I enjoyed reading David Lodge Nice Work. I thought the femininist viewpoints were rather comical. For instance, Robyn was shocked at the lack of women at the factory. In fact, the women that she did see were indinstinguishable as women. Additioanlly, Robyn was upset about the workers' posters and the idea of a scantly clad calendar. I believe that the feminist viewpoint was in the novel to replicate the Victorian era women workforce. I thought it was a clever way to update that part of the English Industrial Revolution.

This is my last blog for this course. I thought I would take the time to reflect on this course. This course had a lot of reading and several papers, as well as these blogs. This course had more work than any other course that I taken at Central. However, it was truly one of the most rewarding courses that I have taken and the one course I feel I have learned the most. I truly feel confident regarding my knowledge of the Condition of England Novel. After reading Lodge's Nice Work, I felt like Robyn in the sense that I could restate those lectures like she did in the book.
I need one more course to receive my degree. So I don't need to take any additional courses. However, in the future, I plan on taking another course with Dr. Jones. He is truly a super teacher!

I have finished reading David Lodge's Nice Work. The passage that I liked pertains to the issue surrounding the employers. On page 85, Wilcox tells Robyn "I don't like making men redundant, but we're caught in a doublr bind. If we don't modernise we lose competitive edge and have to make men redundant, and if we do modernise we have to make men redundant because we don't need 'em any more." (Lodge 85)

I choose the above passage for two reasons. The first one is that this short passage explains the issue surrounding the employers. It is a Catch 22 that puts the employers and their workers at odds. It not only complicates the English Industrial revolution but, it also complicated today's capitalistic society with the advent of new technological advances, most notably in computers,

Tonight, I learned that Alton is writing this relection while he is on a boat that is traveling from England to America. I was totally unaware of this setting until it was pointed out to me. This seems like an important piece of information because it shows his disdain for his homeland. He felt like he was imprisoned in England and he has freed himself from its confines. I guess over the course of the novel we will see why he hates England so much and how this hatred caused him to leave it behind.

I have just finished reading Alton Locke. I liked the stereotypical statements that Alton makes about the working class. Alton states that he gradually found himself "learning slang insolence, laughing at coarse jokes, and taking part in angry conversations." (Kingsley 28) At first Alton is upset by their behavior, but later he assimilates into their culture. However, ultimately, he wants to change them to his way of thinking. I am wondering if he will continue to want to change them thoughout the novel, or will he forget about their differences and learn from them.

After reading the second half of Hard Times by Charles Dickens, there were two passages that clearly stand out in my mind. One passage has to do with Mr. Bounderby's statement to Mr. Gradgrind that his daughter Louisa doesn't know how to treat a man of prestige like Mr. Bounderby.(265) However, the passage that I will focus on is Mr. Gradgrind's realization that he has failed his daughter. Mr Gradgrind states, " Let me say I, then," he returned, in answer to the coarsely blurted question;"I doubt whether I have understood Louisa. I doubt whether I have been quite right in the manner of her education."(263) This thought is clearly against what he espouses when the novel begins. This drastic change shows that he is an introspective person and that he can clearly observe his failings in the emotional affect of his daughter. In fact, this notion shows that Mr. Gradgrind can see beyond mere facts and can see the affect a factual world has on people. If England continues to focus on statistics and becomes even more selfish, the future of England is in jeopardy. England is going to have to change in a similar fashion to Mr. Grudger.

I have finished reading the novel Hard Times by Charles Dickens. At the end of this Condition of England novel, Thomas Gradgrind changes his philosophy regarding the education of his children. On the first page of the novel, Gradgrind is concerned with facts and he is against any thoughts of fancy. However, after he sees how these beliefs impacted his children, he is forced to rethink his beliefs. The fact filled world has led to his Louisa's unhappiness and most likely to his son's illegal behavior. So I am left pondering the main point of the novel. Well, obviously it describes Coketown and its habitants in a way that clearly articulates the hardships of the working class. My belief is that Gradgrind changed his philosophy because at this time, there was a reliance on factual data. However, when one looked at the actual effect, especially regarding one's emotions, you could easily see the affect it was having the the workers. This novel showed that the privledged had problems and that the true good guys were the men and women who toiled everyday. The workers were more virtuous and they espoused the good parts of humanity. However, with Gradgrind's change, this novel also showed that the elite could also change. In essence, this novel seems to say that the elite can change and that this will bring about a better and happier England.

In Charles Dicken's Hard Times, he believes that education should only espouse reason and facts. In the first paragraphs of this novel, Mr. Gradgrind talks about facts. He says:
"Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!"(41)
According to Mr. Gradgrind, the root of all existence are facts. He believes this so profoundly that he is deeply troubled when he finds his children in actions that are not directly tied to facts. This literal definition seems rather odd and I do not know how this belief fits into the Victorian era.

As the novel progresses. Mr. Gradgrind tells us that the only reason for education is reason. To Mr Gradgrind, the people who think in ideas that are not part of reason turn into vagabonds. This apparently is the fear that is driving Mr. Gradgrind's thinking and behavior. I wonder if this fear is realized.

I have started reading Charles Dicken's Hard Times. This Social Problem novel is a rather simple read and it has some unique attitudes regarding education. According to Mr. Gradgrind, his two children Louisa and Thomas are only to study calculations and fact. They are forbidden to study ideas that are imaginative or that create a sense of wonder. I am wondering why this seems to be such a prevalent issue in the novel. This type of study may keep the Gradgrind's wealthy and out of the working class population. He may be saying that the reason the working class is the way they are is because they concentrate on thoughts that are counter productive to any meaningful place in Victorian society. I'm sure the answer will be found at the conclusion of the novel.

I also finished writing the interpretive paper. Although this paper was rather straight forward, I found it quite difficult to find the examples that I needed from the approximately 2000 pages of text. Additionally, I didn't take notes in the books related to the themes, so the task was even harder. Well, I hope I did an admiral job!

As I was reading Charlotte Bronte's Shirley, I came across an interesting passage. The passage reads:
"You expected bread, and you have got a stone; break your teeth on it, and don't shriek because the nerves are martyrixed: do not doubt that your mental stomach - if you have such a thing - is strong as an ostrich's - the stone will digest. You held out your hand for an egg, and fate put into it a scorpion. Show no consternation: close your fingers firmly upon the gift; let it sting through your palm. Never mind: in time, after your hand and arm have swelled and quivered long with torture, the squeezed scorpion will die, and you will have learned the great lesson how to endure without a sob." (128)

I thought this passage was interesting because it clearly states that pain equals strength. Additionally, if one is bitter, he/she also has strength. Bitterness makes you strong, especially if you are able to hold it in. This passage states that life is vastly unfair. Your life is usually bad and your actions only cause you more harm. This passage is emotionally intense. It is the opposite of what we believe to be true and it shows the dire straits that the women are in during this era.

I have finished reading Charlotte Bronte's Shirley. In preparation for this blog, I pursued through my notes that I wrote as I was reading the book. I underlined the following passage in the book:

Consequently, of whom you know nothing. Excuse me, - indeed, it does not matter whether you excuse me or not - you have attacked me without provocation: I shall defend myself without apology. Of my relations with my two cousins, you are ignorant: in a fit of ill-humor, you have attempted to poison them by gratuitous insinuations, which are far more crafty and false than anything with which you can justly charge me. That I happen to be pale, and sometimes to look diffident, is no business of yours. That I am fond of books, and indisposed for common gossip, is still less your business. That I am a "romancing chit of a girl," is a mere conjecture on your part: I never romanced to you, nor to anybody you know. That I am the parson's niece is not a crime, though you may be narrow-minded enough to think it so. You dislike me: you have no just reason for disliking me; therefore keep the expression of your aversion to yourself. If at any time, in future, you evince it annoyingly, I shall answer even less scrupulously than I have done now.' (Bronte, Charlotte. Shirley. England, 1849.)

I underlined this passage because Shirley argues with Mr. Yorke and she does it in a very bold and masculine style. I mentioned masculine style because this type of argument was unheard of from a women during the Victorian Era. In essence, Shirley tells Yorke to mind his own business and that she doesn't accept the fact that he has put her down on many accounts. This speech shows her frank and honest nature and it also shows her unwillingness to succumb to the female roles that are currently held in her society.

Charlotte Bronte's novel Shirley has a very interesting narrator. At times, the narrator gives us a ton of information. She gives the reader a lot of information about what a character is thinking, especially before he/she begins a dialogue with another character. Additionally, the narrator seems very serious and then at other times, she seems quite playful. For example, when a character would normally enter an expletive, Bronte will simply tell the reader that what was said was to egregious for us to hear. During the Victorian time, this would have been the appropriate way to handle this type of situation. Also, by writing it this style, it cleverly draws our attentions to the character's emotions.

Our first encounter with the narrator was on the first page. On this page, she tells the reader that we should question the purpose of the novel. She also tells us to lower our expectations before we read any further. By doing this, she tells us that she is a credible narrator and it offers a sense of realism.

I have finished reading Charlotte Bronte's Shirley. This book started off very slow and at times, it was hard to follow because she often mentioned a character and then didn't speak about him/her for a hundred or so pages. Additionally, I found it odd when the narrator spoke directly to the reader. Lastly, some of the characters' had a few names that made it somewhat difficult to comprehend who was who.

This novel is essentially a love story. However, it is much deeper than that. This novel features two love interests, but it uses these women as an analogy for the industrial Revolution. Their genders are symbolic of the Warring classes of people in Europe. It was also a classic Victorian Social Problem Novel because it ended in marriages. It also had a happy ending, In the end Robert Moore, a mill owner saw the errors of his ways and vowed to change his beliefs as well as the town and society at large. However, the resolution of this novel was contained in the last few pages. I thought the resolution was too quick and simplistic for such a clever and lengthy novel.

Why should we suffer alone?

The inequity of treatment is evidenced by the passage on page 55. "Carriages still roll along the streets, concerts are still crowded by subscribers, the shops for expensive luxuries still find daily customers, while the workman loiters away his unemployed time in watching these things, and thinking of the pale, uncomplaining wife at home, and the wailing children asking in vain for enough of food, - of the sinking health, of the dying life of those near and dear to him. The contrast is too great. Why should he alone suffer from bad times?" The two classes of people see each other very differently. The rich is oblivious of the lower class, except of their presence at the factories which results in their wealth. The poor are hyper sensitive to all of the amenities and basic necessities that they can't afford in their lives. It must be very difficult to see the privileged class meandering through their day without a care in the world, while the poor must deal with a malnourished family due to the absence of food, even though they may have worked several hours in the factory. In fact, it isn't fair. These differences eventually lead to trade unions and aggression towards the manufacturer.

Relationship in Mary Barton

We have read two novels that illustrate the differences in lifestyles, beliefs and attitudes between the rich and the poor. In both novels, there has been a relationship between members of the two different classes. The two classes are so different that it difficult for the two classes to join forces. However, in Sybil the gulf seems to be impassable, but they marry which proves that it can be crossed.

We have always had different classes of people. In fact, to have an elite class, you must also have a poor class. It also can be said that the different classes fail to understand each other. However, what seems to be missing during the industrial Revolution in England is a genuine concern about humanity. It is quite apparent that that rich, for the most part, do not care for the well being of the poor. This seems to be a major difference compared to today. I know today we have some people who disregard the poor, but the majority of people care for their fellow man. I wonder if the times were so different, or that the English Industrial Revolution is a little exaggerated. To me, I thing England was so egocentric that they simply dismissed the lower class.

Differences Between Mary Barton and Sybil

I have finished the first half of the novel Mary Barton. This novel is much easier to comprehend than Sybil. The novel is written in a clearer style of speech and it doesn't contain all of the complicated lineage that was rampant in Sybil. Additionally, Sybil was a novel that was clearly written by a politician, while Mary Barton was written by an eloquent writer who was very knowledgeable of the conditions in England during the Industrial Revolution.

Before each chapter, their is a little poem or ditty. These passages give us a clue as to what is going to occur in the chapter. For me, these passages were like a mini Spark Notes synopsis of the chapter. Additionally, these passages show the abundance of writing that centered abound the Industrial Revolution

Poor Helping the Poor

As I was reading Elizabeth Glaskell's Mary Barton, I immediately came across a passage that elaborated on the differences between the two classes; the rich and the poor. On page 40, John Barton replies, "I tell you, it's the poor, and only, as does such things for the poor. Don't think to come over me with th' old tale that the rich know nothing of the trials of the poor; I say, if they don't know, they ought to know. We're their slaves as long as we can work; we pile up their fortunes with the sweat of our brows, and yet we are to live as separate as if we were in two worlds; ay, as separate as Dives and Lazarus, with a great gulf betweixt us: but I know who was best off then, " and he wound up his speech with a slow chuckle that had no mirth in it." This passage and the subsequent stories in the novel illustrate the stark differences between the two classes. In the novel, the poor are treated differently regarding such basic items like health care. Additionally, they are treated so poorly in life, but they are also treated poorly in death. The poor must prepay for their funeral costs and failure to do so results in a pauper funeral service where the dead are buried a mere few feet under the ground. These passages along with the stories that provide truthful evidence, make this novel an enlightening source for the Industrial Revolution of the 1800s.

Benjamin Disraeli's Sybil: Description of the Poor

After I completed Sybil, I began to think of parts of the novel that I found . My attention was quickly diverted to chapter 3, where Disraeli describes the living conditions of the poor.

On page 52, Disraeli writes, "Before the doors of these dwellings, and often surrounding them, ran open drains full of animal and vegetable refuse, decomposing into disease, or sometimes in their imperfect course filling foul pits or spreading into stagnant pools, while a concentrated solution of every species of dissolving filth was allowed to soak through, and thoroughly impregnate, the walls and ground adjoining." (Disraeli, Benjamin. Sybil. New York: Oxford, 1981)

I chose the above passage because I believe the plight of the poor is the cornerstone of this novel. Disraeli clearly shows the reader, which in his times were the aristocrats, the abhorrent living conditions of the lower class. Disreli is showing the privileged class the other part of society that they don't see mainly because they seldom have any contact with the commoners. This chapter shows the stark differences between the two classes and the sheer amount of work it will take to make the lower class better and more humane.

Class Discussion On Disraeli's Sybil

At the beginning of class, we discussed our general impressions of Benjamin Disraeli's novel Sybil. Some members of the class didn't like the novel, mainly due to its complex nature and its narrative style.

I agree that this novel is quite complex. The aristocratic lineage is at times, quite hard to understand. Additionally, there are several footnotes that one must read to fully understand the novel, and they tend to jar the rhythm of the novel. However, generally, I do like the novel. Disraeli is an intelligent writer that fully understands that he must write elaborate passages to explain the city/country settings and the lives of the two classes. These eloquent passages clearly delineate the differences between the two nations.

This novel will take quite some time to finish. However, I am looking forward to seeing what transpires between agreement and Sybil. Additionally, at the end of the novel, I am wondering what kind of social reform will be mentioned.