HARDY FORUM ARCHIVE H01069 7/2/01 "JULY 2001 NOTES AND QUERIES" ================================================================= From: "Michael Barry" Subject: Re: Character of Tess Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 09:42:44 +0100 Further to the earlier discussion on the character of Tess, it struck me that there was quite excellent material there for a most interesting programme note (for our forthcoming theatre production). I have at last (and at very last minute) managed to make a preliminary edit, which I hope will be acceptable to contributors. I have given a credit to those who participated and to the Society itself, as you can see. A further pruning will be necessary to fit it into a page of the programme - but I would welcome any immediate objections or requirements for change that participants may feel necessary. With all thanks for your help. Michael Barry ************************************************************************** THE CHARACTER OF TESS Having been introduced to Tess by way of Polanski's film, which starred Natassia Kinski, I had a preconception that she was a passive creature, who found it difficult to assert herself. When we performed the play in 1993 however, the excellent Jane McKell gave a very spirited performance, who was nonetheless capable of deep suffering. The production affected audiences greatly, but my reading of the character of Tess didn't noticeably change. I recently floated the idea of Tess as an excellent character for a novel, but potentially poor material for a drama. Dramas, in my experience, need a "proactive" central character, a protagonist, who at least attempts to take control of a situation, an antagonist, or adverse circumstances with as much effort and energy as s/he can muster, and to resolve it positively to his/her benefit. Whether or not s/he fails is neither here nor there, but the "proactivity" is all. I floated this provocative starter to the internet discussion circle of the Thomas Hardy Society, and received a wealth of wisdom in response - in spite of the fact that the issue had clearly been debated a number of times before. What follows are some of the more pointed remarks. A key difficulty is "what most girls (these days)" would do in Tess' position. The suggestion that Hardy should somehow represent her acting with the kind of self-assertion potentially available to a young woman in the early 21st-century is clearly inappropriate. What the novel presents is Tess' astonishing strength and resiliency. The key thing is that Tess leaves Alec - an event for which he is clearly unprepared. How many others of his working-class victims of seduction have broken off the engagement first, do you suppose? I don't understand why more readers don't recognize the assertion of self-respect this represents, and acknowledge the strength of will it requires. The section following "Maiden No More" is entitled "The Rally." Tess is constantly "rallying," no matter what sexual oppressions and double standards her culture throws at her, as embodied in Alec and Angel. Tess poses a serious threat to Angel's sense of self-identity. She is clearly presented as the stronger of the two characters. The fact that he has all the patriarchal power, and that this allows him to impose a completely unjust evaluation upon his wife, doesn't really change this. Although she appears to "passively" accept his rejection, Hardy is careful to show that she is not broken by his verging-on-hysterical inability to deal with her sexual past. Mostly what she does, however, is endure, and we have an unfortunate tendency in our contemporary world of "self-actualization" to see endurance as a weakness, instead of a strength. This is our problem, not Hardy's. Alec's murder ..... First, the text has incrementally foreshadowed her potential for violence with the push she gives Alec on the horse in the Chase, and with her striking him in the face with her threshing glove at Flintcomb-Ash. Second, the entire pattern of victimization which Alec has imposed on her (and which, by the way, she has fiercely resisted) has set up this action, and to ignore all of that is to ignore pretty much the entire ideological movement of the text. And finally, Angel's sudden reappearance clearly devastates Tess to the point where she is primed for violence, which Alec himself provokes by taunting her and calling Angel "by a foul name." There is more than enough opportunity to dramatize Tess as as strong, resilient, erotically powerful woman. It is her innocence that is her strength; this much is clear even in the last scenes when she seems not to have all her faculties intact. Supreme acceptance and endurance. Enduring can be a strength for a female character. In all her "fateful" situations, Tess was pitted against the entire patriarchal, mechanical mindset in ascendance. Each assault upon Tess's fortunes is part of a larger picture, of mankind, or humankind, imagining that its mind could bring the world to heel. Perhaps endurance is nature's greatest strength. Is Tess strong or weak? What constitutes strong or weak? What is her relation to society as a whole? These questions themselves keep me coming back to Tess, not their easy resolution. Remember those of us, who at least occasionally enjoy getting to know characters as complex as ourselves. Tess cannot be detached from her historical context. The shameful label of 'fallen women' and the disgrace of bearing an 'illegitimate' child no longer press so fiercely upon westernized women today. Hardy implanted a middle-class sense of shame into the working-class Tess and then demonstrated how that shame so injustly cripples Tess, how her fear of others' moralising judgements agonises her. She does not accept that she is a sinner which, it should be remembered, would have been a general middle-class attitude towards her. Her gradual questioning of her so-called shame and her growing sense of injustice at Alec's and especially Angel's hands are a triumph of character. That Tess imagines that Angel may forgive her, especially after his confession of a past affair, that she imagines a relationship in which a man and woman may love each other with equal passion and acceptance is quite revolutionary. It would have certainly challenged readers of the time. Tess possessed an incredibly strong and challenging mind which can still inspire women and men today. The great point about her (is) the fact that she quietly and and powerfully stands against all the constructions that patriarchy wants to place on her. Tess's strength - her faith that Angel will still love her, her revived optimism after all she has endured and , above all, her own rejection of a crippling morality she herself had previously espoused - a rejection which must have demanded so much inner strength. Her murder ..... the actions of a trapped animal that has been hounded and hunted its entire life because of society's strictures and finally defends itself. Many of Tess's struggles with Alec and Angel and others' perceptions of her are struggles many women still experience today. Women still have to deal with images of how they should be and stereotypes of how they should behave even if they are not quite those of Tess's time. The Thomas Hardy Society can be reached at http://www.yale.edu/hardysoc/welcome/welcomet.htm. I am indebted to the following for their input to this discussion: Richard Nemesvari, Meg Cronin, Nathan Elliott, Robert Schweik, Carol Farrelly, Alan Shelston, Shannon Rogers, Joan Sheski and especially Rosemarie Morgan, whose book "Women and Sexuality in the novels of Thomas Hardy" was such a fascinating insight. Thank-you all. Michael Barry ========== From: "Marta Rabikowska" Organization: Glasgow University Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 17:25:09 +0100 Subject: Venus and her arm Dear Members, I work on Jude considering the text from a semiotic perspective. I feel I have a problem with a sign of Venus mentioned chapter III, part II. For me the following fragments refer to a figure of Venus who had both arms or at least one undamaged: "They were in the main reduced copies of ancient marbles, and comprised divinities of a very different character from those the girl was accustomed to see portrayed, among them being a Venus of a standard pattern" [...] (93). Occasionally peeping inside the leaves to see that the Venus'arm was not broken" (94) Penguin Classics Ed.1998 I wonder now, whether the figure was treated as a copy that was "improved" and had two arms, or one whole arm? What does "standard pattern" of Venus meant in Christminster, or rather why Hardy called this figure "standard" if it was possible for Sue to check if the arm was not broken (being already broken). A narrator admits, that a saler who sold the figure to Sue "was re-arranging [all the figures] before proceeding with them on his way" (93). Can it mean that he changed their shapes, through for example fitting an arm? And whe Sue was not aware of this difference? This question is very important for my work; the idea of Venus imroved (created, rearranged, rewritten) can become a significant argument for my reasearch in which I deal with simulacra signs. Venus from the above fragments seems to be one of them. But maybe I am wrong, maybe I read this passages too subjectively. I will be very grateful for any comments. Marta University of Glasgow ========== F From: "Patrick Roper" Subject: Re: Venus and her arm Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 18:59:28 +0100 Later in Jude TH refers to Praxiteles's Venus. The Roman copy of this statue is illustrated here: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/art/greek/10_97_5_68.jpg It appears as though her left arm has been broken off at some stage. Is it possible that the plaster casts showed the line of this break (if this was the statue TH had in mind) and Sue was concerned in case the arm came off? Patrick Roper ========== From: "Jaimes, Eric" Subject: Infinite Unimportance Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 14:30:22 -0400 Do I have time to write this? Obviously not. I am not, as I suspect most of you are, in the bowels of Academia at the moment, but at, erm...work. Anyhow, Hardy is one of my favo(u)rite authors - if not my favorite. However I have never read Tess of the D'Urbervilles, believe it or not, but I started it this past weekend. What I wanted to say was a bit about the Preface, about how Hardy defends himself early on against his "holier-than-thou" critics. Shortly after I read this passage I had a discussion with a friend of mine about something I had written. It's a song that paints a picture of something unpleasant, and she told me the song disturbed her at times and asked if I was prepared to defend it in case it ever reached the public (she is a musician playing this song with me in a band). I immediately thought of what I had read in Hardy's preface moments ago which seemed so fitting. What Hardy says is "Let me repeat that a novel is an impression, not an argument; and there the matter must rest; as one is reminded by a passage...." etc. Funny how what was shocking then is so tame by today's standards. Where will we be in 50 or 100 years? He then quoted a letter from Schiller to Goethe saying "They are those who seek only their own ideas in a representation, and prize that which should be as higher than what is. The cause of the dispute, therefore, lies in the very first principles, and it would be utterly impossible to come to an understnading with them." Chances are this is far too simplistic a concept for all you great literary minds out there. Perhaps you are more interested in deconstructionalist approaches to Hardy's work and to see how many Eagletonesque "isms" you can come up with. This is my first post to this group, so I don't really know what to expect. Many authors have, of course, been put in a position to defend themselves like this. But I found Hardy's choice of a quote particularly fitting and applicable to what I was going through at the moment. Does anyone have any additional information about what Hardy went through with critics and how he defended himself? I know that after Jude he packed in the fiction altogether because of these narrow minds. Also, let me take this opportunity to say what a joy it is to have authors like Hardy available to us who truly make art of language. Thanks for reading! Eric Eric Jaimes Account Director UltraStar Internet Entertainment, LLC 135 East 55th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10022 p: 212-265-2525 ext. 18 ========== Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:01:32 -0700 From: Betty Cortus Subject: Re: Character of Tess Michael, I tried to send the following message to you privately, but it was returned "address unknown." Just another e-glitch I suspect. Betty Dear Michael, I was so pleased to learn that you found the responses to your question about Tess's character useful, and I'm sure all the participants in the discussion will be quite flattered to know that they will appear in print. Thanks too for the nice plug for the TTHA web-site, and I am sure Rosemarie will appreciate having her excellent book mentioned. One minor correction though--we are The T.H. Association, not Society. We have a fine sibling relationship with the T. H. Society in the UK, and we cooperate on many levels, but it is an entirely separate entity. Once again, wishing you the best of luck with your upcoming production. All the Best, Betty ========== Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 15:24:46 -0400 From: Rosemarie Morgan Subject: Re: Infinite Unimportance "How he defended himself?" Mostly, defensively -- (you are not alone...) Latterly, offensively -- (becoming the twentieth century's greatest poet) With every good wishism Rosemarie Morganism ========== Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:20:16 -0600 From: Harry Sheski Subject: Re: Character of Tess Thanks to Michael Barry for "collecting" our comments - wish we had just such a person always. Hoping the production is successful, I'll add "break a leg!" Joan Sheski ========== Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:48:12 -0500 From: "John P. Farrell" Subject: Edmund H. New Can anyone furnish me with information--or a source of infomation--about Edmund H. New, who illustrated Bertram Windle's The Wessex of Thomas Hardy (London, 1902)? I've checked various resources on the net and in some standard Hardy books and have only found an account of New's visit to Kelmscott. Unfortunately I don't have a DNB lying around anywhere. Many thanks. Prof. John P. Farrell Department of English University of Texas Austin 78712 512-471-8755 jackfar@mail.utexas.edu ========== Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:51:32 -0700 From: Betty Cortus Subject: Re: Edmund H. New Not being near a library either right now I'm afraid I can't shed any further light on Edmund New. However there is a brief mention in Millgate's Biography that Hardy did in fact cooperate with Windle and New, perhaps because he recognized "that the circulation of such volumes could serve only to enhance the sale of his own books." Betty Cortus ========== Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:07:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Plate 13 for The Trumpet-Major From: "Philip & Andrea Allingham" Dear Birgit, Just in case you haven'd had a chance to peruse my tabulation of the *Trumpet-Major* plates, I've discovered a discrepancy at Plate 13: I have the picture of Matilda Johnson standing in front of her mirror; you have a picture of Matilda and Bob on a wagon. I propose that we exchange good quality photocopies. Furthermore, I'll send you a jpeg of the plate you're missing if you'll give me an appropriate web address to which I may send it. Philip Allingham ========== From: "Jeanie Smith" Subject: MA Dissertation Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 12:42:34 +0100 Dear List Members I am working towards an MA in Information Management at Thames Valley University, London, and am in need of the assistance of people engaged in Hardy research to answer a questionnaire about their use of bibliographies and other resources. If any of you feel able to assist me I would be very grateful. The TTHA has given me kind permission to make this request but asks that all replies be sent to me personally at jean_e_smith@hotmail.com and not to the Forum. If you are typing my address the first part is jean_e_smith, I'm afraid the underlining refuses to go! My research includes the compilation of a bibliography of works about Hardy for the years 1990-1999. If you would like more detail about my project before agreeing to help I am happy to answer any queries at the above address. My best wishes and thanks Jeanie Smith ========== From: "Martin Hemming" Subject: Re: MA Dissertation Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 18:08:30 +0100 Jeanie, Please send me your questionnaire and more details of your project. Martin Hemming ========== Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:14:48 -0200 From: "Anastasia Nevstruyeva" Dear List Members don't you know how the name Thomas Hardy referred to Lyme Regis? With best wishes, thanks in advance Anastasia ==========