The amorous relationships throughout Hard Times takes a satirical jab at the classes during the 19th century and the unfair advantage the rich have over the poor when it comes to marriages.
Stephen Blackpool, a factory Hand, is trapped in wed-lock with his infamous drunken slag of a wife. After finding long-lasting love with Rachel, he approaches Mr. Bounderby for hopes of somehow annulling his burdensome marriage. In book 1, Mr. Bounderby insists that it is Stephen's own fault for his misfortune, that he " 'took her for better or worse.' " (75). Mrs. Sparsit shows she is "dejected by the immorality of the people", obviously opposing this desired separation. Dickins' use of parallel structure on the following page to demonstrate the unfairness of Blackpool's situation and to further stress his incapability of marrying Rachel (76). Bounderby insists the only way he might achieve this divorce would be "with a suit".
Interestingly enough, Bounderby exhibits his own desire for divorce in book three when Louisa begins to spend more time in her father's house (237). It is obvious that Dickens means to juxtapose Bounderby and Blackpool when Grangrind repeats the exact phrase Bounderby had used on Blackpool, applying it to Louisa: " 'You have accepted a great charge of her; for better or worse -' " (236).
Bounderby exerts refusal to accept these similarities in class and circumstances, with the narrator noting that "Mr. Bounderby may have been annoyed by the repetition of his own words to Stephen Blackpool, but he cut the quotation short with an angry start". Bounderby demonstrates his infamous arrogance for believing he can get away with hypocracy, ignoring that his situation is exceedingly similar to Stephen's. Grangrind's reminders are in vain, as Bounderby insists that he is "going to finish this business according to my own opinions."
It is also quite interesting that Dickens uses parallel structure through Bounderby when he's explaining to Stephen that he can't get a divorce. Dickens continuously has him say "you'd have to"(76) go to an official, followed by "with a suit"(76). This repitition emphasizes that there are many legality issues which would need addressing and by the time they're done, it would cost a huge sum for the entire divorce, one that Stephen couldn't afford. But when Bounderby wants a divorce, he just says to Mr. Gradgrind that "if [Louisa] don't come home tomorrow by [midnight]... I shall send her wearing apparel... and you'll take care of her future"(237). He doesn't even pay a single cent or file a single suit. Also, when in the first scene Mrs. Sparsit looks with disdain at Stephen's suggestion, in Mr. Bounderby's situaton, she is the one who gives Louisa all her belongings (238) (symbolizing how she was the mode of separation). This reversal may be suggesting that the social norms can be easily twisted by the rich to fit their own needs.
ReplyDelete-Jessica K
"Of course there is" (76) is also another example of parallel structure.
DeleteI noticed that, too, how Mrs. Sparsit flocks to praise Bounderby. Looks like she's still trying to worm her way into his cash pile. It is quite interesting the fluidity of manipulation of rules to how the rich see fit -- do you suppose there is something more Dickens is trying to say with this social commentary?
~Cam
Well, since this is satire after all, Dickens, by portraying how the rich can manipulate the rules to fit their own needs, might be suggesting that this is wrong. The poor, represented by Stephen, continue to be in "a muddle" (77), while the arrogant rich, represented by Bounderby, can have anything they want with ease. This contrast emphasizes the injustice being done to the poor, and thus may send the message that the voice of the poor needs to be heard as well.
DeleteOn a side note, I said Bounderby represents the arrogant rich, but this point is truly emphasized when you realize that all his boasts are about being poor (21), but that he is in fact rich from birth (253). Thus, his lies emphasize that he wanted something to brag about to blow his already natural image up, despite the emptiness in the substance.
-Jessica K.