Black Flag, just what do you have against Tess Durbyfield? Why are you trying to make her look bad. First with your original thread and now with this ridiculous b/s about her not really being raped?!!!!
I think you got a chip on your shoulder.
Black Flag, just what do you have against Tess Durbyfield? Why are you trying to make her look bad. First with your original thread and now with this ridiculous b/s about her not really being raped?!!!!
I think you got a chip on your shoulder.
oh, how much purer is love imagined than love realised!
Oh no!!! You've caught me at it! You've unraveled my sinister plan of defaming Tess D'Urberville (Durbyfield)! I've hated that vile girl for years and I've dreamed night and day of exposing her for the slut she is---Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!. I would have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for these meddling kids!Originally posted by Keats
Black Flag, just what do you have against Tess Durbyfield? Why are you trying to make her look bad. First with your original thread and now with this ridiculous b/s about her not really being raped?!!!!
I think you got a chip on your shoulder.
Good God, man. Get a life.
"Friends stab you in the front" --Oscar Wilde
See you just called her a slut. And I stil think you need to relook at your opinion of Tess Durbyfield.
oh, how much purer is love imagined than love realised!
Keats, the wonderful wonderful thing about literature is that you don't have to like or dislike ANY character/plot/theme/ect... because your reaction is based on your opinion. Just like in real life, you don't have to like everyone who's nice. Some nice people irk me for no particular reason, so I don't like them. I guess Tess just irks Black Flag. Let it go. And the type of critisism that Black Flag applied (looking at beliefs about rape from Hardy's time) is a very valid form of crit. Don't be afraid to think badly about a character, because in the end, they're not real people.
...Also baby duck hat would be good for parties.
get a grip keats. i like black flag's question about 'the rape'. okay, ive not yet read the whole book. last night i watched the film (justine waddell) and read hefty chunks from the book which i was interested in. im still hacking my way through another hardy but tess is next on my list. i read the first 5 chapters last summer and couldnt get into it. im hoping, now i know a little more about the story, i will be more persistent with it next time.
so, although my experience is mostly film-based (thus, wrong(in all probability)) i feel i have something to add to the discussion. angel asked tess after her confession if alec was 100% to blame and she replied in the negative. this points away from rape. another clue was found in the notes of the recent penguin publication (the one im reading from). hardy changed the 'druggist's bottle' for a coat or something for tess to sit on. the druggists bottle screams rape. hardy changed this (i hope i got this the right way around) in order to cast a cloud over what really happened. thus, it is up to the individual reader to decide if she was raped or not. you choose. everyone reads the story differently. thats the beauty of books.
for me, she was raped. afterwards she cries with her mother about not being told the dangers of men. she was just an ignorant girl when she left home for the first time.
This book is the best Hardy wrote in my opinion.
the boring answer is >alec< but i like him. for me, >angel< is the baddy in tess of the d'urbervilles. a number of reasons:
Alec's love for tess is unconditional
Angel's love is on condition that she is pure
Angel's double standard about himself not being pure
Angel ran away from his problem
Alec was told to leave and honoured this request until Tess came back serendipitously.
tommy.
yes, angel is a self-righteous bastard. I hated his puritanical guts.
"Friends stab you in the front" --Oscar Wilde
Thomas Hardy made it very clear that Tess was asleep on the ground at the point of the rape, and it was chance that Alec happened to have found her, he called out her name, he got no reply, and took up the chance, Tess was tired and did not have much power to fight back at this point, also when the book was first published Hardy made it even more clear that it WAS rape, but because of the very high bad comments about the rape and the detail, he was made to cut out many parts.Originally Posted by Black Flag
Just thought I would make that point clear, I have done about this book for about 10 weeks now, it drives me crazy, is is a rather good story plot, however sometimes Hardy's use of language and words annoys me.
Tess was not a slut, but more of a weak character, because she never thought back, untill the end when it was too late when she started to hit Alec, but come on he was stalking her! & she made it very clear that she wanted him to go away.
However I much say I like Alec a lot more than I do Angel, because it should have been Angel looking after Tess, not leaving her to go to Brazil or trying to take another woman with him, however Alec is there for Tess in her times of need, however Hardy makes it clear that Tess does not want him around, and only went to work for him because of her family.
Yes I am quite finished giving off unneed bits of information.
Just want to make it clear that Hardy did actually intend for Tess to be raped.
In my opinion Hardy makes it clear throughout the novel that she was raped and alludes to it in many passages. Hardy is implying her purity is intact and is poking holes at society's scourge of rape. Joan Durbyfield even implies it by saying something like; why didn't you take advantage of this and marry him.
Enjoyed being raped? Common "conception" (ironic....) Her sentiments about Alec were clear form her words and deeds. She was a fly caught in a spider's web and that spider went way beyond Alec - indeed it was nearly the whole of "refined" British society of that time. That WAS Hardy's point!
I also think she was raped, but Black Flag has a point. Who is to say that Hardy didn't intend Alec to seduce Tess, having (consential) sex with her, and having got her pregnant, then cast her off and just saw it as a bit of fun where she saw as serious?
A lot of girls went that way, making out with the son of the house and then having their illusions spoilt and ending up as a single mother... It is a common theme in Naturalism and that one would actually be much more sorrowful than the rape in itself.
Although... Putting the scene in a dark and misty wood, with such desperate words... Having Alec stoop while she is sleeping... It was probably already taking place before she was really awake and knew what was happening. (sorry for the image, but I'm a woman as well, so don't see me as a pervert...)
However, she does reproach her mother for not warning her. If Alec wanted to rape her, he could have done his thing, because he was stronger. (which woman can really resist and succeed in preventing it?) Whereas, if he made advances and promises without wanting to make them come true (marriage...), then Tess could have done with some healthy advice from her mother as to the nature of advances from a rich man to a poor woman, but the mother seems to have illusions too...
It will never solved, this enigma. Maybe Hardy wrote something in his letters or memoirs about it. Does anybody know?
One has to laugh before being happy, because otherwise one risks to die before having laughed.
"Je crains [...] que l'âme ne se vide à ces passe-temps vains, et que le fin du fin ne soit la fin des fins." (Edmond Rostand, Cyrano de Bergerac, Acte III, Scène VII)
Personally, it seems to me that Tess's encounter with Alec wasn't exactly rape. I accept that he took advantage of her innocence (and ignorance), but she didn't leave Trantridge for a couple of weeks after the night in The Chase. Why stay?
Also, I have to say that I prefer Alec to Angel, and believe that Alec actually loves Tess, unlike Angel, who at first only appears to be aware of her physical features. After all, Alec never abandons Tess. When he learns of his dead child, he offers to marry her, whether or not he would ever have gone through with it. Additionally, Angel's double standards are terrible. He confesses to having committed the same 'sin' as Tess, but, because she is a woman and bore a child as a result, is unable to forgive her as she forgives him. Which seems like the better man, fundamentally?
Does anyone agree?
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Yes, I do. I prefer Alex, although there's no doubt that he took advantage, but Hardy isn't explicit that it's rape. Angel is a berk, and his behaviour leaves Tess in that vulnerable position, which leads to the inevitable conclusion. Granted that Alex plays a major part in her downfall, but he knows himself. Doesn't he say something along the lines of that he's bad, but he does love her, and won't let her down, quite near the start of the story? Angel purports to be free-thinking, loving and supportive, but look how he behaves. He's a hypocrite.
Although, I think Angel was skocked himself about his 'free' thinking.
He thought long and hard about leaving Tess, and it was never his intention to abandon her entirely. She was allowed to ask for upkeep and demand he care for her. Yet she never dared to go to her father-in-law... No doubt because of her own pride...
Anyway, Angel thought long and hard about what he had to do and decided in the end that he would go to Brazil to look for a plot of land (which of course went wrong), and to try and establish a farm. He did that, probably, because: Angel could leave his wife and think about what had to be done, without bringing Tess into any danger (yellow fever, hunger... I think not even one half of colonists made it through their first year! Not only in America with harsh winters, but I can imagine in countries like Brazil, strange diseases also plaid a part, like in countries like Australia) and it allowed him time to think. He in the end didn't send for Tess because of his disease. He came back after it, but then of course, everything had gone wrong for Tess. When he came back, he had made up his mind to go back to Tess...
The whole of that case looks bad, but I think Angel himself is a sad case. He propagates free thinking, but is not as free as he thinks he is, because of society and its values no doubt. He's shocked by that himself I think. And probably also shocked because Tess forgives him and he feels he should forgive her, but can't. After she told him, he probably realises why she didn't want to consent to a marriage with him, because she knew what stigma was attached, yet he insisted and then fails to be able to think as freely as he should and made out to do, which he knows is unfair but is stronger than himself. When he then finally was able to conquer that within himself, he is too late and realises he really denied his responsibility in Tess's lot. When Tess kills Alec, she really does what he deserves, but does that because Angel actually said that Alex stood between them... She could have left him like that, but she killed him because he stood in the way of Angel. He of course didn't tell her that he had come to terms with himself and so she herself signs her deathwarrant. In essence, Tess sacrifices herself for the peace of mind of Angel, failing to realise that it is he himself who needs to get peace of mind, and that the lack of it is not down to her, but down to himself. In killing Alec and being hanged for it Tess hopes to relieve Angel of his guilt, but probably failed to do so...
The last words of the novel really say a lot: 'Justice' was done.
Justice according to the law, but not taking into consideration what Alec did to be killed. But also, I think, justice in the way of relieving Angel of his wife 'he didn't love' (couldn't love because she wasn't a virgin, which wasn't true in the end, but that is not what Tess knew when she killed Alec), thus allowing him to have another one (Tess's sister). Sad really, because it wasn't necessary anymore for Alec to go and for Tess to disappear, because Angel had come to retrieve Tess. So the sacrifice is no longer necessary to have the world start anew.
Does this make sense?
One has to laugh before being happy, because otherwise one risks to die before having laughed.
"Je crains [...] que l'âme ne se vide à ces passe-temps vains, et que le fin du fin ne soit la fin des fins." (Edmond Rostand, Cyrano de Bergerac, Acte III, Scène VII)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote