Dickensians! discussion
David Copperfield - Group Read 1
>
May - June 2020: David Copperfield: chapters 45 - 64
Oh, sorry Jean, I completely missed your earlier comment about the re-written scene, I saw the illustration of Phiz with David in the room with Mr. Peggotty and Emily without Martha and Michael Steig mentioning Dickens re-write, but I also could not find where Steig had located drafts of the old version. I was wondering if the original version could be found in a museum of Dickens' original works. A job for expert researchers.
Mod
Mod
Dan Peggotty arrives at David's home the next day, to tell him Emily's story, which she had spent much of the night relating to him. Betsey Trotwood offers to leave them alone, but Mr Peggotty prefers her to stay to hear the account. His emotions overcome him a little, when he remembers how humbled she had been at the start, kneeling down at his feet, to make a sort of confession. But he recovers himself and apologises, not having intended to yield to his feelings.
Mr Peggotty, momentarily angry at the recollection, starts from the point when Emily broke out of her locked room and ran away from Littimer, "that there spotted snake as Mas’r Davy see". She ran along the coast for many miles, not heeding the sharp rocks which cut her feet, for "there was fire afore her eyes, and roarings in her ears". Emily ran until she dropped.
She became aware of a young woman speaking to her. Although Emily had run for many miles, the woman, who was expecting a baby, recognised her from all the times when Emily had wandered among the fisher-folk, and made friends with their children. The kind young woman took Emily home and took care of her while her husband was away at sea. She knew it was important to keep this a secret. Emily fell into a fever, and forgot the language of the country, but could only speak her own native tongue. In her delerium, she had dreams that she was back near the boathouse, and was desperate that they should all forgive her. Some time passed, and eventually the fever passed and Emily was calm and in her right mind. She cried in her friend's arms, and the telling of this so affected Mr Peggotty, and his listeners, that:
"He could not speak of this good friend of Emily’s without a flow of tears. It was in vain to try. He broke down again, endeavouring to bless her!
‘That done my Em’ly good,’ he resumed, after such emotion as I could not behold without sharing in; and as to my aunt, she wept with all her heart;"
From that time Emily began to recover, although she had to sign what she wanted to say. She grew stronger, and one day a child addressed her as "fisherman's daughter" in the foreign tongue, and she discovered she could understand it once more:
"they used at first to call her “Pretty lady”, as the general way in that country is, and that she had taught ‘em to call her “Fisherman’s daughter” instead."
When her friend's husband came back from sea, the kind couple arranged for her to travel to France, where Emily began to wait on tables at an Inn. But one day she saw "that snake" (which we assume is Littimer, not Steerforth, from Dan Peggotty's earlier reference in his speech) and fled for England, landing at Dover. She yearned to go home to the boathouse in Yarmouth, and started out for it, but began to feel unsure of the welcome from everyone in the town. So Emily made her way to London instead:
"She—as had never seen it in her life—alone—without a penny—young—so pretty—come to London."
Almost at once, she was met by a woman who said she would help Emily find some needlework, and enquire about her family. Emily trusted this woman, and was taken to a lodging house. Martha had been watching out, and found her there:
"'When my child,’ he said aloud, and with an energy of gratitude that shook him from head to foot, ‘stood upon the brink of more than I can say or think on—Martha, trew to her promise, saved her ... She says to her, “Rise up from worse than death, and come with me!’ ... and brought her safe out, in the dead of the night, from that black pit of ruin!’"
Mr Peggotty is grateful beyond words that Martha had found Emily, and rescued her from her fate, and he says that they talked deep into the night.
Aunt Betsey detects what has not been said, that Emily is very probably expecting a child, mentioning how she would have loved to be a godmother to (the fantasy child) David's sister, but that:
"hardly anything would have given me greater pleasure, than to be godmother to that good young creature’s baby!"
And David knows why she speaks in the past tense, for:
"‘They will emigrate together, aunt,’ said I.
‘Yes!’ said Mr. Peggotty, with a hopeful smile. ‘No one can’t reproach my darling in Australia. We will begin a new life over theer! ... She’ll work at them clothes, as must be made; [until such time as we goes upon our voyage] and I hope her troubles will begin to seem longer ago than they was.’"
Dan Peggotty has thought of everyone, and made sure they will be safe and secure after he and Emily leave. His sister Peggotty would not like to leave England, and her friends such as David, so she will stay and take care of Ham, as Ham finds it a comfort to talk to her. Dan Peggotty feels that nobody would quite understand - or put up with - Mrs Gummidge, and that they would find her "peevish". So he proposes to find somewhere for her to live by herself, and make her an allowance.
Mr Peggotty has added up all the money Emily had posted to him, and the money she had on her person, and asks David to check that the total is right. He then asks David to send it back to Steerforth, via his mother:
"I shall tell her, in no more wureds than I speak to you, what it’s the price on; and that I’m gone, and past receiving of it back."
He has also written to Ham to tell him about the emigration, and will go to say goodbye to Yarmouth the next day. He is relieved that David will go with him.
As they walk along, David notices Mr Omer smoking his pipe as he used to in Omer and Joram’s shop, and calls in to see him. They have a pleasant chat about how things are, and Mr Omer is joking, and making the best of his situation, even though he is now in a makeshift wheelchair. The tiniest member of the family is adept in wheeling him around. Mr Omer is complimentary about David's writing success, and says he has even read all three volumes of David's book, without it making him feel sleepy at all.
"I laughingly expressed my satisfaction, but I must confess that I thought this association of ideas significant."
Mr Omer goes on to remember David's mother's funeral, and his father's before, so David quickly goes on with the news about Emily, and everyone involved in her tale whom Mr Omer knew. Mr Omer listens carefully, and is keen to say how much all the family would like to help Martha. He said that when his daughter Minnie had spoken out against her, it was "all show", as she was kind in her heart, and would help her in private.
After this, David goes to see Ham and Peggotty, as Peggotty has now sold the house and Barkiss's business, and lives with Ham. Mr Peggotty and Mr Gummidge are also there. They all talk of how good Mr Peggotty and Emily's lives will be in the new country (although they do not mention Emily' by name). Peggotty tells David in private that Ham:
"was broken-hearted; though he was as full of courage as of sweetness, and worked harder and better than any boat-builder in any yard in all that part ... he mentioned Emily as a child. But, he never mentioned her as a woman."
David decides to go to see Ham the next day. Neither mention Emily by name, but Ham wants to know if David has seen her. They agree that it might be best if Emily does not see either of them, but that David will write to her, on Ham's behalf. He now feels that it might be because he had pressed her to be his sweetheart, that Emily had no longer told him her worries, as she had formerly. He regrets that, because he might have been able to save her, and he wants David to ask her forgiveness.
Ham also tells David that he could only be happy if he forgets Emily - but does not want him to say that. By telling David what he does not want him to say, David (and the readers) see that Ham is hurt almost beyond bearing, and "tired of his life", although he does not want Emily to feel blame, or think that Ham could ever marry another woman.
David says that he will do his best, and will also thank Dan Peggotty for everything he has done in raising him, as Ham wishes.
Back at the boathouse, everything is ready for their departure, and all Mr Peggotty has left to do is to return the key to his landlord. To his astonishment, Mrs Gummidge bursts out with an entreaty that she mustn’t be left behind. She pleads with him, saying that she will do anything, as long as he will take her along. Mr Peggotty is kind, but says she she doesn’t know what a long voyage, and what a hard life it will be. But Mrs Gummidge is adamant. She is not as she used to be, she says. Watching and waiting so long for him to bring Emily home, and thinking about everything he had done for her, had done her a lot of good. She begs to be included in the voyage, and the next day, David sees on the coach to London:
"Mrs. Gummidge and her basket were on the seat behind, and Mrs. Gummidge was happy."
Dan Peggotty and Ham - Frank Reynolds 1910
Mod
Since we now know Emily is pregnant (though if you blinked you might have missed the 2 references, as Charles Dickens is so coy) perhaps Steerforth's actions are a little more understandable, given the time. Despicable, still, but in keeping with the Victorian mores.
I can't think of any more fictional examples off-hand (anyone?) but I'm fairly sure that if a high-born Victorian gentleman got a servant into trouble, he would attempt to fob her off by marrying her to one of his servants, or anyone else from perhaps a slightly better background, with a bit of money to make up for it. It was thought to be an honourable transaction, acceptable to all, as it saved the woman from being thrown out in penury.
So instead of giving Emily a lot of money, when he abandoned her, to enable her to make a fresh start, this was, in his mind and moral code, a better solution. (I have to give Steerforth's point of view as he's not here to speak for himself!)
I also wonder whether this is why Ham cannot see Emily. If she had not been pregnant, I think he is the sort of person who could have welcomed her back as his beau; I was sorry this has not happened. But she would be much safer having a child out of wedlock in Australia. She could take a new husband there, with no recrimination, or knowledge of her background.
And of course the reason David does not spell this out, is not only because of coy Victorian euphemisms, but because he and Dora have lost - and must still be grieving for - their unborn child.
Mod
Also another point about the difficulties of first-person perspective, as we noted in the previous chapter. This part, about Dan Peggotty:
"He saw everything he related. It passed before him, as he spoke, so vividly, that, in the intensity of his earnestness, he presented what he described to me, with greater distinctness than I can express. I can hardly believe, writing now long afterwards, but that I was actually present in these scenes; they are impressed upon me with such an astonishing air of fidelity.”
The narrator wants to impress upon us the veracity, and strength of feeling, of Dan Peggotty's account, but I feel it loses something by being told in this way. It is diluted from Emily, to Mr Peggotty, to David ...
Mod
This chapter is so full of foreboding and references:
David, in fear and consternation: "I thought of Steerforth ... of his being near at hand and liable to be met at any turn."
Ham, as before when Emily had run away, once again dwelling on something far out at sea:
"As I looked after his figure, crossing the waste in the moonlight, I saw him turn his face towards a strip of silvery light upon the sea, and pass on, looking at it, until he was a shadow in the distance."
Plus lots of biblical references - and quotes from Hamlet, I think. I'll add some I picked up here later - or many some others here can say?
I'm glad that Mrs. Gummidge is going to emigrate with Mr. Pegotty and Emily. Emily will surely appreciate a female companion.
Dickens is starting to tie up the loose ends, it seems. He's dealt with the entire Peggotty family and Mrs. Gummidge in this chapter. It's an exciting new beginning for the three of them! It's sad, though, that this happy family unit is permanently broken up as they are.
I feel saddest for Ham. While this is a chapter of healing and endings, his story is left hanging and painful. To lose a Love and to never move beyond that loss to find & enjoy another Love is heartbreaking. Perhaps he'll heal in time, like Mrs. Gummidge, and find the happiness he deserves.
I feel, though, that in all of this story, he's the one that lost the most, while being the one who's done no harm.
Jean, I can't think of any specific examples but it was common for the lord of the manor to marry off a servant who got pregnant with the Lord's or his son's offspring. Money would pass hands, a marriage arranged and all kept silent about the child's origins.
Mod
Yes - this happened with any wealthy family or family with property really, in this country. It might have followed on from the earlier tradition of the "droit du seigneur" from medieval Britain, where feudal lords were allowed to rape servants or any women in their service or on their land, on the woman's wedding night.
I'm sure there are examples of a wealthy man paying someone to marry a lower-class woman who is carrying his child in other Victorian novels, but can't call one to mind. I'm sure someone will though :) (All I can come up with is Michael Henchard selling his wife in a novel by Thomas Hardy, but they were both from the labouring class.)
"Dickens is starting to tie up the loose ends, it seems"
Ah don't be too sure we won't see someone again ;) As I said yesterday, we still have almost a quarter of the novel to go! (actually 13 more of his eventful chapters) and Charles Dickens will be keen to give us more meat in the final chapter of each episode (this was the first chapter of the three making up installment 17).
I missed the conversation yesterday so I'm catching up. I'm not sure what was going on with David's hanging back in the next room and listening to Emily being excoriated by the clearly unhinged Miss Dartle. As has been noted, all of the theories that have been advanced are rather weak. He hung back so that we would hear all of Miss Dartle's diatribe? I think she would have continued even if he were there. She had come to spit her venom at Emily and nothing was going to stop her. David's presence might have driven her to violence? She already attempted to hit Emily and was apparently very uncoordinated, because how do you miss a sitting target? David mentions several times how inflamed she was, and that he had never witnessed such rage. Thinking that, how could he be certain that Emily was safe being alone in the room with her? In the face of such overwhelming hatred, how could he be sure Miss Dartle wouldn't suddenly pull a knife and stab Emily? Whether it is to emphasize the passivity of his nature or not, I think it makes the scales tip more toward cowardly. Jean, I did pick up on Mr. Omer's pointed comment about NOT falling asleep while reading David's books and had to smile. I love Dickens' sly humor! One thing I do miss in this book is Dickens' philosophizing. It's there, but in lesser quantity, I feel, because of the personal narrative structure of the book. I love his biting social commentary but feel he is limited in its portrayal in this format. I miss those paragraphs where he seems to be calmly musing over events or relating a humorous anecdote, while simultaneously delivering a savage indictment of society or the human condition. There are still instances of it, but since David is the one talking, I feel it is limited. Still greatly enjoying the book, though! :)
Mod
Yes, this was odd. Rosa may be slightly unhinged, as you say.
"One thing I do miss in this book is Dickens' philosophizing. It's there, but in lesser quantity, I feel, because of the personal narrative structure of the book."
Good observation!
Because I chose our first read, I was keen to make it one without too much in the way of Charles Dickens's discursiveness! Although you like it, (as most fans do :) ) for a new reader, it can be a put-off. I think with David Copperfield we have an absorbing and complex narrative, without some of the undisciplined hectoring of the earlier novels, which are clearly a younger man's outbursts and diatribes rather the more persuasive and sardonically witty writing we have later.
What David Copperfield gives us is much humour and drama, and the social commentary is revealed through the incidents and characters, rather than included as lecturing preachy paragraphs, as some of the Victorian novelists are wont to do.
The other thing, which we miss with a first person narrator, is those wonderful atmospheric descriptions Charles Dickens is so very good at, although he does include some :)
But I really went with accessibility, and what is preferred by a modern audience (knowing that there are some melodramatic parts - though everyone here is so swept up with the events that most seem to have enjoyed them, which is lovely!) And the clincher was that Charles Dickens always said that this one was his favourite novel. So how can we dispute that? It's the one I always recommend as a first read, but I am looking forward to our next one too.
This chapter wasn´t easy to read/listen to, so thanks again Jean for the work with the summary! Mr. Peggotty is such a nice man, and I´m sad about Ham.
I don´t know if it was true for Britain, but I read that the "ius primae noctis" was a tale, and was perhaps never executed, but paid in money.
Mod
"What they done, is laid up wheer neither moth or rust doth corrupt, and wheer thieves do not break through or steal. Mas’r Davy, it’ll outlast all the treasure in the wureld.”
This comes when Dan Peggotty was talking of the young woman who had taken Emily in, and looked after her, and then she and her husband helping her to travel. "All the treasure in the world" reminded me of the "Sermon on the Mount" (Matthew 6, 19-21), about good Christian deeds laying up treasure in Heaven.
There are other parts which sound like the Bible, eg., when Martha says to Emily, “Rise up from worse than death, and come with me!” - it sounded a bit like one of Christ's parables.
And what about “Them belonging to the house would have stopped her, but they might as soon have stopped the sea”. Did that make anyone think of Christ parting the the waves?
And isn't the language of Martha’s cry “Stand away from me” is a little reminiscent of “Get thee hence, Satan” (Matthew 4, v. 10)?
There are so many Christian references and allusions in this chapter, that I think this way of Dan Peggotty's way of expressing through the language of the Bible must be significant. We know he is such a kind, caring and sympathetic character.
Mod
Well I'd like to think so, and perhaps only a minority of wicked landowners insisted on this horrific practice, in fact. But how would the peasants obtain the money to fend/pay off the nobleman? What they could pay would be a pittance, surely?
(I'm glad my summary helped with the tricky dialect. It ended up being quite a marathon!)
Well, Australia seems to be the promised land. It would be nice if Martha could go too.
I had not caught on that Emily was pregnant, there's being subtle and not wanting your readers to get it, but I guess the contemporary reader might have been more used to euphemism than we are. Could it be also why Miss Dartle is so very angry? We all think her unhinged and she already hated Emily with all her heart, but that must be to her the ultimate betrayal and maybe that's why she misses trying to hit Emily?I wonder what will be done for Martha, I also wish like Debra that she could go to Australia with the rest of them, but I think she would be a constant reminder of the past.
I don't know if the droits du seigneur were real or not, but a lot of fiction do refer to it; we also here a lot about servants being pregnant just being thrown out of the house, nobody taking responsibility... after all how dare she seduced the man of the house! (like these women had a choice just trying to keep their job or being so young when they entered service that they were just waiting prey).
Mod
Excellent thought! That hadn't occurred to me, but if Aunt Betsey could tell, then presumably others could.
Debra wrote: "Well, Australia seems to be the promised land. It would be nice if Martha could go too."Hear! Hear! …..or is that, Here! Here!
That's a wonderful plan for Martha. Debra, I do hope this comes true. She deserves a break.
The pregnancy was very subtle. I really didn't know whether I interpreted that correctly or not until Jean's summary. I thought I might be reading more between the lines than Dickens' meant me to. France-Andree, great thoughts about Miss Dartle. That all makes perfect sense in the scene as it was portrayed.
Just a couple of thoughts: Rosa Darkle has been shown by Dickens to express her rage in verbal ways through sarcasm, threats and name-calling. Dickens seems always to depict her as a woman filled with rage and a fire within that is seen in her eyes but always has her able to suppress words from escalating to action. When she strikes out at Emily, she can be viewed as finally maniacally cracking through that restraint to actually try to physically harm Emily in her uncontrolled rage; or, deliberately missing the mark demonstrative of creating intense fear in Emily and in showing her complete power over her. Many of us have seen people who might motion to strike out in anger to show their power and their potential ability to harm in order to create great fear or compliance to their wishes.
Love the reference to Biblical themes in the narratives that you mention, Jean. They also remind me of the hymn Amazing Grace "I once was lost, now I am found." The Bible is full of stories of people lost who are now found.
As mentioned in other comments, Mr. Peggotty seems to be the embodiment of a good Samaritan in his acts of providing his home to family and friend who have suffered loss. He thanks God that he could be God's instrument (as is Martha) by which Emily is found and saved. We see Emily kneeling before Mr. Peggotty telling/confessing "as if it were her prayers" to him.
Another thing noticeable is the frequent reference and emphasis to hands and the gestures and touch of the hand not only in this chapter but in all of the novel. The appearance and use of hands can reveal the social class of an individual; hands are used to hurt and soothe; hands can "rest in perfect repose but with resolution" and determination; the touch of the hand can show affection and concern or be invasive; the positioning of hands in prayer; and the trembling hand can reflect the turmoil, the will and the emotional state of the mind. Dickens makes good use of hands in all his characters!
Dickens had a charity for fallen women. He requested that the women be allowed to read fiction, not just “improving” books and to wear colorful clothes. They learned skills like sewing and then were sent to emigrate, just like Emily.
Image: SS Great Britain leaving Prince’s Pier, Liverpool, for Australia, 1852. ANMM Collection (Australian National Maritime Museum)
From 1788 to 1868 Britain transported more than 160,000 convicts from its overcrowded prisons to the Australian colonies, forming the basis of the first migration from Europe to Australia.
Between 1793 and 1850 nearly 200,000 free settlers and assisted immigrants chose to migrate to Australia to start a new life. The majority were English agricultural workers or domestic servants.
Thanks Elizabeth. Great bit of history. Now I see why Dickens choose Austrilia.
Well, that's good timing for Peggotty and Emily to arrive. LOL.Thank you for the interesting info on Australia, Elizabeth.
Mod
David is aware that the time for their mysterious appointment with Mr Micawber is the next day in Canterbury, so he begins to make preparations. He is doubtful whether his aunt should now leave Dora, as Dora is so very weak by now, but Dora herself is cheerful and bright about it, and insists that she should go. So it is that Betsey Trotwood, Mr Dick, Traddles and David all go down to Canterbury by the Dover mail coach that night. Arriving in the middle of the night, they stay at an indifferent Inn, ready for what should transpire the next morning.
Early next morning David takes his customary walk, and enjoys the familiar sights, including the Wickfields' house where he used to live:
"I looked at the old house from the corner of the street, but did not go nearer to it, lest, being observed, I might unwittingly do any harm to the design I had come to aid. The early sun was striking edgewise on its gables and lattice-windows, touching them with gold; and some beams of its old peace seemed to touch my heart."
Mr Micawber arrives promptly at half past nine, and is not wearing his formal legal clothes, but other attire. To David's surprise he has consulted Traddles for legal advice. Mr Micawber asks the company to give him a 5 minute start, and then to set off to ask for Miss Wickfield, at the office of Wickfield and Heep, in the old town house.
When they arrive they see Mr. Micawber sitting at his desk in the little office on the ground floor. He seems absorbed in his work: either writing, or pretending to write, hard. With a commanding air, he announces them, and shows them in to see Uriah Heep. Uriah Heep is taken aback at first, but quickly recovers his composure:
"A moment afterwards, he was as fawning and as humble as ever."
He attempts to exchange pleasantries tinged, as always, with insinuations, as his "cunning red eye ... at once scrutinized and evaded us." Uriah Heep makes himself known to Traddles, who remains cordial. Agnes is then ushered in by Mr. Micawber, and Uriah tells him to leave, but Mr Micawber will not. Taken off guard, Uriah Heep pales, and threatens to dismiss him, but Mr Micawber bursts out:
"If there is a scoundrel on this earth,’ said Mr. Micawber, suddenly breaking out again with the utmost vehemence, ‘with whom I have already talked too much, that scoundrel’s name is—HEEP!"
Uriah Heep says he now knows this is a "conspiracy", and assumes it has been engineered by David. David does not disabuse him of this idea, and Uriah Heep begins to rant, talking of both Mr Micawber and David as "the very scum of society", and warning Agnes not to join "that gang", or he would ruin her father. Mysteriously he singles out Aunt Betsey too:
"Miss Trotwood, you had better stop this; or I’ll stop your husband shorter than will be pleasant to you. I won’t know your story professionally, for nothing, old lady!"
Having reminded everyone that he has something on them, Uriah Heep gloats, "I have got some of you under the harrow."
Traddles returns with Mrs Heep, who is anxious to speak, but is silenced by her son, who now drops all pretence of humility:
"Though I had long known that his servility was false, I had had no ... conception of the extent of his hypocrisy, until I now saw him with his mask off ... the malice, insolence, and hatred, he revealed; the leer with which he exulted, even at this moment, in the evil he had done—... at first took even me by surprise, who had known him so long, and disliked him so heartily ... I was shocked by the mere thought of [Agnes] having lived, an hour, within sight of such a man."
Mr Micawber and Uriah Heep - Fred Barnard
Mr Micawber has been trying to speak, and now draws out a letter from his breast-pocket. It is addressed to everyone present, and he reads it out to them with great relish. It is perhaps the most discursive and verbose letter he has even written, but it does reveal the truth about Uriah Heep's "infernal business". Uriah Heep had gradually inveigled Mr Micawber into acting in his "falsification of business, and the mystification of an individual whom I will designate as Mr. W." by keeping Mr Micawber so short of money that he had to keep borrowing from Uriah Heep in order to feed and look after his family. When he had exerted this power, Mr Micawber was then taken more into "the ruffian" Uriah Heep's confidence, so that:
"I thus became immeshed in the web he had spun for my reception."
Over the course of a year's "clandestine investigation", Mr Micawber has managed to acquire detailed proof of three serious malpractices:
1. Uriah Heep falsified the books to show that Mr Wickfield had drawn out some money for "pretended business charges and deficiencies which were either already provided for, or had never really existed." Mr Wickfield was in fear of Uriah Heep over this, because he believed that he must have made a mistake when he was incapable of doing business, (through being intoxicated). Mr Micawber says that Uriah Heep "has used it, ever since, to torture and constrain him.”
2. Mrs Micawber discovered a little notebook in the ashes of the grate, in which Uriah Heep had been practising Mr Wickfield's signature. Uriah Heep had been "systematically forg[ing] the signature [to] various entries, books, and documents".
Part way through Mr Micawber's letter, the author's voice comes in with a sly ironic exposition on:
"the tyranny of words ... we like to tyrannize over them too; we are fond of having a large superfluous establishment of words to wait upon us on great occasions; we think it looks important, and sounds well."
He concludes his lengthy diatribe by saying that our "nation ... has got into many great difficulties, and will get into many greater, from maintaining too large a retinue of words."
Mr Micawber continues to read his letter, with proof that the money alleged to be absconded by Mr Wickfield was fictitious, and that the relevant documents are in Traddles's safe keeping.
3. Mr Micawber is in possession of the falsified books, with ample proof that Uriah Heep had systematically enmeshed and:
"induce[d] Mr. W. to execute a relinquishment of his share in the partnership, and even a bill of sale on the very furniture of his house ... with pretended borrowings of money at enormous interest, really coming from—HEEP—and by—HEEP—fraudulently obtained or withheld from Mr. W. himself, on pretence of such speculations or otherwise; perpetuated by a miscellaneous catalogue of unscrupulous chicaneries—gradually thickened, until the unhappy Mr. W. could see no world beyond."
After the whole letter has been read aloud, Uriah Heep rushes to his iron safe, to find it empty. Traddles has all that was within.
To David's astonishment, Betsey Trotwood seizes Uriah Heep by the collar, and demands her property back. She had never moved her investments from Mr Wickfield's charge to another man of business, as she had maintained. That had been a pretence, to save Mr Wickfield's honour. Even David did not know of this, she says:
"But, now I know this fellow’s answerable for it, and I’ll have it! Trot, come and take it away from him!"
Every so often Mrs Heep has been breaking in and begging her son to "make terms", and when Traddles mentions Maidstone Jail, she becomes completely prostrate with emotion:
"My Uriah means to be umble!’ cried his mother. ‘Don’t mind what he says, good gentlemen!"
Traddles insists, although Uriah Heep claims he does not have it, that he produce the "deed of relinquishment", which binds Mr Wickfield. At this, David views his friend in a new light:
"I cannot help avowing that this was the first occasion on which I really did justice to the clear head, and the plain, patient, practical good sense, of my old schoolfellow."
Accompanied by Mr Dick, Mrs Heep fetches the deed plus a banker’s book and some other papers that could be used against Uriah Heep.
When this is done Mr Micawber now says that he needs to go home as "the veil that has long been interposed between Mrs. Micawber and myself is now withdrawn," as she has not known anything of these secret plans to reveal Uriah Heep's crimes.
On arriving home he falls into his wife's arms, and all the children react with great excitement.
At the Micawbers' house - Phiz
Betsey Trotwood asks about the eldest boy, and leans that he sings in a pub rather than in a church as Mr Micawber had hoped. The boy himself bursts out with a morose speech, which is reminiscent of Mr Micawber's flowery protestations. Aunt Betsey suggest that they might like to emigrate, at which Mrs Micawber wishes to know whether her husband's talents would be able to develop there, and on being assured this was so, the Micawbers take to the idea with great enthusiasm. They will go out to Australia in the same ship as David's friends, the Peggotty's, and the passage will be paid, as a loan, by Betsey Trotwood.
The chapter ends on an upbeat note, with "Mrs. Micawber discours[ing] about the habits of the kangaroo, ... and Mr Micawber looking at the bullocks, as they came by, with the eye of an Australian farmer!"
Mod
I liked the way David at last appreciates the worth of his friend, and stops patronising Traddles. And I especially enjoyed the revelation by Aunt Betsey, that there was no other "man of business", so that her property will be recovered.
Thanks Elizabeth, for the reminder about the importance of hands in Charles Dickens's writing. I think he draws special attention to hands, partly because of his dramatic impulses, and the fact that when he was writing novels, he would keep breaking off to act out a minor exchange in front of a mirror.
Other noteworthy things were those rooks again, flying around Canterbury cathedral and presaging some sort of dramatic event - plus I noticed a couple of references to Hamlet in Mr Micawber's speech, but didn't have time to check them out.
Mod
It seems odd that Britain exported both convicts and those seeking new opportunities in life, to the same place! Yet here Aunt Betsey and everyone agree that the climate was good, and there would be plenty of prospects.
Charles Dickens himself was very keen on emigrating, and even strongly encouraged two of his sons to go there. Alfred emigrated in 1865 and Edward ("Plorn") in 1868. He wrote about emigration in his newspaper "Household Words". And in 1848, the journalist Samuel Sidney produced an Australian "Handbook" which recommended emigration of the working-class, because of the agricultural life in Australia. This was successful, as Elizabeth has said. (Thanks Elizabeth for the image and info!) Emigration by choice, for "a land of opportunity", was in full flow in 1849-50, at the time of David Copperfield's publication.
However, Charles Dickens's attitude to emigration is conflicted. He included characters who emigrated in several of his novels - but this was not always willingly! He also wrote about the transport of convicts to America, even though that had stopped in 1776. (After then they were sent to Australia.)
It's estimated that 140,000 criminals were transported to Australia between 1810 and 1852, although this transport of convicts was actually abolished in 1857. It was for life, and if a convict ever returned to Britain, they were hanged (by law, until 1834), even though the original offences were sometimes quite minor by modern standards. This comes into his novels too, although it would be a spoiler to say where.
One example of a minor character very involved in the procedure, is in his next novel, Bleak House: the appallingly single-minded Mrs. Jellyby. Charles Dickens is very judgemental when writing about her, because of her neglect of what he saw as her family duties. He based her on the missionary Caroline Chisholm, founder of the "Family Colonisation Loan Society" who was involved in the assisted emigration of young families to Australia for a better life.
So Charles Dickens does seem to be ambivalent about emigration, approving the concept both for his own sons, and the characters here, yet also writing a lot about the transportation of criminals.
Robin wrote: "Dickens had a charity for fallen women. He requested that the women be allowed to read fiction, not just “improving” books and to wear colorful clothes. They learned skills like sewing and then wer..."Thank you for that information Robin. It softens my attitude towards Dickens, which tends towards the negative because of the way he treated his wife.
Dickens does not mention the Australian gold rush in David Copperfield as the gold rush was in 1851, one year after publication of his book. However Dickens had been interested in Australia as early as 1835-1840's. Later he sent staff there to write articles for his "Household Words." Per Alastair McGregor in Australian Geographic in a 12/14/2012 article:
"Although he never visited, Dickens’ keen interest in Australia is reflected in the fate of a number of his characters. The early novels reflect the common impression of Australia as a place of banishment and punishment, but, as his prodigious output grew, Dickens saw a moral purpose for both convict and free settler making good in a new land. In Australia, the reformed felon or downtrodden poor could avail themselves of opportunities unimaginable in England." The land of redemption and renewal.
It was nice to have the extent of Uriah's deception revealed and know he will be taken to task. It seems kind of nice to me that Traddles is the man to do it rather than David. I had felt that Aunt Betsey's actions in pulling her account and investing for herself seemed out of character. I am glad to find it was a deception to protect Mr. Wickfield (which seems completely in character!)
You could almost miss the irony when Aunt Betsey offers to pay for the Micawbers' passage to Australia as a loan. Mr. Micawber would never accept this offer as a gift - only as a loan which he would vow to pay back but would probably give her an IOU as "payment" - Aunt Betsey of course knows this!
Mod
And now at last I can reveal ...
The conundrum about Aunt Betsey !
In an essay entitled "Is Betsey Trotwood a spinster?" the author and critic John Sutherland focuses entirely on the events as they unfold through the action and reported action.
You'll remember that we learned right at the start of the novel that Aunt Betsey had been married to a man considerably younger than herself, who was "strongly suspected of having beaten Miss Betsey", and - unusually for a female at that time - that she had managed to free herself from him by paying him off. He then went to India, and she moved to the coast and reverted to her maiden name.
Interestingly we are also told later (in chapter 47) that Aunt Betsey believed her husband had married another woman, presumably bigamously. Word then reached Aunt Betsey "within ten years" that he had died. Hence, we deduce she is a widow.
Add into the mix the fact that living in Aunt Betsey's house is another man, Mr. Dick, described by John Sutherland as an "amiable lunatic". Aunt Betsey seems to have sole change of this man. She even changed his name from "Richard Babley". Yet given the conventions of the day, he is a valuable commodity, possessing £100 a year of his own, plus about £3000 in savings. Why should a court happily "give away his adoption to an eccentric old woman who felt sorry for him and had no near connection with him"? Why did she ever even come across him in an asylum - what was she doing there? Was it possible that she was incarcerated herself, after her first disastrous marriage?
About a third of the way through the novel we become aware that this first husband is not dead after all. David refers to him as "my aunt's persecutor", a mysterious man who frightens Betsey and preys on her for money.
We learn as the novel proceeds that Betsey's former husband had gambled away all her money - and yet in a couple of interchanges it is clear that he has still has some hold over her. There seems to have been a separation, but no actual divorce, despite his remarriage. John Sutherland points out that as a bigamist he would be, "in no position to apply any blackmailing pressure at all on his abused former wife. He would be in mortal fear of criminal prosecution."
Betsey is an independent, formidable plucky woman. She is not cowed by the Murdstones, or by Uriah Heep. Why then does she fear this man? Is it because, according to the law at that time, if they had never gone through an actual divorce (which was a very unusual circumstance needing an Act of Parliament in those days) then her property should revert to her husband?
Interestingly Charles Dickens's mentor and biographer John Forster refers to Betsey Trotwood as "Mrs Trotwood" which implies that he was aware of Charles Dickens's intentions as to the storyline - and also the legal implications of what had actually happened in the novel. This is probably in one of the two later volumes of our current side read.
Also in doubt is whether Betsey Trotwood's first husband (who remains nameless throughout) ever actually went to India, and what, if anything other than a vain hope, had led her to believe that he had died.
I think we mentioned at the time that there is an apparent digression in chapter 33, about "Thomas Benjamin" a bigamist with a scam involving routinely entrapping and marrying eligible young women. He would use only part of his name so as to be able to prove in the future - when he had tired of them - that the marriage had never been legal.
If a woman like Betsey Trotwood had been taken in, in this manner, she would hardly be likely to own to it. If such a scenario pertained, then one could argue that Betsey Trotwood may never have been anything other than a spinster.
So are these mistakes on the part of the author, as to property, inheritance, marital status and widowhood, changing of names - even the duration of the assumed time in India? John Sutherland suggests that this might well be a case where Charles Dickens used his common ploy of having several "back-up" plot lines up his sleeve, which he never actually used.
And now I remember that there is one final twist, which I still cannot divulge! It won't be long though :)
Mod
Aunt Betsey is indeed a more complicated figure than she might seem on the surface. All the possibilities of where Dickens might have taken this are fascinating. I had not thought again of the tale about the scammer in the divorce proceeding, but that Aunt Betsey might have been taken in on a dishonest swindle would have been very believable. As regards Mr. Dick, I did think it strange that he had an income. I had initially assumed that he was without resources and that his family had been happy to shift the burden to Betsey. It had not occurred to me that she would have consulted a court and have an official control over him. You are so right that any family who would have discarded him into an asylum would never have surrendered his money to another guardian.
You have set me thinking!
It seems a little cruel to the Peggottys to send the Micawbers with them. Maybe I don’t think Mr. Micawber can stop his borrowing and knowing another family means that’s where he’ll start next time. Hoping I am wrong.Aunt Betsey paying for the Micawbers emigrating because Elizabeth is right, the money is really a gift by other words, but since it is payed with money recovered, I see it as a thank you.
I wonder if that’s the end of the Heeps? I found it a little anticlimactic... maybe the letter made the action tamer? I know it’s more important for the characters to recover what they can (money and reputation), I guess the consequences are not over for Uriah and his mother and we will hear from them again.
I was surprised that Mr Micawber was smart enough to pull this off. Thrilled that he did it and that Traddles was involved. Loved the ruler that Micawber used. I can see Micawber making it as a farmer in Austrilia. Or as a tavern owner/barkeeper.
I also wonder if this is the end of the Heeps.
I never understood how Mr. Dick came to be with Aunt Betsey and with money. Is Mr. Dick related to Betsey's husband?
I can see Micawber doing well in Australia. He's got pluck and in a new land with lots of opportunity, pluck goes a long, long way. Despite his financial finanglings, I like him and wish him & his family well. I thought Mr. Dick came to Aunt Betsey through his brother, mentioned at some earlier point (or am I misremembering?). I assumed that Aunt Betsey was a close friend, maybe a distant relative, of the family and inherited Mr. Dick when the brother died.
Jean, that essay does open up a lot of avenues that Aunt Betsey may have travelled along. Very interesting speculations. That would put Aunt Betsey in the same boat (sort of) as Emily. Both duped by a persuasive man.
I had mentioned that divorce loophole at the time we read it. I couldn't believe that it was this easy to dupe a woman out of her reputation and future......and all while she believed in the system and her "marriage".
Jean, I did enjoy Mr. Micawber's loquacity and Dickens' ironic observations in the middle! :) I know a lot of people who object to Dickens' wordiness, but I'm not one of them. I love that he encases his meaning in layers of verbosity that have to be peeled away to get to the kernel of truth in the middle. I'm a firm believer in the rights of vocabulary--if a word has an official place in the dictionary and you are using it correctly, then you should be allowed to use it! I don't care how many syllables it has or how archaic it is, you are free to use it--especially if it is the word that popped first into your head! (My husband and I argue about this a lot)! :)France-Andree, that was the first thought that popped into my head, too! Haven't the Peggottys been through enough? Why do you want to punish poor Mr. Peggotty by gifting him the responsibility for the Micawbers? The fact that Mr. Micawber stood up for justice and freed the Wickfields from Uriah Heep's control does not mean that he has become an entirely new person! As France-Andree pointed out, he will probably be borrowing money or persuading Mr. Peggotty to sign a note for him before they've even reached Australia, and like Traddles, Mr. Peggotty is so nice and kind that he'll probably do it.
I was just thinking about the deal that Steerforth proposed for Emily. If she had married Littimer, she would have been conveniently close for their affair to continue (as long as her looks and charm drew him). He must have been taken with her indeed, to have chosen her over his relationship with his mother, and to have kept her for so long. Once she gave birth to his child, he might have wanted to continue seeing her. Any issue resulting from their relationship could be foisted onto her husband. This could continue even after Steerforth marries a bride suitable for his station. Pretty sweet deal for him, not so much for everyone else!
Well, that was a very satisfying chapter to read! I love all the information and insights too! Very informative and helpful. I’m wondering if Dickens deliberately highlights the true gentlemen in the novel by revealing whether they are truly men of honor. Heep attempts to make himself a gentleman by nefarious deeds but is discovered. Consequently, Heep will be denied due to his criminal dealings. So, is this meant to be a moral lesson? There are true gentleman here and we can identify them not by their manners and dress but by their actions. Also, we see there are ways a man can elevate himself but that is by honest labor and perseverance which Traddles has achieved and which I hope Mr Macawber will discover in Australia.
France-Andrée wrote: "Aunt Betsey paying for the Micawbers emigrating because Elizabeth is right, the money is really a gift by other words, but since it is payed with money recovered, I see it as a thank you."Yes, the money she gives is a "thank you gift," or reward, for Mr. Micawber which Aunt Betsey disguises as a loan so he will accept it. Mr. Micawber still owes Tommy Traddles for his co-signing on his rent.
Hopefully, Aunt Betsey will give Micawber funds to get him started and that "something will turn up" quickly in Australia so he doesn't borrow from Mr. Peggotty. Mr. Peggotty has returned money to Mrs. Steerforth, so I'm not sure if he would have much to "lend" to Micawber.
I felt I had to investigate and refresh our knowledge of Aunt Betsey and Mr. Dick. "Mr. Dick is a sort of distant connexion of mine--it doesn't matter how; I needn't enter into that. If it hadn't been for me, his own brother would have shut him up for life. That's all."
"Because his brother was a little eccentric--though he is not half so eccentric as a good many people--he didn't like to have him visible about his house, and sent him away to some private asylum-place: though he had been left to his particular care by their deceased father, who thought him almost a natural.
So I stepped in and made him an offer. I said, "Your brother's sane--a great deal more sane than you are, or ever will be, it is to be hoped. Let him have his little income and come and live with me. I am not afraid of him, I am not proud, I am ready to take care of him, and shall not ill-treat him as some people (besides the asylum-folks) have done. After a good deal of squabbling, I got him..."
So, she had a connection of some sort to the family, the father had left funds particularly for Dick's care, she squabbled with the brother and got custody. I think she did it by sheer force of character and never had to pursue it in court. She calls it his "little income" so perhaps the money was not sufficient to matter so much and was being given to the asylum anyway, the brother did not want the responsibility, and Aunt Betsey can be a force when she wants to be. Can't help remembering how she handled Miss Murdstone.
Sorry to go back so far in the story, but the question of how Aunt Betsey had come to have Mr. Dick was bothering me.
Sara: Thanks for the recap of Aunt Betsey and Mr Dick. It seems ages ago that we read that, doesn’t it?
Thankfully Dickens titles the chapters in a way that helps you to go back and find information.
I am enjoying this read so much more than I would on my own thanks to everyone's comments and Jean's excellent summaries.I also think we could form an Aunt Betsey Fan Club-she is such a strong and wise character.
I would be in, Rosemarie. I feel the same about this read.
I agree, Rosemarie. Aunt Betsey is wonderful, and adds so much to everyone's lives. I also feel that David added lots to her life. She's so involved and helpful with David's circle of friends. While the early scenes of her chasing donkeys away were amusing, she's capable of so much more. Aunt Betsey has good intuition, grasps what's important about a situation quickly, and enjoys being needed and loved.
I also agree - the comments and observations from other readers in the group have definitely provided me a much more enjoyable experience than if I had tried to read it on my own. Jean especially has contributed to our understanding of the book in her excellent chapter summaries and the additional "a little more" comments and insights into the characters, the time period, and of Dickens himself. Thanks to all!
I think it was only Dickens' youngest son, called by the strange name of Plorn, who was really a success in Australia (or at all, a great disappointment to Dickens, who generally preferred his daughters.) Of course, as with emigrating to America, Australia was considered free for the taking and there was little concern for the indigenous people, except for missionaries who wanted to convert them.
Dickensians!
Books mentioned in this topic
10 Novels and Their Authors (other topics)David Copperfield (other topics)
Little Dorrit (other topics)
Little Dorrit (other topics)
Little Dorrit (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
J. M. Wayfarer (other topics)Charles Dickens (other topics)
Charles Dickens (other topics)
Charles Dickens (other topics)
Robert Langton (other topics)
More...
This is what I said in comment 89! (and from the same source). It made me attempt to research further, and:
a) actually find the original illustration before Phiz changed it (which is why I went with the Fred Barnard one instead) and also
b) look for the original draft before his August rewrite.
Sadly I could do neither despite looking through the letters he wrote at the time, and reading several other articles. So I finally decided to move on, but if anyone does find out more, please do share it! There may be something hidden in a bio ...
Great observations Elizabeth, and thanks for posting the second illustration. Thanks everyone for sharing your insights and I'll get the next chapter up as as soon as I finish the précis :)