Note: Submitted on time
Book 1, Chapter 5 in a Tale of Two Cities is all about the
spilling of a cask of wine and the ensuing rush as the masses scoop up handfuls
and satiate their voracious appetites, both literally and figuratively, with
the drive and impetus for change falling in the latter category. Why wine? Why
not turnips or orange juice? Because Wine is the drink of the Aristocracy. And,
because, Wine is symbolic of blood!
On that dramatic note, let’s analyze the very interesting
chapter in light of the context of Paris in the decade leading up to the fall
of the Bastille in 1789. French society at this point is markedly divided in
terms of class compositions and is injudiciously skewed with respect to the
distribution of power, as a result of which the poor are bruised, batter, and
hungry, with “Hunger” prevalent and pervasive. Charles Dickens was the champion
of the poor, and raised their standard with a ferocity in his works. This stand
for the poor, along with the idea that a relatively smooth reform could be
attained, is highlighted in this scene, where the wine is shared by the crowd,
and the “wine game” had “little roughness and much playfulness” with a “special
companionship.” The ideal society no? Individuals having equal worth in the
eyes of the State and society regardless their economic fortunes or lack
thereof. Karl Marx would have a field day really, and indeed, judging by the
content of this chapter, he and Dickens would be present at the scene with
their own “little mugs of mutilated earthenware”.
Alas, I become the bearer of two bad news. Firstly, as
Dickens aptly notes, “the birds took no warning”. The class which was, and had
been for eons, subjected to torturous oppression, was not conscious enough
about said injustice, and was languishing in a bestial state. Indeed, even the
way they drank the wine was very instinctive and bestial in nature; a people
reacting in desperation without fully grasping the root of their troubles and
not comprehending the way to solve them in an efficacious manner. This last
point leads on very nicely to the second piece of bad news, which is the extent
of the revolution. Charles Dickens and numerous Enlightenment theorists, philosophers
and proponents like Mary Wollstonecraft were not pleased by the drastic course
the revolution, under the Jacobins led by Robespierre, took i.e. the Reign of
Terror. Perhaps as horrendous as the idea of the rich mercilessly crushing the
poor was the poor mercilessly crushing the rich; blind and irrational actions
that are not conducive to harmony and long term development and progress. This
is also where the fine line between reform and unnecessary revolution needs to
be drawn, in order to bring a smooth social order. Indeed, it would gainsay
even Marx’s radical assertion of the uprising of the Proletariat if a group of
said class replaced the former elites as the oppressors of the masses.
Summing up, this post touches upon the idea of revolution as
is presented in this chapter as well as in the larger plot of the book along
with posing certain caveats that highlight reservations to gruesome change
which are as significant as the prodding towards needed change.
No comments:
Post a Comment