[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Socialconnections are paramount, and the novel itself tends to focus on the wider socialimplications of individual relationships rather than on the individuals themselves. Tenderest Caresses 113Miss Swartz herself only visits Amelia on her return to the more fashionable partof London:Swartz would have liked her always if she could have seen her.One must do her thatjustice.But, que voulez-vous? in this vast town one has not the time to go and seek one sfriends; if they drop out of the rank they disappear, and we march on without them.Whois ever missed in Vanity Fair? (781)Indeed, the enthusiastic display of passion, in its susceptibility to theatrical posturing,is presented as potentially suspect throughout the novel, and the most moral figure,Dobbin, is significantly restrained in his expression.The less sympathetic Georgeis driven by an undisciplined indulgence rather than by genuine passion; similarly,Rebecca s passions are for good society, and later for whisky and gambling, ratherthan for any particular individual.Amelia appears initially to be driven by passion, ifnot for her friend, for her husband, and later her child; however, her self-indulgenceis remarked on by the narrator as well as by other characters, and Dobbin commentsin the final pages of the novel that she is incapable of an elevated response to genuinefeeling.Paradoxically, it is this containment of a real passion that marks Dobbin asan authentic gentleman , according to the narrator.In this ambiguity Thackerayembodies the dilemma identified by Stedman as pertaining to all expression ofemotion in Victorian literature:In the 19th century, individualisation had advanced significantly and the cult of privacy albeit a highly organised privacy had reached new heights.Being too open-heartedand willing to express one s emotions without any restraint whatsoever was not in keepingwith this cult.But since the absence of all emotional expression not only implied theunhealthy absence of all feeling, but also rendered it impossible to judge what kind of classan individual belonged to, and what type of character he or she represented, the Victoriansfound themselves confronted with an almost unsolvable dilemma.This dilemma is thereason why authors of texts on the emotions oscillate between the call for total emotionalcontrol and the sometimes only grudgingly admitted individual and social necessity ofemotional expression.(Stedman, 55)This analysis, while it fails to account for the prevailing fashion for the highlyemotional cult of romantic friendship, is none the less useful in the light it castson Thackeray s individual position as his narrator vacillates between admirationfor Dobbin s self-control, and criticism of the ill-bestowed passion it is designed toconceal.Ambivalent about both marriage and female friendship, the narrator bases Dobbin smoral status largely on his supportive but non-romantic, adult friendship for GeorgeOsborne.Famously condemning the novelistic practice of ending with a marriage,the narrator of Vanity Fair in fact leads up with a high degree of inconsistency tothe final marriage of Dobbin and Amelia in the closing pages.The satire of femalefriendship and rivalry Rebecca openly flirts with George on his honeymoon withAmelia is contained within the initial marriage plot.However, this in turn hinges onDobbin s friendly and self-sacrificial intervention, while the more important romanceplot leading up to Amelia s declaration of love for Dobbin is inhibited throughout bymale loyalty.Having first orchestrated the marriage of the woman he himself loves 114 Romantic Friendship in Victorian Literatureto his friend, Dobbin later protects George s memory by concealing his involvementwith Rebecca, even though this perpetuates Amelia s illusions about the worthinessof the husband she has lost.Characteristically approving of the potential for malefriendship, the narrator draws attention to Dobbin s energy in assisting his friend:What is the secret mesmerism which friendship possesses, and under the operation ofwhich a person ordinarily sluggish, or cold, or timid, becomes wise, active, and resolute,in another s behalf? (Vanity Fair, 269)The parallel relationship between Amelia and Rebecca is based, on the contrary, onrivalry and competition for George s attention even Rebecca s belated interventionon Dobbin s behalf proves to be redundant, as Amelia has already written to recallhim before learning of her husband s proposed desertion.Describing itself as a novel without a hero , Vanity Fair purports to expose theinconsistencies of socially regulated individual behaviour through the commentaryof a narrator whose very complicity in false values renders his satire the moreeasily digestible.Through a series of parallels, individual characters response totheir situation exposes them to the judgement of the reader.But the novel locatesfalse displays of feeling almost entirely in the female realm, while advocating thesteadfast friendship shown by Dobbin to a friend whose lack of credibility ceasesto be an embarrassment with his death halfway through the novel.In constantlydisplaying female inconsistency against this resolute male loyalty, the narratorimplicitly questions the status of female relations in general.It is through the presentation of Amelia s behaviour, as both the epitome ofapproved feminine standards, and weak dependence, that female codes of behaviourare most closely questioned.The deliberately formed product of her education, muchas Eliot s Rosamond Vincy would later be presented with heavy irony as the pride ofMiss Lemon s school in Middlemarch, Amelia is at once the embodiment of femininevirtue and the sentimental purveyor of false standards [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl trzylatki.xlx.pl
.Socialconnections are paramount, and the novel itself tends to focus on the wider socialimplications of individual relationships rather than on the individuals themselves. Tenderest Caresses 113Miss Swartz herself only visits Amelia on her return to the more fashionable partof London:Swartz would have liked her always if she could have seen her.One must do her thatjustice.But, que voulez-vous? in this vast town one has not the time to go and seek one sfriends; if they drop out of the rank they disappear, and we march on without them.Whois ever missed in Vanity Fair? (781)Indeed, the enthusiastic display of passion, in its susceptibility to theatrical posturing,is presented as potentially suspect throughout the novel, and the most moral figure,Dobbin, is significantly restrained in his expression.The less sympathetic Georgeis driven by an undisciplined indulgence rather than by genuine passion; similarly,Rebecca s passions are for good society, and later for whisky and gambling, ratherthan for any particular individual.Amelia appears initially to be driven by passion, ifnot for her friend, for her husband, and later her child; however, her self-indulgenceis remarked on by the narrator as well as by other characters, and Dobbin commentsin the final pages of the novel that she is incapable of an elevated response to genuinefeeling.Paradoxically, it is this containment of a real passion that marks Dobbin asan authentic gentleman , according to the narrator.In this ambiguity Thackerayembodies the dilemma identified by Stedman as pertaining to all expression ofemotion in Victorian literature:In the 19th century, individualisation had advanced significantly and the cult of privacy albeit a highly organised privacy had reached new heights.Being too open-heartedand willing to express one s emotions without any restraint whatsoever was not in keepingwith this cult.But since the absence of all emotional expression not only implied theunhealthy absence of all feeling, but also rendered it impossible to judge what kind of classan individual belonged to, and what type of character he or she represented, the Victoriansfound themselves confronted with an almost unsolvable dilemma.This dilemma is thereason why authors of texts on the emotions oscillate between the call for total emotionalcontrol and the sometimes only grudgingly admitted individual and social necessity ofemotional expression.(Stedman, 55)This analysis, while it fails to account for the prevailing fashion for the highlyemotional cult of romantic friendship, is none the less useful in the light it castson Thackeray s individual position as his narrator vacillates between admirationfor Dobbin s self-control, and criticism of the ill-bestowed passion it is designed toconceal.Ambivalent about both marriage and female friendship, the narrator bases Dobbin smoral status largely on his supportive but non-romantic, adult friendship for GeorgeOsborne.Famously condemning the novelistic practice of ending with a marriage,the narrator of Vanity Fair in fact leads up with a high degree of inconsistency tothe final marriage of Dobbin and Amelia in the closing pages.The satire of femalefriendship and rivalry Rebecca openly flirts with George on his honeymoon withAmelia is contained within the initial marriage plot.However, this in turn hinges onDobbin s friendly and self-sacrificial intervention, while the more important romanceplot leading up to Amelia s declaration of love for Dobbin is inhibited throughout bymale loyalty.Having first orchestrated the marriage of the woman he himself loves 114 Romantic Friendship in Victorian Literatureto his friend, Dobbin later protects George s memory by concealing his involvementwith Rebecca, even though this perpetuates Amelia s illusions about the worthinessof the husband she has lost.Characteristically approving of the potential for malefriendship, the narrator draws attention to Dobbin s energy in assisting his friend:What is the secret mesmerism which friendship possesses, and under the operation ofwhich a person ordinarily sluggish, or cold, or timid, becomes wise, active, and resolute,in another s behalf? (Vanity Fair, 269)The parallel relationship between Amelia and Rebecca is based, on the contrary, onrivalry and competition for George s attention even Rebecca s belated interventionon Dobbin s behalf proves to be redundant, as Amelia has already written to recallhim before learning of her husband s proposed desertion.Describing itself as a novel without a hero , Vanity Fair purports to expose theinconsistencies of socially regulated individual behaviour through the commentaryof a narrator whose very complicity in false values renders his satire the moreeasily digestible.Through a series of parallels, individual characters response totheir situation exposes them to the judgement of the reader.But the novel locatesfalse displays of feeling almost entirely in the female realm, while advocating thesteadfast friendship shown by Dobbin to a friend whose lack of credibility ceasesto be an embarrassment with his death halfway through the novel.In constantlydisplaying female inconsistency against this resolute male loyalty, the narratorimplicitly questions the status of female relations in general.It is through the presentation of Amelia s behaviour, as both the epitome ofapproved feminine standards, and weak dependence, that female codes of behaviourare most closely questioned.The deliberately formed product of her education, muchas Eliot s Rosamond Vincy would later be presented with heavy irony as the pride ofMiss Lemon s school in Middlemarch, Amelia is at once the embodiment of femininevirtue and the sentimental purveyor of false standards [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]