Jude the Obscure: Week 4 - Part Fourth

[Jan]

Christopher wrote: "This simmering sexuality between Jude and Susanna is quite fascinating to me. We know that Jude has been 'hot' for Sue, but what about her?"
Yes, this attitude of Sue's is quite perplexing. When she ran away to be with Jude it wasn't so surprising that she didn't jump straight into bed with him...after all, she was in a very emotional state at that time, having survived a leap from the balcony, she explains her actions to Phillotson, and is then rather touched by his kindness at allowing her to extricate herself from the bonds of marriage. This kindness is confusing to her and she would have been more ready for love-making with Jude if she had suffered cruelty.
"...perhaps, because it is by his generosity that I am now free, I would not be other than a little rigid. If there had been a rope-ladder, and he had run after us with pistols, it would have seemed different, and I may have acted otherwise. But don't press me and criticise me, Jude! Assume that I haven't the courage of my opinions. I know I am a poor miserable creature. My nature is not so passionate as yours!"

The whole book is about the conflict between the head and the heart. Somehow Sue feels she could let her heart run away with her if Phillotson had been cruel (notice the almost childishly romantic notion of rope-ladders and pistols). Then her head is telling her conflicting things as well...on the one hand that she is unconventional and doesn't believe in restrictions, on the other that this goes against everything she believes is acceptable...that is hurting a kind person is not the sort of thing she should do. She is in inner turmoil. She has been let out of her trap, but is she ready for the responsibilities and consequences of freedom?

[MadgeUK]

Insightful post Jan especially that Sue had been 'let out of her trap', which brings us back to Chris's mention of Jude and the release of the rabbit. Now another trap is looming, that of marriage...

[MadgeUK]

Chris wrote: And, of course, this must bring us right back to Hardy's marriage to his wife, Emma Gifford Hardy. It is well known that by this time, both Hardy and his wife were deeply unhappy with their marriage.

I think it is clear that Hardy was writing out his pain in several of his novels Chris:( Unless you chose to 'live in sin' and be ostracised, the only solution was to live apart which is what Hardy increasingly did in his escapes to his London house and abroad. Later, in Dorset, they decided to sleep in separate bedrooms and lived apart from 1898 onwards. He had several close but not adulterous friendships with other women, and he lived with and eventually married his 35 year old secretary Florence Dugdale when he was 74 - he had chosen not to divorce Emma, even though she had become increasingly eccentric. The latter part of their marriage and the effect of her death upon Hardy was very sad:(.

Hardy was also well known for studying marital law, as extracts in this online book show:-

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=YO...

It says, amongst other things, that 'In an early work such as Desperate Remedies, for example, we find characters whose goals and wishes are facilitated by the operation of the law, while in other later works like The Woodlanders, Tess of the D'Urbevilles and Jude the Obscure the law is increasingly seen as an invasive, prescriptive and unwelcome presence that is resisted by Hardy's characters......The legal presence in Hardy's life and fiction lie deep within the themes and plots of his novels and stories and underscores his purpose as a writer.' Hardy was a Magistrate and he also attended courts, especially divorce courts, to gather facts and inspiration for his novels, so his experience of people's marital and other problems was based on real life events.

[Deborah, Moderator]

Jan wrote: "Christopher wrote: "This simmering sexuality between Jude and Susanna is quite fascinating to me. We know that Jude has been 'hot' for Sue, but what about her?"
Yes, this attitude of Sue's is quit..."

Nice post Jan. I think you've hit the nail on the head. Sue is caught between what she feels life should be and the rules of society. Her role in the world is being changed and she's adapting to that, but in her head these choices are fighting with what she's always been told it should be.

[Deborah, Moderator]

Madge - Your addition re the legal presence was new to me. Thanks for that. It struck me as interesting that in the cafe we've been discussing basically this same issue of legal presence in lives and what is right. Hardy must have gotten his point across to us ;-)

[MadgeUK]

The end of Part Fourth is far from tragic and more comic. The scenes when Phillotson loses his job are hilarious:

'It has been stated that Shaston was the anchorage of a curious and interesting group of itinerants, who frequented the numerous fairs and markets held up and down Wessex during the summer and autumn months. Although Phillotson had never spoken to one of these gentlemen they now nobly led the forlorn hope in his defence. The body included two cheap Jacks, a shooting-gallery proprietor and the ladies who loaded the guns, a pair of boxing-masters, a steam-roundabout manager, two travelling broom-makers, who called themselves widows, a gingerbread-stall keeper, a swing-boat owner, and a "test-your-strength" man. This generous phalanx of supporters, and a few others of independent judgment, whose own domestic experiences had been not without vicissitude, came up and warmly shook hands with Phillotson; after which they expressed their thoughts so strongly to the meeting that that issue was joined, the result being a general scuffle, wherein a black board was split, three panes of the school windows were broken, an inkbottle was spilled over a town-councillor's shirt front, a churchwarden was dealt such a topper with the map of Palestine that his head went right through Samaria, and many black eyes and bleeding noses were given, one of which, to everybody's horror, was the venerable incumbent's, owing to the zeal of an emancipated chimney-sweep, who took the side of Phillotson's party. issue was joined, the result being a general scuffle, wherein a black board was split, three panes of the school windows were broken, an inkbottle was spilled over a town-councillor's shirt front, a churchwarden was dealt such a topper with the map of Palestine that his head went right through Samaria, and many black eyes and bleeding noses were given, one of which, to everybody's horror, was the venerable incumbent's, owing to the zeal of an emancipated chimney-sweep, who took the side of Phillotson's party.' !!!

I wonder why Hardy felt the need to insert this piece if frivolity, this Greek chorus?, at the end of what had been a very serious part of the story? Was it because he felt the novel was getting too 'heavy' or is he setting us up for something else? I feel Hardy is doing something Aristotlean:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_does_t...

(BTW 'emancipated chimney sweep' was probably a reference to the law of 1840 which made it illegal for anyone under the age of 21 to sweep chimneys. Prior to that children as young as 8 had been used.)

[Captain Sir Roddy, R.N. (Ret.), Founder]

Excellent comment, Madge! I never really noticed the relationship of this scene to the chorus of Greek theater, but you are absolutely correct. I would guess that Hardy uses the scene of Phillotson's dismissal as further illustration of the society that feels itself compelled to 'punish' people who are out-of-step with what is considered proper conduct. Clearly, in this novel, I would maintain that Phillotson is one such enlightened individual whose views of marriage, even his own, would have been considered anathema to many in Victorian Britain.

You know this particular scene brings to mind something that I've been thinking about for a while. I have come to view Thomas Hardy as somewhat of a closet social radical. I really think that he used his fiction (and his poetry too) to kind of grab society by the scruff of the neck and give it a good shake. Whether it was the rights of women (much of his fiction), the marriage laws ("The Woodlanders" and "Jude the Obscure"), sexuality ("The Return of the Native" and "Tess"), property ownership ("Far from the Madding Crowd"), etc.--Hardy seems to have used his fiction as a 'bully pulpit. Very much reminds me of how Charles Dickens used his fiction to help effect change. Fascinating notion, and one that I want to continue to think about.

[MadgeUK]

Yes, he certainly had some radical ideas about women and marriage. I keep thinking how very 'modern' Jude is.

I have posted a nice little Youtube series on his life in the Background thread, which includes some good stuff on his marriage and photos to drool over:).

[Jan]

Chris, I absolutely agree with your view of Hardy as a social radical. While he claims that his story is a moral one, dealing with the conflict between flesh and spirit, almost every chapter seems full of questioning...questioning the rules and laws of marriage and their effect on people's lives. I don't think he is deceitful, because Jude the Obscure must surely be one of the most honest works of fiction ever written, exposing the inner turmoil of characters who fall in love, bringing into the open the unspoken secrets of Victorian society, exposing the troubles that were usually kept behind closed doors.
Yet what are we to make of this claim in the preface to the 1895 edition?
" ...For a novel addressed by a man to men and women of full age; which attempts to deal unaffectedly with the fret and fever, derision and disaster, that may press in the wake of the strongest passion known to humanity; to tell, without a mincing of words, of a deadly war waged with old Apostolic desperation between flesh and spirit; and to point the tragedy of unfulfilled aims, I am not aware that there is anything in the handling to which exception can be taken.
Like former productions of this pen, Jude the Obscure is simply an endeavour to give shape and coherence to a series of seemings, or personal impressions, the question of their consistency or their discordance, of their permanence or their transitoriness, being regarded as not of the first moment."

While he certainly achieves the above stated aims, he also includes in the novel many passages which could be seen as questioning the laws relating to marriage, and questioning the attitudes of Victorian society. Yet he claims he is not aware of anything in the handling to which exception could be taken.
Has he forgotten his use of irony in such passages as
" And so, standing before the aforesaid officiator, the two swore that every other time of their lives till death took them, they would assuredly believe, feel, and desire exactly as they had believed, felt, and desired during the preceding few weeks. What was remarkable as the undertaking itself was the fact that nobody seemed at all surprised at what they swore."
These little authorial comments occur throughout the text, he must have intended them to set the reader thinking...yet Hardy seems to be surprised by the vehemence of protest against the book. The preface to the 1912 edition sheds further light on his attitude to marriage. " ...My opinion at the time, if I remember rightly, was what it is now, that a marriage should be dissolvable as soon as it becomes a cruelty to either of the parties- being then essentially and morally no marriage- and it seemed a good foundation for the fable of a tragedy, told for its own sake as a presentation of particulars containing a good deal that was universal, and not without hope that certain cathartic, Aristotelian qualities might be found therein."
Hardy scratched the facade of the Victorian household, and exposed the turmoil that dwelt within. He was not claiming that everyone was unhappy, or that no-one should get married, but he was speaking about the unspeakable(sexual relationships), and he was questioning attitudes and values. Very radical, as I see it.

[MadgeUK]

Absolutely wonderful post and spot on Jan! I think that Hardy thought that he had got over some of the problems with his public because Tess later became such a success, so he was surprised when Jude ran into the same 'Mrs Grundy' difficulties. He thought his public had 'moved on' but the questions he raises in Jude about premarital sex, living together outside of marriage and so on, are still controversial in some places today so I think we could say he was a bit ahead of his time! Radical indeed.

[Captain Sir Roddy, R.N. (Ret.), Founder]

Great points, Ladies! As we keep reading the novel, I'd like to keep this topic at the fore and discuss it as appropriate.

Madge, thanks for the videos too. This is great stuff!

[Lily]

a churchwarden was dealt such a topper with the map of Palestine that his head went right through Samaria

Of course, Samaria, with all its double meanings in New Testament writings -- hated outcasts, yet the woman at the well, the Good Samaritan, bringing the message to the wider world, ...

Hardy, like so many, seems naive and shrewd at the same time. I thoroughly enjoyed Madge's comparison with the Greek chorus -- I wonder whether that was conscious technique or from the intuitive gut as Hardy wrote. We know a bit of how Hardy received his architectural training, which we see reflected again and again in his writing. Has anyone here read biographies that reveal how, other than writing again and again, he developed his writing skills? (I see in these videos reference to interest in Keats and Shelley; I don't know their work well enough to know if elements of their styles are used by Hardy.)

The photos, both in the videos Madge just posted and in the recently released Jane Eyre, show lands of such great beauty.

(NJ is exceptionally beautiful this weekend -- forsythia, tulip trees, cherries, and pears are all in full bloom in some areas -- the forsythia are late this year, so the warm weather of the past few days has brought an unusual confluence of peak bloom. So, from Princeton and down along the Delaware, the yellows, whites, and pinks were ethereal, even under a gloomy sky. Hopefully, it is early enough that the heavy rains now will not wash too much away overnight, although I suspect at least the forsythia will suffer.)

[MadgeUK]

Our tree blossoms are in full fig too Lily - such cheer! Unfortunately my neighbours have cut down the 50 year Forsythia which once brightened and windproofed my front door!:( I have planted another one in my back garden.

Lily wrote: I wonder whether that was conscious technique or from the intuitive gut as Hardy wrote.

Hardy's mother was a prolific reader 'who had him reading Dryden and Johnson before he was ten'. As he was a sickly child he read a great deal when very young. He went to a good grammar school in Dorchester where he studied Latin and French and when he was 16 he met Henry Moule, son of the vicar of Fordington, who taught him Greek and they studied the Greek dramatists together. He was also mentored by the Dorset poet, the Rev William Barnes. He wrote his first published article How I Built myself a House when he was 25 and wrote an unpublished novel The Poor Man and a Lady the following year. Desperate Remedies was published when he was 31 and Under the Greenwood Tree a year later. When A Pair of Blue Eyes was published in 1873 he decided to give up architecture to become a full time writer, aged 33.

[Lily]

Thanks for the insights, Madge.

[Deborah, Moderator]

Christopher wrote: "Excellent comment, Madge! I never really noticed the relationship of this scene to the chorus of Greek theater, but you are absolutely correct. I would guess that Hardy uses the scene of Phillots..."

I agree Chris. I've always viewed him as a radical trying to show society it's ills and change the world. It's one of the reasons why I enjoy reading him so much.