The struggle of good against evil in the works of Charles Dickens

 

Throughout his career, Dickens protested the abuse of children and the corruptionof individual feelings. His portrayal of the destructiveness of society's institutions and values becomes more insistent and savage in his later novels. In his early, hopeful novels, the problems of his protagonists, who are often orphaned or abandoned as children, are solved by the benevolence of good men; the charitable nature of the Cheeryble Brothers in Nicholas Nickleby is indicated by their name, and David Copperfield is rescued from the Murdstones' clutches by Aunt Betsey.Dickens lost faith in the ability of individuals to remedy the unjust treatment of individuals; he perceived that injustice, indifference, and cruelty were pervasive and incorporated into society's institutions.of Dickens's moral outrage and his attacks on society's institutions and values, later critics, who were often Marxists, hailed him variously as subversive, rebellious, and even revolutionary. They did not necessarily claim that Dickens was aware of the subversion or revolutionary thrust of his novels. George Bernard Shaw compared Marx and Dickens thus: «The difference between Marx and Dickens was that Marx knew he was a revolutionist whilst Dickens had not the faintest suspicion of that part of his calling».was good reason for contrasting the two men; Marx fled to London in 1849, died there in 1883, and was also a writer. Thus, the two men were observing the same society and class structure; both were subject to similar social conditions and pressures. Furthermore, Barnaby Rudge and A Tale of Two Cities both are set in revolutionary times, identify some of the abuses that sparked the outbreaks, and describe the violent, chaotic behavior of the mobs.Orwell, in 1946, viewed Dickens's «rebelliousness» from a different perspective: «In Oliver Twist, Hard Times, Bleak House, Little Dorrit, Dickens attacked English institutions with a ferocity that has never since been approached. Yet he managed to do it without making himself hated, and, more than this, the very people he attacked have welcomed him so completely that he has become a national institution himself».is true that Dickens's readership remained loyal to him, despite his savage attacks on society and his forcing his wife of twenty-some years to leave their marriage and their home (remember that Dickens was perceived as the upholder of the sacred domestic hearth and the family). One reason that he retained his popularity may be that Dickens had no agenda or systematic program, as Marx did, to tear down society and replace it with a new structure.critics have wondered whether Dickens was really attacking human nature and not society. Granted, Dickens did repeatedly reject the assumptions that class was more important than common humanity or that rank was superior to virtue: «I believe that virtue shows quite as well in rags and palaces as she does in purple and fine linen.... I believe that she goes barefoot as well as shod. I believe that she dwells rather oftener in alleys and by-ways than she does in courts and palaces...»

Nonetheless, Dickens still accepted the existing class structure and distinctions: «Differences of wealth, of rank, of intellect, we know there must be, and we respect them».attacks on society were based on traditional moral beliefs and humanism rather than on social or political theories and programs. He urged a secular ideal of human brotherhood. Fraser's Magazine, in its obituary of Dickens, noted this aspect of Dickens's beliefs: «He spent no thought on religious doctrines or religious reforms, but regarded the Sermon on the Mount as good teaching, had a regard for the village church and churchyard, and quarrelled with nothing but intolerance».of Dickens's belief in domestic life as the source of happiness and the alternative to social evil, Angus Wilson added, «Even more vital to Dickens was the idea of pure love as the means of redemption of flawed, weak, or sinful men. Neither of these beliefs can properly take the weight that he imposed on them...», his contemporaries saw him as a member of and the spokesman for a particular class; a reviewer for Blackwood's in 1855 noted: «We cannot but express our conviction that it is to the fact that he represents a class that he owes his speedy elevation to the top of the wave of popular favour. He is a man of very liberal sentiments-an assailer of constituted wrongs and authorities-one of the advocates in the plea of Poor versus Rich, to the progress of which he has lent no small aid in his day. But he is, notwithstanding, perhaps more distinctly than any other author of his time, a class writer, the historian and representative of one circle in the many ranks in our social scale. Despite their descents into the lowest class, and their occasional flights into the less familiar ground of fashion, it is the air and breath of middle-class respectability which fills the books of Mr. Dickens».Thackeray, Dickens was not seen as quite or fully a gentleman. Thackeray's province was, as W.C. Roscoe described it, «the debatableble land between the aristocracy and the middle classes»; Dickens showed the efforts of the lower strata of the middle class to rise from being tradesmen and upper servants into the respectable middle classes.wrote that «an English gentleman knows as much about the people of Lapland or California as he does of the aborigines of the Seven Dials or the natives of Wapping»., of course, knew, and wrote with sympathy and understanding, about the classes who lived in such neighborhoods as Seven Dials and Wapping. Furthermore, Dickens was accused of being unable to describe a gentleman. G. K. Chesterton explained that this accusation really meant «… that Dickens could not describe a gentleman as gentlemen feel a gentleman. They mean that he could not take that atmosphere easily, accept it as the normal atmosphere, or describe that world from the inside... Dickens did not describe gentleman in the way that gentlemen describe gentlemen... He described them... from the outside, as he described any other oddity or special trade».

Let’s talk more widely about one of the most famous and favourite novels written by Charles Dickens - David Copperfield, in which we can find the themes of good and evil in all their forms.David Copperfield social status and class are ubiquitous as issues throughout the novel. In fact, the novel can be viewed in large measure as a commentary on social status and class-based wealth.and undeserved respect are shown constantly for those of a higher class. For example, in the case of Steerforth, it is obvious that he is treated much better than David and the other students at Salem House. Furthermore, he is highly regarded by David and even by Mr. Peggotty and Ham, both of whom are of a lower class, when in fact Steerforth is the one who should be respecting them for their moral character. He constantly puts down those below him in status, such as Mr. Mell and Ham once he gets engaged to Little Emily.striving for social status can also be seen through David's and Dora's courtship and marriage. David's first thought after hearing of Miss Betsey's financial downfall is shame at being poor, and Dora cries at the thought of David being poor and of having to do her own housework. David is constantly striving to make money so that he can live and provide Dora with a life of wealth. Little Em'ly also expresses unhappiness at her low social status and longs to be a «lady», which is why she runs off with Steerforth in the first place.times throughout the novel, the search for true happiness takes prominence. The narrator notes in particular the innocent joy David had as a child before his mother married Mr. Murdstone. The plot in general focuses on David's search for true happiness, and it is up to the reader to judge whether or not he has succeeded.of the characters find or try to find their own routes to happiness. Some, such as David and the Peggottys, find true happiness through their families and spouses. Others, such as the Micawbers and Uriah, believe that money will bring them great happiness, although the Micawbers are also happy just remaining with one another.others, such as Dora, find happiness in simple, frivolous pleasures. Dickens appears to question whether any of these characters can ever find true happiness, for each of these methods of reaching happiness has its pros and cons.makes the symbols of good and evil very easy to distinguish in the novel, although one must note that these concepts are more complex than they might seem, not least because they are embodied as fairly complex characters. The theme of good versus evil is prevalent especially as a symbolic battle for David's soul between Agnes Wickfield and Steerforth. Agnes represents David's «good angel», as he calls her. She is his voice of reason and is the person who is able to calm him and give him the advice that he needs. Steerforth, in contrast, is his «bad angel», as Agnes says. He is the one who feeds David's desire for upper-class, shallow wealth and leads him to do things like get very drunk and embarrass himself in public.also is very commonly a symbol of evil. He is eventually defeated by Agnes, Miss Betsey, Mr. Micawber, and Traddles, all of whom are symbols of good. Yet, there are times when the evil wins out, namely in the case of David’s mother Clara and the Murdstones. The evil duo overpower her and contribute to her death.'s «undisciplined heart» is his tendency to fall victim to passion. He falls very quickly and very strongly for girls. This is especially the case regarding Dora, with whom he falls in love even before he has had the chance to say one word to her. He learns that she does not like to work around the house and is unwilling to learn about keeping a house, but he still decides to marry her.examples of David's undisciplined heart include his feelings for Miss Shepherd, a brief crush on a person he barely knew, and his impractical crush on another woman much older than he.is not until the very end of the novel that he learns to control or understand his undisciplined heart, and it is then that he finally realizes that Agnes is the person whom he truly loves maturely.apparently is fascinated with children, and this novel examines in detail how children are treated. The narrator mentions near the beginning of the novel how impressive it is that children can remember so many details so clearly, and he claims that he is proud to have such a childlike memory himself., the simpler, more childlike characters are among the sweetest in the novel. For example, Tommy Traddles is very simple and sweet in demeanor, and he goes on to be a successful lawyer, engaged to a beautiful, generous woman. Dora Spenlow may not know how to do household chores, but her devotion to David is extremely touching and admirable, and it wins David's heart. Finally, Mr. Dick, very simple-minded, is perhaps the best-liked character in the novel.simplicity and innocence thus are valued in the moral world of the novel. When Dickens writes scenes that show cruelty to children, he most likely is demonstrating an evil to raise readers’ passions against such cruelty.novel explores feminine power to some degree, seeming to favor strong, powerful women, such as Peggotty and Miss Betsey. In contrast, women who do not hold much power or who simply exist in their marriages, such as Clara Copperfield, do not fare very well.Betsey, an admired character throughout the novel, fights against her husband and manages to acquire a divorce, a feat that was not simple for women at the time (although he continues to bother her for money some time afterward).. and Mrs. Micawber, however, are a good example of a married couple in which each spouse holds almost an equal amount of power, and they are a very happy couple, even though they are broke. Thus, Dickens seems to be a proponent of feminine power in the sense of basic equality in institutions such as marriage.role of the father figure is one of the first issues that comes up in the novel, for David is born six months after his father dies. Dickens is apparently suggesting that a father figure is essential for happiness and developing a good character. Still, not all fathers or father figures fit the norm or are even beneficial. Peggotty seems to be David's father figure growing up, for he describes her as large and «hard». Thus, he has a disciplinary figure along with his warm, loving mother to give him a balanced childhood.Emily and Ham have Mr. Peggotty, and both turn out to be very good people, especially Ham. Little Emily is simply seduced by Steerforth, who, as it turns out, never had a father figure and even admits that he regrets that and wishes that he could have had a father figure so that he could be a better person. Uriah has no father mentioned either, and he is one of the most evil characters in the novel.