In Charles Dickens' Great Expectations, there are some cases where Pip struggles to distinguish between virtue ad vice in those he meets. These cases generally arise from Pip's inability to distinguish between virtue and vice in himself, which I believe comes about because of the way he is suddenly thrust into the life of a London gentleman before he has a chance to know himself. I think that Pip's views of the virtues and vices of the people he meets in London and the people he knew in Kent are usually accurate, and it's only when one of the people from Kent tries to cross into Pip's life in London that he begins to struggle with virtues and vices. The most important of these characters are Joe, Magwitch and Pip himself.
When Pip was a little boy living in Kent with his sister and Joe, he saw Joe as someone to look up to. Joe was always kind to Pip, and they looked after each other when Pip's sister went on one of her Rampages. Pip knew that when he grew up he would be Joe's apprentice, and that would be a good life for him. It is likely that he would have been content with that life, as he says himself, if only he had never gone to see Miss Havisham. But Pip does go to Miss Havisham's, where he meets Estella and falls in love with her. She says things about Pip's appearance and manner that make him wish he'd been brought up more like a gentleman. After that day, Pip can't think of Joe without also thinking of how uncouth and unmannerly he is. Later in the story when Joe comes to visit Pip in London, all Pip can see is how Joe doesn't fit into Pip's new life and how embarrassing it is for Pip to have him there. Pip can no longer see the virtues that still infuse Joe's being.
The second character, Magwitch, Pip originally associates with vice. Pip meets him as a nameless convict, a dangerous man who will stop at nothing to get what he wants. He scares Pip so badly at that first meeting that Pip agrees to steal food for him. Pip forever after remembers that act with shame, which I think contributes to his negative opinion of Magwitch when the two meet again. Even though Magwitch's actions in the meantime have been virtuous and almost entirely for Pip's sake and the man is still trying to give Pip his fortune, Pip continues to see Magwitch as a danger, an embarrassment and a source of trouble.
As I said before, Pip also struggles to distinguish between his own virtues or values and vices. While spending his childhood in Kent, Pip is usually virtuous, because his values are the things he's learned from Joe: hard work, kindness, love, perseverance and duty. Once Pip meets Estella, he begins to value things such as status and image. Although Pip still tries to be virtuous, he's no longer happy, and his vice becomes wishing for something he knows he cannot have. When suddenly his dreams come true and he's whisked off to London, Pip has to change once again to fit into his new society. For the most part, the values are similar: status and image. However, without Joe's influence and Joe to please, Pip succumbs more easily to the vices of this new society, and "acquires expensive habits" as well as becoming very sensitive of how his peers see him. This last vice leads to his rejections of Joe and Magwitch when they appear again in his life. I think that in the end, Pip is redeemed when he finally returns to his virtues: first duty, then love. It's duty that makes him agree to help Magwitch escape, but love that makes him stay with the man so he can die in peace. It's a duty to apologize that drives him back to Kent to see Joe and Biddy, but their love that allows him to forgive himself and go on in his life.
Sunday 9 June 2013
Friday 7 June 2013
To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Several of the characters in To Kill A Mockingbird embody the idea that "When a character acts selflessly against the prevailing vices of the the dominant social order, true virtue exhibits itself."
The first of these characters is Tom Robinson. He acts against the dominant social order when he begins doing small odd jobs for Mayella Ewell and refusing to take payment. In the culture of the novel, there's a lot of tension between black and white people, and black are regarded as a lower working class. Because of that, they are NEVER expected to do something for nothing. Tom says, "I was glad to do it, Mr. Ewell didn't seem to help her none, and neither did the chillun, and I knowed she didn't have no nickles to spare." He tries to help her simply out of the goodness of his heart, even though Negros aren't supposed to feel sorry for white girls. Unfortunately for Tom, when things go sour and he ends up in court for a crime he didn't commit, no one listens to his side of the story because he's a Negro.
A second character who embodies the quotation is Boo Radley. Boo's 'vice' is not so much a vice as simply the expectations of his family and the people in his neighbourhood. He's been forbidden by his father to ever step out of the house, but on the night of Scout's Halloween pageant he has to in order to save the children who have become in a strange way his friends. Whether he is the one who kills Bob Ewell that night or not is left to the imagination of the reader. Either way, Boo gets away with acting against that 'vice' because he acts for such a selfless reason. Mr. Heck Tate defines it as,"I never heard tell that it's against the law for a citizen to do his utmost to prevent a crime from being committed, which is exactly what he did." He then goes on to say that he won't tell the rest of Maycomb about Boo's virtue because he doesn't want to drag the shy man into the limelight. Unlike Tom Robinson, Boo's circumstances enable him to be very successful in his selfless actions. Scout sums it up perfectly when she says, "Well, it'd be sort of like shootin' a mockingbird, wouldn't it?"
The third character, the one who embodies the quotation the most, is Atticus Finch. Atticus chooses act against the vice of always thinking of himself. Instead he constantly displays virtue by acting for the good of someone else and taking the consequences upon himself. He tries his best to defend Tom Robinson when he could have just let the case go without doing anything to help. More than that, he puts himself in danger to protect Tom at the jail the night before the trial. He allows Bob Ewell to spit in his face and threaten him because he thinks it's better for him to put up with it than for Ewell to take it out on his children. In the second last scene he tries to take the blame and responsibility for Ewell's death onto himself and Jem, and insists he doesn't want it hushed up because he doesn't want Jem to live with a shadow over him. Mr. Tate won't let him, instead insisting that Ewell fell on his own knife, but the fact that Atticus tried to protect Boo Radley is another sign of his virtue. As Mr. Raymond says, he's "not a run-of-the-mill man."
The first of these characters is Tom Robinson. He acts against the dominant social order when he begins doing small odd jobs for Mayella Ewell and refusing to take payment. In the culture of the novel, there's a lot of tension between black and white people, and black are regarded as a lower working class. Because of that, they are NEVER expected to do something for nothing. Tom says, "I was glad to do it, Mr. Ewell didn't seem to help her none, and neither did the chillun, and I knowed she didn't have no nickles to spare." He tries to help her simply out of the goodness of his heart, even though Negros aren't supposed to feel sorry for white girls. Unfortunately for Tom, when things go sour and he ends up in court for a crime he didn't commit, no one listens to his side of the story because he's a Negro.
A second character who embodies the quotation is Boo Radley. Boo's 'vice' is not so much a vice as simply the expectations of his family and the people in his neighbourhood. He's been forbidden by his father to ever step out of the house, but on the night of Scout's Halloween pageant he has to in order to save the children who have become in a strange way his friends. Whether he is the one who kills Bob Ewell that night or not is left to the imagination of the reader. Either way, Boo gets away with acting against that 'vice' because he acts for such a selfless reason. Mr. Heck Tate defines it as,"I never heard tell that it's against the law for a citizen to do his utmost to prevent a crime from being committed, which is exactly what he did." He then goes on to say that he won't tell the rest of Maycomb about Boo's virtue because he doesn't want to drag the shy man into the limelight. Unlike Tom Robinson, Boo's circumstances enable him to be very successful in his selfless actions. Scout sums it up perfectly when she says, "Well, it'd be sort of like shootin' a mockingbird, wouldn't it?"
The third character, the one who embodies the quotation the most, is Atticus Finch. Atticus chooses act against the vice of always thinking of himself. Instead he constantly displays virtue by acting for the good of someone else and taking the consequences upon himself. He tries his best to defend Tom Robinson when he could have just let the case go without doing anything to help. More than that, he puts himself in danger to protect Tom at the jail the night before the trial. He allows Bob Ewell to spit in his face and threaten him because he thinks it's better for him to put up with it than for Ewell to take it out on his children. In the second last scene he tries to take the blame and responsibility for Ewell's death onto himself and Jem, and insists he doesn't want it hushed up because he doesn't want Jem to live with a shadow over him. Mr. Tate won't let him, instead insisting that Ewell fell on his own knife, but the fact that Atticus tried to protect Boo Radley is another sign of his virtue. As Mr. Raymond says, he's "not a run-of-the-mill man."
Sunday 28 April 2013
The Pearl by John Steinbeck
So the artist probes the central mystery of life as he sees it, the paradox of how evil comes out of good, the tear at the heart of laughter, the dream doomed to disappointment in the moment of dreaming, despair conjoined with hope, with which humanity, if it is wise, must learn to live. (Page 129, The Pearl by John Steinbeck.)
The characters in John Steinbeck's novel The Pearl (Kino and Juana) quite clearly live through this paradox when Kino finds his amazing pearl in the local oyster bed. The pearl, which at first offers a chance at wealth and a way out of the poverty in which the family lives, actually becomes the root of all the misery the characters suffer through. Kino begins dreaming of all the things he will be able to buy after he sells the pearl, but once he has said them aloud he becomes stubbornly determined to make them happen. I think the turning point where the pearl becomes truly evil is when Kino steps out of his hut, is attacked by someone trying to steal the pearl and ends up killing the man. Something terribly wrong has come out of what appeared to be good, and things only get worse from there.
Based on a rereading of pages 120 - 122, I think the couple have learned that they must live with this paradox, if not exactly how. I think Juana had always had a deeper understanding of it than Kino, but now she knows just how important that is. Kino, I think, has learned that if he's going to live with it at all, he needs Juana to help him. They have to stand together.
Finally, I think there are a few connections to be drawn between The Pearl and the novel study topic. You can look at it from Kino's point of view: he wants to sell the pearl to get enough money to give his family a better standard of living, and is willing to do whatever it takes to ensure that that happens. But I think the stronger argument is from Juana's point of view. She knows the pearl has become evil and that it will only bring sorrow to Kino, yet she agrees to go with him to sell it in the capital. Several times Kino begs her to take the baby and hide someplace safer, but each time Juana refuses because she knows there is a chance she can help Kino and a certainty that he will need her support. Even though in the end Juana loses her child, she stays by her husband and forgives him. I think she can act so selflessly because she understands the paradox mentioned above: evil will come out of good. The only way for her to live with that is to accept it and love her family regardless, so that her small bit of virtue can counteract the evil in the rest of the world.
The characters in John Steinbeck's novel The Pearl (Kino and Juana) quite clearly live through this paradox when Kino finds his amazing pearl in the local oyster bed. The pearl, which at first offers a chance at wealth and a way out of the poverty in which the family lives, actually becomes the root of all the misery the characters suffer through. Kino begins dreaming of all the things he will be able to buy after he sells the pearl, but once he has said them aloud he becomes stubbornly determined to make them happen. I think the turning point where the pearl becomes truly evil is when Kino steps out of his hut, is attacked by someone trying to steal the pearl and ends up killing the man. Something terribly wrong has come out of what appeared to be good, and things only get worse from there.
Based on a rereading of pages 120 - 122, I think the couple have learned that they must live with this paradox, if not exactly how. I think Juana had always had a deeper understanding of it than Kino, but now she knows just how important that is. Kino, I think, has learned that if he's going to live with it at all, he needs Juana to help him. They have to stand together.
Finally, I think there are a few connections to be drawn between The Pearl and the novel study topic. You can look at it from Kino's point of view: he wants to sell the pearl to get enough money to give his family a better standard of living, and is willing to do whatever it takes to ensure that that happens. But I think the stronger argument is from Juana's point of view. She knows the pearl has become evil and that it will only bring sorrow to Kino, yet she agrees to go with him to sell it in the capital. Several times Kino begs her to take the baby and hide someplace safer, but each time Juana refuses because she knows there is a chance she can help Kino and a certainty that he will need her support. Even though in the end Juana loses her child, she stays by her husband and forgives him. I think she can act so selflessly because she understands the paradox mentioned above: evil will come out of good. The only way for her to live with that is to accept it and love her family regardless, so that her small bit of virtue can counteract the evil in the rest of the world.
Tuesday 23 April 2013
Anthem by Ayn Rand
"Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life."
This ideal from Ayn Rand is realized in her novel Anthem through the story of Equality 7-2521. The character breaks out of the collective society in which the story is set and begins pursuing his own happiness through his work. For a while, the work becomes his highest purpose in life. He stops sacrificing his life and mind for others, but neither do his actions cause trouble for anyone else. He knows he's breaking the rules, but he does it anyway because it makes him happy. The character realizes for himself that he should not be a means to the ends of others, and that enables him to start living the life he longs for.
Secondly, if selflessly is changed to selfishly in the idea that when a character acts selfishly against the prevailing vices of the dominant social order, true virtue exhibits itself, this can still make sense in a way. It is said that the dominant characteristic of a hero is self-sacrifice. But Rand describes sacrifice as:
A sacrifice is the surrender of a value. Full sacrifice is full surrender of all values. If you wish to achieve full virtue, you must seek no gratitude in return for your sacrifice, no praise, no love, no admiration, no self-esteem, not even the pride of being virtuous; the faintest trace of any gain dilutes your virtue. If you pursue a course of action that does not taint your life by any joy, that brings you no value in matter, no value in spirit, no gain, no profit, no reward—if you achieve this state of total zero, you have achieved the ideal of moral perfection.
She also defines it as:
If a man dies fighting for his own freedom, it is not a sacrifice: he is not willing to live as a slave; but it is a sacrifice to the kind of man who’s willing.
By looking at sacrifice this way, it can be argued that a hero does not make a sacrifice because he does whatever it is he does because he believes it's right or because he does it for the people he loves or because of some other value he cherishes. No matter how virtuous he may appear to others, he has selfish reasons for his actions. But usually the fallout from those actions has good effects, so in the eyes of others the hero has exhibited true virtue.
This can also be seen in the story of Equality 7-2521. He acts selfishly early in the novel when his begins sneaking away to work in the subway tunnel, but what comes of that is his rediscovery of electricity. He immediately decides to show his discovery to the world. Not only will it be useful, but he thinks it will be enough to make the Council overlook his faults. He also believes he will become famous and be allowed to live the life he dreams of. Two out of three of these reasons are selfish, but because an observer would not be able to share Equality 7-2521's thoughts, his actions would appear as virtuous. Later, at the end of the story, Prometheus (as he now calls himself) says he will go back to the City and rescue his friends. This is also both virtuous ( he wants to save his friends from 'suffering under the yoke of their brothers') and selfish (he wants to save them because they're his friends and he loves them). So in this way the connection between selflessness and virtue can be twisted into a connection between selfishness and virtue and still, in a way, make sense.
To read more about Ayn Rand and her philosophy of objectivism, visit the Ayn Rand lexicon at aynrandlexicon.com or go right to the page about sacrifice at http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/sacrifice.html.
This ideal from Ayn Rand is realized in her novel Anthem through the story of Equality 7-2521. The character breaks out of the collective society in which the story is set and begins pursuing his own happiness through his work. For a while, the work becomes his highest purpose in life. He stops sacrificing his life and mind for others, but neither do his actions cause trouble for anyone else. He knows he's breaking the rules, but he does it anyway because it makes him happy. The character realizes for himself that he should not be a means to the ends of others, and that enables him to start living the life he longs for.
Secondly, if selflessly is changed to selfishly in the idea that when a character acts selfishly against the prevailing vices of the dominant social order, true virtue exhibits itself, this can still make sense in a way. It is said that the dominant characteristic of a hero is self-sacrifice. But Rand describes sacrifice as:
A sacrifice is the surrender of a value. Full sacrifice is full surrender of all values. If you wish to achieve full virtue, you must seek no gratitude in return for your sacrifice, no praise, no love, no admiration, no self-esteem, not even the pride of being virtuous; the faintest trace of any gain dilutes your virtue. If you pursue a course of action that does not taint your life by any joy, that brings you no value in matter, no value in spirit, no gain, no profit, no reward—if you achieve this state of total zero, you have achieved the ideal of moral perfection.
She also defines it as:
If a man dies fighting for his own freedom, it is not a sacrifice: he is not willing to live as a slave; but it is a sacrifice to the kind of man who’s willing.
By looking at sacrifice this way, it can be argued that a hero does not make a sacrifice because he does whatever it is he does because he believes it's right or because he does it for the people he loves or because of some other value he cherishes. No matter how virtuous he may appear to others, he has selfish reasons for his actions. But usually the fallout from those actions has good effects, so in the eyes of others the hero has exhibited true virtue.
This can also be seen in the story of Equality 7-2521. He acts selfishly early in the novel when his begins sneaking away to work in the subway tunnel, but what comes of that is his rediscovery of electricity. He immediately decides to show his discovery to the world. Not only will it be useful, but he thinks it will be enough to make the Council overlook his faults. He also believes he will become famous and be allowed to live the life he dreams of. Two out of three of these reasons are selfish, but because an observer would not be able to share Equality 7-2521's thoughts, his actions would appear as virtuous. Later, at the end of the story, Prometheus (as he now calls himself) says he will go back to the City and rescue his friends. This is also both virtuous ( he wants to save his friends from 'suffering under the yoke of their brothers') and selfish (he wants to save them because they're his friends and he loves them). So in this way the connection between selflessness and virtue can be twisted into a connection between selfishness and virtue and still, in a way, make sense.
To read more about Ayn Rand and her philosophy of objectivism, visit the Ayn Rand lexicon at aynrandlexicon.com or go right to the page about sacrifice at http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/sacrifice.html.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)