《CHARLES DICKENS’ HARD TIMES ROMANTIC TRAGEDY OR PROLETARIAT PROPAGANDA毕业论文外文文献翻译》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《CHARLES DICKENS’ HARD TIMES ROMANTIC TRAGEDY OR PROLETARIAT PROPAGANDA毕业论文外文文献翻译（9页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、CHARLES DICKENS HARD TIMES: ROMANTIC TRAGEDY OR PROLETARIAT PROPAGANDA?Ronnie OldhamThe Department of English, Aalborg University In Hard Times, Charles Dickens gives us a close-up look into what appears to be the ivory tower of the bourgeoisie of his day, yet these middle-class characters are viewe
2、d from a singular perspective, the perspective of those at the bottom of the social and economic system. Though Dickens characters tend to be well developed and presented with a thoroughly human quality, the stereotypical figure of arrogant and demanding Bounderby fails to accurately capture the mot
3、ivations and attitudes of the typical successful businessman of the day and is an indication of the authors political motives. Hard Times, rather than presenting a historically accurate picture of the extraordinary changes brought about by the industrial revolution, is a one-sided attack on the util
4、itarian value system of the middle 19th century based upon emotional blue-collar appeals for labor sympathy that are not uncommon in todays corporate environment. Josiah Bounderby of Coketown represents the utilitarian attitude and, as such, is the villain of the story and clearly the target of Dick
5、ens political argument. Dickens characterizes Bounderby as a powerful individual, driven by greed and guided by a distorted view of human nature. He is the only wealthy industrialist introduced in Hard Times, although Mr. Sleary might arguably be considered the more virtuous businessman. Dickens cle
6、arly portrays Bounderby as a greedy and individualistic, self-serving capitalist; rather than an insightful, forward-looking crafter of a new industrial age. Dickens artfully weaves his political enemy into a pompous, arrogant image reinforced with traditional working-class themes that lead the read
7、er to conclude that Bounderby, as a manifestation of Gradgrinds and Choakumchilds philosophy of fact, represents all that is wrong with industrial society. Dickens apparently expects his readers to accept his portrayal of Bounderby as being typical of this new breed of industrialists, but the charac
8、ter reflects none of the beginnings of modern scientific principles of management date emerging in the first half of the 19th century. By building on the principles of Adam Smiths Wealth of Nations, the works of Babbage, Jevons, Newman, Riccardo, Taylor, von Clauswitz, and others were not only helpi
9、ng shape the future of management philosophy, but were decisively impacting contemporary business thought throughout Dickens lifetime (George 67-78). No indication of these developments can be seen in the character of Bounderby. Author Archibald Coolidge writes that:Dickens has a sort of preoccupati
10、on with money. But he calls businessmen villains and schemers. He almost never shows or describes them at work; when he does, the are show being crooked or at least harsh.It seems fairly clear that he did not analyze the problems of the businessman or those created by himnever analyzed the problems
11、of creating, distributing, or getting wealth (140). This unrealistic portrayal of businessmen is not uncommon for Dickens. Other works by Dickens are peppered with the characters of Ralph Nickleby, Hawk, Squeers, Gride, Quilp, Tigg, Pecksniff, Heep, Smallweed, Krook, Merdle, Flintwich, Casby, Fledge
12、by, Wegg, and Hexam. All reveal Dickens tendency to depict wealthy entrepreneurs as wicked and self-serving embodiments of oppression (Coolidge 189). Indeed, an evil capitalist is almost a stock character for Dickens. A primary working class theme found throughout Hard Times is that managers, such a
13、s Bounderby, unjustly live in the lap of luxury at the expense of the workers. The picture presented is a common one; hard-working laborers, who toil long hours for little pay, resenting the boss, who appears to do little work and yet garners the full reward of their collective efforts. The reality
14、is that many entrepreneurs and mangers are typically more personally involved in the business and have a larger stake in the commercial success of the company than other employees. They tend to have a much larger investment at risk, work longer hours, and secure a proportionately larger take of the
15、companys profit. Commenting on 19th century managerial functions and principles, J. Lawrence Laughlin wrote that:He who controls a large capital actively engaged in production can never remain at a standstill; he must be full of new ideas; he must have power to initiate new schemes for the extension
16、 of his market; he must have judgment to adopt new inventions, and yet not be deceived as to their value and efficiency (223) Bounderby is not described in these terms; however, any successful manager must ordinarily perform many critical functions not acknowledged by those at the bottom of the hierarchy. When a manager is perceived as incompetent or exploitative, whether justified or not, resentment of behalf of the workers is common.
