CHARLES DICKENS’ HARD TIMES ROMANTIC TRAGEDY OR PROLETARIAT PROPAGANDA （毕业论文外文文献翻译） .doc

charles dickens hard times: romantic tragedy or proletariat propaganda?ronnie oldhamthe department of english, aalborg university in hard times, charles dickens gives us a close-up look into what appears to be the ivory tower of the bourgeoisie of his day, yet these middle-class characters are viewed from a singular perspective, the perspective of those at the bottom of the social and economic system. though dickens characters tend to be well developed and presented with a thoroughly human quality, the stereotypical figure of arrogant and demanding bounderby fails to accurately capture the motivations and attitudes of the typical successful businessman of the day and is an indication of the authors political motives. hard times, rather than presenting a historically accurate picture of the extraordinary changes brought about by the industrial revolution, is a one-sided attack on the utilitarian value system of the middle 19th century based upon emotional blue-collar appeals for labor sympathy that are not uncommon in todays corporate environment. josiah bounderby of coketown represents the utilitarian attitude and, as such, is the villain of the story and clearly the target of dickens political argument. dickens characterizes bounderby as a powerful individual, driven by greed and guided by a distorted view of human nature. he is the only wealthy industrialist introduced in hard times, although mr. sleary might arguably be considered the more virtuous businessman. dickens clearly portrays bounderby as a greedy and individualistic, self-serving capitalist; rather than an insightful, forward-looking crafter of a new industrial age. dickens artfully weaves his political enemy into a pompous, arrogant image reinforced with traditional working-class themes that lead the reader to conclude that bounderby, as a manifestation of gradgrinds and choakumchilds philosophy of fact, represents all that is wrong with industrial society. dickens apparently expects his readers to accept his portrayal of bounderby as being typical of this new breed of industrialists, but the character reflects none of the beginnings of modern scientific principles of management date emerging in the first half of the 19th century. by building on the principles of adam smiths wealth of nations, the works of babbage, jevons, newman, riccardo, taylor, von clauswitz, and others were not only helping shape the future of management philosophy, but were decisively impacting contemporary business thought throughout dickens lifetime (george 67-78). no indication of these developments can be seen in the character of bounderby. author archibald coolidge writes that:dickens has a sort of preoccupation with money. but he calls businessmen villains and schemers. he almost never shows or describes them at work; when he does, the are show being crooked or at least harsh.it seems fairly clear that he did not analyze the problems of the businessman or those created by himnever analyzed the problems of creating, distributing, or getting wealth (140). this unrealistic portrayal of businessmen is not uncommon for dickens. other works by dickens are peppered with the characters of ralph nickleby, hawk, squeers, gride, quilp, tigg, pecksniff, heep, smallweed, krook, merdle, flintwich, casby, fledgeby, wegg, and hexam. all reveal dickens tendency to depict wealthy entrepreneurs as wicked and self-serving embodiments of oppression (coolidge 189). indeed, an evil capitalist is almost a stock character for dickens. a primary working class theme found throughout hard times is that managers, such as bounderby, unjustly live in the lap of luxury at the expense of the workers. the picture presented is a common one; hard-working laborers, who toil long hours for little pay, resenting the boss, who appears to do little work and yet garners the full reward of their collective efforts. the reality is that many entrepreneurs and mangers are typically more personally involved in the business and have a larger stake in the commercial success of the company than other employees. they tend to have a much larger investment at risk, work longer hours, and secure a proportionately larger take of the companys profit. commenting on 19th century managerial functions and principles, j. lawrence laughlin wrote that:he who controls a large capital actively engaged in production can never remain at a standstill; he must be full of new ideas; he must have power to initiate new schemes for the extension of his market; he must have judgment to adopt new inventions, and yet not be deceived as to their value and efficiency (223) bounderby is not described in these terms; however, any successful manager must ordinarily perform many critical functions not acknowledged by those at the bottom of the hierarchy. when a manager is perceived as incompetent or exploitative, whether justified or not, resentment of behalf of the workers is common. todays senior executive salaries in the millions of dollars are viewed with the same disdain, especially when these executives implement downsizing and lay-offs. it is interesting that dickens paints the aristocracy, through the character of mrs. sparsit, as a failed and outdated institution and yet, no comparison is made to traditional class distinctions or to the lifestyle previously enjoyed by peasants and serfs under feudal domination. the clear distinction drawn between the dirty, crowded worker dwellings and bounderbys luxurious country estate is reminiscent of the vast traditional differences between the lives of aristocrats and the lives of peasants. no doubt there were similar lifestyle differences between the middle-class bourgeoisie and the working poor; however, these differences pale in comparison to the class separation that had existed for centuries prior. in reality, the division of labor and the technological advances brought about by the industrial revolution resulted in an improved standard of living for most of the working poor. w.h. hutt in his essay the factory system of the early nineteenth century, comments that compared to factory workers, the agricultural laborers lived in abject poverty, and the work to which country children were put was far more exhausting than factory labor (qtd in hayek 180). t.s. ashton, citing actual data from the industrial town of oldham in standard of life of the workers in england, indicates that in 1831 the standard diet of the poor cost about the same as in 1791 (qtd in hayek 156-7). they worked and could afford more, certainly not an image conveyed by dickens in hard times. another working-class theme masterfully entwined into the person of bounderby is that of demanding and unappreciative bosses having no compassion for their employees. the hands are viewed as mere factors of production, not much different than the machines they operate. bounderby himself views anyone that asks for more than they already have as wanting to dine on turtle soup and venison with golden spoons at his expense. to be fair, labor in the mid-19th century was generally a plentiful commodity and treated as such (george 182) and, according to business historian john wilson, the high levels of fixed investment in building and machinery evidently forced the industrialist to work assets as hard as possible in order to maximise returns (32). bounderbys seemingly uncaring attitude regarding the plight of the hands actually would not have been particularly unusual among mid-century industrialists. agreement with thomas malthus statement that the increasing wealth of the nation has had little or no tendency to better the conditions of the poor (312-13) was commonplace. this image of the futility of investing time or money in the poor is reinforced by the callous manner in which bounderby dismisses the storys martyr, stephen blackpools, sincere request for advice. the cold-hearted businessman simply views this request for help as an attempt to avoid his responsibilities and rightful obligations by seeking an easy way out his marriage. bounderby knows all of the bricks in coketown, but little about the concerns of individual people. he appears to live so isolated and segregated from the lives of common people that even he fails to notice the irony in his desire to terminate his own marriage. the conversations between bounderby and blackpool demonstrate dickens tendency to emphasize middle-class efforts to avoid fraternization and social contact with the lower classes, while minimizing the reality of industrial paternalism in the 19th century. another contributor to the vilification of bounderby is the fear most of the workers have of losing their job or of being marked as a troublemaker. often for the greater good of the company, non-conforming or dissenting employees are singled out as an example to others. when these judgements are made in error, the individual harmed naturally feels unjustly injured and assigns the blame to the incompetence of management. stephen blackpool writes his troubles off as being just a muddle. still, the implication is clear. if bounderby had not jumped to a premature conclusion and unfairly condemned blackpool without the benefit of due process, the tragedy of blackpools death could have been averted. in dickens day a disgruntled employee had little recourse; however, prejudice against and suspicion of the motives of the poor still exist. someone who has consciously and consistently bettered his own life finds it difficult to understand why others merely complain about their situation instead of doing something about it. perhaps the dominant working-class theme expressed in the character of bounderby is the moral sacrifice required for success in a capitalist world. those who aspire to greater wealth and power appear to do so with selfish motives and must forfeit the ability to love or be compassionate in the bargain. numerous biblical references identify love of money as the root of all evil and a choice between god and mammon. indeed, this idea has remained a core component of christian society. still, the message in hard times is more in line with the words of karl marx:the ancients denounced money as subversive of the economic and moral order of things. modern society, which soon after its birth, pulled plutus by the hair of his head from the bowels of the earth, greets gold as it holy grail, as the glittering incarnation of the very principle of life (61). as a result of these same inconsistencies, many contemporary managers face tough decisions when machiavellian business practices conflict with christian morals or social custom. by questioning bounderbys motive and method, dickens is providing a direct attack on the profit motive as an incentive for individual entrepreneurship, a basic tenant of laissez-faire capitalism. dickens uses bounderbys propensity to exaggerate his own rise to power from humble origins as an indication of less than virtuous motives. though the character traits, hard work, and circumstances behind bounderbys rise to power are not detailed in hard times, it was certainly more difficult for men to cross class boundaries in the 19th century than it is today. dickens leads the reader to assume that bounderby had attained his position by undesirable means, yet bounderby must have possessed some qualities capable of propelling him to rise above his earlier station. most of the newly rich were quite proud to have risen from the less privileged classes to a level of power and prestige known before only to the aristocracy, a trait easily visible among modern success stories. for someone in bounderbys position to exaggerate their tale over time seems understandable, though no less an untruth. even after mrs. peglers revelation of bounderbys true background and his characterization as a fraud, he remains a self-made man and a wealthy businessman albeit alone and unhappy. dickens also leaves the impression that it is worse to be stepped-on and used by one of your own kind than by an aristocrat, who does not know better. the political changes brought about by the french revolution, along with the introduction of steam power and the machinery of mass production, marked a profound change in european society in the 19th century. people could aspire to more than their birthright. opportunities for greater wealth and self-actualization were better than ever. still, the price in human terms was high and the result was a fundamental change in the structure and values of society. more than that, capitalism crystallized an altogether new value system, where individual worth and self-esteem are measured in monetary terms. thorstein veblen describes this change in the leisure class: gradually, as industrial activity further displaces predatory activity in the communitys everyday life and in mens habits of thought, accumulated property more and more replaces trophies of predatory exploit as the conventional exponent of prepotence and success. with the growth of settled industry, therefore, the possession of wealth gains in relative importance and effectiveness as a customary basis of repute and esteem. (222). it is significant that characters in hard times that demonstrate ambition or desire for a higher station are shown as poor role models and the prescribed path to success is disdained by all except bitzer, the brown-noser. even the selfish and irresponsible tom gradgrind appears more virtuous compared to bitzers blind ambition. both are contenders for a promising position with bounderby. john.f. wilson suggests the likelihood of this type of arrangement:most managers still learnt their jobs through practical training, or were brought into the firm because of their family or religious connections, and this tradition became a distinguishing characteristic of british business for much of the nineteenth century (31). dickens fails to detail to specific opportunities associated with such a position. additionally, he positions gradgrinds school as the only available training ground for management recruits, hardly a realistic representation of the poor of potential candidates available. in fact, many functional and operational managers were promoted from within the lower echelons of the company, a practice prevalent today (wilson 31). the industrial revolution can indeed be viewed as both the triumph and the shame of the bourgeoisie, yet for the first time non-aristocrats were successfully running the show. these men were pioneers, adapting to the cues and demands of a new age without a collective knowledge of how to run an industrial economy. dickens points out the flaws and limitations of this new society in his eloquent and passionate plea on behalf of the working poor without thoroughly or accurately presenting the big picture. compared to the attitudes and lifestyles of slaves and serfs in centuries past, dickens time might even be looked on as good times. dickens himself begins another novel with it was the best of times. it was the worst of times. apparently dickens is attempting to provide some balance to the dominant utilitarian philosophy of the greater good. through sissy jupes simple and wise answers in the classroom, dickens reminds us not to forget those left behind, who receive little of the trickle-down wealth generated by a vibrant and growing industrial society. dickens has touched on a problem that is still with us today. although capitalism and free markets dictate that there will always be winners and losers, a compassionate and truly human society should strive to benefit all classes of its citizens. works cited:coolidge, archibald c., jr. charles dickens as serial novelist. ames, ia: iowa state university press, 1967.hayek, f. a., ed. capitalism and the historians. chicago, il: university of chicago press, 1954.laughlin, j. lawrence. the elements of political economy. new york, ny: 1896.malthus, thomas. first essay on population, 1798. london, england: macmillan & company. 1926.marx, karl. capital. great books of the western world. vol. 50. ed. robert hutchins. chicago, il: encyclopdia britannica. 1982. veblen, thorstein. selected writings of thorstein veblen. ed. wesley c. mitchell. new york, ny: viking press. 1947. wilson, john f. british business history: 1720-1994. manchester, england: manchester university press. 1995. 查尔斯狄更斯的艰难时世：浪漫的悲剧还是无产阶级的宣传？罗尼奥尔德姆奥尔堡大学外语系在艰难时世中，查尔斯狄更斯为我们提供了一个近距离观察这似乎是他的时代的资产阶级的象牙之塔的机会，然而，这些中产阶级人士从社会和经济制度的底层这一个独特的角度来观察这个象牙塔。虽然狄更斯的人物倾向于发展和体现出完全的人类品质，但是，一贯傲慢的人物形象和严苛的庞得贝没能准确地捕捉那个时代典型的成功商人的动机和态度，而只是象征着作者的政治动机。与其说艰难时世呈现出了一幅由工业革命引起不平凡的变化的准确的历史性画面，不如说它以情绪激动的工人阶级呼吁在现今的企业环境中并不罕见的劳工慰问为基础，片面地抨击19世纪中期功利主义价值体系。焦煤镇的约西亚庞得贝是小说中的反派角色，他代表着功利主义者的态度，而且他无疑是狄更斯政治论点的目标。狄更斯把庞得贝塑造成一个有权势的个体，他被贪婪驱使着，被扭曲的人性带动着。他是艰难时世中唯一富有的实业家，虽然史利瑞先生也可以被认为是更有道德的商人。狄更斯清楚地把庞得贝描绘成一个贪婪的、个人主义的资本家，而不是一个有见地，有前瞻性的新工业时期的工匠。狄更斯巧妙地为他的政治敌人编造出自大傲慢的形象，从而来加强传统的工人阶级的主题，引导读者得出结论：作为葛擂梗和裘卡姆丘尔德的“事实”哲学的具体表现，庞得贝代表着社会工业中所有错误的一切。显然，狄更斯希望他的读者接受庞得贝这典型的新实业家类型的写照，但这个人物完全没有反映出自19世纪上半叶起出现的现代科学管理学原理。根据亚当斯密的国富论，以及巴贝奇，杰文斯，纽曼，里卡多，泰勒等人的作品思想所建立的现代科学管理学原理，不仅帮助塑造管理哲学的未来，而且决定性的影响着狄更斯一生的当代商业思想。（乔治67-78）在庞得贝这个人物上，完全没有迹象表明这种发展。作者阿奇博尔德柯立芝写道：狄更斯对于金钱有某一种成见，他称呼商人为恶棍和阴谋家。他几乎从不显示或描述他们工作的情况，当他这么做的时候，也是展现出不当的或至少是苛刻的描述这似乎相当清楚，他没有分析商人或那些由他创造的人物的问题他从不分析创造，分发，或获取财富的问题。（140） 这种对于商人不切实际的描写，在狄更斯的小说中并不罕见。狄更斯其他作品中的拉尔夫尼克利比，霍克，格莱德，奎尔普，派克斯列夫，希普，斯墨尔维德，库鲁克，凯斯比，弗莱德比等人物使他的文章更加辛辣。所有的人物都揭示狄更斯试图把富裕的企业家描绘成邪恶且自私自利的压迫人民的化身。（柯立芝189）事实上，对狄更斯来说，一个邪恶的资本家几乎是他会优先选择的人物形象。艰难时世中一个主要的工人阶级的时代主题是，如庞得贝这样的管理者以工人为代价，不法的在奢侈的环境中生活。图片介绍是常见的一种，为了微薄的薪资而长时间的劳作的辛勤的劳动者怨恨着他们的老板，这些人极少工作，但却得到他们集体努力的全部的收益。现实情况是，许多企业家和管理人员通常更亲自参与了自己的生意，他们在公司的商业成功上比其他员工冒着更大的风险。他们往往有一个更大的投资风险，延长工作时间，并保证在比例上更多地取走公司的利润。学者j劳伦斯劳克林在谈到19世纪的管理职能和原则时写道：控制了大量资金的他积极地从事不会永远处于停滞状态的生产中；他必须是充满新创意；他必须有能力启动扩展市场的新计划；他必须判断是否采取新的发明，但不能被它们的