Go back to the Dickens page for more texts and other resources.

Ambiguity of the Characters in A Tale of Two Cities

An analysis of the ambiguity in values and actions of the characters.


A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens in a large way reflects the experiences of his life and his time in general. Charles Dickens was born into a lower Middle Class working family. His family did reasonably well and from 1812, when he was born, until 1822, when he was ten, he lived in the suburb of Chatham. His mother taught him to read when he was three and by nine he had read his first novel. However, after having experienced the ?best? of possible lives, his father, who was too generous with his money, overspent. The Dickens family was forced to move into the slums and to fire their housekeeper, who Charles replaced, by dropping out of the school he had gone to for all his life. Even with these extreme measures all of the Dickens family was forced into debtor?s prison. This was Dickens? ?worst? time since he lived alone in the slums and was forced to work for long hours for little pay in a boot-blacking factory under filthy conditions. He begged his parents to allow him to let him join them, however, his mother declined him, signifying his first rejection by a woman. This period left a permanent mental scar on Dickens. However, Charles again fell on good times when a relative of his father?s died. His father received a handsome inheritance, which he used to free himself of debtor?s prison and send Charles back to school. However, by this time Charles had seen to much of the world and was unable to sit through tedious classes. The scars from his experience left him with an insatiable ambition, which motivated him to get a newspaper job. It was also his ambition and hard work that caused his status and pay to increase at the newspaper company. Dickens wrote his first novel at the age of 26, called the Pickwick Papers. He fell desperately in love in his early twenty?s with a woman named Maria Beadwell. He proposed marriage, however, she declined him since her parents believed him to be under her. Thus Dickens was rejected for a second time. This too may be the reason we have a ?perfect woman? figure in A Tale of Two Cities in the form of Lucy. However, Dickens moved on with his life and married Catherine Hogarth for whom he felt no passion but married anyway because she was reflective of typical Victorian Age values. Because of this he spent little time with her or his children and had numerous affairs until he was forty-six when he fell in love with a eighteen year old named Ellen Ternon. When he became infatuated with her he finally separated from his wife. Dickens life therefore is full of contradictions. The values of the two times he lived in greatly differed as well. He was born into the Age of Romanticism which rose from the devastation of the French Revolution. Romanticism, which lasted until Dickens was twenty, was everything the age of reason wasn?t: passionate, emotional, and non-conformist. Dickens was torn between this time and the Victorian Age, which encompassed his entire adult life. The values of the Victorian Age are those of people today: prosperity, progress, respectability, grow, capitalism, world domination, confidence, family values, and sentimentality in the form on nationalism. The reason this time was so optimistic was because the British controlled territory throughout the world, which was clearly visible in the quote, ?The sun never sets on the British Empire?. The middle class was prospering and dominating so these values are a reflection of them as well. Dickens is a perfect model of these values since he went from rags to riches, and from being unknown to being the most internationally renowned authors of all time. The plot of Dickens? book is an intricate and complex one. It centers around a story of a Doctor who was imprisoned and how his daughter married a descendent of his captors. Its intricacies are clearly illustrated in that the woman who raised Lucy, the Doctor?s daughter, was the brother of a man who had testified against Lucy?s imminent husband. However, an even more interesting aspect of the book is its various contradictions and ambiguities. A clear example of this is present in the first two parts of the first sentence of the book, ?It was the best of times, it was the worst of times?. This sentence then goes on to rattle off seven additional contradictions. These contradictions aren?t just England versus France as one might think but clearly present in each since in the second chapter people are afraid to roam the streets of England at night because of highway robbers. If not for this chapter one my think England was the perfect society. Another phrase at the beginning of the book is when the rider comes to Jarvis Lorry and says, ?Recalled to Life? which is a positive message since it means that Dr. Mannette has been freed from prison while at the same time being eerie since it makes it sound as though Dr. Mannette has been dead for eighteen years. In France we are introduced to France in the slums where the people are so hungry that they lick wine off the street. They are good people but they become more and more terrible throughout the novel. An example of one of these ambiguous people is Madame Defarge who is a terrible woman with no mercy. However, we sympathize with her at the same time since the Marquis?s family raped and killed her sister, killed her brother when he tried to rescue her sister, and then in the long term killed her parents because of the mental scars it left. Ernest Defarge was also present at this time to see the true injustice of the Evermonde?s as well which caused him to be almost as merciless as Madame Defarge toward their family. Another character with this ambiguity is Charles Darnay. Charles is an Evermonde by birth which causes some people to look at him through a negative lens immediately. However, he is nothing like his father or uncle and has left behind their cruelty to pursue a normal, virtuous life in England. Finally, Sydney Carton, while being an alcoholic and somewhat of a lowlife, has redeeming qualities which are ever present at the end of the novel when he gives his life for Darnay?s. Therefore, characters such as the Defarges, Charles Darnay, and Sydney Carton make clear that Dickens believed bad and good are never simple to define. Rather, he offers the reader a story in which the ?best? and ?worst? can not be separated, one from the other, and vice and virtue remain, at best, ambiguous.
Although on the surface Therese Defarge and her husband appear to be the obvious villains of the novel, a closer reading reveals that Therese?s monstrous cruelty as well as the complicity of her husband has been created by years of abuse and suffering at the hands of the French aristocracy. The pre-revolutionary France into which Therese is born is a terrible one, ?? a ruined country, yielding nothing but desolation?(p.229). And whom does Dickens blame for this desolation? He blames the aristocracy of eighteenth century France. Monseigneur in town, is representative of this class, to whom Dickens refers satirically as a ?national blessing?, who had ?wrung dry and squeezed out?(p.229), every last drop of vitality the country had to offer. These actions are equated with his swallowing, ?his morning?s chocolate [which] could not so much as get into the throat of Monseigneur, without the aid of four strong men besides the Cook?.(p.108) Indeed, Dickens tells us, that by some few sullen minds [he was] supposed to be rather rapidly swallowing France.?(p.108) The upper-classes of France , ?pillaged and plundered [the people] to the degree that when [they] chanced to have a bit of meat, [they] ate it in fear??.(p.328) Therese Defarge?s father went so far as to say that what they, ?should most pray for, was, that [their] women might be barren and [their] miserable race die out!?(p.328) The Evermonde brothers are the epitome of a not so ambiguously drawn aristocracy, who, unlike other characters in the novel , are completely evil or ?black?, ?the worst of the bad race?(p.328). One brother, the Marquis Evermonde, truly illustrates this viciousness when his carriage runs over a young boy in the street because of his imprudence in forcing his carriage through the streets at uncontrollable speeds. His first action is to, ?[run] his eyes over [the peasants], as if they had been mere rats come out of their holes?.(p.114) Instead of apologizing he, ??threw out a gold coin?(p.114) for the father of the dead boy, and instead of inquiring about the boy?s state of health he says, ?how do I know what injury you have done my horses??(p.114). Then when he leaves he leaves, ??with the air of a gentleman who had accidentally broken some common thing, and had paid for it?.(p.115) It is also important to note the reference to Madame Defarge in this passage when Dickens says, ?and the figure that stood beside [the father of the dead boy] was the figure of a dark stout woman, knitting?(p.115). Madame Defarge is able to stay so calm throughout the ordeal because she has been made inhuman by a rapacious crime committed in 1757 for which she had split all of her tears. She has become incapable of normal human reaction. Indeed, the monstrosity of the aristocracy has turned the peasants into something less than human. Dickens warns, ?crush humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms?.(p.374) Therese?s entire life has been controlled by the horrifying crime of 1757 which shaped her being into a ?tortured form?. The vengeance which drives her has possessed her in the form of survivor?s guilt, ??that husband was [Therese?s] sister?s husband, that brother was [Therese?s] brother, that father [Therese?s] father, those dead are [Therese?s] dead, and that summons to answer for those things descends to [Therese]!?(p.344) The crime began when, ?[an Evermonde brother] took [Therese?s sister] away - for his own pleasure and diversion??. Then, the Evermondes, ?kept [Therese?s brother in law] out in unwholesome mists at night, and ordered him back into his harness in the day?(p.329) until he fell dead. When Therese?s brother tried to rescue his sister, he met a similar fate, impaled by a sword. Later, Therese?s mother and father die from the heartbreak of this terrible crime. This tragedy is enough to destroy anyone?s compassion. But for Therese, her obligation to that moment becomes a mania: ??tell Wind and Fire where to stop, but don?t tell me?.(p.344) She has married Monsieur Defarge, not out of love, but out of a mutual hatred for the aristocracy. It is made clear when Monsieur Defarge talks to his wife, ?with his head a little bent, and his hands clasped behind his back, like a docile and attentive pupil??(p.182) that there is no passion between them. In fact, she does not even tell her husband about the most painful experience of her life, the crime, until after she and her husband find a letter by Doctor Manette describing it. The fact that she marries more out of an alliance than anything else shows us her monomania in her struggle against the Evermondes, ?I have this race[the Evermondes] a long time on my register, doomed to destruction and extermination?.( ) Another way her monomania is illustrated is through the fact that she has no children. Her hate is so consuming that her child has become her quest the kill the Evermondes whom she nurtures every day until she gives birth to the French Revolution.. Evidence of her inhumanity and ruthlessness in her quest is seen through Dickens? description of her, as ?immovable?, three times, making her seem almost robotic. She has become a ruthless robotic women meant only to kill. Dickens goes so far as to equate her to La Guillotine when, ?she put her foot upon [the guard]?s neck, and with her cruel knife - long ready- hewed off his head?(p.222). Her monomania goes so far as for her to believe that since her sister?s unborn child was killed so should Darnay?s only child, Little Lucy, ?The shadow attendant on Madame Defarge and her party seemed to fall so threatening and dark on [Little Lucy]??.(p.272) And Madame Defarge does truly become the shadow in Lucy and Little Lucy?s life. Therese?s monstrosity in he plot to destroy Darnay?s family is a reflection of France at the time, a land where ?Every green leaf, every blade of grass and blade of grain, was a shriveled and poor as the miserable people?.(p.229) Thus she is a product of the resentment of the peasant class as a whole in the late eighteenth century: ?Their were many women at the time, upon whom the time laid a dreadfully disfiguring hand; but, there was not one among them more to be dreaded than [Madame Defarge].?(p.365) Thus, whether it had been Therese or some other individual, eighteenth century France was so miserable that it would have ?heaved? a person with the characteristics of monomania and monstrosity so clearly represented throughout the novel through Madame Defarge under any circumstances. Dickens shows us that this monomania is her undoing. Deterministically she must go to fight Miss. Prose. It is a battle of all that is good and virtuous versus all that is disfigured and cruel: ?That basin fell to the ground broken, and the water flowed to the feet of Madame Defarge. By strange stern ways, and through much stained blood, those feet had come to meet that water?.(p369). Thus Dickens leaves us with a sense of ambiguity. While Dickens tells us that Madame Defarge has undoubtedly become monstrous, he also tells us that she is but a product of a cruel aristocracy and thus makes us fell for her. This ambiguity of Madame?s character may reflect Dickens? own life. He was a peasant and worked in a boot-blacking factory when he was young, and thus knows their hardships and feels deeply for them. At the same time he is now part of the aristocracy and therefore fears that they will revolt and kill him.
Ironically, both Therese Defarge and Charles Darnay are victimized by the same crime of 1757, but while Therese becomes a monstrous avenger, Charles turns away from the horror of his family?s guilt and seeks to escape his destiny. It is this evasion that makes him a questionable hero. Charles starts as a blameless boy who had the poor luck of coming from a family of destruction and hate. His mother does everything to keep him pure and disassociated with the sheer cruelty of Evermonde family: ?For his sake Doctor I would do all I can to make what poor amends I can. He will never prosper in his inheritance otherwise?.(p. 335). In fact, she makes, ?it the first charge of his life to bestow, with the compassion and lamenting of his dead mother, on this injured family??.(p. 335). Charles promises his mother that he will make amends if possible. However, as we see when Madame Evermonde leaves, ?caressing him?(p.335) he is his mother?s child: weak, frail, and powerless to do anything against the Evermonde brothers. Charles lives up to his mother?s weakness in character, when talking to the Marqui he says ?If [the Evermonde estate] passed to me from you, to-morrow I would abandon it, and live otherwise and elsewhere?What is it but a wilderness of misery and ruin??.(p.128). He feels that he is ?bound to a system that is frightful to [him], responsible for it but powerless in it; seeking to execute the last request of my dear mother?s lips and obey the last look of my dear mother?s eyes, which implored me to have mercy and to redress?.(p.127). Thus Charles? frailty does lead him to follow this hypothetical talk he had with his uncle, fleeing France, leaving all the hurt and destruction to which he was supposed to make amends unhealed and in the hands of his servant Monsieur Gabel. He flees to England which is ?very attractive to [him]?(p.129) as his uncle observes because he looks forward to spending time with Doctor Manette and Lucy. Here we again see that Charles is a decent person who sees the hurt and misery of the people of France but in accordance with his role as a questionable hero he runs away from it instead of fulfilling his promise to his mother to make amends. He escapes to a place of perfect happiness which even turns Mr. Lorry from a cold, detached businessman who, ?[has] a business charge to acquit himself of?(p.26) to a man who had, ?become the Doctor?s friend, and [for whom] the quiet street-corner was the sunny part of his life?.(p.96) This was a place where, ?peaches ripened in their season?(p.96), and symbolically therefore a very fertile place. This place almost seems to perfect when Dickens tells us that at the doctor?s house in Soho, ?when the streets grew hot, the corner was in a shadow?, which hints to Dickens early life in Chatam: his perfect life. It is, ?a very harbor from the raging streets?, where Charles is able to be consumed in this perfect life in England for twelve years until 1792, ignoring the pain and torment he has left untouched in France where a strong hate is building for Monsieur Gabel. He is again the ?nice boy? who has returned to his mother?s womb; he is again relying on others for his happiness: namely Dr. Manette. However, this is the not the only sacrifice Dr. Manette has to make for Charles? perfect bliss and comfort. At this point Dr. Manette?s ?energy which had at once supported him under his old sufferings and aggravated their sharpness, had been gradually restored to him?. However, idiotically, Charles aggravates these old wounds and the Doctor tries to suffer through them with strength to see his daughter happy. First, he reminds the Doctor that, ?[he] had loved [himself]; let [his] old love speak for [Charles]?(p.136) to which the Doctor responds with a, ??cry [that] was so like a cry of actual pain, that it rang in Charles Darnay?s ears long after [Dr. Manette] had ceased?.(p.136) It is unthinkable for Charles to say this when he must suspect that it was his family that pulled the Doctor and his wife apart. Then he again mentions France, which can only bring back more terrible memories for the doctor: ?No, dear Doctor Manette. Like you a voluntary exile from France; like you, driven from it by it distractions, oppressions, and miseries?.(p.137) Here again Charles must be infuriating the doctor since it was his family who created these malignancies and it is he who is doing nothing to mend these wounds. When he tries to tell the doctor his true name, ?My present name, though but slightly changed from my mother?s is not, as you will remember my own?, the doctor went so far as to put, ?his two hands at his ears?(p.140), and then, ?had his hands laid at Darnay?s lips?(p.140), before Doctor Manette tells Charles to, ?stop!?(p.140). Later because of this Lucy, ?heard a low hammering sound in [Doctor Manette?s] room?.(p.140) His relapse again shows us the ambivalence of Charles? heroism since his proposal to marry Lucy, although in good intent, forces Doctor Manette to suffer for Charles perfect bliss. Charles doesn?t find out about the doctor?s relapse and it is safe to assume that he doesn?t want to since it would shatter his perfect world. However, it is when Charles tells the doctor his real name on his wedding day in Doctor Manette?s room that, ?he was so deadly pale - which had not been the case when they went in together - that no vestige of colour was to be seen in his face?.(p.196) Even with this burden the doctor keeps his composure until after Lucy and Charles have left and then, ?a great change [came] over the Doctor; as if the golden arm uplifted there had struck him a poisoned blow. He had naturally repressed much, and some revulsion might have been expected in him when the occasion for repression was gone?(p.197) From here the doctor returns to his room and relapses in a state of mental torment in which he returns to making shoes for nine days. However, the doctor miraculously recovers before the honeymooners return and thus Charles never knows of the huge burden of pain that the Doctor has taken for him yet again. However, the doctor is not the only one who suffers; the peasants of France suffer from Charles lack of systematic help for them while he his enjoying his new life with Lucy. However, his na?vet? his again all to evident in his actions after receiving a letter from Monsieur Gabel. This letter tells us that Gabel has, ?long been in danger of [his] life a the hands of the village?(p.243), again reaffirming what we know about Charles leaving things unsettled in France. Gabel tells Charles to come so that he may be freed since his, ?fault is, that [he] has been true to [Charles]?(p.244) Thus Charles, Dickens? ambivalent hero again shoes us his ?nice boy? side when he is disturbed by, ?the peril of an old servant and a good one, whose only crime was fidelity to himself?.(p.244) Thus he recognizes that he had ?acted imperfectly?.(p.244) His na?vet? is alarmingly again present when he recounts that, ?he had oppressed no man, he had imprisoned no man?,(p.245) and therefore assumed that the peasants would see him as their savior and as good and kind noble. His lack of political awareness went so far as for him to believe that he might have, ?some influence to guide this raging Revolution that was running so fearfully wild?.(p.246) Thus like a sailor being drawn to the perilous shores of lodestone rock, likewise Charles is being pulled unknowingly towards his doom. Thus knowing, ?that to the force of these circumstances he had yielded?,(those circumstances being the bliss of his world in England)(p.244) he sets off for France with high hopes. However, he is brought down to earth when he is first imprisoned, and then when he talks to Monsieur Defarge: ?Indeed I am lost here. All here is so unprecedented, so changed, so sudden and unfair, that I am absolutely lost. Will you render me a little help??, ?None?.(p.257) Charles sees, ?that perils had thickened about him fast, and might thicken faster and faster yet?. Finally, some realism has come to him as to the peasant?s cruelty. However, he still can?t comprehend, ?how [the peasants could] have a place in the shadowy conceptions of a gentle mind?. Thus again we see Charles? ambiguity as a hero. He is again polite and gallant, however, he lacks the courage or cleverness found in all heroes. In fact he only escapes because Sydney Carton, in an attempt to better Lucy?s life, is willing to lay down his life. Charles is so helpless that, ?[he] felt like a young child in [Sydney?s] hands?. Thus Dickens tells us through Charles? experiences that ?the pretty picture is not always the worthy one?. This may have come from examining his picture perfect Victorian life after meeting Eleanor Turner. Thus he challenges the reader to truly ask himself, what is goodness?
It is in Sydney Carton that the ambiguity of vice and virtue is most clearly depicted as he is a man who rises from debauchery to sainthood. Like Therese Defarge and Charles Darnay Sydney?s ambiguous nature grows out of a childhood tragedy: The loss of his parents when he was no more than twelve years old. The blow of his father?s death was a life altering tragedy. Dickens tells us that Sydney, ?had followed his father to the grave?.(p. 317) He went from being, ?a youth of great promise? to one who cared nothing for himself and did everyone?s homework but his own. And, of course, why should he shine? He no longer has someone to work for and therefore no reason to excel. In fact, the shock of this event leaves Sydney an iconoclast when we see him in court at Darnay?s trial seventeen years after he was orphaned: ??this one man sat leaning back with his torn gown half off him, his untidy wig put on just as it had happened to light on his head after its removal, his hands in his pockets, and his eyes on the ceiling as they had been all day?.(p.80) However, it is on this very day that this man of a ?disreputable look? again gains something to shine for: Lucie Manette. It seems that Lucie is like Christ in that whatever she touches, she is able to heal. Indeed it is this realization about Lucie that causes Sydney?s terrible rudeness to the man whose life he had saved that very day, again leaving the reader with a sense of Sydney?s ambiguity. He is as usual ?reckless in his demeanor?(p.80) when we see him with Charles Darnay whose gentlemanly facade serves to worsen Sydney?s dissipation: ?Charles Darnay was soon recruiting his strength with a good plain dinner and good wine: while Carton sat opposite to him at the same table with his separate bottle of port before him, and his fully half-insolent manner upon him?.(p.87) However, the light that Lucie has awakened in Sydney soon begins to trouble him when we see him throw, ?his glass against the wall, where it shivered to pieces?(p.87) after Darnay makes a toast to Lucie. In Lucie?s obvious love of Darnay, Sydney begins to see how much he threw away. This recognition furthers his hate of Darnay to the point that he asks Darnay, ?Do you think I particularly like you??(p.88) and then goes on later to confess to his reflection that he, ?[hates] the fellow[Darnay]?.(p.89) He begins to see that the bitterness left by the death of his parents has destroyed his life and any chance he might have had of Lucie?s loving him. It also leaves him unable to develop a close relationship with another person: ?I care for no man on earth, and no man on earth cares for me?.(p.89) Thus we have his relationship with C.J. Stryver whom he neither likes nor respects, yet makes his only companion. Stryver supplies him with insults for he fears the loss of love. Such insults were his way being ?the lame way?(p.93) which fills that part of Sydney which believes he is guilty of failing his dead parents. Stryver also provides Sydney with the money to live and drink and also a person with whom Sydney can work and still feel no loss if some tragedy were to befall Stryver. Indeed, he is Stryver?s jackal who subjects himself to humiliation and allows Stryver to take credit for his brilliant thinking. However, it is after leaving Stryver that Sydney truly hits rock bottom in his life. Dickens description of the morning of Sydney?s departure from Stryver?s house is a look into Sydney?s emotions: ??the air was cold and sad, the dull sky overcast, the river dark and dim, the whole scene a lifeless desert?(p.95). Those images serve as a psychological landscape exposing Sydney?s despair. Making the experience worse is Sydney?s momentary glimpse of what his life could have been: ??airy galleries from which the loves and graces looked upon him, gardens in which the fruits of life hung ripening, waters of Hope that sparkled in his sight?.(p.95) Indeed Sydney is a, ?man of good abilities, and good emotions, incapable of their directed exercise, incapable of his own help and his own happiness, sensible to the blight on him and resigning himself to let it eat him away?. We see that Sydney has all the qualities of a good person inside of him. However, the death of his parents has sent those good qualities in the wrong direction. However, we are given the hope that Sydney might one day distinguish these qualities as they were meant to be expressed.
However, ?from being irresolute and purposeless, [Sydney?s] feet became animated by an intention and, in the working out of that intention, they took him to the Doctor?s door?. Sydney?s feet are used as synecdoche to represent his transformation from a, ?moody and morose lounger?(p.152) to a man full of purpose. Those feet that brought him to the Doctor?s door have been driven by a need to fully confess his feelings to Lucie. During this summer, a season of life, he asks Lucie, ?Will you hear me??.(p.153) With her consent he confesses to her that he is, ??like one who died young?.(p.153) He also tells her that she has, ?kindled [him], heap of ashes that [he is] into fire?. Thus, Dickens assures us that she has ?recalled? him to life. He also tells her that since meeting her he has, ?heard whispers from old voices impelling [him] upward?.(p.154) Thus we see that Lucie?s presence, and that of her family has brought back memories of his own mother and father, and the family unit which he once knew. Although he tells Lucie that she can indeed not, ?recall [him]? with the shake of the head he does tell her that he would, ?give his life, to keep a life [she loves] beside [her]?. Sydney?s resolution to develop a meaningful relationship with a person is only more obvious when he asks Mr. Lorry if could honestly say that he had, ?secured to [himself] the love and attachment, the gratitude and respect, of any human creature,..[his] seventy-eight years would be seventy-eight heavy curses; [if he had not]??.(p.315) It is with the desire to ?secure?attachment?gratitude?and respect? that Carton reaches out to Darnay and Lucie when they return from their honeymoon. Feeling terrible over his behavior to Charles at the bar the night after Darnay?s trial Sydney says, ?the curse of those occasions is heavy upon me, for I always remember them?I wish you would forget it?.(p.209) He is further trying to put things right here and undo the hurt he has caused as he ascends to becoming a great man. And although Darnay believes they already are Sydney asks Darnay if they, ?might be friends?.(p.208) With this friendship Sydney also requests that he, ?might be permitted to come and go as a privileged person [in Darnay?s house]?.(p.210) Here we see he is making an attempt to again become part of a family unit, so that he might share in its happiness and kindness. He is beginning to put his life on the right track again so much that Lucy even remarks to Darnay that she is, ? sure that [Sydney] is capable of good things, gentle things, even magnanimous things?.(p.211)
However, it is not until Sydney arrives in France that he becomes the Christ figure manifesting the virtues which Lucie believes he possesses. One of the first things we see Sydney to do in France is to buy packets of chemicals from a chemist and then proclaim that there is little to be done that night:
? ?There is nothing more to do,? said [Sydney], glancing upward at the moon, ?until tomorrow. I can?t sleep.? It was not a reckless manner, the manner in which [Sydney] said those words aloud under the fast-sailing clouds, nor was it more expressive of negligence than defiance. It was the settled manner of a tired man, who had wandered and struggled and got lost, but who at length struck into his road and saw its end?

This speech confirms many things about Sydney?s change in character. It shows us that Sydney has again become a good and virtuous man from the ?desolate dog? he had become in that he is no longer negligent of himself. In fact this is the first time during the night that we see Sydney sober. Instead of wandering the streets at night drunk Sydney is walking them sober and full of purpose. This quote also confirms the foreshadowing of his speech to Lucy in which he promised to give his life to save the life of someone she loved in that he sees ?the end? of his life. The fact that he has, ?struck his road and [seen] its end,? shows us that he has had an epiphany in which he saw that he was born for this purpose. The fact that he is so resolute and peaceful shows us that he has accepted God again whom he had renounced at the death of his parents, since the only man who looks forward to his death is one who believes that God will be waiting for him in heaven. This idea of eternity is represented when Sydney is, ?watching an eddy that turned and turned purposeless, until the stream absorbed it, and carried it out to sea?, which represents his years of purposelessness as an eddy who is now being brought to the sea which represents eternity by Lucy?s love which is represented by the stream. The way in which Sydney perceives the sunrise has also changed, just as the way he perceives the world. When he left Stryver?s house, ?the day was coldly looking in through [Stryver?s houses] windows. When he got out of the house the air was cold and sad, the dull sky overcast?(p.95), however when leaving the stream he sees, ?the glorious sun, rising, seemed to strike those words that burden the night, straight and warm to his heart in it bright rays?.(p.319) Dickens leaves no doubt as to God?s forgiveness of Sydney when, ?a bridge of light appeared to span the air between him and the sun?, since this bridge of light, a rainbow, is the sign of the covenant between Noah and God. We are only able to truly get a glimpse at the fully changed Sydney in Darnay?s cell: ?Their was something so bright and remarkable in [Sydney?s] look that, for the first moment, the prisoner misdoubted him to be an apparition?With wonderful quickness, and with a strength both of will and action, that appeared to be quite supernatural??. Thus Sydney has is no longer a ?tired dog? but so supernaturally perfect that he appears worth of sainthood. Sydney?s will is indeed so strong that he is able to undo the ?knitting?, or planning of thirty-five years by Therese Defarge in less than twenty-four hours. He is also able to bring the strength of faith in God and eternity to a seamstress who is, ?naturally a poor little thing, faint of heart?.(p.377) He is so kind and Christ-like the seamstress believes that Sydney was ?sent to [her] by heaven?.(p.377) Even after Sydney dies with his ?prophetic? calm, Dickens bring him back to say, ?I see that child that lay upon [Lucy?s] bosom and who bore my name, a man winning his way up in the path of life which once was mine?.(p.380) Thus Sydney has been immortalized in Manette family in a child who had his same youthful promise and capitalized on it. Thus Dickens tells us that a less than average man can grow to be an unambiguous hero.
Through the unlikely heroism of Sydney Carton, Dickens resolves the ambiguities of bad and good, and we are able to understand better the creation of Therese Defarge and Charles Darnay. Through the ambiguity of all three he implies that no one on earth can be perfect. The only place where true perfection can be found is in heaven, as in the case of Sydney Carton. He implies the same thing with Therese Defarge who is cleansed by the water of Mrs. Prose before dying which hint at her forgiveness by God. This idea of forgiveness and salvation may be the worries of an older man over dying since Dickens was forty-eight when he died. Dickens novel also tries to establish the idea that the pretty picture is not always the worthy one. He does this by showing the weakness of Darnay, the perfect Victorian man, and the ultimate strength of will on the part of Sydney who followed the ?lame way? for the better part of the novel. Perhaps the most obvious part of this novel that stems from Dickens own life is the lack of protection of all three of his ambiguous characters by their parents. Therese lost her father, mother, sister, brother, and brother-in-law in the course of a few days, leaving no one to protect her from the harsh world. It was also unfair for her to have to face murder and rape at the age of twelve. Darnay too was left unprotected from the harsh world when his mother died, leaving only his callous father and uncle to guide him in life. He also made a promise at the age of two, when he was too young to understand its implications, and the huge burden it left on him. Next, Sydney was orphaned at twelve like Therese, and left with no one to compensate for them. Thus Sydney turned to the bottle to ease his pain and ruined his life. Finally, the author of all three of these characters was a young boy when his too generous father caused his family to be placed in debtor?s prison and caused him to be left unprotected in the slums trying to survive by working long hours in a boot-blacking factory. Thus the imperfect childhoods of all three characters stem from his own imperfect childhood. His commitment to showing that pretty picture is not always the worth one is a direct result of his rebellion against the Victorian standard of a perfect family which left him with a wife who he didn?t truly love. Therefore, Dickens seeks forgiveness for his mistake of marrying based on a Victorian norms instead of true love. Therefore Sydney?s ability to be forgiven for his wasted life may really be Dickens hope for forgiveness for himself by God so that he may walk that rainbow, that Sydney sees, to Heaven.






Authors | Quotes | Digests | Submit | Interact | Store

Copyright © Classics Network. Contact Us