Oliver Twist And The Dark Side Of

British History Essay, Research Paper

Oliver Twist and the Dark Side of British History

Progress can be compared to a coin. On one side of the coin is wealth, and on the other side of the same coin are poverty, despair, misery, and crime. As Gertrude Himmelfarb explains:

The Victorians were avowedly, unashamed, incorrigibly moralists. They . . . engaged in philanthropic enterprises in part to satisfy their own moral needs. And they were moralists in behalf of the poor, whom they sought not only to assist materially but also to elevate morally, spiritually, culturally, and intellectually. (Himmelfarb 48).

In the novel Oliver Twist Charles Dickens allegorizes evil in contrast to good through characterization and melodrama. As Greg Stoddard summed up, .Most of the moral judgements of the reader are pre-made for him or her. As a result, the reader objectively absorbs the moral lessons Dickens has set forth. (Stoddard 5). In his novel Oliver Twist- Charles Dickens uses characterization and social satire as a means of revealing a dark era of British history.

Gregory Stoddard writes, .In Oliver Twist, there is a clear, defined system of criticism and rhetoric marked by sarcasm, and the language judgement. (Stoddard 1). The first words of Chapter 2 of Oliver Twist are an example. In this chapter Dickens describes the situation in which the innocent Oliver finds himself. He chooses his words carefully as he conveys his moralist judgements to his reader:

For the next eight months, Oliver was the victim of a systematic course of treachery and deception. He was brought up by hand. The hungry and destitute station of the infant orphan was duly reported. the parish authorities.resolved, that Oliver should be .farmed..where twenty or thirty other juvenile offenders against the poor laws rolled about the floor without the inconvenience of too much food or too much clothing. . . (Dickens 4).

Dickens chooses the words .treachery. and .deception. to state his moral judgement on the evil of society. .Victim. implies that there is a source that victimizes others. This is further strengthened by his use of the word .systematic,. which implies that the evil committed is intentional (Stoddard 2). Although the overall message is clear, coming on the heels of the Poor Law of 1834 as this book did, the characters Dickens creates for the purpose of making his social commentary range from one-dimensional to multidimensional. All, however, bear the common thread of being larger than life. He uses them as a means of presenting the .other. side of wealth . the dark, evil side.

To this end, Oliver operates as a catalyst rather than a hero. His lack of hero status allows the reader to follow him into the underworld without ever being a participant in it, just as Oliver never desired to be a participant in it (Blount 16-17). The reader follows him through Dickens’ moral judgements because to actually participant in that world would be too disgusting. The novel can, therefore, be moralized from a distance along with Dickens, even though the reader observes the most gruesome of killings and terrible circumstances of his or her life.

Although he is both innocent and a thief, Oliver does not grow in his role; he merely becomes wealthy in the end. For this reason, the evil actors, Fagin, Nancy, and Sikes are those characters that Dickens makes multidimensional. The victims of wealth are the innocent, and they are also the victims of the more romantic criminals and prostitutes . the other side of the coin. Dickens uses all of these characters to attack both systems, the upper and lower world. This is generally, but not always, performed within the confines of darkness. Darkness resides in the workhouses, in the underworld, in officers such as the .fat man. Bumble, and in the legal system. Through the range of characters and their various personalities, Dickens can address the world of greed and generosity, kindness and cruelty, and innocence and vice (Romano 140).

Not only are many of the acts of the multidimensional actors evil and ugly, the characters themselves are evil and ugly in appearance. This is particularly true of Fagin, Sikes, and Monks (Daleski 76). At the same time, the novel.s good characters, Oliver, Rose, and Mr. Brownlow are attractive. Characters who play both roles of good and evil, such as Nancy, are described depending on their role at any given moment. The same is true for other characters whose looks and character are not distinct. As symbols of evil, Fagin, Sikes, and Mr. Bumble are believable, while the number of situations in which Oliver finds himself are often beyond belief.

.Fagin wrongs without being wronged, and as such can be classified as evil. (Stoddard 3). On the other hand, Fagin is also comical and at the end of the tale somewhat sympathetic. For example, Fagin is the one who provides Oliver with a home. Fagin.s home is not only the source of evil, but also the source of warmth. Fagin is the entertainer and the thief, as well as the comic and kidnapper. According to Ivan Melada, Dickens. intent for Fagin is to .raise him to the archetypal level of .an aging Lucifer,. an incomprehensible bogey-man. (Melada 218).

Even as he represents the underworld and all the ugliness that it embodies, Fagin is the character who makes the offer of wealth. He is Charles Dickens. symbol of the Bri