Questions About Tess of the D’Urbervilles

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Tess of the D’Urbervilles, please sign up.

Answered Questions (22)

this book made me hate Thomas Hardy. Why hardy, why so sad?

Walid M Rihane Well, to start with, the book is a tragedy. Secondly, Hardy uses the tragic style to critcise the Victorian society through a female character. So I t…moreWell, to start with, the book is a tragedy. Secondly, Hardy uses the tragic style to critcise the Victorian society through a female character. So I think Tragedy was the best way to highlight the flaws in the Victorian society rather than using a "happy" one.

Hope this answered your question(less)

flag

I don't understand the motives behind that Alec keeps pushing Tess to marry him? Why he debased her in the first place and then so obsessed with marrying Tess? For me it feels like that he possesses Tess but does not treat her with the equal measure of caring. (It feels that he tried to do something sort of right with a terrifying attitude.) Thank you.

Heather McAlister As Alec himself says: "Remember, my lady, I was your master once! I will be your master again. If you are any man's wife, you are mine!"

It's the class…moreAs Alec himself says: "Remember, my lady, I was your master once! I will be your master again. If you are any man's wife, you are mine!"

It's the classic "I want you because I can't control you" mentality. When he first met Tess, he saw her as just another potential conquest. But she resisted his advances before the rape (which just made him want her even more), and after the rape she willingly left his service and turned down the money he offered as a half-hearted compensation.

When he saw her again a few years later, I think his old lust for her reared its head in a moment of shock and surprise when he saw her in a crowd. (After all, he was preaching against the sin of lust, then a living reminder of his own sinful past reared showed up out of the blue and reminded him of his old fun and conquests.) But, unsurprisingly, she wanted nothing to do with him. The more he tried to talk to her, the more she ignored and rebuffed him, the more he wanted her to pay attention to him; to bend to his will.

Remember, Alec is all about power and control. He gets off on controlling women beneath his station. Remember, before he raped Tess he did things like drive too fast to scare her into kissing him when she didn't want to, and force her to open her mouth to let him feed her a strawberry by hand, even though / BECAUSE it made her uncomfortable. He was used to being able to use his wealth and status to lord over poor women. He saw them as mares to break; things to conquer and then discard once he'd had his way with them. And he especially loved using his money to bribe and coerce them into doing what he wanted, be it submit to sex willingly, or take his pity money afterwards.

Tess is, for lack of a better term, "unique" for turning down his advances. No matter how much money he offers her, she would rather keep living in working poverty than enter his gilded cage. And the fact that she keeps saying "no" to him drives him crazy. Even after she finally breaks down and acquiesces to be his mistress to help her family, in spirit she never really submits to him; she doesn't love him, and she doesn't obey him fully.(less)

flag

what is hardy's philosophy?

Dave This is an excellent question. Some understanding of Hardy's philosophy can help in understanding several of his novels.

My attempts of understand Hard…moreThis is an excellent question. Some understanding of Hardy's philosophy can help in understanding several of his novels.

My attempts of understand Hardy's philosophy led me to something known as ethical evolution, more followed towards the late nineteenth century. The idea is that as Darwin's evolutionary theory was applied to various aspects of life, it was applied to philosophy by some with the idea that society's ethics were on an evolutionary continuum.

In this philosophy Spencer theorized that man was progressing from egocentricity/selfishness to altruism. In this belief it was necessary for a person to face life's unpleasant realities and be unhappy in order to progress to the altruistic. Strangely then, Hardy views a character's unhappiness as hopeful for the character in becoming a better person, a guide for the rest of society.

If you apply this philosophical template to Tess, the story takes on deeper meaning and is more uplifting. Tess has a miserable time and then is hung, but through her misery she seems to become more understanding and compassionate to others around her. The scene of her finding fatally wounded pheasants and mercifully killing them while reproaching herself for paying to much attention to her own sorrows seems to show this..

So, she progresses through her unhappiness with broadened awareness of life's hardships. At the end, through her demise she brings Liza-Lu and Angel together which might result in happier lives for them. Further, a union of sorts between the Derbyfield and Clare households seems likely to benefit both. The Derbyfields can use the disciple, responsibility and moral guidance so intense in the Clares, which the Clares can use some moderation in accepting life as it is and appreciation of man's "animal" natures.

Tess herself has come to realize passionate love is a dangerous basis for marriage. A moral from the tale of her romance with Angel is that compatibility and a warm friendship acquired over time is a sounder and longer lasting basis for marriage than ardent love, easily seen in the deceptive idealized love Angel and Tess had for each other.(less)

flag

This question contains spoilers... (view spoiler)

Joia Tragedy, as a genre, ennobles characters through their deaths. Think of Oedipus, Macbeth, Hamlet. The tragic flaw leads to a terrible, inevitable mist…moreTragedy, as a genre, ennobles characters through their deaths. Think of Oedipus, Macbeth, Hamlet. The tragic flaw leads to a terrible, inevitable mistake; the recognition of that mistake; and with acceptance the audience receives catharsis as the hero dies, now beyond the reach of suffering.

Hardy doesn’t do beautiful tragedy. Nor does he do Dickensian pathos, in which good characters are heaped with suffering, and the reader can find satisfaction in their deaths by raging at the social inequities that doomed them. His worldview is much darker (and truer): the world is uncaring and fate non-existent. What happens to us is a combination of the choices we make and the world around us, and seeking virtue (Angel) or evil (Alec) has a limited effect on what happens.

The book ends as it does (no spoilers) because it embraces Hardy’s darkness. There’s no scene of redeemed mistakes or a blessed end to suffering. What we do see is the people who would have cared the most simply pause, then continue with their day. All that happened, the book says, was of little significance and no value. That’s FAR darker than a “tragic” ending.(less)

flag

this book was so sad and unfaire, every time i came across it, my heart hurts. what was his purpose of writing such a story anyway??

Bluebell I agree, it's extremely sad. As for the purpose of writing it I think he wanted to show people the failings of society at the time, specifically in re…moreI agree, it's extremely sad. As for the purpose of writing it I think he wanted to show people the failings of society at the time, specifically in regard to women and their rights. (less)

flag

Load 5 more questions