‘Does no mean no, Tess?’
Said Alec in the Chase that
Brought both sides to blows.
Was Tess raped, or did she submit willingly? Does it matter at all, if we consider that one of Hardy's greatest achievements as a novelist was to create characters who could lead sensual and moral lives at the same time. Tess is a fleshy character - her body is more important than her mind, because that's what life expects from her. Berating her (or Hardy) for her being so passive is like criticising a Roman doctor for not knowing about antibiotics. Is it truthful, in the terms of the novel, to expect a milkmaid to be assertive?
No.
She's not a Destiny's Child, she's a child of destiny. Ho ho ho. Her fate lies not so much in her own character as in her inability to step outside her role within society.
Hardy's later work (notably The Mayor of Casterbridge or The Woodlanders) deals with this more effectively by making the novel's tragedy come from within rather than without the main characters. Sensuality v Victorian conformity = tragedy, with society winning out over the individual.
It also explains why, a few chocolate box adaptations aside, we seem to have brushed Hardy under the same carpet as DH Lawrence. We just can't imagine why sex causes his characters so much pain.
Sex kills though. Just take Joni's word for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment