|
|
I have not yet finished the novel, but cannot help but think of John Donne. I cannot see any connection Dickens is trying to make with Donne, and do not want to suggest that he is. But in reading Donne, a professor once asked, how do we reconcile "Jack" Donne - the reckless playboy - with "John" Donne - the gallant lover and spritiual poet. I remeber reading an article that simply stated that Donne was trying to show the many varieties of love. Dickens is creating a similar study in A Tale of Two Cities. Miss Mannette is at the center of this theme. To her, we see the love of a father (Dr. Mannette), the love of a woman as a socal stepping stone (Stryver), true love for a woman (Darnay) and desperate love for a woman to be a moral savior (Carton). The novel will also examine love of country and love of truth. In my mind, Dickens is tackling a lot in one of his shorter novels. |
|
|
Ido not see a structure that is similar to a Shakespeare play, but I cannot help but notice the similaties between Madame Defarge and Lady Macbeth. Madame Defarge goads her husband in mush the same way as Lady Macbeth. She questions her husbands manliness, calls him weak, and shows no mercy in accomplishing her goal. Monsieur Defarge has some pity and hopes that Miss Manette will never come to France with Charles Darney, a former member of the aristocracy and their sworn enemy. He feels compassion for Dr. Manette and affection for the father and daughter so long separated by injustice and recently reunited. Madame Defarge quickly records Darney's name in her knitting and sees his punishment as a necessary event. She has no feeling towards Darney nor the Manettes who suffered for so long. Much like Lady Macbeth, she has no feelings whatsoever and is quite willing to kill Darnay's wife and child to get her revenge. |
|
|
|
Oftentimes, when reading Dickens, it is easy to see whose side he is on. Even when characters are flawed, Dickens clearly shows that this person is in the right or in the wrong Take Our Mutual Friend. No matter how you look at it, characters like Wegg, Headstone, Fledgeby, and Riderhood are clearly evil and, conversely, characters like Venus and Bella, though flawed, are clearly commendable. As a result, there is a clear picture of good and evil in the novel. But in A Tale of Two Cities, it is not so clear. As we watch Monsengieur barrell through the streets and kill a child with no remorse, the reader is left with no sympathy for the aristocracy. Still, the reader has no sympathy for the patriots as they mercilessly butcher their foes and lock the innocent away. This lack of a center, a missing social cause, is clearly paving the way for the novel's painful, yet hopeful, conclusion which can only be achieved through sacrifice and suffering.
It was interesting to see at the conlcusion of the novel, that even a "moral" cause is often driven by personal, individual reasons. Madame Defarge, the most ruthless of the revolutionaries, is driven more by personal hatred of and revenge against the Evermondes (Darnay) than love of freedom. The "citizens" deny any aristocrat or any suspected sypathized of the aristorats the very freedom they are fighting for. Thei casue is hypocritical and distorted. Dickens narrotr comments at one point that all is tainted, or deranged. No cause in the novel, neither the resotation of the aristocracy nor the revolution, is just or worthwhile.
Hope seems only to be found in personal relationships. Miss Manette, through her kindness and beauty, is able to recall to life her father and Sydney Carton. Similarly, Mr. Lorry - the man of business - is steady and reliable and as a result is a strong and hopeful character. I found it unusual that a man of business takes on such a redemptive role in a Dickens novel.
|
|
