Bryan Zheng

Thomas Hardys Comments on Victorian Society

Despite Angel Clares blatantly holy first name and despite Alecs clichd
villainous moustache, Thomas Hardy actually develops complex, nuanced, and
ambiguous characters and themes in his novel, Tess of the DUrbervilles. Hardy often
criticizes organized religion in Victorian England using both Clare, who is inescapably
trapped in his religious family and their values, and Alec, who is seemingly reformed but
relapses into sin by Tess temptation. Yet, Hardy does not simplify his argument by
characterizing religion as purely evil since his criticism is more often of societys attitude
regarding religion than of religion itself, as he scorns the close-mindedness associated
with blindly following organized systems. This is demonstrated when the vicar
unreasonably and unexplainably damns Sorrow, whose microcosmic life mirrors Tesss
own involuntary damnation. Therefore, Hardy uses the irony of Angel Clares supposed
freethinking and Alecs feigned conversion, as well as the symbol of Sorrow, to criticize
how religious dogma traps Victorian society and prevents any freethinking.
While Angel Clare notices how his brothers have become mindless servants of
either the church or of education, he also believes himself to be completely free of
religious or Victorian ideals when in fact, he is just as trapped as they are. He complains
about how Felix seemed to him all Church. Cuthbert all College and thinks that his
farming has unchained him from his fathers supposed intolerance toward contradictory
opinions (159). While Hardy later reveals Clare to be hypocritical with his self-righteous
individuality, Hardys argument disapproves of the consequences of the emphasis on
education and the Church, which has taught Victorian society to mechanically follow
without question. This argument is developed when Clare, who was purportedly

Bryan Zheng
uninfluenced by stereotypical religious ideals, reacts ironically by falling back to his
familys values regarding lineage and purity after Tess reveals her past abuse from Alec.
Thus, he shows that he may be more intolerant of contradictory opinions that his father,
who actually provides a minor foil to Clare by patiently trying to convert Alecs
antagonistic temperament. Clare alludes multiple times to religion influencing his thought
process when he says that Tess was more sinned against that sinning and when he
parodies a line of religious poetry by stating, Gods not in his heaven Alls wrong with
the world (233,256). This shows that, while he thinks he is more liberal that his brothers,
being raised in a family of clergymen has entangled him in Victorian and religious dogma
just as much as them. Thus, Clares hypocritical philosophies reveal that no matter how
much he tries to escape, societal and familial codes are too influential for anybody to
truly have unique opinions. Also, when Hardy sarcastically remarks, Justice was
done, he reveals that the Victorian sense of justice with respect to Tesss actions is
flawed and not truly justice (404). Not only does he imply a flawed judicial system, but
he also adds how Clare and Liza Lu simply watched and unceremoniously went on
because nobody has enough power to bring about any appreciable change in values or
general opinions (405). Thus, it is nearly impossible for Victorian ideals to change,
regardless of whether they are moral or immoral, because nobody can be independent in a
society of unconscious followers.
Just as multifaceted as Clare, Alec DUrberville undergoes a voluntary conversion
and at first appears successful at renouncing his sinful past, but shows, like Clare, how
unavoidable his nature is when he relapses at the sight of Tess. His change is described as
less a reform than a transfiguration (308). Thus, he only gives the appearance that his

Bryan Zheng
character has fundamentally changed when, in fact, he is the same individual in a slightly
altered and moustache-less physical body. However, any hope of actual conversion is
extinguished when he sees Tess, who reveals his true character. Her effect is described as
electric, far stronger than the effect of his presence upon her and His fire, the
tumultuous ring of his eloquence, seemed to go out of him (309). This imagery of a
sudden shock back to reality shows how he was able to begin a change without Tess, but
could never truly transform his character if the source of his sin was present. Thus, both
he and Clare are trapped in their own unchangeable philosophies, showing that all of
society falls victim to social and religious doctrine. In fact, Hardy states, The
lineaments, as such, seemed to complain. They had been diverted from their hereditary
connotation to signify impressions for which Nature did not intend them (309). This
clearly indicates how Alec did not inherently change, but also implies a higher power in
the capitalized Nature that influences Alec. Hardy therefore reveals how both Clare and
DUrberville try to change their characters for the better, but are influenced by higher
powers; Clare cannot escape his familys and societys status quo while DUrberville
cannot escape his fate at the hands of Nature.
Hardys discussion of fate versus free will manifests itself in Tesss baby, Sorrow,
since Sorrows short life was not dictated by his actions as an innocent infant, or even his
mothers, but by what Hardy sees as an unfair and blind following of religion. In fact, his
fate a result of societys general opinion serves a symbol of Tesss own indictment and
unfortunate destiny. During Sorrows burial, Hardy lists the people that he was associated
with: unbaptized infants, notorious drunkards, suicides, and others of the conjecturally
damned (97). This is a direct criticism of religious beliefs since Sorrow did not belong to

Bryan Zheng
any of these groups, especially when the vicar, after some internal argument, said that
Tesss baptizing him was valid at first. Sorrow, as an infant, had no control over his fate
just as Tesss fate was not likely a result of her own actions. Additionally, the vicar notes
his internal struggle by explaining the struggle and ironic contrast between the man and
the ecclesiastic, two entities that are typically synchronized with each other (96). While
the man succeeds at confirming that Tesss baptism is the same as any other baptism,
the ecclesiastic ultimately trumps since Sorrow was buried with the eternally damned.
This furthers the idea that higher powers cannot be changed, since the vicar ultimately
gave in to the Churchs doctrine against his own humanity. The vicar also does not
provide any legitimate reason for why the ecclesiastic ultimately changed his opinion
when he only uses the phrase certain reasons, immediately dismissing Tesss questions
(97). This reveals Hardys disapproval of how the vicar blindly follows religion without
question and how he denies Tess for inquiring how God would see Sorrow after an
unorthodox baptism. Thus, Sorrows damnation was not only unrelated to his own
actions, but also a result of nonexistent reasons from the vicar, revealing the flaw in the
religious system of judgment.
In conclusion, Tess and her child, Angel Clare, and Alec DUrberville cannot
fundamentally be blamed for their actions or their fates according to Hardy since
ultimately they had little control over Victorian and religious ideals. They were simply
victims of unchangeable dogmas that prevented Alecs true conversion and imprisoned
Angel in the very close-mindedness he criticized. Hardy uses Sorrows burial and Tesss
execution to criticize the defective and ignorant nature of Victorian society, and uses
Angel and Alec to reveal how powerless individuals are at changing or escaping it.