Summary: The Serious Pleasures of Suspense

The summary for the introduction from The Serious Pleasures of Suspense is very detailed.  Within, “ Victorian fictions, the secret, when it finally emerges, turns out to be entirely different from what we have been invited or expected to imagine.  Readers and characters may put forward a range of guesses and conjectures, but narrative mysteries remind us that even the plentiful range of our guesses may be narrow when compared with the hidden truth.  And so, as we read suspenseful plots, we learn to doubt and guess, to speculate and hypothesize, to pause in the knowledge that we do not know”.

The author transitions between subjects of the scientific to the dramatic then to politics.  It first starts out with what some of the top critics say about suspense.  Some of them say it is barbaric, boorish and low.  Others say that it is the exact opposite: too civilized.  The two critics agree to disagree and settle on the idea that it is “organized set of stoppages”.  The first critics that say it is too barbaric are E.M. Forster and Roland Barthes.  They say that, “suspense emerges as a literary instrument of social control.  The other critics like John Ruskin, Michael Faraday, Charlotte Bronte, and Wilkie Collins would say the contrary, “the experience of suspense was not a means of social regulation, but a rigorous political and epistemological training, a way to foster energetic skepticism and uncertainty rather than closure and complacency. 

Suspense not only has a place within literature, but also within science.  Most nineteenth century scientists felt that the doubtful pause that someone gets was necessary in the pursuit of knowledge; otherwise, we would assume that our thoughts are correct and never think of the possibility of surprises or unexpected truths.  Also most scientists and philosophers would agree that to do a true experiment one should not use their imagination, but only rely on the facts that the world brings to the table.  However, others would say that it is imagination that creates the possible experiments.  For if someone cannot think of new situations to experiment with then the raw data is not true within every realm.  The only main thing that they all agree on is that the imagination should be kept within check.  It would be the imagination that would try and correlate the data within the same realm as what the hypothesis had envisioned.   

Within the realm of Victorian Realism the idea is to mimic real life.  In order to mimic life “John Ruskin urged the scientific experiment as the most effective approach to cultural images, inviting his readers to test the representations around them against the reality of their own experience”.  The only drawback to this experiment was that the images that were placed in front of the reader were not real enough compared to the images that the reader had experienced firsthand.   

Suspense seems to be only a narrative problem.  Many Realist authors are trying to allow the reader to gather their own assumptions that align with their own ethics, morals, and values.  Along with that they are also trying to change the reader’s boundary of comfort zone and make a new judgment upon witnessing the world within someone else’s culture.  Within those new experiences the author engages the reader to allow themselves to review their ethics, morals, and values.  Within the nineteenth century suspense was, “an essential critical instrument” within the intellectual culture.      

A Dirty Town

What it seemed to me what the overall point that Dickens was trying to make was the shortcomings of the society of the time.  He was trying to point out inefficiencies of agencies, greed, and self-delusion.  Instead of one organized crime there were child farms, abused burial practices, no restriction on slums, and other documentary elements of a horrible society.  He was unable to ignore such things and decided to expose those many scandals through a carefully organized plot.  Just some of the examples would be the procrastination of Chancery which is similar to the disorder of Krook’s emporium, the dirt and mismanagement of the Jellyby household, the cobwebs of Tulkinghorn’s bottle of port, the filth of Tom-all-Alone’s, and the grit and grime of the “iron country” up north, and so on.  Then to contrast those examples in the story there is the cleanliness of Bagnets, the dependability of Trooper George, and the efficiency of Inspector Bucket.  I feel that Dickens was establishing Sir Leicester as both character and significant symbol with cross-reference with the Chancery and Tom-all-Alone.  It seems that Dickens is comparing Sir Leicester to Chesney Wold.  Chesney Wold (like Sir Leicester) is wet, dark, and damp compared to a place with ample sunlight (like Esther or Mrs. Bagnet).

I understand that London may actually be pretty dark, rainy, and smoggy throughout most of the densely populated area, but Dickens makes it sound more so of a place of death.  Through this physical landscape that he is willing to show the reader he assists in showing the horrible living conditions of the true London citizens.  I am sure there are other areas that are nice and efficient; however, Dickens wants to show the reader how bad the conditions are in London during that time.  That political atmosphere may not be as obvious in the current U.S., but there are still many authors that seem to want to follow Dickens’ lead on expression.  The bureaucracies do not run very quickly because they are not there to please the customer; however, they do keep their standards to a professional level in today’s government.     

PTSD: Esther's Best Illness

In most of my life’s experiences and education of human growth there is one slogan that has to be stopped right now and that is “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.”  No matter how some people feel about it and want to support this slogan it is not true.  Words do hurt.  With Esther’s case it is not only the words, but also how the words are said and the actions that follow.  To this very day one of the biggest mental illnesses known to our species is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.  Esther may not actually be chronically ill with PTSD or her thoughts are not as deeply affected by her past, but it still does have an impact on her actions and plays a role in her life. 

While living with her Godmother (aunt) she is shown no emotion from her or the servant.  The emotional trauma that she experiences when she has her birthday always brings shame, embarrassment, and the feeling of being guilty.  Instead of someone of celebrating the day that you were brought into this world her aunt says that it was a mistake would be troublesome for anyone to handle.  Because of all this early conditioned learning, Esther has a mental illness.  Esther seems to be one of the few that use this illness to her own advantage to appreciate the relationships that she does build later in life. 

Within the story, her “illness” allows her to be a more trustworthy narrator.  The reader is can better understand her point of view when she is not worried about the Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce case.  Her motivation is not driven by prestige, power, or wealth.  The only wealth that she is looking for is a sense of belonging within society or her group of friends. 

Within her life her decisions she is able to appreciate a great opportunity for love when it presents itself.  After Esther accepts Mr. Jarndyce’s proposal for marriage she feels the need to get rid of the bouquet of flowers that Allan Woodcourt had given to her.  She was trying to give her whole self to Mr. Jarndyce and getting rid of the bouquet that, “preserved in memory something that was wholly past and gone.”  Even later with Mr. Woodcourt’s renewed love proposal is shot down because she thought she should out of respect for Mr. Jarndyce.  It was only after Mr. Jarndyce gives Esther to Mr. Woodcourt that she is able to outwardly recognize her true feelings. 

The Feminine Roll: According to Dickens

As the protagonist, Esther seems to be a part of everyone’s life.  She helps with other people’s children, she is a friend to other males and females, and she is given the keys to the house of Mr. Jarndyce to keep safe.  It may not be obvious, but she is the superb being of a housekeeper.  I probably cannot say housewife since she does not get married to anyone until the end of the story.  However, she does seem to keep order within the household and is something to everyone.  Esther seems to fit right in to the key role that everyone within the British culture imagines what women should be what being feminine can represent.  It does not really seem that Esther ever have to do true manual labor such as cleaning, but she does “keep up” other people’s houses and helps organize servant chores.  She does physically assist with Charley once fallen ill, but I am sure that Mr. Jarndyce could have hired more help if it was a true “danger”. 

During that time period if a person was earning a wage for their labor then they were the working class.  As for the females that were in the home tending to children or the household chores they were not technically working.  The women that are within the household do not earn status at this time, but what they are given by their husbands.  Throughout the story Esther always seemed to be a subordinate to the men within town because she was not “earning a wage”.  She did not hardly compare to Dr. Woodcourt, Inspector Bucket and the lawyer Tulkinghorn.  However, she did have a different and higher level from other housewives since her caretaker was able to afford her lifestyle needs she was more of a “leisure lady” that could enjoy things that some working men would never be able to enjoy.  However, Dickens seems to have a conflicting situation.  Esther probably has the ability to be a “leisure lady”, but chooses to assist whenever and where ever she can unlike the Lady Dedlock that is a member of a corrupt aristocracy in Chesney Wold.  Dickens seems to distinguish Esther from being a part of the aristocratic leisure world. 

It seems as though either way the women of this time are being held back to their potential.  If I remember correctly this is about the time where certain laws are passed for labor of women and children.  Not only did the laws restrict where the women and children could work, but also the amount of time they were able to work in one day at their position.  I think of this as a set back for women’s rights because it is out to prove that they cannot handle the same work load or work time as men.  Any thoughts?      

Smallpox: Not Really

For some reason, Charles Dickens decides to give Esther and Charley contagious illness from Jo.  Most people assume that it is smallpox.  However, I am not a qualified medical professional, but I have been given the smallpox vaccine and live with a Registered Nurse at my home of record.  To start out with there was no mention of any type of rash on anyone of the individuals.  When someone contracts smallpox it takes around twelve days for the incubation period.  That incubation period is when the smallpox will develop and within the story Charley was taken ill within only four days of exposure to Jo.  After exposure and then rash the infected site then “erupts” into a sore.  The sores need to be covered or else sores will run rampant across the body because it is so contagious; even just touching the infected site and touching another area will bring about further sore spots.

Esther had evidently contracted the “smallpox” after caring after Charley.  Dickens writes that when she recovers her face is not the same as it was.  However, towards the end of the story Mr. Woodcourt says that Esther is even more beautiful now than she ever was.  If it were truly “smallpox” on her face then the sores that erupt and spread so very quickly then the healing process would create pits in her face with true, deep scarring and would most definitely disfigure Esther’s face creating a less symmetrical face.  Of course, there is the possibility that Mr. Woodcourt was just trying to reassure her that her scars would not only heal more so over time, but that his love is so true that he can see past them and love Esther for being herself.

The discussion in class included the idea that Mr. Jarndyce only wanted to marry Esther to keep her safe from a homeless lifestyle and never getting married to anyone else, but even in a time of arranged marriages the man of the relationship that has the most power to make changes would need to be attracted to the fiancée just a little bit before he would commit to a lifetime of marriage.  So if Mr. Jarndyce were willing to sign the contract of marriage with Esther then her wounds were not as bad as Dickens tried to make them sound.  What I am sure about is that since Mr. Jarndyce knew Esther far before the “illness” happened that he could see past the wounds.