in its small volume (this is Dickens's shortest novel), clarity of construction, simplicity of characters, and the absence of side effects. storylines and humorous scenes, the stern and restrained tone of the narrative. Artistic originality The novel was noted by Russian researchers of Dickens's work, in particular, V.V. Ivasheva writes about the compositional harmony of the novel, the relatively small number characters.
Some researchers see the lack of the novel in the clarity of construction and clearly expressed idea. T. Silman identifies the features of the novel “Hard Times”, but assesses its originality negatively. She believes that this schematic novel lacks the basic originality of Dickens’s works, the writer of “a mood that comes from the setting, from a warm, family, or from a romantic, grotesque coloring... In Hard Times this coloring is absent. There are questions and answers, problems and tasks. And if all this is clothed in the so-called figurative form, then the image is felt here precisely as an appearance, as the embodiment of a thesis, which, perhaps, would be more convenient to be clothed in its primary, thesis form.” I.M. is also close to this position. Katarsky, who notes that the novel is “too dry, unpoetic in a Dickensian way, his goodies much more colorless than the heroes of previous novels.” The style of the novel is defined as not entirely adequate to its content.
This point of view is largely shared by English-speaking literary critics - the novel is called Dickens’ “failure”, and is reproached for its incompleteness, lack of humor, and caricature technique, which reduces the artistry of the work.
Opinions were also expressed in defense of the novel “Hard Times.” F.R. Leavis argued that "of all Dickens's works, this is the novel that embodies the full force of his genius" and included his analysis in an appendix to the monograph " Great tradition", emphasizing the connection of the novel with the main line of development of English literature. B. Shaw considered Hard Times the writer's masterpiece. J. Ruskin rated it highly; he began his essay on the novel with the remark that “many thinking people"we have unwisely lost sight of the essential merit and justice of Dickens's novel simply because it conveys its truth with some shade of caricature."
“Hard Times” is a work in which a number of modern problems are reflected in a conventional form. As noted by N.P. Michalskaya, “nowhere does Dickens’ denunciation of bourgeois society receive such a generalized, all-encompassing character as in this novel, where he tries to present not individual phenomena social life, but the bourgeois system as a whole." The generalized nature of the reconstruction of reality determines the peculiarities of the construction of the novel and its figurative solution.
The novel is two-dimensional. His images embody, first of all, the philosophy of utilitarianism, a certain type of attitude towards life. In the novel great importance has an allegory, thanks to which it acquires the features of a parable novel. This has been noted in a number of English-language works.
Hard Times should not be regarded as a work uncharacteristic of Dickens. The appearance of a novel with the features of a parable is predetermined by the entire course of development of the writer.
It is known that his first works were built on the principle of an adventure novel or a biographical novel. In the 50s, during the heyday of the writer's skill and his greatest political activity, a number of changes occurred in the composition of novels. The plot in them is built around one social problem. It is characteristic that during this period negative social phenomena are interpreted by the author in a generalized, symbolic manner, such as, for example, the Court of Chancery in Bleak House. At the same time, the writer remains a moralist, still striving to “educate” and teach “a lesson in goodness.”
Many of Dickens's works contain fairy-tale elements: motifs, villain characters, settings (The Curiosity Shop, some Christmas Stories). He often mentions heroes folk tales, writes about the need to respect the fairy tale in the “age of utilitarianism.” For Dickens, this is the world of imagination, fantasy and dreams, which is opposed to utilitarianism. Friendly ties connected Dickens with G.X. Andersen. The writer was also attracted to the fairy tale by its moralism and edification, which brings it closer to a parable. In the endings of his novels, Dickens punishes evil and rewards virtue, and often does this with Victorian methodicality, not even forgetting minor characters.
The novel “Hard Times” embodies the writer’s attitude towards modernity in the form of a parable. Naturally, the parable beginning does not completely determine the specifics of the novel, but is essential for a correct understanding of the stylistics of the work.
There are two main types of allegory: historical (or political) allegory and allegory of ideas, "in which the characters represent abstract concepts and the plot serves to convey a doctrine or thesis." An allegory of ideas is presented in the novel “Hard Times.” First of all, the writer had utilitarianism in mind, but the philosophy of “facts and figures”, the bearer of which is Gredgrind, is somewhat broader than utilitarianism. Dickens opposes any theory that forgets about the “soul” and sees only the statistical average, not specific person.
High degree Conventions of images and allegory in a work are not always correctly interpreted by researchers.
Already contemporaries saw in the exaggerations the originality of the writer’s style, sometimes reproached him for deforming his life, and saw in this a departure from realism. Critic-positivist D.G. Lewis believed that Dickens had no characters, but only "masks... caricatures and distortions human nature».
V. Dibelius wrote that “Dickens is impatient, subjective and unfair when he generalizes,” and that due to the author’s obvious subjectivity, the credibility of the images of Gradgrind and Bounderby as typical representatives certain classes.
The characters of this novel are set from the very beginning - each of them embodies a certain idea. The fates of Gredgrind's children - Louise and Tom - demonstrate the inconsistency of the philosophy of "facts and figures" and education in the spirit of this philosophy. Sissie Jupe represents the world of imagination; she is opposed by Bitzer, the first student at Mr. Gradgrind's school, whose behavior proves the harmfulness of his upbringing.
One or two traits are emphasized in the characters in the novel. Talking names highlight the main focus of the image and reveal it allegorical meaning. In Hard Times, almost all the names are meaningful.
It is known that Dickens often used leitmotifs. V. Dibelius noted one of the side effects of this technique: “A style based on formal repetition is fraught with danger. It gives a powerful stylization of reality, a bright highlighting and delineation of the essential, but suppresses all variations and shades.” At the same time, leitmotifs and repetitions have “symbolic meaning”, “symbolic impact”.
Many leitmotifs permeate the novel "Hard Times". The characters say the same phrases (Bounderby, Gredgrind). In the descriptions of the appearance of the characters and the scene of action, one or more characteristic details are highlighted, which are then repeated every time the hero appears or the situation is described. This technique, which runs through the entire work, is emphasized by the title of the chapter containing a description of Coketown - “The Main Mode”, or “Leitmotif”. In the second phrase of the chapter we read again: “Let us listen to this fundamental mode - Coketown - before we continue our song.” The titles of the chapters of the novel contain parallel constructions, for example, “Father and Daughter”, “Husband and Wife”, “People and Brothers”, “Workers and Masters”, “Funny and Ridiculous”, “Decisively and Firmly”, “Someone is Missing” , “Someone has been found.” This gives the work compositional harmony.
The text often contains parallelisms with anaphoristic repetitions and lexical repetitions. An example is the description of Gradgrind's appearance in the first chapter. As noted by L.S. Kuznetsova, " characteristic feature Dickens’s stylistic manner is the persistent repetition of a limited group of words and phrases... The author often gives these words a broad, symbolic, generalizing meaning.” For the novel Hard Times, the word is “fact.”
Conventional and Coketown - the setting of the work, a city with a telling name, which is not on the map of England. All Dickens' novels contain descriptions real places, and only the novel "Hard Times" could not be localized - only the general atmosphere had to be reminiscent of Manchester.
The plot of the novel is completely subordinated to the main task - to show the collapse of Gradgrind's educational system and the failure of his philosophy. As E. Wilson notes, this is “a rare case in Dickens when a surprisingly simple plot is subordinated from the very beginning to the design of the work as a whole.” It embodies the idea of the punishability of evil, of inevitable retribution. This idea was emphasized by dividing the novel into books with symbolic names“Sev”, “Harvest”, “Gathering in granaries”, which was done when preparing the novel for separate publication and was absent from the journal publication. This division gives his composition clarity and completeness and highlights an idea that is important to the author.
The titles of the novel's three books are reminiscent of the biblical proverb, “what goes around comes around.” The same proverb is cited in the author’s preface to “Martin Chuzzlewit” and is found in the text of the novel; a similar idea is developed in “A Tale of Two Cities.” In the novel "Hard Times" there are many other periphrases and images that have biblical parallels (Stephen, Rachel). Compositional harmony is given to the novel by the parallelism of the titles of the first chapters of the first and third books - “One for Need” and “Other for Need”. An ironic effect arises when comparing the biblical chapter titles and their contents. The second chapter of the first book, which describes Gradgrind's school, is called "Massacre of the Innocents." There are numerous biblical allusions and paraphrases in the text of the novel. For example, the principle declared by Sessie is “to treat people as I would like them to do to me” - paraphrased words of Christ. In his description of Coketown, in a parody of prayer, Dickens inserts a phrase from the prayer book that relates to the most vulnerable core principle of the Manchester School. The novel mentions the commandments Tower of Babel, Last Judgment. Biblical allusions do not indicate the religious spirit of the novel, although there are some Christian motives, associated with the images of Stephen Blackpool and Rachel. Biblical analogies give the images of the novel a generalized meaning, universality, and enhance the parable beginning. M. Quilligan’s study “The Language of Allegory” notes that any use of the Bible is an important feature of an allegorical work.
“Hard Times” is not an allegory or a parable in pure form. The parable principle appears to varying degrees in individual parts of the work. It is known that in literary text the beginning and the end play a special role. At the beginning, a key is given, as it were, to the work, its genre. Allegorical works are especially characterized by the “emblematic” or “symbolic” nature of the beginning. In the novel "Hard Times" the beginning and the ending also stand out. The first chapter takes no more than a page. Its convention is obvious.
Gredgrind sets out the essence of his philosophy, and the novel begins with his words. In Gradgrind's 77-word speech, the word "fact" appears five times. In total, “fact” is mentioned 10 times in the first chapter. The second chapter begins with Gredgrind's self-characterization, then the author notes that in this way Gredgrind mentally recommended himself to his acquaintances and the general public. This way of presenting and characterizing the hero is very conventional. From the very beginning of the work, its parable character is noticeable. At the end of the novel the author says future fate heroes - the future opens before their mind's eye. The last paragraph of the novel is a direct appeal to the reader with a warning, a reminder of responsibility; Here the novel’s moral tendency, didacticism, and even journalisticism are especially strongly felt.
Exposing the philosophy of “facts and figures,” Dickens writes a novel distinguished by its clarity and symmetry of composition, strict accuracy and logic of plot, i.e., a work constructed largely according to the laws of the theory he refuted.
The parable nature of the work can be explained by the writer’s need to express his views on modernity and the desire to do this in the most effective form. The conventionality and allegorical nature of the novel may be associated with the desire to overcome the fragmentation of the material, with the desire for broad generalizations, which intensified in the writer’s novels in the 50s. Allegory was a means of compensating for the “spontaneity, disorganization of empirical life material” due to the socio-historical approach. A similar role in Thackeray’s novel “Vanity Fair” was played by the likening of life to theater.
The fact that the novel is dedicated to Carlyle cannot be underestimated. Dickens was aware of Carlyle's speeches against Bentham and utilitarianism; he was greatly influenced by the famous publicist, which repeatedly manifested itself in his work. Of Dickens's contemporaries, it was Carlyle who often resorted to allegory and parable in his pamphlets. One of his parables, about an Irish widow, influenced Dickens's treatment of the relationship between the upper and lower classes of society in Bleak House. The influence of Carlyle's book on french revolution based on Dickens's novel A Tale of Two Cities. It is no coincidence that Carlyle liked the novel “Hard Times” more than other works of the writer.
The title of the novel, which is symbolic, is indicative. There are about fifty possible titles in the manuscript, including “Facts,” “Stubborn Things,” “Mr. Gredgrind", "Hardheaded Gredgrind", "Mr. Gredgrind's Facts", " Simple Arithmetic", "Two plus two is four", "Prove it!", the name appears several times, which became final. “Hard Times” is an aphoristic name that has a generalized, symbolic meaning.
In the middle of the 19th century. It is in the work of Dickens that the conventional forms popular in the literature of romanticism are preserved. However, the romantics, resorting to allegory, preferred the symbol with its polysemy and did not value allegory. The traditions of allegorical storytelling are preserved in satirical works; Carlyle's pamphlets and pamphlet novels are built in the spirit of Swift's allegory. The social novel of the 19th century is no stranger to allegory. In novels and essays Thackeray
Keywords: Charles Dickens, Charles Dickens, “Hard Times”, criticism of the works of Charles Dickens, criticism of the works of Charles Dickens, download criticism, download for free, English literature 19th century
In the city of Coketown live two close friends - if we can talk about friendship between people equally deprived of warm human feelings. Both of them are located at the top of the social ladder: Josiah Bounderby, “a famous rich man, banker, merchant, manufacturer”; and Thomas Gradgrind, "a man of sober mind, obvious facts and accurate calculations", who becomes MP for Coketown.
Mr. Gradgrind, who worshiped only facts, raised his children (there were five of them) in the same spirit. They never had toys - only teaching aids; they were forbidden to read fairy tales, poems and novels and generally touch anything that was not associated with immediate benefit, but could awaken the imagination and was related to the sphere of feelings. Wanting to spread his method as widely as possible, he organized a school on these principles.
Perhaps the worst student in this school was Sessie Jupe, the daughter of a circus performer - a juggler, magician and clown. She believed that flowers could be depicted on carpets, and not just geometric figures, and openly said that she was from the circus, which word in this school was considered indecent. They even wanted to expel her, but when Mr. Gradgrind came to the circus to announce this, there was a heated discussion about the escape of Sessie's father with his dog. Sessy's father had grown old and worked in the arena no longer as well as in his youth; He heard applause less and less, and made mistakes more and more often. His colleagues had not yet reproached him bitterly, but in order not to live to see this, he fled. Sessie was left alone. And, instead of kicking Sissie out of school, Thomas Gradgrind took her into his house.
Sessie was very friendly with Louise, eldest daughter Gradgrind until she agreed to marry Josiah Bounderby. He is only thirty years older than her (he is fifty, she is twenty), “fat, loud; his gaze is heavy, his laugh is metallic.” Louise was persuaded to this marriage by her brother Tom, for whom his sister's marriage promised many benefits - a very tireless job at the Bounderby Bank, which would allow him to leave the hated home, which bore the expressive name “Stone Shelter”, a good salary, freedom. Tom perfectly learned the lessons of his father's school: benefit, benefit, lack of feelings. Louise, from these lessons, apparently lost interest in life. She agreed to the marriage with the words: “Does it matter?”
In the same city lives the weaver Stephen Blackpool, a simple worker, fair man. He is unhappy in his marriage - his wife is a drunkard, a completely fallen woman; but in England divorce is not for the poor, as his master Bounderby, to whom he came for advice, explains to him. This means that Stephen is destined to carry his cross further, and he will never be able to marry Rachel, whom he has loved for a long time. Stephen curses this world order - but Rachel begs not to say such words and not to participate in any unrest leading to its change. He promises. Therefore, when all the workers join the United Tribunal, Stephen alone does not do this, for which the leader of the Tribunal, Slackbridge, calls him a traitor, a coward and an apostate and offers to ostracize him. Having learned about this, the owner calls Stephen, reasoning that it would be nice to make the rejected and offended worker an informer. Stephen's categorical refusal leads to Bounderby dismissing him with a wolf ticket. Stephen announces that he is forced to leave the city. The conversation with the owner takes place in the presence of his household: his wife Louise and her brother Tom. Louise, imbued with sympathy for the unjustly offended worker, secretly goes to his home to give him money and asks her brother to accompany her. At Stephen's they find Rachel and an unfamiliar old woman who introduces herself as Mrs. Pegler. Stephen meets her for the second time in his life in the same place: at Bounderby's house; a year ago she asked him if his owner was healthy and looked good, now she is interested in his wife. The old lady is very tired, kind Rachel wants to give her tea; So she ends up with Stephen. Stephen refuses to take money from Louise, but thanks her for her good intention. Before leaving, Tom takes Stephen to the stairs and privately promises him a job, for which he needs to wait at the bank in the evenings: the messenger will give him a note. For three days, Stephen regularly waits, and, without waiting for anything, leaves the city.
Meanwhile, Tom, having escaped from the Stone Shelter, leads a riotous lifestyle and gets entangled in debt. At first, Louise paid his debts by selling her jewelry, but everything comes to an end: she has no more money.
Tom and especially Louisa are closely watched by Mrs. Sparsit, Bounderby's former housekeeper, who, after the owner's marriage, takes the position of bank supervisor. Mr. Bounderby, who likes to repeat that he was born in a ditch, that his mother abandoned him and raised him on the street and that he achieved everything with his own mind, is terribly flattered by the supposedly aristocratic origin of Mrs. Sparsit, who lives solely on his favors. Mrs. Sparsit hates Louisa, apparently because she is aiming for her place - or at least is very afraid of losing hers. With the arrival in town of James Harthouse, a bored gentleman from London who intends to stand for parliament from the Coketown constituency to strengthen the "party of hard numbers", she increases her vigilance. Indeed, the London dandy, according to all the rules of art, besieges Louise, groping for her Achilles heel - love for her brother. She is ready to talk about Tom for hours, and during these conversations the young people gradually become closer. After a private meeting with Harthouse, Louise becomes frightened of herself and returns to her father's house, declaring that she will not return to her husband. Sessie, whose warmth now warms the entire Stone Shelter, takes care of her. Moreover, Sessy own initiative goes to Harthouse to convince him to leave the city and not pursue Louise anymore, and she succeeds.
When news of the bank robbery spreads, Louise faints: she is sure that Tom did it. But suspicion falls on Stephen Blackpool: after all, it was he who was on duty at the bank in the evenings for three days, after which he fled the city. Enraged by Louise's escape and the fact that Stephen has not been found, Bounderby posts notices all over the city with signs of Stephen and the promise of a reward for anyone who gives up the thief. Rachel, unable to bear the slander against Stephen, goes first to Bounderby, and then, together with him and Tom, to Louisa and talks about last evening Stephen in Coketown, about the arrival of Louise and Tom and about the mysterious old woman. Louise confirms this. In addition, Rachel reports that she sent Stephen a letter and he is about to return to the city to justify himself.
But days go by and Stephen still doesn’t come. Rachel is very worried, Sessie, with whom she became friends, supports her as best she can. On Sunday they go from the smoky, stinking industrial Coketown out of town for a walk and accidentally find Stephen's hat near a huge scary pit - the Devil's Mine. They raise the alarm, organize rescue efforts - and the dying Stephen is pulled out of the mine. Having received Rachel's letter, he hastened to Coketown; saving time, I went straight ahead. Workers in the crowd curse the mines, which took their lives and health while in operation, and continue to do so when abandoned. Stephen explains that he was on duty at the bank at Tom's request, and dies without letting go of Rachel's hand. Tom manages to escape.
Meanwhile, Mrs. Sparsit, wanting to show her zeal, finds a mysterious old woman. It turns out that this is Josiah Bounderby's mother, who by no means abandoned him in infancy; she ran a hardware store, educated her son and was very proud of his successes, meekly accepting his command not to appear near him. She also proudly announced that her son takes care of her and sends her thirty pounds annually. The myth of Josiah Bounderby of Coketown, a self-made man who rose from the mud, has collapsed. The immorality of the manufacturer became obvious. The culprit of this, Mrs. Sparsit, lost the warm and satisfying place for which she had fought so hard.
In the Stone Shelter, the families are experiencing the shame of the family and wondering where Tom could have disappeared to. When Mr. Gradgrind comes to the decision to send his son away abroad, Sissie tells where he is: she suggested that Tom hide in the circus where her father once worked. Indeed, Tom is hidden securely: he is unrecognizable in makeup and a blackamoor costume, although he is constantly in the arena. The circus owner, Mr. Sleary, helps Tom get rid of the chase. To Mr. Gradgrind’s gratitude, Mr. Sleary replies that he once did him a favor by taking in Sessie, and now it’s his turn.
Tom arrives safely South America and sends letters from there full of repentance.
Immediately after Tom's departure, Mr. Gradgrind puts up posters naming the true culprit of the theft and washing away the stain of slander from the name of the late Stephen Blackpool. Within a week of becoming an old man, he becomes convinced of the inconsistency of his education system, based on accurate facts, and turns to humanistic values, trying to make numbers and facts serve faith, hope and love.
"Hard times"
In the novel Hard Times, Dickens most fully and with particular poignancy revealed his attitude towards Victorian society. Here he takes up arms against the idea of progress, as it was understood by sober Victorian capitalists who professed the principles of laissez faire 1. Beginning with Oliver Twist, he constantly criticizes that aspect of utilitarianism that sees man as an abstract statistical unit 2; condemns education, which destroys the imagination by blind worship of fact; affirms faith in the honesty and industry of the common English worker; advocates for the poor and oppressed. In “Hard Times,” however, a new point arises: Dickens refuses to recognize the ability to get by without anyone’s help and through hard work, limiting oneself in everything, to become one of the people as an unconditional virtue. True, this attack is partly weakened by the fact that the boast of the bully manufacturer Bounderby, allegedly on our own“getting out of the ditch” turns out to be a lie; he was helped, he was supported in life by modest loving parents, and yet Bounderby is really a man who, through hard work, at the cost of hardship, rose from the bottom on ambition alone. However, these virtues do not adorn him, the leading representative of a soulless system of exploitation.
The hands of Mr. Rouncewell, the "iron master" of Bleak House (and the same could be said of his workmen), are "wiry and very strong." They are also “a little sooty,” but, despite possible shortcomings, Mr. Rouncewell’s Yorkshire world, which owes everything to its own labors, promises healing progress at the end of the novel; and the world of Mr. Bounderby, too, it would seem, is his creation own hands, brings only poverty and death to others. Thus, in this novel, Dickens gives up one of his most living hopes (and he had few of them left) - the hope of independence, ambition and the ability to establish himself in society. His success rests on this own life, but this was not at all confirmed by the experience of other members of society. His benevolent old men early works all belonged to the number of people who made their way in life through their own efforts: Pickwick, the Cheeryble brothers, Scrooge reborn to a new life, Garland, old Martin Chuzzlewit. But Mr. Bounderby abolishes them all. From now on, ambitious aspirations will cause outright hostility in Dickens, the only answer to social injustice- withdraw, go into peace of mind and Christian humility, lead purely privacy, decorating her with good deeds as much as possible.
And of course, no riots. Hard Times is a sharp book, but it is far from the socialist treatise that some contemporaries wanted it to be. The strikers are all here positive people, misled by the clever instigator Slackbridge, pursuing his goals. Left-wing critics who approved of Dickens's denunciation of capitalism were invariably horrified by the disgusting, bile-filled portrait of the strike leader. Indeed, the picture is strikingly different from the portrait of the Preston strikers to whom Dickens dedicated an essay in " Home reading” in early February 1854, just two months before the publication of the first issue of the novel. Dickens writes that the strikers' meeting (if I'm not mistaken, he attended only one) left him with the most favorable impression of its consciousness and organization: “If we compare this meeting with a meeting in the House of Commons from the point of view of silence and order, then the honorable Speaker would give preference to Preston" 3. He specifically draws attention to the fact that the strike committee decided not to hear the Manchester delegation of the Labor Parliament 4 when it became clear that the delegates intended to speak not about this strike, but with a broad program of political demands. There is no trace of such restraint, moderation and simply order among the unbridled demagogues he portrayed in the novel “Hard Times.”
And yet, it seems to me, radical readers should not be surprised by the diversity of opinions in Dickens. Indeed, in his article “On the Strike,” Dickens tells how on a train he defended the strikers from the attacks of an elderly gentleman, who declared that “they need to be taught a good lesson... brought to their senses.” It is noteworthy, however, that Dickens only opposes lockouts carried out by employers, but not in support of the strike itself, although he considers it justified.
Three years ago, during the railway strike, he did not think so. He did not want reprisals to be applied to the strikers, but he strongly recommended that they return to work, since they have no right to use their strength to the detriment of society and especially to the detriment of the railway companies that spared no capital to give them work: “It is quite obvious that even if the directors decided to make concessions, they would consider it unworthy to deal with those who are opposed to public benefit and safety.”
Yet there is indeed a gulf between the novel's caricature of the strike leader and the benevolent picture in the article about Preston. Maybe Dickens made a mistake in his views, catering to the petty-bourgeois reader? No, it was, in general, the same reader for whom the article was intended. It seems to me that something else is more likely: the novel required a lot of details, and all of them are enlarged, while in the description of the meeting Dickens limited himself to expressing, based on his own reasons, his disdain to the most active Chartist leaders, showed fear of a riotous crowd and thus, of course, pleased the middle class, which was to take an active part in the discussion of social reforms on the pages of Home Reading.
What place does this novel occupy in Dickens's work? The rapid success of the novel still did not make it a favorite reading for the general public. However, he had ardent admirers from among very authoritative persons: Bernard Shaw, who owes much of his work to Dickens, and F. R. Leavis, who in the last ten or two years has created an extremely high reputation for the novel in academic circles, which, admittedly, Dickens is not particularly favored. Since a forgotten but interesting novel is being returned to the reader, this enterprise deserves praise; but at the same time, the reader is not revealed the true masterpieces of Dickens, and this is worthy of strong condemnation. Classifying Hard Times as Dickens's masterpiece is a risky proposition. What usually motivates such a responsible conclusion? Brevity, clear morality, simplicity of plot and characters, absence of humorous dialogues and side plot lines. But this notorious condensation is explained solely by the weekly publication regime, and Dickens himself considered this form of work “disastrous”; he did not return to it for more than twelve years - only Barnaby Rudge was published in such issues, but there were more detailed episodes.
However, neither this forced brevity nor the haste in which the novel was published could prevent it from becoming a masterpiece. Quite the contrary. But the masterpiece did not come out.
The moral of the novel “Hard Times” is formulated already in the first two chapters, where there's a story going on about Mr. Gradgrind’s utilitarian school, when the circus performer’s daughter Sessie Jupe, to everyone’s indignation, cannot determine what a horse is, but the exemplary student Bitzer immediately gives the correct answer: “A four-legged thing. Herbivore. There are forty teeth, namely: twenty-four molars,” etc. The contrast between the dead world of facts (Mr. Gradgrind) and the world of imagination (Sleary and his circus) is given quite clearly. It is a rare case in Dickens when a surprisingly simple plot is subordinated from the very beginning to the design of the entire work as a whole. But this, perhaps, exhausts the merits of the novel (although there will still be a lot of good and interesting reading), since lack of space forced the author to crumple and simply blur another social problem that occupied Dickens, perhaps even more than the first - the problem of divorce laws, exceptionally cruel in England.
We have to regret this, since the novel itself, and especially the image of Louisa Bounderby, who promised to become one of the most interesting female characters in Dickens, opens up new depths. Education with “facts” dried out the soul of Louisa, Mr. Gradgrind’s daughter, and imposed on her an extremely simplified, purely practical, pragmatic view of life; at the insistence of her father and wanting to help her brother get a better life in life, and most of all, without having time to awaken from spiritual hibernation, she marries a rude lout; then she almost falls victim to an empty London wit and seducer, because she mistakes his cynicism for a bold condemnation of what she now sees as a meaningless life. We have a character and theme in the spirit of George Eliot. In subsequent novels, Dickens will give an independent and deep development of these psychological aspects. But in Hard Times, more than anywhere else in need of space for thought and analysis, Dickens is forced to interrupt himself and patter to such an extent that Louise's story only outlines a problem awaiting deeper exploration. And the daughter of the circus performer, Sessie Jupe, arrived in time with her unclouded, clear morals and loving soul and who saved Louise - she was absent too long (even for such a small book) for us to get an idea of her spiritual development and, most importantly, believe in him.
And then, the setting is an industrial town in Northern England, where Dickens does not feel at home at all. Coketown would be very good in a journalistic article. In general, Dickens knew how to characterize even unfamiliar places, but the characterization was episodic. For example, after his numerous trips to France, he managed in one or two paragraphs to convince us of the reality of the town of Chalon-sur-Saône in the novel “Little Dorrit”; but this town is seen through the eyes of a traveler, it is simply a place where the acquitted Rigo is hiding from the avengers pursuing him. Coketown is at the center of the novel Hard Times, and yet it is not organic to it, no matter how much Dickens tried to improve the matter with good journalism - for example, the parallel of factory machines with crazy elephants; and since the novel is not concentrated around a single center - this is the only thing that brings a breath of genuine life into Dickens's novels - one very often gets the feeling that there is an inordinate amount of weak prose and not enough good prose. Mr. Bounderby's existence on the pages of the novel consists of endless circling in the sphere of swaggering, rattling demagoguery; but the dramatic coexistence of the old aristocratic ruling class England with the new cruel world of Mr. Bounderby is perfectly outlined by the very fact that Bounderby takes as his housekeeper an elderly lady with aristocratic connections, but without funds.
Regarding this far from amicable cohabitation between money and nobility, Mr. Bounderby throws up one of his most absurd races, which, however, makes sense to think about.
“At that time when tumbling in the street mud for the amusement of the public would have been a real blessing for me, a happy lottery ticket, you were sitting in the Italian Opera. You, madam, came out of the theater in a white silk dress, covered in precious stones, shining with magnificent splendor, but I had nothing to buy tow to shine on you.” “Of course, sir,” answered Mrs. Sparsit with mournful dignity, “I was very familiar with the Italian opera.” early age" “And to me, madam, and to me,” said Bounderby, “but only with reverse side. You can believe me - it was a bit harsh to sleep on the pavement under the colonnade Italian Opera. People like you, madam, who have been accustomed since childhood to bask on feather beds, have no idea what it’s like to lie down to sleep on the stones of the pavement. You have to try it yourself.”
Let us note in passing that this charming conversation concerns the time when both Bounderby and Mrs. Sparsit lived in London (and this is the world of novels “ Bleak House" and "Little Dorrit"), and not at all in foggy Coketown.
So, the list of accusations Dickens brought against Victorian society includes (however, only temporarily) and sums up industrial progress and the virtues of laissez-faire and the struggle for “a place at the top.” In the mid-fifties, when Hard Times and Little Dorrit were written, the writer's despair over the situation in England reached its limit; these sentiments were superimposed, as we will see later, by growing disappointment in family life, which ended with leaving Katherine. To cholera and terrifying living conditions, to the ignorance that gives rise to crime, with the complete mediocrity and inactivity of the government, has now been added Crimean War, which was carried out just as ineptly, stupidly and without the slightest sense of responsibility, dooming the soldiers to suffering. It was during these years that, for the first time in his life, Dickens plunged headlong into overt politics - he was so clearly aware that existing system requires urgent changes from top to bottom.
The eyewitness Laird, a former archaeologist who found and excavated Nineveh, and now a radical member of parliament, had a definite opinion about some of the absurdities in the conduct of the war. Laird insisted on reforming the entire English system of government and, in support of his parliamentary demands, created a society designed to express public opinion. Dickens took an active part in the creation of the Association for the Reform of Government of the Country, even speaking at its meetings. In a letter to Laird (April 1855), he expresses his rather gloomy forecast of the current situation and his dismal hopes for its outcome.
“Nothing now causes me such bitterness and indignation as the complete exclusion of the people from public life... All these years of parliamentary reforms, the people had so little to participate in the game that in the end they gloomily folded their cards and took the position of an outside observer. The players remaining at the table cannot see beyond their noses. They believe that winning and losing, and the whole game, concern only them alone, and will not grow wiser until the table with all the bets and candles goes upside down... After all, exactly the same mood of mind was in France on the eve of the first revolution, and all it takes is one of a thousand possible accidents - a crop failure, another manifestation of the arrogance or worthlessness of our aristocracy... a lost war... and such a fire will break out that the world has not seen since the time of the French Revolution.
Meanwhile, every day there are new manifestations of English servility, English sycophancy and other features of our disgusting snobbery... It seems to me that to lead public opinion at a time when this opinion has not yet formed... is unthinkable... to help the people, who refuses to help himself is as hopeless as helping a person who does not want to be saved... I can only tirelessly remind him of his grievances.”
Which is what he did in his journal and in next novel— “Little Dorrit.” And of course, without much success. Laird's enterprise failed miserably in Parliament. The management system underwent some changes only in the year of the writer’s death. Less than a year had passed since the fall of Sevastopol and the British victory in the war when he wrote to Miss Cootes on August 13, 1856:
“They managed to ruin everything after the peace was concluded. However, I always knew for sure that Lord Palmerston is the most empty charlatan imaginable, all the more dangerous because not everyone sees it. Less than three months have passed since the conclusion of peace, and the main terms of the agreement have already been violated, and the whole world is laughing at us! I have no more doubt that in the end these people will achieve our conquest, just as I have no doubt that one fine day I will die. For a long time we were hated and feared. And to become a laughing stock after this is very, very dangerous. No one can predict how the English people will behave when they finally wake up and realize what is happening.”
And a year later, now after the sepoy uprising in 1857, he looks at the situation of the country with the same hopelessness:
“I would like to be the commander-in-chief of India. First of all, I would shock this Eastern race by explaining to them in their own language, that I consider myself appointed to this position by God’s will and, therefore, I will make every effort to destroy the people who have stained themselves with recent cruelties...”
In the same year, he wrote the story “The Sorrows of Some English Prisoners,” in which he pays tribute to the bravery of English ladies during the Sepoy Mutiny, although the story takes place on the pirate coast of South America and India is not even mentioned. Next year he will be completely consumed by personal problems. He will remain a friend of the poor, will be just as skeptical of parliament, but never again, apart from one bold speech, will he take political issues to heart, or indeed engage in politics as diligently as he did in the mid-fifties.
Notes
1....principlelaissez- faire — the principle of “non-interference” was proclaimed by the so-called “Manchester school” in political economy, which advocated under the slogans of “free trade” and “freedom of private enterprise.” She fought against any attempts at “factory” (worker) legislation; in the 60s public opinion is increasingly demanding legislative regulation between labor and capital.
2. ...statistical unit- narrow personal calculation as the main incentive for human activity and practicality - a natural consequence of the “theory of utility” (utilitarianism) of the English bourgeois economist Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and the followers of his school.
3. ...would prefer Preston— the writer got a favorable impression of the consciousness and organization of the workers’ meeting in contrast to the behavior of the opposition in the House of Commons: if a decision was disapproved, members of the opposition started riots.
4....Workers' Parliament- in 1852-1853, in the context of an impending industrial crisis and the growth of the strike movement, the most advanced Manchester proletariat in class terms launched an agitation for the creation of a “Workers’ Parliament”. The initiator of this movement, which aimed to create a proletarian party, was a prominent figure in the Chartist movement, the poet E. -C. Jones (1819-1869).
Two close friends live in the city of Coketown - if we can talk about friendship between people equally devoid of warm human feelings. Both of them are located at the top of the social ladder: Josiah Bounderby, “a famous rich man, banker, merchant, manufacturer”; and Thomas Gradgrind, "a man of sober mind, obvious facts and accurate calculations", who becomes MP for Coketown.
Mr. Gradgrind, who worshiped only facts, raised his children (there were five of them) in the same spirit. They never had toys - only teaching aids; they were forbidden to read fairy tales, poems and novels and generally touch anything that was not associated with immediate benefit, but could awaken the imagination and was related to the sphere of feelings. Wanting to spread his method as widely as possible, he organized a school on these principles.
Perhaps the worst student in this school was Sessie Jupe, the daughter of a circus performer - a juggler, magician and clown. She believed that flowers could be depicted on carpets, and not just geometric figures, and openly said that she was from the circus, which was considered an indecent word in that school. They even wanted to expel her, but when Mr. Gradgrind came to the circus to announce this, there was a heated discussion about the escape of Sessie's father with his dog. Sessy's father had grown old and worked in the arena no longer as well as in his youth; He heard applause less and less, and made mistakes more and more often. His colleagues had not yet reproached him bitterly, but in order not to live to see this, he fled. Sessie was left alone. And, instead of kicking Sissie out of school, Thomas Gradgrind took her into his house.
Sessie was very friendly with Louisa, Gradgrind's eldest daughter, until she agreed to marry Josiah Bounderby. He is only thirty years older than her (he is fifty, she is twenty), “fat, loud; his gaze is heavy, his laugh is metallic.” Louise was persuaded to this marriage by his brother Tom, for whom his sister’s marriage promised many benefits - a very tireless job at the Bounderby Bank, which would allow him to leave his hated home, which bore the expressive name “Stone Shelter”, a good salary, freedom. Tom perfectly learned the lessons of his father's school: benefit, benefit, lack of feelings. Louise, from these lessons, apparently lost interest in life. She agreed to the marriage with the words: “Does it matter?”
In the same city lives the weaver Stephen Blackpool, a simple worker, an honest man. He is unhappy in his marriage - his wife is a drunkard, a completely fallen woman; but in England divorce is not for the poor, as his master Bounderby, to whom he came for advice, explains to him. This means that Stephen is destined to carry his cross further, and he will never be able to marry Rachel, whom he has loved for a long time. Stephen curses this world order - but Rachel begs not to say such words and not to participate in any unrest leading to its change. He promises. Therefore, when all the workers join the United Tribunal, Stephen alone does not do this, for which the leader of the Tribunal, Slackbridge, calls him a traitor, a coward and an apostate and offers to ostracize him. Having learned about this, the owner calls Stephen, reasoning that it would be nice to make the rejected and offended worker an informer. Stephen's categorical refusal leads to Bounderby dismissing him with a wolf ticket. Stephen announces that he is forced to leave the city. The conversation with the owner takes place in the presence of his household: his wife Louise and her brother Tom. Louise, imbued with sympathy for the unjustly offended worker, secretly goes to his home to give him money and asks her brother to accompany her. At Stephen's they find Rachel and an unfamiliar old woman who introduces herself as Mrs. Pegler. Stephen meets her for the second time in his life in the same place: at Bounderby's house; a year ago she asked him if his owner was healthy and looked good, now she is interested in his wife. The old lady is very tired, kind Rachel wants to give her tea; So she ends up with Stephen. Stephen refuses to take money from Louise, but thanks her for her good intention. Before leaving, Tom takes Stephen to the stairs and privately promises him a job, for which he needs to wait at the bank in the evenings: the messenger will give him a note. For three days, Stephen regularly waits, and, without waiting for anything, leaves the city.
Meanwhile, Tom, having escaped from the Stone Shelter, leads a riotous lifestyle and gets entangled in debt. At first, Louise paid his debts by selling her jewelry, but everything comes to an end: she has no more money.
Tom and especially Louisa are closely watched by Mrs. Sparsit, Bounderby's former housekeeper, who, after the owner's marriage, takes the position of bank supervisor. Mr. Bounderby, who likes to repeat that he was born in a ditch, that his mother abandoned him and raised him on the street and that he achieved everything with his own mind, is terribly flattered by the supposedly aristocratic origin of Mrs. Sparsit, who lives solely on his favors. Mrs. Sparsit hates Louisa, apparently because she is aiming for her place - or at least is very afraid of losing hers. With the arrival in town of James Harthouse, a bored gentleman from London who intends to stand for parliament from the Coketown constituency to strengthen the "party of hard numbers", she increases her vigilance. Indeed, the London dandy, according to all the rules of art, besieges Louise, groping for her Achilles heel - love for her brother. She is ready to talk about Tom for hours, and during these conversations the young people gradually become closer. After a private meeting with Harthouse, Louise becomes frightened of herself and returns to her father's house, declaring that she will not return to her husband. Sessie, whose warmth now warms the entire Stone Shelter, takes care of her. Moreover, Sessie, on her own initiative, goes to Harthouse to convince him to leave the city and not pursue Louise anymore, and she succeeds.
When news of the bank robbery spreads, Louise faints: she is sure that Tom did it. But suspicion falls on Stephen Blackpool: after all, it was he who was on duty at the bank in the evenings for three days, after which he fled the city. Enraged by Louise's escape and the fact that Stephen has not been found, Bounderby posts notices all over the city with signs of Stephen and the promise of a reward for anyone who gives up the thief. Rachel, unable to bear the slander against Stephen, goes first to Bounderby, and then, together with him and Tom, to Louise and talks about Stephen’s last evening in Coketown, about the arrival of Louise and Tom and about the mysterious old woman. Louise confirms this. In addition, Rachel reports that she sent Stephen a letter and he is about to return to the city to justify himself.
But days go by and Stephen still doesn’t come. Rachel is very worried, Sessie, with whom she became friends, supports her as best she can. On Sunday they go from the smoky, stinking industrial Coketown out of town for a walk and accidentally find Stephen's hat near a huge scary pit - the Devil's Mine. They raise the alarm, organize rescue efforts - and the dying Stephen is pulled out of the mine. Having received Rachel's letter, he hastened to Coketown; saving time, I went straight ahead. Workers in the crowd curse the mines, which took their lives and health while in operation, and continue to do so when abandoned. Stephen explains that he was on duty at the bank at Tom's request, and dies without letting go of Rachel's hand. Tom manages to escape.
Meanwhile, Mrs. Sparsit, wanting to show her zeal, finds a mysterious old woman. It turns out that this is Josiah Bounderby's mother, who by no means abandoned him in infancy; she ran a hardware store, educated her son and was very proud of his successes, meekly accepting his command not to appear near him. She also proudly announced that her son takes care of her and sends her thirty pounds annually. The myth of Josiah Bounderby of Coketown, a self-made man who rose from the mud, has collapsed. The immorality of the manufacturer became obvious. The culprit of this, Mrs. Sparsit, lost the warm and satisfying place for which she had fought so hard.
In the Stone Shelter, the families are experiencing the shame of the family and wondering where Tom could have disappeared to. When Mr. Gradgrind comes to the decision to send his son away abroad, Sissie tells where he is: she suggested that Tom hide in the circus where her father once worked. Indeed, Tom is hidden securely: he is unrecognizable in makeup and a blackamoor costume, although he is constantly in the arena. The circus owner, Mr. Sleary, helps Tom get rid of the chase. To Mr. Gradgrind’s gratitude, Mr. Sleary replies that he once did him a favor by taking in Sessie, and now it’s his turn.
Tom reaches South America safely and sends letters from there full of remorse.
Immediately after Tom's departure, Mr. Gradgrind puts up posters naming the true culprit of the theft and washing away the stain of slander from the name of the late Stephen Blackpool. Within a week of becoming an old man, he becomes convinced of the inconsistency of his education system, based on accurate facts, and turns to humanistic values, trying to make numbers and facts serve faith, hope and love.
Charles Dickens
HARD TIMES
BOOK ONE
One thing you need
So I demand facts. Teach these boys and girls only the facts. Life requires only facts. Do not plant anything else and uproot everything else. The mind of a thinking animal can only be formed with the help of facts; nothing else benefits it. This is the theory by which I raise my children. This is the theory by which I raise these children. Stick to the facts, sir!
The action took place in a crypt-like, uncomfortable, cold classroom with bare walls, and the speaker, for greater impressiveness, emphasized each of his sayings by running his square finger along the teacher’s sleeve. No less impressive than the words of the speaker was his square forehead, rising like a sheer wall above the foundation of his eyebrows, and under his canopy, in dark, spacious cellars, as if in caves, his eyes were comfortably located. The speaker’s mouth was also impressive - large, thin-lipped and hard; and the speaker’s voice is hard, dry and authoritative; His bald head was also impressive, along the edges of which the hair bristled like fir trees planted to protect from the wind its glossy surface, dotted with cones, like the crust of a sweet pie - as if the stock of indisputable facts no longer fit in the cranium. Unyielding posture, square coat, square legs, square shoulders - whatever! - even the tightly knotted tie that held the speaker tightly by the throat as the most obvious and irrefutable fact - everything about him was impressive.
In this life, sir, we need facts, nothing but facts!
All three adults - the speaker, the teacher and the third person present - took a step back and looked around at the small vessels arranged in orderly rows on an inclined plane, ready to receive gallons of facts with which they were to be filled to the brim.
Massacre of the innocents
Thomas Gradgrind, sir. A man of sober mind. A man of obvious facts and precise calculations. A person who proceeds from the rule that two and two are four, and not one iota more, will never agree that it could be different, better, and do not try to convince him. Thomas Gradgrind, sir - that's Thomas - Thomas Gradgrind. Armed with a ruler and scales, with a multiplication table in his pocket, he is always ready to weigh and measure any specimen of human nature and accurately determine what it is equal to. It's just counting numbers, sir, pure arithmetic. You may flatter yourself with the hope that you will be able to drive some other nonsense concepts into the head of George Gradgrind, or Augustus Gradgrind, or John Gradgrind, or Joseph Gradgrind (imaginary, non-existent persons), but not into the head of Thomas Gradgrind, oh no , sir!
With these words Mr. Gradgrind was in the habit of mentally recommending himself to a small circle of acquaintances, as well as to the general public. And, undoubtedly, with the same words - replacing the address “sir” with the address “pupils and pupils” - Thomas Gradgrind mentally introduced Thomas Gradgrind to the vessels sitting in front of him, into which it was necessary to pour in as many facts as possible.
He stood, menacingly flashing at them with his eyes hidden in the caves, like a cannon filled to the very muzzle with facts, ready to knock them out of childhood with one shot. Or a galvanic device charged with soulless mechanical force, which should replace the tender childhood imagination that was scattered into dust.
Student number twenty,” said Mr. Gradgrind, pointing a square finger at one of the schoolgirls. - I don’t know this girl. Who is that girl?
“Cessie Jupe, sir,” answered student number twenty, all red with embarrassment, jumping to her feet and crouching.
Sessie? There is no such name, said Mr. Gradgrind. - Don't call yourself Sissy. Call yourself Cecilia.
“My dad calls me Sissie, sir,” the girl answered in a trembling voice and sat down again.
It’s in vain that he calls you that,” said Mr. Gradgrind. - Tell him not to do it. Cecilia Jupe. Wait a minute. Who is your father?
He's from the circus, sir.
Mr. Gradgrind frowned and waved his hand, dismissing such a reprehensible craft.
We don’t want to know anything about this here. And don't ever say that here. Your father probably rides horses? Yes?
Yes, sir. When horses can be obtained, they are ridden in the arena, sir.
Never mention the arena here. So, call your father a bereitor. He must be treating sick horses?
Of course, sir.
Great, so your father was a farrier - that is, a veterinarian - and a groomer. Now define what a horse is?
(Cessie Jupe, scared to death by this question, remained silent.)
Student number twenty doesn't know what a horse is! - Mr. Gradgrind announced, addressing all the vessels. - Student number twenty does not have any facts regarding one of the most ordinary animals! Let's listen to what the students know about the horse. Bitzer, tell me.
The square finger, moving back and forth, suddenly stopped on Bitzer, perhaps only because the boy was in the path of that ray of sunlight, which, bursting into the uncurtained window of the thickly whitened room, fell on Sessie. For inclined plane was divided into two halves: on one side of the narrow passage, closer to the windows, the girls were placed, on the other - the boys; and the ray of the sun, with one end touching Sessie, who was sitting at the end of her row, with the other end illuminated Bitzer, who occupied the extreme seat several rows ahead of Sessie. But the girl's black eyes and black hair shone even brighter in sunlight, and the boy’s whitish eyes and whitish hair, under the influence of the same ray, seemed to have lost the last traces of the colors given to him by nature. The boy's empty, colorless eyes would have been barely noticeable on his face if not for the short stubble of eyelashes of a darker shade bordering them. His short-cropped hair was no different in color from the yellowish freckles that covered his forehead and cheeks. And his painfully pale skin, without the slightest trace of natural blush, involuntarily suggested that if he had cut himself, not red, but white blood would flow.
Bitzer, said Thomas Gradgrind, explain that there is a horse.
Quadruped. Herbivore. There are forty teeth, namely: twenty-four molars, four eyes and twelve incisors. Sheds in spring; in swampy areas the hooves also change. The hooves are hard, but require iron shoes. You can tell age by your teeth. - Bitzer blurted out all this (and much more) in one breath.
Pupil number twenty, said Mr. Gradgrind, now you know there is a horse.
