Monday, October 4, 2010
Hard Times-Chapter 2
First, the description of Mr. McChoakumchild is a hyperbole. Dickens compares him to a boxer who would beat the facts into people. This isn't really a way to teach children so the fact that Dickens has a boxer teaching the children I think tells us that not only is this not the right person to be teaching children, but what he is teaching the children isn't what their education should be about. On the next page, the word fact is repeated a number of times once again to stress that facts are not all that children should be learning. The exchange between Sissy and Mr. McChoakumchild over the flower rug shows the contrast between a typical child's point of view and the crazy fact-based teaching method that Mr. McChoakumchild and Thomas Gradgrind agree on. On page 7 at the bottom, there is a description about Mr. McChoakumchild and his educational journey. Dickens describes it as coming from a factory. This statement shows Dickens's opinion of the education system of the day and the happenings of the times. Everything is being industrialized even the schools until one day everything will be the same and everything will come from a factory. On page 8, Dickens says, "If he had only learnt a little less, how indefinitelybetter he might have taught much more." This statement is an oxymoron because normally the more you know the better you can teach; however, in this case Dickens is saying that had Mr. McChoakumchild been less like a machine and more like a human being maybe he would be able to teach the students in a more effective way. Finally, Dickens makes an allusion to Ali Baba which I don't entirely understand but I think he is saying that Mr. McChoakumchild is teaching the other students by harming Sissy. By making fun of Sissy, he is mocking her in order to teach the others.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In addition to Brianna's analysis of the second half of Chapter 2, I thought one of Dickens' primary rhetorical devices in this section was humor. Like Ms. Siegel said in class, this passage is just really funny because of how absurd the whole conversation is. Obviously Sissy doesn't actually believe that horses are supposed to gallop along the walls of a room, but that doesn't stop her from liking the image of these horses. Dickens portrays the gentleman to be a pretty ridiculous character, and he mocks this gentleman through his repetition of fact. On page 7, he says "'We hope to have, before long, a board of fact, composed of commissioners of fact, who will force the people to be a people of fact, and of nothing but fact.'" This heavy, serious, repetitive tone is present for most of the second chapter. But in the last paragraph, Dickens starts using an Old English, more emotional tone. This heavily contrasts with the previous part of the chapter, in which the mechanical nature of "fact" is reflected through Dickens' harsh tone. The shift in tone may be a commentary on the lack of effectiveness in Gradgrind's teaching style, as compared to a style full of imagination and creativity.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I'm definitely not the first to notice this, but Dickens' name choice for the teacher is remarkably notable. Mr. McChoakumchild??????
ReplyDeleteI think Dickens is completely- and effectively- characterizing this teacher precisely to maintain the theme of limits in the classroom (Mr. Mc- choke- a-child).
Continuing on with everything Bri and Rebecca thoroughly noted in Chapter 2, I wanted to point out something Dickens says that I believe effectively encapsulates Mr. Mc-choke-a-child. On page 7, Dickens writes, "So Mr. McChoakumchild began in his best manner. He and some one hundred and forty other schoolmasters had been lately turned at the same time, in the same factory, on the same principles, like so many pianoforte legs. He had been put through an immense variety of paces, and had answered volumes of head-breaking questions. Orthography, etymology, syntax, and prosody, biography... were all at the ends of his ten chilled fingers." As if Dickens' background of McChoakumchild didn't already demonstrate to the reader what his role in the story would be, this quote further illustrates the establishment and the obsession of facts over fancy. He employs catalog in listing the plethora of ridiculous topics that McChoakumchild studied. In addition, Dickens critical and somewhat mocking tone really resonates in this chapter.
The most puzzling part of this Chapter stems from the question: Why? The unnamed gentlemen who is lecturing in a good portion of this text keeps reiterating to the children that this fact-driven mindset is a "new discovery." He is giving the impression that they have just stumbled upon this perfect way to live, think, and educate but they give no reason as to why this is A) a completely novel or earth-shattering idea and B) what was so wrong with society before they came upon this revelation? These authority figures are giving no justification as to why this is a superior way to live - they never say what the dangers of "fancy" are or why they should be avoided other than the reason that they are not fact. It is really circular logic. Furthermore, they are really undermining the brilliance of the human race - they are essentially dumbing us down to only surrounding ourselves with fact and denying our ability to have imagination and creativity that we can still discern from fact. While this observation may not be based on specific writing styles of Dickens - I think this demonstrates another aspect of social commentary/satire in which he is mocking the ridiculousness of the rules of society by equating the way of life of a new generation to some absurd idea of middle aged me. This also relates back to the Allegory of the Cave and this concept of education and what principles, norms, and values we arbitrarily become accustomed to just based on our environment.
ReplyDeleteDickens also uses the language of the text to reflect Thomas Gradgrind's actual method of thinking and speaking. The beginning of the chapter is very factual and straightforward with no room for opinion or disagreement. The first chapter begins with "Thomas Gradgrind, sir. A man of realities. A man of facts and calculations." Each of these statements are very direct and reflect Gradgrind's character.
ReplyDeleteThis tone soon changes as the chapter continues and once Sissy has had her chance to speak. Sissy's character, full of emotion and imagination, almost overpowers Gradgrind's tone. While Gradgrind wins in the fight against her in the classroom, the tone switches to one filled with detail and intricate examples and allusions.
It's interesting to note the specific diction Dickens uses to describe that third unnamed gentleman in the room (neither Gradgrind nor M'Choakumchild). On page 10, Dickens says, he was "in his way (and in most other people's too, a professed pugilist". When I looked up pugilist, it was defined as a humorous or dated word. I think this plays into the satire effect of Dickens writing, how Dickens is trying to make the 'gentleman' seem ridiculous and absurd. I mean, I know I laughed when I first read this paragraph because Dickens describes the gentleman as damaging "any subject whatever with his right...exchange, counter, bore his opponent (he always fought All England)" (10). The entire sentence is just ridiculous and an oxymoron: how can this gentleman be 1. a gentleman since gentleman do not fight (they work things out peacefully, with words, or bribes, they never want to sully their good name with hand to hand combat) and 2. bore his opponent since he's clearly defeating him - if I was punched and pummeled I surely wouldn't be bored.
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning of the novel, Dickens really uses characterization to help portray the the ideas of the story. His description of Mr. Gradgrind really set off the rigid fact learning system by repeating the squareness of his body and even portraying him in terms of math. On page 5, Dickens starts describing the gentleman as a tough boxer: "a professed pugilist; always in training, always with a system to force down the general throat like a bolus..." This description can also be related back to the rough utilitarian educational system and the image of Coketown as a whole.. Dicken's characterization really sets the mood of the work and gives not only words for the reader, but also images that help us see his message.
ReplyDeleteI would also like to add to what is previously said that like the word "Fact" which is written with a majuscule in the second chapter, I noticed that in my book on page 14 the word "Fancy" is also capitalized. By referring this word with a capital letter, it adds importance to the word, and brings it in contrast with the word "Fact". Also the use of diction was noticeable to me, the teachers within the classroom use tone and diction to elevate themselves and give themselves importance through speech. The use of repetition of the word fact creates an emphasis on the word itself, and draws the attention of the reader, making it seem like fact is what governs these teachers, and its the only thing they believe in. The use of denotation is also noticeable in bitzer's speech when defining what a horse is. Describing the horse so coldly gives a direct contrast to how Sissy would describe a horse herself if she had to. This then relates back to the difference of the cold hard facts and the imaginative fancy facts. One more thing, the use of imagery to portray Bitzer in contrast to Sissy parallels the contrast of facts vs. fancy. Fancy is colorful and full of like like Sissy, and facts are cold, lifeless, just like Bitzer is described.
ReplyDeleteIt is rather unsettling to read about how people such as M’Choakumchild are strangling the childhood out of the class, as Gradgrind would do with Louisa. Chapter 2 emphasizes the dominance of fact, and repetition helps exert this dominance. Besides repetition of the word “fact,” there is also repetition between the unnamed man and Gradgrind, such as with “you must paper it,” “you are not… to do anything of that kind,” etc. Catalogue has been mentioned above with the ridiculous topics Choak studied, but catalogue was also used in the listing of things which, by the fact men’s definition, are “Fancy,” such as painting “foreign birds and butterflies upon your crockery.”
ReplyDeleteThe children are intimidated into saying the “correct” answers. We saw that, by the third time a question was asked, only a few “feeble stragglers” responded Yes instead of No. The children, perhaps like society at the time, were conforming to rules or standards imposed upon them from a higher authority. The God reference was made in class, but noting that the unnamed man was a government officer who was ready to “fight all England,” I believe Dickens is criticizing the government in particular.
Christina Bauer(for some reason I can't post comments using blogspot so I have to post them through AIM)
ReplyDeleteOne thing that really struck me while re-reading chapter two was Dickens' frequent use of parallel structure. For instance in the very beginning of the chapter, when describing Thomas Gradgrind, he depicts him as "A man of realities. A man of fact 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"(2). These short sentences seemed very cut and dry, and are said with authority and without question. So Dickens uses Gradgrind's philosophy of rigid fact to describe his characters. Similarly, when Dickens describes Mr. McChoakumchild, he describes him as " always in training, always with a system to force down the general throat like a bolus, always to be heard of at the bar of his little public office, ready to fight England"(5). His repetitive use of the word "always" puts emphasis on the fact that Mr. McChoakumchild is a man who unlike Mr. Gradgrind, will never stray from rationalism, and will continue to "choke" the imagination and creativity out of children.
Wow. Reading all of these posts are a little intimidating. Anyway....
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter Two, Gradgrind is constantly repeating whatever the gentleman (later described as Mr. Bounderby)says. For example, on page 5, the gentleman says "You must paper it" and then Gradgrind repeats, "You must paper it". Later, on page 7, the gentleman says the words facts three times and then Gradgrind repeats it three times. This repetition is Parison. By using this literary device, Dickens is drawing attention to Gradgrind's behavior which is analogous to the behavior of a parrot or a bird that just mimics the behavior of others.
This copying concept is important in showing Dickens' real opinion on the industrial and factorial world. Gradgrind represents a world completely focused on facts and he got these ideas of a world based on facts from this gentleman. However, at the end of the novel (spoiler alert), the reader discovers that the gentleman (Mr.Bounderby) is actually a complete fraud and thus, his world based on fact is also a farce.
On a side note and to complement what Katie posted about the names, does anyone else think of machines and grinding to a halt when they hear, "Gradgrind". Maybe Dickens's is commenting on the idea that Gradgrind is halting the progress of society/Coketown because he is forcing the children to abandon imagination and feelings.
As we discussed in Chapter One, the use of religious undertones is important to Dicken's literary style and continues to carry weight in the second half of Chapter Two. Anaphoric statements, such as "...you are not to see anywhere what you don't see in fact; you are not to have anywhere what you don't have in fact" are similar to the parallel structure seen in Biblical passages (6). Like the Bible, Dickens differentiates what is good and righteous in Coketown (Fact) and contrastingly, what is evil and corrupt (Fancy). The shift to Old English in the end of the chapter furthers the religious tone, as "thou shalt" is a phrase also used in the English version of the Ten Commandments (ex. "Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods", etc) (8). The disembodied narrator uses this form of speech to omnisciently say that McChoakumchild can try to brainwash facts into the students' minds, but in the end, the "robber Fancy" will continue "lurking within" (8). The narrator as an external source of wisdom, much like Biblical references that emanate wisdom and truth, tells the reader that fancy will never completely leave society, just as evil/corruption will never completely die off either. Dickens reminds the audience that no matter how fervently the authorities in Coketown try to drive home the need for fact, imagination and creativity is part of human nature and cannot truly be removed from our reality.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting that Dickens alludes to arabic literature, specifically "Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves". At the end of the chapter, the narrator writes, "He went to work in this preparatory lesson, not unlike Morgiana in the Forty Thieves: looking into all the vessels ranged before him, one after another, to see what they contained. Say, good M'Choakumchild. When from thy boiling store, thou shalt fill each jar brim full by and by, dost thou think that thou wilt always kill outright the robber Fancy lurking within -- or sometimes only maim him and distort him!" In "Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves" Morgiana realizes that there are robbers hiding in oil vessels and kills them by pouring hot oil into the vessels. Morgiana is often considered a heroine, which is why I find it strange that McChoakumchild, who seems like an antagonist, would be compared to a protagonist. I think that Dickens draws a parallel between the two characters to illustrate how both of them are cautious and capable of detecting evil. In McChoackumchild's case, evil takes form in Fancy.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading, I noticed that Fancy is also capitalized. The fact that Fact and Fancy are both capitalized indicates that both forces are powerful. Dickens portrays Fancy as Fact's arch nemesis, but honestly the two do not seem as opposite as Fact and Fiction. I am curious as to why Dickens chose the word Fancy to battle Fact.
Also I want to draw attentio to the way Dickens refers to the children as vessels and pitchers. Both objects are meant to hold water, which is a symbol of purity. It seems as if the children are empty vessels to begin with, and slowly are filled up with Gradgrind and Choakumchild's lessons.
Nice work folks, you must have worked up a sweat there, but fear not, for I have come into the scene now. So, you have all written valid arguments, and by far, my favorite comment there was the comment on Mr. McChoakumchild's name. It is just so amazing and for some reason, I did not notice it. I just find it amazing that he is choking the creativity and such out of em children. I noticed that when talking to these kids, these teachers are treating them like young adults. There is no baby language and there is no sympathy, there is straight out dull and scientific talk like you might here in some military lecture. This just goes on to add to how these kids are being breeded to follow a certain philosophy
ReplyDeleteAlso, I want to mention that with Plato, he did mention how as a person can go into the light, people can also be brought into the darkness and how it will take time to adapt to that sort of thing (At least if my memory does tell me correctly). Anyways, I see this with those midgets who are being dragged out of the light of creativity and into the chains of the darkness, staring into their shadows.
Adding to Saranya's analysis of the forty thieves, I think that it makes sense that Chucky (clever?!?!?!) is being compared to Morgiana. Before I talk about this though, I want to mention that Chucky has his resumé pretty much laid out before us in his description, but nothing more or less. Anyways, the thing with Morgiana is that she noticed these thieves sure, but rather than sparing any or punishing them, she goes straight to killing them through an ever so gruesome method. Chucky does pretty much the same by forcing fact down the kids' throats and by forcing this ideology and such. Sure that was complete BS, but the mercilessness part of that analysis is 100% genuine and from my heart