Academia.eduAcademia.edu

On Great Expectations.pdf

Great Expectations is, perhaps, Charles Dickens’ greatest work, because it is, on the surface, the most disappointing of his works to read. It is his mature master work every bit as much as The Tempest was Shakespeare’s, and what “flaws” these works share suggest that they are not flawed at all, but are in fact being mis-read by the critics who see them as failing to meet the high standards set in each writer’s previous works, works composed, by and large, by their authors in a younger and more vigorous phase of their lives. Great Expectations is Dickens’s repudiation of all the romantic tropes he had happily utilized in his hey-day. The persevering young hero makes good, having achieved a certain status within his social milieu, and perhaps even having moved up a notch or two in the class hierarchy. Despite the troubles and travails, pluck and determination, coupled with an internal moral resolve, help this archetypal Dickens hero to overcome obstacles and the circumstances of his birth and succeed in life. Even Sydney Carton, the roué who redeems his wasted life by offering his own for that of condemned French nobleman Charles Darnay, gains a certain Christic patina through his self-sacrifice in A Tale of Two Cities. No, Great Expectations ends in the loss of all of the blessings which character and an impoverished noblesse oblige had attracted to Pip. His benefactor dead and his fortune, Pip’s by right, now forfeited, Pip must take a job exactly suited to his birth and education – that of a lowly clerk. That his love object, Estella, used and discarded by the man whom she had maneuvered into a marriage which she had hoped might support her in the custom of her over-indulged childhood as the adopted daughter of Miss Havisham, has now been brought down to Pip’s level and can only just begin to find in him an acceptable mate, leaves the reader feeling a bit as though Dickens was, perhaps, too much of a realist, albeit the original ending had no such reconciliation and would have been, otherwise, even less satisfying an ending. Yes, the disillusionment which the reader feels is, for Dickens, a very real point of hopefulness. Pip, victim of happenstance, has not changed – his negative experiences have made him a realist, but they have not changed or altered his inner core values. He takes the job as a clerk knowing he has another thirty or forty years of work before he drops dead at his clerk’s desk, pen in hand, yet willingly embraces his fate, despite all else he might have had. Pip, you see, still has his personal integrity, however it might have been repressed while he was in the process of “becoming a gentleman,” as well as his sense of personal honor. Dickens seems to have abandoned what, in America, would later become the “Horatio Alger” stock narrative attitude and decided to tell his audience that life only turns out the way you want it to in books – and romantic books at that. No. Here, he seems to say, “though fortune may smile upon you today, it is all ephemeral and can disappear at the drop of a hat or a change in the wind.” The dark, sooty streets inhabited by the laboring class, toil, sickness, and want, seem to be all you can hope for out of life, but you can live your life with the honor due every person who does an honest day’s labor for a working man’s wage. “I may be old,” Dickens seems to be saying, “but at least I’ve learned this.” As with Shakespeare’s Tempest, the ending is unsatisfying to audiences who like things all wrapped up in a nice little summation, where all loose ends are tied up and the good get what is seen as their just reward, and those who are wrongdoers get what is coming to them. “No, it’s not really like that at all,“ these two giants of English literature are saying. “Here’s what really happens, and why, and it’s not all bad that compromises are made or that there are no true black-and-white positions. As long as you continue to recognize what is important in life, you can continue with compromising your own selfhood or values.” And that’s not a bad lesson to try to teach. ### On another note entirely, Hollywood and the British film industry still don’t seem to get this about Great Expectations; they keep trying to turn it into a period costume melodrama with miscast name actors who merely detract from the film by being so recognizeably famous rather than the characters in the book. Ralph Fiennes and Helena Bonham Carter are fine actors, but they are horribly miscast, if the trailers are any indication. Vanessa Redgrave or Maggie Smith would have been suitable Miss Havishams, and someone like Bob Hoskins would have been better suited to play the criminal-turned-benefactor Abel Magwitch. Neither Feinnes or Bonham-Carter are seasoned enough actors, nor, for that matter, old enough, make-up jobs to the contrary, for the roles. — JB