I'm confused by the parallelism as well, but what I do know is that the parallelism is done on purpose and for some effect. In general, the townspeople could be labeled "bad" and the circus folks "good". The traits of the circus people are lots of imagination, true love, sense of humor, and affinity to art and passion. The traits of the town people are lack of imagination, lack of true love, lack of humor, and a irrational reliance on rationalism or facts.
I first read Hard Times during my first year at university in 1981. Along with Great Expectations it was one of my favorite Dickens' novel. Now 20 years later I have picked it up again and I must admit that its generally darker overtones are a bit of a slog through. I think that your question regarding the circus people is of interest. The sociology of England at that time was an interest in the "natural state of man" or "natural man" which was a concern with just how close we are to reverting to savagery or a "wild state". You must remember that this was still a period of colonial powers and the opening of the American west. England was eager for stories of encounters and adventures with strange wild beasts and savage races in strange and wonderous lands. Religious institutions also were hell-bent on civilizing these so-called wild peoples too. Clergy and philosophers were still discussing the potentiallity of the souls of these peoples and how close to nature they were and could the civilized man succumb to the same lifestyle if exposed for any length of time. Out of this era too we have Edgar Rice Burroughs' "Tarzan of the Apes": the story of a blue-blooded baby of aristocratic parents who is raised by gorrillas in Darkest Africa. Somehow he retains by virtue of his bloodline such admirable qualities as justice, integrity, tolerance, civility, honour and he is "saved" and returned to "civilization" to which he adjusts relatively easily. Tarzan did not become wild from his upbringing because his of his English uppercrust background and what was "bred in the bone" -his aristocratic heritage that included a long line of relatives with a sound education in the facts. This prevented him by birthright alone from returning to a natural state-ie savage. The circus folk appear to represent the lowest level (according to Gradgrind and Mchokumchild) of civilized man and they are close to there natural state as children. Because they waste their lives pursuing frivolous athletic activities and animal tricks solely for the purpose of entertaining whoever wishes to watch-something that to Gradgrind produces no viable product - they need to be tamed. Sissy is one of their children-close to nature-very close to a natural state, almost wild, and therefore a threat to Gradgrind's children for her ability to wonder and a challenge for Gradgrind to "civilize".-in this case crush her child within. The circus people represent a type of folksy innocence-skilled and knowledgeable in their craft, but lacking formal education-they are innocence and Sissy, thrust into the den of Coketown, is essentially childhood innocence lost. The townsfolk are considered fodder for the mills and factories only-folk who want their tea and have aspirations to dine with a gold spoon-meaning that they are always in want and need and can never be satisfied with their lot-again somewhat childlike but more effusive and full of angst like teenagers. They are considered somewhat civilized but lacking in appreciation for the privelage of toiling away in the mills and factories-ungrateful and prone to drink, and participating in idleness such as enjoying the circus.
I am currently reading hard times and i am finding it extremely hard to follow, i am a avid reader of charles dickins but i can not seem to follow the plot, i find it extremely boring.
I have recently done an essay on Charles Dickens hard times .It is still relevant to todays society but what i can't understand is the underlying meaning of the circus people and the ordinary town's peolple
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote