Saturday, January 7, 2012
Book I: Chapters 1-6
Welcome! Remember to write two comments on the first six chapters of "Hard Times" by Thursday, January 19. Read your classmates' comments and make sure the study guide questions on the class handout all get covered, and make sure one of your own comments reacts to someone else's observations, while your other comment brings up new ideas of your own. Also make sure to quote the text directly at least once. Have fun!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
62 comments:
Alright, why not get this started as soon as possible, and with no nonsense...
There's a lot to talk about when it comes to the description of Thomas Gradgrind in chapter 1, but first I want to look at his name. When I reached chapter 2, at which time the reader learns Gradgrind's first name, I looked up the etymology of "Thomas". Thomas, though a very common name now, used only to be a priest's name. Given that Gradgrind is portrayed by Dickens as a man obsessed with facts, I think it's reasonable to assume that Gradgrind is meant to be a "priest" of facts. That is, he sees himself as being so completely knowledgable about facts that he thinks it is his divine appointment to disburse forcefully to all his students those facts, as a missionary might militantly force his religion upon barbarians who have not yet heard the word of God. In fact, Gradgrind sees his pupils as "pitchers" to be filled with facts. One line in chapter 1 states that Gradgrind "swept with [his] eyes the inclined plane of little vessels then and there arranged in order, ready to have imperial gallons of facts poured into them until they were full to the brim."
I think the name Gradgrind is probably indicative of the time period -- the industrial revolution was just beginning, and people in developing cities might have heard the grind of mechanisms and gears if factories were sprouting up around them -- and the mode of education that Gradgrind uses in his school. In children like the ingenuous Sissy Jupes, he grinds out "fancy" in order to substitute fact. I'm not quite as sure about the "grad" in his name, but I think it suggests that he might even be a graduate of a similar utilitarian type of education. Dickens's name choice for Gradgrind seems to suggest that this novel might be somewhat skeptical of the way Victorian England was evolving into an industrial nation at the time.
I'm really happy for you Mr. Gradgrind, I'mma let you finish, but Mr. M'Choakumchild had one of the best names of all time.
Going off of what Jesse said, I'm really glad he looked up Mr. Gradgrind's first name because that adds even more depth, description, and the overall why Mr. Gradgrind's personality is what it is. What I mean is that the whole priest idea can not only show him thinking of himself as the divine person that forces facts upon students, but how much it really shows how Mr. Gradgrind sees himself elevated above pretty much everyone else (much like how a priest can have a higher status due to the connection of God that others don't have) and I think it's interesting that not only does he force facts upon his students, but that he forces his family to embrace only facts and education (since that is his way to become superior) so that he can not only feels that he is absolutely better and less common than other people, but that the superiority extends through his family members. So I think that Mr. Gradgrind not only feels that it is his mission to disperse facts, but that it makes him feel especially superior to other people.
While we are on the topic of Mr. Gradgrind, I would like to adress question four. I feel that the description of his physical appearance in chapter 1 supports his name and his personality as a whole. Many of his features are described as "square". For example his "...square forefinger...underscoring every sentence..." and his "...obstinate carriage, square coat, square legs, square shoulders..."
Now to explain why I believe Dicken's word choice while describing him is reasonable- squareness is plainness and also a solid, stable shape. Mr. Gradgrind, being a schoolmaster, fits as a "square" type of person because he is ordinary and stable in his personality.
I would like to discuss the significance of what is revealed about Louisa Gradgrind and Mr. Gradgrind through their dialogue in chapter 3. As I said before, Mr. Gradgrind came across to me as the kind of man who desires a sense of superiority over others and he gains that through his constant teaching and obsession with facts. However, in chapter 3 I think there is a definite irony involving Mr. Gradgrind's obsession with facts and his children's desire of facts. The irony that Mr. Gradgrind has provided his family with instruments and books of all assortments on topics that he approves of shows that in his effort to efficiently maximize educating his family, he made a mistake as is revealed when he catches Louisa and Thomas peeping at the entertainers. His mistake becomes even clearer when Louisa boldly and shortly explains to her father that they "Wanted to see what it was like," or in other words, they were lacking the background knowledge because their father deprived them of that particular education. A helpful fact that is revealed in chapter 3 about Louisa is that she is about fifteen or sixteen which all the more proves her rebellious spirit toward what her father wants and what she is starting to decide for herself that she wants (as is told through her defiant conversation with her astounded father). A final note on what I think is revealed about Mr. Gradgrind is that he deeply cares about what the people he holds in high regard think of him and his family as is shown when he repeatedly harps on Louisa "What would Mr. Bounderby say?" at the end of chapter 3. So overall, I think that what is revealed through the dialogue is that the father and daughter don't see eye to eye anymore (Louisa is thinking for herself, but is expressing her thoughts in a cheeky attitude which makes Mr. Gradgrind think his daughter childish because he doesn't see her expressing herself maturely).
I completly agree with Jordan. I also think Louisa is starting to question the way her father has been raising her by drilling the "facts" idea into their heads. She does seem to be in those teenage years where it's expected to rebel, but also I got the sense of maturity from her. When Mr. Gradgrind catches her and Thomas, Louisa takes full blame for it "I brought him, father," and to me this simply proves how she analyzed the situation her and her brother were in, and knew how her father would react and tried to protect him. Lets face it, many of us would say whatever to try to get punished the least, but Louise didn't. Yes it can be seemed like a simple act of kindness, but I saw it more as her being mature and taking responsability of the situation.
I want to address how Charles Dickens describes Coketown. He doesn't like the industrial age, as shown by the degrading tone when he said "... or of brick that would have been red if the smoke and ashes had allowed it..." pg 36. He doesn't like what it had done to the town or the people there. For example Mr. Bounderby who is a manufacturer looks down upon anyone who doesn't have power and wealth.
Back to the town he uses words with negative connotation such as "unnatural" "savage" "ill-smelling" and "melancholy." By doing this it shows that he doesn't like the effect of the factories on the town. It has brought out the worst in people and has ruined the beauty of the town.
I also see the sense of maturity in Louisa, that Diana mentioned, by her willingness to take the blame for the situation she and her brother were caught in, and seconding Jordan’s point I also think that by the end of the dialogue there is a clear point made that she and her father don’t really see eye to eye. Louisa kind of reminds me of Claudia from the Bluest Eye because of the fact that, unlike her brother, she seems to have the personality where she isn’t completely submissive to what is expected of her and because of that we are able to see a bit of hope in her. “She looked at her father again, but no tear fell down her cheek” (chapter 3, page 24). I think this line shows how Louisa is different than most of the other children in the book, she seems to be a bit more hard headed and independent. I predict that by the end of the novel we will see more rebellion from Louisa and though I don’t really know if she is representative of the author’s voice (like Claudia was), I do think that her rebellion will be representative of the future generations.
I agree with what Jasjit said about Louisa representing the rebellion in the future generations. She doesn't follow the rules as seen by her taking her brother to see the circus. Her "rebellion" will grow and slowly become things that will impact more and more people.
This is also about Louisa but I think that Mr. Bounderby is being really creepy. He really likes her though she is clearly a lot younger than he is. For example staring at her when she comes home and asking for a kiss. To add on she doesn't like it at all and it makes her feel uncomfortable.
I would like to discuss Mr. Gradgrind offer of taking Cecila Jupe in to raise her in his philosophy of facts. Though the reason that brought Mr. Gradgrind to Sissy Jupe's house was to let her father know she will no longer be able to attend his school because he believed she had led his children to misbehave, I still find it nice that he offered to take her in after finding out her father abandoned her. "I doubt if you ever will see him now..." said Mr. Childers to Mr. Gradgrind about how Sissy's father left her because he couldn't bare the emberassment, and Mr. Gradgrind took this as an opportunity to lead her into a path of facts, just as he has with his own children. Though at first his intentions at first weren't too generous, and trying to change her into only believing in facts isn't any better I find his actions to be kindhearted.
I would like to comment on what Kelly said about Dickens presentation of Coketown. I would agree that he does portray a negative attitude through his bleak diction and industrial imagery. It is clear that he does not admire the “town of machinery and tall chimneys.” He presents it as a city that offered nothing but laziness and filth. He describes the city as being full of people who “lounged listlessly.” Throughout this chapter Dickens uses cold colors such as “black” and “purple” to illustrate the city. The only other mention of a contrasting color is when he describes the “red bricks” of the town. However that is even underscored when even this bit of color is tarnished by “smoke and ashes.”
To add on to what Kelly initially said about Louisa, I agree that Louisa represents future generations but I don’t think that encompasses her whole representation. The book seems to be divided between facts and imagination. Mr. Gradgrind spearheads the side of factual representation and belief in economic value. His clear contrast is Sissy Jupe who lives in a world of imagination. To me Louisa falls in-between the two as she was raised in a factual based household but her small circus rebellion implies that she too yearns for free thought and imagination. In this sense Dickens could be impling that that future generations will not be able to completely erase the industrial era but rather will be able to find humanity in the new world.
I would like to talk about how a Pegasus is a perfect emblem for the circus world characters. The Pegasus not only represents the circus characters unexplained and mythical nature, but also serves as a symbol for their role in society. Having a mythical creature represent themselves depicts Gradegrind’s emotions toward the circus characters because they seem just as unknown as the Pegasus. Gradegrind being a wealthy and educated man cannot relate to the lifestyle the circus characters live. Therefore having something that is uncommon and supernatural as their emblem helps describe the mystery the circus characters present to Gradegrind. Gradegrind is unable to understand these characters and looks down upon them because they do not offer “facts” and an intellectual role in society but instead foster imagination. Gradegrind expresses these emotions when he questions Sissy Jupes name and tells her that he doesn’t want to hear about her father’s profession. Just like a Pegasus is not factual the circus characters do not provide society with facts and are therefore are not accepted by Gradegrind.
I agree with what Arie said about the description of Mr. Gradgrind. In chapter one when he is being described everything in the description relates to the geometrical relevance and significance of the square. A square was an important choice for the shape that represents Mr. Gradgrind because of its simple geometrical symmetry and congruency. Geometrically the square is the most defined in many cases and thus has the most unalterable parameters whilst still maintaining the title of a geometrical square. A square must have parallel opposing sides, all corners must have exactly 90 degree corners, and all the side lengths must have congruent side lengths. Because of the strict geometrical parmeters that constitute a square, it is a symbol for structure and concrete specification. For these reasons the geometrical shape of the square fits the completely conformist and uncompromising personality of Mr. Gradgrind. Gradgrind has zero tolerance for different opinions and really opinions in general, he lives a completely factual based life and opinionated thinking of any kind is too far gone for the completely fact driven personality of Gradgrind.
A significant theme that seems to be played upon in the first six chapters of the book is the way the education system and society in general smother the emotional and imaginative portion of human characteristic, which results in more mechanized people, and in turn society. "He was a rich man: banker, merchant, manufacturer, and what not. A big, loud man, with a stare, and a metallic laugh. A man made out of a coarse material, which seemed to have been stretched to make so much of him." In the description of Mr. Bounderby there is almost a mechanical and complete materialistic way in which he is presented to the reader. His metallic laugh and looking like he is made of coarse materials lend to the idea that he is more mechanical and synthetic than organic in his makeup. It begins to sound like Bounderby has been crafted by the society that he lives in. This idea lends itself further when the reader learns that Bounderby has no respect for his factory workers and treats them as expendable resources, almost like machines, without emotion. Through this revelation Charles Dickens seems to be commenting on human condition by accentuating the importance of emotion and imagination as aspects that are key in constituting a human, and the importance of individuality in a society that is becoming more and more subordinate.
I would like to discuss Mr. M'Choakumchild and the meaning his name has. Even in the brief introduction we are given to him, we can see he is a vastly unpleasant man, one very much like Mr. Gradgrind. Although he is extremely well-schooled and assumed to be very intelligent, the book states "if he had only learnt a little less, how infinitely better he might have taught much more!" This implies that Mr. M'Choakumchild's schooling was too in-depth and rigorous for him to teach anything beyond the "facts," or even believe in the value of any such thing, making him a poor teacher. This leads him to attempt to squash any sort of imagination or creativity out of the children. Even his name suggests that he is out to choke any sort of feeling or joy that a child may have. He is a character with a caricature name, intended to represent all schoolmasters (at least as Dickens saw them).
Utilitarianism, is defined as the ethical theory holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes the overall "happiness", basically the idea that a logical course of action will make everybody happy. I believe that Dickens thought that not only would this theory would not work it would have the opposite result, not creating happiness but misery. Dickens show's this though the teaching methods of Mr. Gradgrind not only to his students but his own children. At the very beginning of the novel it is obvious Gradgrind is not a likable character, he is viewed as cold, stubborn and narcissistic, someone who only cares about facts and logic and looks down on any one who isn't at his intellectual for financial status. This is shown by his view of Sissy Jupe. At the beginning of the novel Gradgrind dislikes how Sissy went by a nickname something she made up and not by her real name Cecilia. In the first two chapters of the novel Gradgrind doesn't even use her name beyond that, usually only referring to Sissy as "Girl Number Twenty", taking away her own name only to replacing it with a number. Gradgrind's sense of utilitarianism is also shown in how he tutors his children, specifically Louisa. Louisa is taught strictly not being allowed to experience art or free thinking . Technically she is being taught well, learning and excelling at all her subject's, growing up to be an important and obedient member of society, In the eyes of Utilitarianism she should be happy but she is miserable. Louisa feel's confined and kept. She on the brink of rebellion against her father and the world in general. I believe that Dickens meant Gradgrind to be a satirical character, showing just how cold utilitarianism can be and how it creates people that are classiest, pseudo-intellectual's.
I completely agree with what Kelly and Shelbey said about Dicken's description of Coketown and to build on what they said, Dickens ironically utilizes similes and metaphors pertaining to primitive and animalistic subjects in his narrative of the industrial appearance of Coketown. For example, on page thirty, Dickens likens the soot-stained red brick buildings of Coketown to the "unnatural red and black" of "the painted face of a savage." Continuing in this stream of irony found in the description of "a town of machinery" (chapter five, page thirty), Dickens assimilates the smoke from the town chimneys to "interminable serpents of smoke" that "never got uncoiled" (their bunched up nature perhaps mirroring the unimaginitive and fact-restricted condition of the citizens of Coketown) through a vivid metaphor. Both the simile about the buildings of Coketown and the metaphor describing the smoke that coils from their chimneys serve to support an unsettling and (although in the midst of the industrial revolution and therefore ironic) primitive image of Coketown.
I would like to bring together the comments of multiple people about Dickens' view on the industrial revolution and how it is conveyed in the book. It is obvious that Mr. Gradgrind represents all things of facts and reason. Since he is he can be associated with the industrialization. Industry would not be successful without a well thought out process and method of doing things. Much science goes into the production of industrial products and science is based off of facts and evidence. This industry and science that has developed has turned Coketown in to a slum essentially, as described by Kelly and Shelby. Since industry is based off of facts and has a negative affect on its surrounding, it can be assumed that Dickens uses Mr. Gradgrind, as the factual character, in comparison to the industry. Mr. Gradgrind puts strain and stress on his family by forcing them to learn, live, and believe only facts. That is how I believe Dickens uses the industry in the town and Mr. Gradgrind to show how facts in both cases destroy their environment.
Sorry Charles, but I'm going to have to disagree although correct me if I'm wrong. To me, it seems as though the circus performers come through with a greater display of utilitarianism than does Mr. Gradgrind and those like-minded enough to agree with him. This is evidenced when on page forty-three, Dickens describes the circus folk as possessing "an untiring readiness to help and pity one another," and is even reinforced when, farther up page forty-three, it is mentioned that some of the fathers of the circus troop were in the habit of creating a pyramid out of their bodies through teamwork and support, two very important aspects in the maintenance of utilitarianism. As Sissy's friends in the circus group attempt their best to support and comfort her after her father ran away out of shame, Dicken's opinion that utilitarianism is a noble, kind, community-strengthening, and therefore pragmatic practice comes through.
I would like to bring up the title of the book, Hard Times. Though I believe that we will get a better insight onto why the book is called hard times as we keep reading, I can already see how just the environment that they are in now can be seen as a place of hard times. The description of the town is already so grim and the fact that imagination is so frowned upon shows how there isn’t much room for creativity and free thinking (kind of like how it was in 1984). Already Sissy seems to be facing some hard times and I sense that Louisa is too.
I would like to bring up how the industry in Coketown and Mr. Gradgrind is destroying the emotions of the people in the story.
At any factory, the people working there stand in one spot all day, doing mindless tasks that don't require much thought or skill at all. The basis of emotion comes from being able to think and develop personality, so when these people stop thinking they loose their emotions and seem more like robots at their job.
Mr. Gradgrind is guilty of similar crimes. As other people and myself have described he is associated with facts and reason, linked to industry, and how that can turn their environment into a bad place. Mr. Gradgrind tries to instill facts into everyone around him, especially his students and family. By not allowing them to have an imagination they cannot think freely and develop thoughts deeper than 2+2=4 for instance. With just facts in their mind they can be controled by the person in power feeding them the facts (Mr. Gradgrind). Tom is a prime example of how Gradgrind controls him by crushing his emotion. When Gradgrind catches Tom and Louisa looking at the circus, immagination, he scolds them and brings them home. Since Louisa has emmotion and immagination she is not so submissive to her father, Tom on the other hand is. I quote, "Tom did not look up at him, but gave himself up to be taken home like a machine." Like Tom a machine is emotionless and follows the orders of who ever is in control.
That is how I think the industry of Coketown and Mr. Gradgrind are destroying the emotions of the people.
I would like to comment on what Shelbey had to say about Pegasus being symbolic of the circus performers. I entirely agree with the connections she made but I would also like to add that to me, I saw them as outcasts to the rest of society just as a Pegasus is sort of an outcast in the animal kingdom since it does really not exist. The other characters look down upon the circus performers because they are entirely different from all the other people they know. I also think of the Pegasus as a creature with out-of-the-ordinary abilities since it is a horse that can fly essentially. I think this strengthens the fact that the circus performers are capable of doing things that no outsiders can.
Adding to what Shelbey and Arie have said, I think the Pegasus symbol serves as a sort of contrast with the Industrial society presented. Coketown is described as having “fact, fact, fact, everywhere in the material aspect of the town” as well as the “immaterial” aspects. As Trevor added, the industrial era was based almost entirely on fact through the use of science and innovation. Simply stated, Coketown is fact. Likewise, Pegasus is fiction. The symbol of Pegasus alludes to a completely different society in which creativity and ingenuity were highly valued. Philosophy, art, and drama were all held with high regard within ancient Greek society. As stated earlier, Pegasus in itself is a manifestation of creativity in the form of a myth. Indirectly, this could also reference the early renaissance era in which classical ideas were revisited. The circus is a contrast against the no-nonsense atmosphere of Coketown, such as the Classical Greek era contrasts with the Industrial era, and fiction contrasts with fact. Pegasus, and the circus ultimately represent creativity and freedom of artistic and athletic expression.
On a more physical note, Pegasus is also an agile and flying creature, which reflects the acrobatics of a circus performance quite well.
I’d like to draw out the significance of Mr. Sleary’s lisp. It’s hard to ignore, as I found reading his dialogue exceedingly difficult. I may be making a stretch here, but I suspicion that there may be some sort of meaning behind his lisp. As the proprietor of the circus, Mr. Sleary embodies the circus and is likewise representative of the general expectations of the circus and its participants. As a devout and often lofty-minded educator, Mr. Gradgrind probably looks down on Mr. Sleary in part for his profession, but also his speech impediment. Likewise, this is probably a view that would be shared by much of the fact-based society in which Mr. Gradgrind resides. However, despite this ‘flaw,’ Mr. Sleary is exceedingly kind towards his troupe, as well as respectful towards the haughty Gradgrind and Bounderby. His speech impediment is a characteristic that recognizably makes him human against the mechanical atmosphere of Coketown, and adds a human aspect to the circus as a whole. While this may be seen as a flaw in the viewpoint of Mr. Bounderby and Mr. Gradgrind, the reader appreciates it as a relatable human aspect, despite the difficulty of reading the passages.
I agree with Jasjit's comment about the title of the book and how it. reflects the poor condition of coketown and it's inhabitants. I also believe however that the title also is a reference to the main character, Mr. Gradgrind. Given Mr.Gradgrind's personality of being a cold and hard man. His name also (at least in my opinion) sort of reminds me of stone or some sort of strong ore or mineral. The title also might be a reference to the event's Gradgrind will come under upon adopting Sissy
I would like to go back to what Kelly and Shelbey said about Dickens description of Coketown. I agree with what they said about how Dickens doesn't like what the industrial revolution has done to individuals and society in general. I think it is interesting that he describes the colors of the town as "the painted face of a savage". This made me think that Dickens thought that by having an Industrial revolution and having many advances in technology, people and society had actually become more basic. This is because not many people at this time are doing skilled labor. All they are doing is standing in one place doing something basic over and over again. Dickens is saying that people have actually devolved and become less advanced. This is Ironic because there had to be many advances in technology for this to take place.
In chapter three Dickens says that Coketown has eighteen churches, but follows the question of who attends these churches with the answer “Because, whoever did, the laboring people did not.” This, along with the quote on the previous page “a town so sacred to fact,” and people’s comments on the importance of facts and scientific/methodical thinking, leads me to wonder (and there is every possibility that I am wrong) if the town worships facts instead of any religious deity. This would fit with the “Priest” Thomas Gradgrind, who teaches the facts/religion to the children. I can’t wait to see if this idea will be developed more in the coming chapters.
I would like to support what Jennifer said about M’Choakumchild and him being representative of all schoolmasters in Dickens’s eyes. In chapter two Dickens states that “He (M’Choakumchild) and some one hundred and forty other schoolmaster, had been lately turned at the same time, in the same factory, on the same principles, like so many pianoforte legs.” This supports Jennifer’s statement of M’Choakumchild being representative i.e. the same as all the schoolmasters of the time. But it also makes a reference to the factories making M’Choakumchild and the other teachers, which tells me that Dickens believed M’Choakumchild was a man created by his time; the factories and the Industrial Revolution mad him what he is.
I would like to comment of how Dickens portrays utilitarianism in his description of Sissy Jupe's choice through the character of Thomas Gradgrind. The way Gradgrind portrays that he is in favor of utilitarianism is by persuading Sissy that the best chance she has is to come live at the school under his supervision, not so much for her good as for the progress of society in not letting another child remain uneducated and running around freely in the world. The round about way he goes about it is by stating "and even your father himself appears, on your behalf, to have known and felt that much." In this way he makes it her idea to jump into the arms of the system and become a useful part of society.
To comment on what Jasjit said, I agree that the ambiance so far displays hard times in the lives of all the characters whether it be the the student's (mainly Sissy so far) disciplined lives, Mr. Bounderby's childhood, or the living conditions of the circus folk. I feel we've only scratched the surface of what the lives of the students will be like further in the story. From what seen in the author's description of private, British schools and their instructors, I assume that Dickens himself had some 'hard times' as a child in similar circumstances. On a final note, it reminded me of his book David Copperfield in the sense that youth have to struggle while being over shadowed by their educators.
To comment on what Jack said, I totally agree that one of the major themes of the first six chapters is how education can de-humanize people. I would like to focus on the opposite people than the ones Jack talked about. Sissy and the people of the Sleary Circus, they are the antithesis of the Mr. Grandgrind and everything he represents. They value laughter, family, friends and just living life to the fullest. They do not care about the correctness of facts but rather what those facts can do for them. This leads me to question even further what Sissy's role is going to be within the Gradgrind household. In the eyes of the Gradgrinds it is going to be like bringing in a sinner into their holy house of worship.
I would like to bring up Mr. Bounderby's obvious obsession with the fact that he was abused, neglected and abandoned as a child. The first thing Mr. Bounderby says in the book is "I hadn't a shoe on my foot. As to a stocking, I didn't know such a thing by name. I passed the day in a ditch, and the night in a pigsty." He goes on to just badger Mrs. Gradgrind with the woes of his childhood to the point where she does even know what to say. And this is not the last time he brings it up. He does it at least three or four more times in the next two chapters! Seriously, Mr Bounderby? Seriously? Aside from the fact that he has issues, I think that this is Dickens trying to show the result of a life on the opposite side of the Gradgrinds. From the brief description of his mother and grandmother it seems like these two important figures of Mr. Bounderby's life lived with no education and no direction. A crude and brutal comparison to the circus people. I think that this is to show that a society cannot live on either edge of the extreme or else it will affect the future generation negatively. There has to be a compromise for the middle. The proof is Mr. Bounderby and Louisa. Opposite ends of extreme but both rebel to the other side. Personally, I like Louisa's rebellion more.
I would like to add on to what jasjit and treavor said they kindoff broght things from the book 1984. This may just be me, but I get a sence that Mr. Gradgrind is like Big brother as Jesse Richmond said that Thomas Gradgrind name meant "priest" of facts. Mr. Gradgring sees him self as a prophet from god. just like god's prophet's who were sent to inform the rest of the society of god's word. Mr Gradgrind believes that its his duty to spread facts. But he ENFORCES them into his students and as well as his children. To add to that he is trying to contol what people think of a certain word like BB with the thought police. An example is when sissy did not define the right definition of a horse to Mr. Gradgrind "Girl number twenty possessed of no facts in reference to one of the commonest of animals." Then he calls on a boy named Bitzer to give him the definition and they were all facts "Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders." Mr. Gradgrind wants society to think about the correct facts that comes to his mind. when you hear a word, its like the poem that we read in class when you say the word "barn" nobody is going to have the same picture come to their mind because its your own voice. Basically, that's why i think Mr. Gradgrind is like BB from 1984. This may be wrong.
I would like to bring up the description of the boy (Bitzer). Coketown is desribed the same way as the boy." His cold eyes would hardly been eyes." "His skin was so unwholesomely deficient in the natural tinge, that he looked as though, if he were cut,he would bleed white." Both use words and metaphors that describe sadness. Charles Dickens did this in purpose because bitzer is the one that answers the "correct" defenition of a horse with pure facts. Coketown is the way it is because of Mr.Gradgrind he is the one that produced Coketown to be so industrial and nasty. Machinery was produced from science, science is made up of facts, facts and more facts. Just like Mr. Gradgrind and Bitzer.
I would like to agree with Jennifer about Mr. McChoakumchild, and about his seeking to crush (or "choke out") the creativity in children. Although I don't necessarily agree that Dickens intended Mr. M to represent all school teachers, I think it is crucial for the sake of the story that he has such a revealing name. At first glance, connotation of simply the name alone indicates that he is a negative, or perhaps an abusive, person in children's lives. Certainly Mr. M represents the school teachers of Coketown, but I think Dickens must not have felt that way about every single one of his teachers as a student, and I'm certain none of us do today.
I would also like to address question number one in regards to Mr. Gradgrind. I feel like this last name is extremely indicative of who this man is as a person. He establishes a school that is built entirely on the premise that children should learn facts alone, and wholeheartedly agrees when adults choke out the children's creativity. It is important to note "Gradgrind" as a caricature name because, to me at least, it seems to be a portmanteau of "graduation" and "grind". I was reminded of the phrase "nose to the grindstone" to indicate that Mr. Gradgrind expected children to tediously work their way through their schooling, eventually ending in graduation. Along with this, Mr. Gradgrind also wishes to eliminate any youthful creativity, or "grind" it out.
I would like to respond to what Jack and Arie said about both the description of Thomas Gradgrind and Mr. Bounderby. First off, I agree with Arie and Jack regarding their analyzation of Gradgrind and his square appearance, along with Jack's idea of Bounderby being machine-like. They both are given descriptions that compare to generally strong, perfect, and straightforward objects, which seems to reflect their strict and factual nature. I would have to disagree, however, with the idea that Gradgrind and Bounderby can be labelled as cruel or evil, especially this early on in the novel. I believe that, like a machine or a square, they are indeed inflexible, factual, and less emotional. However they have shown little to no cruelty. This is especially apparent in the case of Gradgrind, who is not only a responsible father, but quite obviously wants what he believes to be best for his children. Gradgrind also takes in the abandoned young Sissy. This consideration for an abandoned child, in my opinion, comes off as much kinder than the action of Sissy's father, who presumably abandoned her. Regardless of her father's reasoning behind his departure, his young daughter is suddenly without a parent. Though they are not as emotional as we may be accustomed to, I do not see these men as cruel. They are like industrial machines, programmed to get one job done, and though they may only understand fact and will try to correct those who are, in their opinion, wrong, they do so for, what is in their eyes, the greater good. Granted, in chapters to come, their colors may change, but as is stands, I believe it is unfair to label either as antagonists.
I would like to talk about Mr. Bounderby and how his attitudes toward business and money are representative of the changing social structure created by the industrial revolution. As a child Mr. Bounderby was very poor and even abused. He grows up to be a very successful business man. The industrial revolution was the firs time in history where it was possible for someone who was from a poor family to raise out of poverty and become successful. This is what Mr. Bounderby does and because of this he almost represents the American Dream. But he cant because in order to stay rich he has to control the factories. This is bad because the conditions in the factories were very poor. He created some of the filth around the city just so he could be rich. This is unlike the american dream because he earned his money while causing harm to other people.
I would like to address the response question #1 in regards to Cecilia "Sissy" Jupe. This struck me as a particularly powerful caricature name simply because the word "sissy" is used often in everyday language. The dictionary definition of the word "sissy" is: "a person regarded as effeminate or cowardly". Therefore, one cannot help but assume that it is implied that Sissy is a sissy. There could be many reasons for this, but I believe that it is meant to address that a person like Sissy, who is emotional, imaginative, and dramatic, was, at this time, considered inferior to individuals such as Gridgrind and Bounderby. In fact, in Chapter II, Gradgrind makes it a point to announce Sissy's incompetence and inferiority: '"Girl number twenty unable to define a horse!" said Mr. Gradgrind, for the general behoof of all the little pitchers." Gradgrind scoffs at Sissy's inability to deliver a response to his demand to define the animal that she encounters so frequently. He does this by humiliating her in front of the students who are accustomed to Gradgrind's questions and teachings, students who are following the belief that you must '"Stick to Facts, Sir!"' This makes Grandgrind and his students appear to be above someone like Sissy, who is a symbol of the people met at Pegasus's Arms and a symbol of those who believe in more than fact. This makes Sissy, along with the people she is supported by, appear to be the "sissies" of the era. They are to be seen as the ignorant, helpless, and unintelligent people who are living in the shadow of those who follow fact.
As Jesse commented, Gradgrind is clearly a fitting name to a man (and period of time) where the daily grind for production is without hindrance of leisure and creativity. Correct me if it has already been stated, but I believe that the "Grad" piece of his name refers to the students themselves as graduates of their education. Thus, Gradgrind is just a verb for the daily pounding of facts and lessons upon students. I would definitely agree that Mr. Gradgrind is presented as a priest of facts, especially in the ways that he values his own sage-like wisdom (as the "eminently practical"). Although his position is one of direct contact and influence, he values the facts that he has to offer so highly that he constantly elevates himself above others as the dominant mind. Nevertheless, he is set on relaying information with bland efficiency and volume purely for fact's sake in the manner that he had been taught to prize the concrete nature of facts as a child and, more importantly, as a Gradgrind.
To comment on what Lara said about Mr. Bounderby's obsession with his terrible childhood and her comparisons of him to the Gradgrinds, I would like to suggest that this is perhaps the root of his interest in Louisa. He himself did not have a "proper" childhood, one with good role models like Mr. Gradgrind or a strong schooling based on facts. Because of this he is drawn to this girl whose upbringing is on the opposite end of the spectrum from his own and is striving to become part of it.
We definitely need to clarify utilitarianism; i've seen a comment or two which seemed to argue that Dickens was in favor of utilitarian ideas.
It is not so.
To define utilitarianism more clearly:
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist philosophy which states that acting only with logical consequences in mind leads to the greatest happiness for the whole; that is, the individual should always take the most logical and empirically reasonable course of action to benefit their society. Utilitarianism stresses the importance of the society over the individual, which essentially negates the concept of personal happiness.
With this outline in mind, it is clear Gradgrind is utilitarian. Furthermore, it is self-evident in Dickens's bare and calculating portrayal of Gradgrind that he, Dickens, is skeptical of utilitarianism.
Gradgrind is a well meaning individual, contrary to what some previous commenters have presumed. Utilitarianism, like all human belief systems, is not intrinsically evil in nature. Though to the naked eye it appears Gradgrind attempts ruthlessly to snuff out "fancy", he does so only because he sincerely believes that he is helping to create a more prosperous society by training his children and students to be prepared to approach the world objectively, so that they may in the future contribute to their industrial civilization. Gradgrind's essential goodness is quite clear when he elects to adopt Sissy Jupes, whom he was minutes from dismissing from his school; the metallic man has a heart.
Nevertheless, by making Gradgrind and Coketown fundamentally utilitarian, Dickens allowed himself room to criticize the philosophy, which he saw being used poorly in his time.
I guess Haley beat me to that.
I'd like to point out the titles of the chapters. Each obviously defines the people/events of the chapters' contents, but they are also quite ironic. Specifically, the first chapter "Murdering of Innocents" is contradictory to Mr. Gradgrinds expectations of the importance of factual lessons. Namely, the word innocents (as opposed to innocence) refers to a concrete individual (in contrast to the concept). For this reason, the chapter heading implies that the the death of the innocent (children), so that it is not their sense of naivety that is being killed, but their spiritual sense of creativity and individuality. It is especially ironic because from Mr. Gradgrind's viewpoint, his teachings are the building blocks to the students' success in life and as citizens. As readers, we begin the see the state of desolation resulting from the lack of creativity. We pick up on the deprivation and resonate with the sadness. Immediately we form sympathetic attitudes towards the children of the novel and a discontent towards the fact- oriented adults.
The other chapter heading I'd like to point out is "Sleary's Horsemanship." Though Sleary approaches children in a softer (and seemingly more loving, "family" driven nature), he too is guilty of alienating the youth. Maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there, but his horsemanship is seemingly applied to Sissy Jupe. While speaking to a dog's inability to "perform without hith mathter," Sleary hints at Sissy's inability to function as she had without her father. Additionally, Sleary offers to "prentith" and train Cecilia, all while speaking to his ability to train a horse without hurting it. The interwoven nature of his transitions between teaching animals and handling the situation with Sissy make the comparisons pretty clear, especially as the chapter title (which deals mostly with Sissy choosing her fate) is named after Sleary's ability to manage horses... there is an ironic contrast between his familial affection and his business-like, money-minded attitude towards treating Sissy as one of his show animals.
Now the other chapters have similar ironic tones as well (Key-notes, A Loophole, etc) which all point at the children receiving the blunt end of a square society, and them being at the forefront of the plot as a result. But we'll see how things unfold. Let me know what you think.
Yeah, for sure, Justin. Most of the chapter titles are very relevant to the plot – more so than in most books. I was thinking the same thing about the second chapter, "Murdering the Innocents". It's definitely a sort of dramatic irony; Gradgrind thinks he's doing a service for the children by educating them only in facts, but the reader knows that he is in fact snuffing out their creativity and emotion.
I also think it's interesting how Dickens organized the book. Note that he broke it into three sections, called Sowing, Reaping, and Garnering, respectively. I predict these titles will parallel the development of the plot, for example: in the reader's introduction to Louisa, Gradgrind's teen daughter, we learn she is rebelling against her father; in other words, she's "sowing" the seeds of rebellion. I can't yet tell what might happen in the second part, Reaping, but I'm going to venture a guess that Louisa's rebellion will take concrete shape. Likewise, the third part, Garnering, will probably explore the consequences of her rebellion and other themes we've seen developed, like utilitarianism's effect on society, and so forth.
To be devil’s advocate I would argue that Dickens is more opposed to industrial civilization than he is to utilitarianism as it could be implied that the need for a utilitarianism mind set is only for fueling industrial progress of the state. Any one agree?
I see evidence in this idea when Gradgrind states he will raise his children on “facts, facts alone” as he believes “nothing else will ever be of any service to them.” It is not that he wants to suppress their creativity for the sake of suppression but rather so they may contribute to the industrial civilization. His bases of a utilitarianism mind set in his parenting style is as to prepare his children to be contributing members of society in the only way he sees fit.
I'd like to make a suggestion that the circus performers represent childhood. Not saying they are childish people but the world they live in is one that could represent childhood when compared to the word of "Facts." For example the first circus performer we meet is "Mr. E.W.B Childers" who has the word child in his name. If the circus does represent childhood could this story then be about the maturing of Sissy Jupe, and even more surprisingly the discovery of childhood and it's wonders by the Gradgrind family?
In standard Myles fashion, I have decided to do exactly what Mr. Barrows told us not to do and get my stuff in right before the deadline. Sorry Barrows, had to go to the basketball game. At any rate, I am going to bring up some findings that I...found. In George Bernard Shaw (a highly credible critic from the early-mid 1900's) explains that Hard Times was written with the basic intention of tearing down stereotypes of the era and providing the masses with a somewhat uncomfortable feeling about the setting and situations. The Victorian Era was a time of new innovations, cutting egde technology and beautiful forms of architecture. The portrayal of Coketown is that of which I just described but without the pride in technological advances, a disregard for the innovations in communication during the time and is coated in "coke". This idea would be slightly uncomfortable for me if I were a citizen of England, especially London, during the Victorian Era. This is what Shaw outlined in his critique. Another example of the awkward nature of the novel is the way in which characters (emphasis on Gradgrind and Bounderby) ignore the standard of promoting innovation and creativity for the purpose of sponsorship of the utilitarian ideal. Again, a slightly uncomfortable character representation for the readers of the time period.
To comment on what Jasjit said earlier on the topic of the title of the novel, I also found that it was at one point titled Hard Times-For These Times. This is also kind of going off of what I said but there is a grey area on who we are allowed to respond to. The reason being that the Victorian Era was a time of culture, innovation and peace and the title, Hard Times-For These Times, it seems, well encompasses the idea that this book is about, which is the hard times these people are subjected to.
I would like to refer to Haley's comment about how Mr. Gradgrind and Mr. Bounderby and not cruel. I think Mr. Bounderby is cruel in the scene where they are talking to Childers and he interrupts Gradgrind expressing his surprise at Childers apprenticeship to, as Bounderby puts it, "Idleness." This comment causes him to be ignored by the performers for the rest of the talk. I wonder why Mr. Bounderby is so rude? Perhaps like Jennifer said he didn't have a "proper" childhood. This could mean the Mr. Gradgrind has some compassion because he may have experienced childhood. If this is true it will be interesting to note, as I said above, his reaction to the "childhood" Sissy will bring to the family. Maybe we'll even learn about Mr. Gradgrind's past as a part of explaining why he doesn't want children to experience childhood. (by childhood I mean being young and free and creative, being able to imagine anything like "carpet having representations of flowers upon it")
In response to Aly's comment, I would agree that the Industrial Revolution and the Utilitarian mindset go hand in hand. I think it is possible that the Industrial Revolution was the one that fueled more of this Utilitarianism thinking, because such thinking was necessary in order to believe in the Industrial Revolution and that industry would bring progress to society which would be favorable to all. Dickens portrays those obsessed with facts as lifeless and unappealing while seemingly trying to attract the reader to the characters who appreciate "fancy" rather than fact, such as Sissy. I think he does this in order to warn his readers of what will happen if society becomes too wrapped up in the Industrial Revolution and adopts a strict utilitarianism mindset--they will become dull and unable to to express themselves freely or be unique. I think he is trying to remind society of the importance of individuality, compassion and imagination.
Alright 11:30, lets do this. I'd like to point out the differences between Grandgrind and Sleary (and i'll spare most of the description of Gradgrind considering how much we have discussed him.) Physically, Sleary is described as a stocky man with a wonky eye and a voice "like the efforts of a broken old pair of bellows, a flabby surface, and a muddled head which was never sober and never drunk." (pg 41) All of this lead me to picture him as a man with lots of imperfections and pretty much just an off looking guy. That contrasts the geometric and symmetrical, as Jack said earlier, body that Gradgrind has. In the way of personality, while Gradgrind is this very logical and down to earth man who is all about the facts, Sleary is a very compassionate and funny man who seems a bit weird and quirky.
Also I'd like to say that if Dickens did want the name Thomas to have the connotation of a priest, I find that very ironic considering how much emphasis Gradgrind puts on facts and how religion is based on faith (pretty much the exact opposite).
I'd like to add to the various comment's about the description of Coketown. I agree with the general consensus that Dickens has obviously portrayed this as a very drab and dark place to live and such a description shows how Dickens was not very stoked about the industrial period in England. One specific example would be, when describing the public buildings in the town he starts with how the jail looks like the hospital and visa versa but the fact that he used the jail as an example puts the idea that living in Coketown would feel like you are constantly in a jail and unable to escape into the reader's head. Another example would be when Dickens talks about how most of the things produced in the town were "comforts of life" (pg 27) but ironically none of these comforts stay in the town they "found their way all over the world". (pg 27)
Though a lot of this has been addressed, I would like to relate the obsession with facts to the machinery of the Industrial Revolution. The obsession with facts takes the feeling or "fancy" out of daily life, basically creating people who do not think for themselves but rather think whatever the facts tell them to think. Machines work in basically the same way--they don't have minds of their own they simply do whatever they are programmed to do. By instilling in his children and students that one should believe only in the facts, Mr. Gradgrind is saying that having your own opinions and feelings is useless and ridiculous, and that people should basically be like machines. In the Industrial Revolution, machinery was taking the place of human labor more and more, and I think Dickens is in a way trying to warn his readers that reliance on machines creates a society that is unable to think for themselves. In chapter two, when Mr. Grandgrind catches Thomas and Louisa trying to watch the circus in chapter 3, Dickens makes the direct comparison of people to machines by saying "Indeed, Thomas did not look at him, but gave himself up to be taken home like a machine." Thomas is letting himself become a machine by giving into his fathers facts and unwillingness to see beyond anything but the facts.
Troupe...not troop. haha thanks Bryce
Post a Comment