Hello readers,
Today I'm going to discuss about marriage system with the reference of the novel "Hard Times" by Charles Dickens. This task is given by our professor Dr. Dilip Barad sir. So let's start…
Introduction
Hard Times: For These Times [commonly known as Hard Times] is the tenth novel by Charles Dickens, first published in 1854. The book surveys English society and satirises the social and economic conditions of the era. Hard Times is unusual in several ways. It is by far the shortest of Dickens's novels, barely a quarter of the length of those written immediately before and after it. Also, unlike all but one of his other novels, Hard Times has neither a preface nor illustrations.
Moreover, it is his only novel not to have scenes set in London. Instead the story is set in the fictitious Victorian industrial Coketown, a generic Northern English mill-town, in some ways similar to Manchester, though smaller. Coketown may be partially based on 19th-century Preston.
◆Hard Times :-
Charles Dickens’s Hard Times deftly weaves a gripping narrative dealing with industrial growth, huddled human lives devoid of warmth and love; a persistent tussle between fact and fancy life and mechanisation, deteriorating familial relations between husbands and wives son/daughter and father friends turned relatives/strangers and crushed childhood, in a society based on Jeremy Bentham’s doctrine of Utilitarianism. Dickens shows the adverse effects of Utilitarianism on education as well as labour in Hard Times to critique this policy which focussed on
“the greatest happiness for the greatest number”.
The novelist, however, views it as extracting maximum output from labour at the cost of their health and similarly making ‘little vessels’, ‘little pitchers’ and ‘empty jars’ to be filled with facts only, thus completely neglecting and negating the spiritual and imaginative side of life that later results in the rudderless existence of the Gradgrind children Louisa and Tom and their subsequent disillusionment.
This blog, however, limits its discussion to the issue of marriage and divorce during the Victorian era and Dickens’s concern for the poor labourers for whom seeking a divorce could never have been possible given the intricate processes and huge expenses. The paper specifically addresses Stephen Blackpool’s case to reflect how divorce was actually the privilege of the rich and not a right of the poor. James Eli Adams contends that the novel grapples with a grave “injustice, Stephen’s inability to divorce a drunken and dissolute wife who long since had abandoned him”. Apart from it, the case of Josiah Bounderby and Louisa would also be considered to highlight how even the rich in some circumstances could not have procured divorce.
◆Marriage:-
A Statement on the Religious Morals of 19th Century British Society The Victorian era in England gave birth to the first real industrial society the world had ever seen. With the rise of industry came large cities, an expanded working class population and the rapid rise of imperialism. Although England was progressing towards a more powerful place in the world, its citizens seemed to be drifting in the opposite direction. Oppressive laws and working conditions set clear boundaries between classes in England. The most oppressive social and state laws were those regarding to marriages and divorces. Just as the people of England felt trapped in the unequal social structure of England, the same is true for those trapped in unwanted marital relations. Marriages were regulated by society and the government, therefore, making them more of a materialistic union than a holy or spiritual one. The marriages in Hard Times represent “industrial society” in England during the Victorian era and portray a separation of society from religion. Mr. Gradgrind ready to marry his daughter with his old friend mr. Bounderby, who was very rich. So, if we talk about today's perspective we find lot many example of that type of marriage when, a man is old and a girl bride is young. And all this happen because of money. People want money and money, for that they do anything ! We can assume that anything…
The system of marriage is increase in 21st century. Parents gives permission to their daughter to marry whom they like. Measure of love marriage is now increase. The practice of monogamy, absence of widow remarriage lack of facility for easy divorce and chastity are regarded as important ideals now we see that changes have occurred in the institution of Hindu marriage, because of several factors such as urbanization, industrialization, secularization, modern education impact of Western culture, and marriage legislations; changes are taking place in Hindu ideals, forms and values of marriage.
◆Three pair of marriage :-
We find three pairs of couple in the novel,
Mr. Bounderby and Louisa
Stephen Blackpool and his wife
Mr. And Mrs. Gradgrind
But, there are no happy marriages in Hard Times. In Stephen's case, it focuses instead on a missed opportunity for true companionship. In the case of the Gradgrinds, you've got an entirely intellectually unequal match where spouses are indifferent to each other. Then there's a loveless disaster where husband and wife grow to hate each other in the case of Louisa and Bounderby. The only happy unions are mythic, have occurred in the past, or are just barely implied, as in the case of the Jupes or Sissy and her eventual family.
Marriage in the Victorian era was hardly an example of an equal partnership. When a woman got married, she gave up all her rights to her husband. The husband controlled all assets in the marriage, including any assets his wife may have had before the marriage. The three main marriages described in Hard Times are those between Louisa Gradgrind and Mr. Bounderby, Mr. and Mrs. Gradgrind, and Stephen Blackpool and his wife. None of these three marriages are loving or prosperous. The inequality in these marriages and the pain caused by them gives insight into the characteristics of real life marriages during this time. For example, the one marriage that affected Louisa’s upbringing the most was that between her parents. From the beginning of the novel, Mr. Gradgrind is described as, “A man of realities. A man of facts and calculations. A man who proceeds upon the principle that two and two are four, and nothing over, and who is not to be talked into allowing for anything over”. The reader sees him as a strong, intelligent, no nonsense figure. However, when Mrs. Gradgrind is described, she is described as the complete opposite of her husband. She is introduced as, “Mrs. Gradgrind, a little, thin, white, pink-eyed bundle of shawls, of surpassing feebleness, mental and bodily; who was always taking physic without any effect, and who, whenever she showed a symptom of coming to life, was invariably stunned by some weighty piece of fact tumbling on her”. Mr. and Mrs. Gradgrind’s marriage displays not only inequality, but also the first signs of incompatibility in a marriage in the book. Already in the novel, Mrs. Gradgrind is oppressed and even burdened by Mr. Gradgrind’s “fact” lifestyle. Mr. Gradgrind’s world of facts is essentially the basis of oppression in marriages during the 19th century.
◆Divorce:-
The fact was, once two people were joined in marriage, it was extremely difficult to get out. In Anne Humpherys’ “Louisa Gradgrind’s Secret: Marriage and Divorce in Hard Times”, she describes the processes of divorce in 19th century England:
“As Bounderby makes clear to Stephen, divorce in 1854 was difficult, complicated, and costly”.
The only "cause" for divorce was adultery, which for women suing had to be "aggravated" by incest or bigamy, though, in fact, legal separations were granted women for abandonment and cruelty. (There were only four full divorces granted women prior to 1857.) Three separate legal actions, including a bill in the House of Lords, were necessary. Legal separation ‘from bed and board’ was possible, but women in that position had no legal rights, nor a right to their own earnings, nor to custody of their children, nor could either party remarry”. Facts were the law. Just as Mr. Gradgrind’s facts were not to be disputed, the law was not to be broken. Any woman who violated the law could be punished by the society. It's one type of disappeared rule that once you got married you can not leave the home of your husband at any cost. In rural area we find that the parents tell their daughter that "your husband and his house is everything for you, if you are in trouble then solve it at your husband's home, now this is not your home, if want any help then tell us but, don't leave your husband's home, it's about our reputation".
◆Mismatched Marriages:-
There are many unequal marriages in Hard Times, including those of Mr. and Mrs. Gradgrind, Stephen Blackpool and his unnamed drunken wife, and most pertinently, the Bounderbys. Louisa agrees to marry Mr. Bounderby because her father convinces her that doing so would be a rational decision. He even cites statistics to show that the great difference in their ages need not prevent their mutual happiness. However, Louisa’s consequent misery as Bounderby’s wife suggests that love, rather than either reason or convenience, must be the foundation of a happy marriage. In this 21st century we fine lot many example of mismatched marriages because a girl want to see her family happy and special her father and brother. So, they sacrifice her all aims and dreams to see her family happy. In many movie we can see that type of scenes that a girl is agree to marry someone only because her father said them to marry.
Conclusion
So we can see that Stephen and Bounderby, the labourer and the mill owner, respectively represent diverse strands. The readers feel sympathy for the former and disgust for the latter. Stephen is virtuous, honest, and a man of principles and integrity; while Bounderby is full of vanity and deceit. Given the situation of both, Bounderby can pay the amount of divorce as he is rich and can enact a Private Act of Parliament; Stephen cannot as he is poor. However, Bounderby cannot get divorce as his wife has not committed adultery. Therefore, he can live separately as the Ecclesiastical Court would grant him permission but cannot remarry as the House of Lords would not permit it. Louisa also cannot find an escape from this “miserable marriage”. Stephen cannot even move to the Ecclesiastical Court as he cannot even pay the requisite amount as he has all the necessary grounds as his wife has committed adultery and is therefore, genuinely to be pitied for. It is quite evident here, after analysing the characters of both, Stephen and Bounderby, that Dickens pleads more the case of Stephen as he is a real victim despite being honest. As Efraim Sicher writes:
“Stephen performs the role of neo-Christian saint of forbearance and kindness, a martyr to the masters’ hardheartedness and criminal negligence, who maintains an all-too perfect moral integrity in the muddle of hypocritical laws made for the wealthy and privileged members of society”.
However, Dickens largely appeals for happy married lives as there is no use living with a person when life turns out to be a real hell devouring all happiness. It is for this reason that he dealt with the marriage laws in his Household Words and advocated lenient laws so that not only women but also men could find an escape from an otherwise caged existence.
●Summary analysis :
1911 words
