Tess of the d'Urbervilles (Penguin Classics)

My favourite in drama, and I have my reasons. What's more, I'll give you some of them : A) A point for which the novel has been (and still is) criticised - Hardy leaves out the two essential facts in the book. This is a very neat trick, for, apart from letting your imagination work, it has two other consequences : 1. since you don't know anything about the rape, the degree of Tess'...more

My favourite in drama, and I have my reasons. What's more, I'll give you some of them : A) A point for which the novel has been (and still is) criticised - Hardy leaves out the two essential facts in the book. This is a very neat trick, for, apart from letting your imagination work, it has two other consequences : 1. since you don't know anything about the rape, the degree of Tess' 'willingness' is in doubt (nowadays we know that 'she wanted it' is the most common lousy defense of the rapist, but that wasn't so in Hardy's days), but also 2. since you don't know anything about the rape or the murder, at each of these moments there is a rupture in your identification with Tess; some people always desperately want to 'identify' with the character, but that's very romantic-western; here it's hindered deliberately, for it suits Hardy's purpose, since he's interested in Tess as an icon of some kind of symbolic inncocence (i.e. which never actually existed, but that is used to juxtapose some things - see point b), plus, due to this rupture, tess becomes more transcendental (which is nicely juxtaposed by here getting 'closer to the earth' during the novel), less tangible, and therefore more the 'role' she plays in the novel/society, which is a more eastern way of looking at things. Like I said, this is balanced by the story tearing in the opposite direction. As a consequence, you FEEL the pull of society (since she becomes abstract through the way of telling), but at the same time FEEL her need to escape (the content of the story). B) Which brings me to the second point, the juxtapositions, of which I mentioned one already. Now, to further emphasize the pull in opposite directions, Hardy pulls off another neat trick : the novel isn't strictly romantic at all. The subject matter is a romantic pastorale, but the language use varies. I.e., the most pastoral descriptions of the countryside (which are, each time, stunning) are mostly written in a very documentary style, almost like New Objectivity / New Realism, which he predates with a couple of decennia. And he stirrs in this objectivity at the exact spots where you expect excessive romanticism. This is no coincidence : though the novel sings the hosanna of rural England, it has one leg planted firmly in the modern world, showing hardy's ambiguity on the subject. The fact that the way of storytelling (also the 'leaving out' of essentials) doesn't really seem to 'fit' the story, enhances the feeling of conflict on which the novel rests, between the past and the future (cutting out the present, like cutting out chords from under a melody line, leaves you with a floating timelessness). Picture this : If all was romantic and e.g. the rape written out, the subjective picturing of the countryside the whole notion of conflict would be lost, since you would sympathize with Tess, and with the pastoral image. Now, an essential reason why people do NOT automatically sympathize with each other (and why we keep killing each other) is exactly because we are unable to fully identify with someone else, because we lack information about that person's inner states. And it is exactly this fact that Hardy uses so well in this book, to make us feel ambivalent towards Tess and towards the issues that he himself was ambivalent to. Because, what most people don't like about it is often the weak Tess character. So they discard the book. But that is just the point! Ambivalence combined with transfiguration of that main character. Hardy could not be entirely subjective, because he himself didnt really have a unified thought about the conflicts (has anybody?). The whole idea is to, through these tricks, carry your identification from Tess to the conflicts in the book, without taking a stand. Looking at Hardy's own doubts. The fact that he did this using not only story but story and style intermixed makes him more of a modern writer than is often thought. C) And if all that bogus doesn't convince you (I'm just making it up as I write, I haven't studied literature or anything, I just read the bloody books), then let me point out that it is EXCEPTIONALLY well written in an EXTRAORDINARILY BEAUTIFUL language. I mean, every few pages I found a paragraph that I'd like to see tattooed on my chest - mirror image, so I can gape at it whilst shaving. But, like all good books, take your time, this is not a book to read for swift storyline developments. This is a book like a single malt - sniff it for hours and when everyone around you has finally categorised you as a loco, take a sip, step in, and let it enfold you as your mind projects emotions, opens the page and drops you in the midst of a field. Open your eyes and you're back. Only in this book, you don't have to do it. It has been done for you, with skill and brilliance. Enjoy   hide

This book is based on the tragic downfall of its main character, Tess. Most people find her character hard to sympathize with for her poor foresight and weakness as a woman. She is made a figure of degradation and disgust when she is taken advantage of. Her later lover finds out about her terrible secret and shuns her with the same regard as all the characters. Eventually he returns having felt...more

This book is based on the tragic downfall of its main character, Tess. Most people find her character hard to sympathize with for her poor foresight and weakness as a woman. She is made a figure of degradation and disgust when she is taken advantage of. Her later lover finds out about her terrible secret and shuns her with the same regard as all the characters. Eventually he returns having felt that he had wronged her only to find that she had become involved with the same man that wronged her to begin with. As a show of her devotion she murders her husband in a frenzy and only afterwards recollecting the consequences of her actions, she subjects herself to a fate expected of a character of that calibre; she is executed. Tess is a victim rather than a heroine. This is what makes her so different from the hundreds of other women regurgitated within english literature time and time again. She is not a rosy cheeked governess, or a daughter of five batting her eyelids one minute and scoffing the next. She is weak, she succumbs in her situations and she kills for the love of a man. She is not inspiring like the so called heroines previously described. She is simply human, and suffers at society's hands when it fails to recognise her flaws as marks of her humanity   hide

Thomas Hardy is a master of landscape. He reminds me of a John Constable of literature. Hardy is notable for his ability to make the landscape a character in the story. In fact, when I read "Tess," I see two unstated characters: Fate (often expressed through nature,) and Hardy himself. My favorite aspect of this book is Hardy's attitude toward Tess. He puts her in unforgiving, merciless...more

Thomas Hardy is a master of landscape. He reminds me of a John Constable of literature. Hardy is notable for his ability to make the landscape a character in the story. In fact, when I read "Tess," I see two unstated characters: Fate (often expressed through nature,) and Hardy himself. My favorite aspect of this book is Hardy's attitude toward Tess. He puts her in unforgiving, merciless circumstances, yet the entire time he upholds her character. It is of interest to note that the original title was, " Tess of the d'Urbervilles: A Pure Woman." This is a girl, who, set against all forces of nature and fate, retains her purity. The fact that Hardy upholds Tess as an image of purity despite her decisions makes one reconsider what actually constitutes purity. Hardy also causes the reader to wonder the extent to which our decisions are our own and the extent to which they are dictated by our circumstances. Tess makes decisions with ill consequences, but Hardy seems to excuse every decision due to the circumstances she was in. Its as though Hardy asks, "seeing her situation, how can you blame her?" Indeed- Thomas Hardy is the only one in the story who doesn't blame her . . . he seems to be the only one who loves her faithfully.   hide

Tess is written with marvelous skill. Hardy's eloquence and scene/psychology painting are both beyond dispute. My main trouble here is with fatalism as it applies to this book. Hardy seems intent on taking innocent people and subjecting them to the worst kinds of beatings as the plot moves. And he does it not with the compassion of Dickens, Austen, Dostoevsky, or Steinbeck, for example. Rather,...more

Tess is written with marvelous skill. Hardy's eloquence and scene/psychology painting are both beyond dispute. My main trouble here is with fatalism as it applies to this book. Hardy seems intent on taking innocent people and subjecting them to the worst kinds of beatings as the plot moves. And he does it not with the compassion of Dickens, Austen, Dostoevsky, or Steinbeck, for example. Rather, he takes delight in plunging both the characters and the reader into ever-deepening hopelessness. I felt gross after reading this book, as much as I admired its craftsmanship. Dwelling on this too much makes the wretched feelings in the story seep into real life. One more thing...the book would be considered backward today if Hardy criticized Islam or any other non-Western religion in this book quite as much as he took pot-shots at Christianity. To create imperfect villains, set them up to prey on decent people, and then graft the formers' misuse of Christianity onto any kind of whole is intellectually dishonest. I refuse to be as cynical as Hardy; Christianity (or any other faith) is not diminished on the account of some imperfect followers.    hide