'itlt Dtnitl

)ott ttct tetl

Ed. Sally
Fatal Extraction: Dickensian
rneapoJ is:

,ilcttti( ol
Bildungsroman and the Logic of
Dependency
t Cltarles

)09. Web. Aleksandar Stevii

iry in The Ft,tctrsing ori Olivel Tlvist, David Copperficld, uttd Great Expectations, r/iis
rrnbricl,qe: sltrdt e,rplore.s tlte itrtersct'tiotrs of'tlta Ditkertsitut biltlungsrotrut tmtl tlte
eurly uttd trtid-l/it'trtriau dcbata.s ubout lltc sourL'es rl porartt atul tltc le-
th a Nerv gitittruct' ot'' clturitalile irttcryerttion itr ulleviutittg it.s e/t'br:ts. 'l'ltese debute s.
n'lticlt t'trlntittutcd eround tlre tintc ol tlre Ncw Prxtr Lav', v'ere tlte ntairt t,ctt-
)85. ue irt lrlticlt politic'rrl cc'ottontist.s, .socirrl rt.lrtnners, prq)onettt.s ol .self-ltelp,
artd arlvocates of'or,e,utti:.cd clturitt e.rcltattgccl orguntcnts about tlte role o.t'
Penguin. per.sonul resportsibilitt'uttcl ettvirortrttetttal pre.\.\ures itt detcrntitting the in-
clividrral'.s ,sttuulirtg irt the world. Tltcir urgrnrrcnt.\ terc irt,uriubh'driven by
c'ottllictitrg ttotiuts of irttliridtrul osenc\': erc tltc poor vic'tiuts tuttl in ueed
ol u.ssi,sttrrrce, or yiciou.s tutcl itt neerl of rlist'ipline'! Et'ett v'hett ttot directll,
Reudar'.s atlrlres.sirrg, tlta provi.siott.s ot' tltc Netr l)oor l-utt'utrd tlrc e.ftet't.t o.t' orgotti:cd
;
clturity, Dickctt.s'.v rtovel.s .seek lo rrcgotiata ,sottre of tltc c^erttrol tensiott.s ol
tltc,\e c()nlelnporor.\' ideologicul cottjlicrs: ittvariably .foc'u.sittg on orpltuus
urrd tlte a.rterrtttl .fuclrtrs tltut .\ltupe tltcir.fata, irtt ludirtg botlr betrcyoletrt turcl
tvrarttticul tarcgivers, Dicken.s'.s rtovcl,: obse,ssivcly e.runtirte tlte nteunittg o.f
clepcttdettt't, uttd gturdiurtsltip. Bt, oruatti:.itt'q lti,s plots arourtd the ntorcl
atttl ltrut'ticcrl intplit:uliotr.s of' :oc'ial ascettt bt trteutt.s ol out.side butevolertl
itttcrvetttiott, Dickctr,t tr,scrl tlte.fitrnt rl tlta ltilrluttg,sronrrut lo e.rplore atr ul-
tentatit'c to IItc dotrrittunt ctIti(.\ o,f sel.f-.;u.fJicietttt.

Ditkcrts Srtrdict.\tutrtrtl. \/olume -15. Copi,ri-eht O 20ll bi'AMS Press. Inc. All ri-shts
reservecl.

63
64 DICKhNS STLIDllrS ;\NNI ir\l-

It lras lon,, bccn recognizetl that lhc lcscuc ol hclpicss orphans is arnong lltc stiltus
rnost l)ersiste nt Dickcnsian l'iurtasir's. \\/ith prt--cisirin n'orthv ol Vlatlintir Pr oltp^s Ve ntiol
ll4orpltolo,qt'ol tltc l:olkttrlc. Dickcns's rriitjor hilclunqsr()nrans 1i1l thc sttuctut-al llrotecl
rolc's of villirins anrl hc'lpcls. locaiine thc ccnte'r'o1'narralive tcnsion not in thc rc-llt- hcroc-s
tiorrship henr'ccn thc he-ro arrrl llic ri'orlcl hLrt in tl.tc cncountcr llct\\,ccn thc hcrtt's ancl BL
irch'crsarics untl his bc-nelhctors. r\ntl ri'hilc I)ickcns's hcrocs ar.c sclclonr tirlll' rchclrrl
lelic-r ccl oi ascncv. his bilclturgsroniaus noncthclcss surrcn(lL'r a (lccisive arn()irnt poor ir
of pou,cl to nunre r'ous c\tenral instuuccs rvhich limit thc atrtononrv ol' prrlur-lo- hclple :

nists.r 0/llcr'71'rrr(18-17 -39). I)ttritl Coltltt't'licll(lli-+9 5()). itntlGrcat lltltt'r'rtt- askine

tiori.r (18(r0 (rl ) all craminc thL' prol)osition that onc's placc in tlrc u'olld- artd tltitt ur
sonlL'tinrcs evL-n luL'lc survivitl is dctclntinerl not bt,itctivL'el'li)rts trlu,artls scll- Hor'
rcalization hut b1,tlre cirrL'an(l ternrcrerciscrl b1'r,arious giurtliarrs. Olii'erl-u'ist ir gcrlr
is Ihrcltc'necl b),thc brutal yrari:h bLrrcaucrac),e\cmplilir-d in Nilr'. Btrnrblc. as u,ell protac
as b1'the'crinrinul Lrnclergronurl ol Flsin. Sikcs. lncl Nlonks. rvho alc all strongly helplr'r
inr.'e slcrl in corruptiuq. ii' nol physicallr' (iL'stroving hirtr. Lrntil hc is t.'scttc'cl to cletr.
tlrroLrgh thc lrencvolc-nt intclr c'ntions ol']\,1r. Ilrou'nlot, uncl li.osc \'laylic's circlc. occu1'li
Dat'irl Coppcrlir'lrl is savctl flrrnr thc tcrror ancl ncglcct ol'I:lclu,ald Murrlstonc rLntl an ear'l
his equallv tvrarrnici.rl sistcr'.lanc thnrugh thc inrolvcmcnt o1'surro-9lltc nrothers tt'rlv I
likc his nulsc PcsgoItl' anrl. in palticLrlar'. his niLurilicent if cccentric aunt Bct\cy. latl ar
Ei,cn Glcrrr E-rlteL'trttiott;. a nruch tiarkcr valiation orr this lanriliar thcme. and abtt s.',
one ri lrich conrplicatcs thc clistinction bcnvecn tllL- bil(hlng\nrn.urn hcro's hclpcrs tlo tto,
and anta.sonisls. sccnrs nonL'lhclL-ss liratc'd on tlic possibilitY 01'cle virtion throLrgh ri ithir
bcnevolcnce-. l-h.- TTlicl recognizecl as rnuch uhr'n the ncir"cl vuas lilst publishcrl: ionlu
irctu c
'flie hclo ol the prc-scnt talc. Pip. is a sort ol Olivcr'. IIc is lori,-born. llrthe-r'lcss ricu:
runrl nrollrcrlc-ss. anrl lrc riscs out ril thc cliccrlcss dcglaclltion of his chiltlhood olhcr
into cprite iulothcr sphcr.e. l'lrr,'thicves !ot a holtl ol Olii'er" trierl to nrakc irgen(
hirn a pickpockct" urtrl u'crc succceclccl iir thcir l'r'icncllv inlenlions bv Mr. . it it 1-1.
-f
Ilr'ou,nlou,. . . . lr.: convicl in the ncu storv takes the place o1 Mr. llrori'nlori
in thc old. antl supplir-s lVlastr-r Pip * ith cve r\, lu\Llr),. In t'itlrer tale. throuch
s()r'ne unlrccountuIrlc clll)ricc ol'lbrtunc. thc pttttv son ()l l]o\/crt\/ suclclenlv
lincls himscll'thc chikl of alllucnec. (Collins -l-15)

Whilc- thc clain.r that "Pip is a sort ol'Olivr'r" ccrtlriulv rc(lLrircs atlclitional r;uali-
fication. this rer'icu'llonctlrclcss lccognizcs l ccrtlin continLrit), in Dickcns's pru'-
lcrrccl plot strLrcturcs: r'L'l)catc(ll) r'ctunrinr-r to thc cltrestion ol'crtcrniLl lirrccs llral
clilect thu- hcro's lile palh uncl tlu'1inc his social positiou. Dicl'cns's novcls ohscs-
sivelv eramirre tlic nrtuni ng ol' tlcpcnclclic\ rncl gtuu'rlianshi1.r.
'fraclitiorralll,. tLris intelest in hcro.-'s b1'rlelinition ubunrlonccl. ncclcctctl. artcl
in ncccl ol'hclp hus b.-cn reurl as rt sigrt o1'l)ickcrrs's tirirtion ott citiltlhootl as itit
c-ristentiul condition chunretcrizcd bl'rulrrcratrilitl'und cxclLrsion.r It is one ol D.
r)\
the irinrs ol this cssu1,to histolicize 1l'ris firrrtion. FIc-lplessncss. clcpetttlcrtce. antl r lr.'
pussivitl, are tlre ccut!ll cutcgolics ol'thc intelrclirtcrl Victoliun clcbatcs ahout thc :::_.

F
 D ic ket t s i ut t B iI tl tut,q s n tr rrtnt 65

rtatus o1'the poor ancl the working classcs, abr>ut clinre. about charitable inter-
rc'ntior.r. ancl about selt'-reliance. When Olivc'r' Tivist's and Davicl Coppertielcl's
protectors and cletractors contkrnt each othcr rvith contrarl, interprctatiotis of the
irerulcs' si tuation-B rorvnkrw and An nt Betsey acknorvleclgi n-s their helplcssness,
irnd Bumblc ancl Murdstone accusit.tg the bo1's olu,illfully l'alling into vice-lhey
rL'hearsc thc fiimiliar argurnerlts knorvn tion.r the clcbatcs about the position ol'the
poor in early Victoriarr l3ngland. Are tl.rey ancl in neecl of discipline. or
"'icious
hu'lpless ancl in need of salvaticlnl Or. shoulcl they. perhaps. help themsu'lvesl 81'
asking sucli cpreslions. Dickens's novels participate in thc'contemporar'1' clebutes
that rvere primarill' concerned u,ith action. passivitl'. ancl intlividual agcncy.
However, in erploling the cliscursivc conclitions that pressurL-(l Dickens to tuln
u -seure tl,pically concerncd rvith social and psl,chological aspects of a 1'outhl'r-rl
protagonisl's transition to aclulthoocl into a lool 1or erploring abanclonrnetrt and
helplessness. I dcpart lronr the unusually persistenl critical tladition that seeks
to dete-rrnine Dickens's status as a social coml.]rcntator ancl tlie exact positior) he
occupicd on the icleolo-eical nrap of niicl-ninetccnth-ccntLtry England. Oncr' r.tgain.
an early re.,'ieu' sets the tone: "O1rle,r'Tlrr.il is." arguecl Richalcl Forcl in lhc Qttur-
rerlt Rericn'shortly atter the novcl u'iLs publishecl. "clirectccl asainst the poor
larv and the u,orkhouse systcnr. and in our opinion',lith mtrch unfuirness. Thc
abuses he clescribcs are not onl1,u-ragge|atecl. bUt in ninL-tL'cn ci.rses ()r.lt t)1'1\\,cnty
do not exist" (Forcl 85).: While comnrittecl to reconstnrctirrg thc tliscursivL'space
rvithin u,hich Dickens's novels operate. I am intelc-stecl in clc-veloping a clecisively
tbrmalist versiott of litcraly historicisnl b1' exanlitrin-u the clialecticill rc-llrtitlnship
betrvcen the logic of the bildungsrolnan plot and scvclal historicalll, conclitiorte'd
vieu,s of ageucy and hclplc-ssncss. Beyoncl cxplicit atiacks on the Pool Lau's ancl
other instancu's ol'overt social comme'nlary. horv ctid thc contrarv propositiotrs on
a_gcucy rvhich accornpanied thc cliscussions aboul povL'rtv. I)ililPL'r'isnt. ut.tcl criure.
shapc the narrative logic of thc Dickensian Bilcluussl'onran'l

I. The State oI'the Laboring People

Con.\ilt'ru| in its tttonrl urtl :,t itrl u\l)L(1. tl1( \lttlL

ol rltt' lultottritt,g l)(ol)l(' llu\ lul!(t l.\' l)('(tt tt strhlt'ct rtf
rttutlt nlt,tr' tltct trlution <tttLl litLttt.riott tlntrt frtrtttLrlr:
lntl tlk' t)l)init)11 tltut it i' 1to/ n()t v ltrl it otr,4ltt trt bt,
Itur ltL't,,ntL' tr'/ \' (( ii.'/i11.
--Jtrhn Stttrtrt \lill. /'r'iir iltlt: rtl Politit ul I:trtttorttt'

By the ntid-nineteenlh century it had hecome comrnon lirr conrmentittot's to dccly

the seemingll, encllcss prolif'eration of rlcbates on thc status ot' the poor. Accitrd-
ing to arr articlc publishecl in lYc,irii irt.;tcr Rct'ictt in ll3(r9. "it is not only that the
u(l i)lCI{^}r\S S itrl)lt:S \\\LI'\i

suir.jcct iol paupcr-i.nr irnti criir.'1 i. nrrirriLri jrt ii.rli. irLrt it is \\()r"il thrca(ll)iu.. Ii ll O\ t- I:
has irccn lr-citierl so olicrr. ilY so riilir',,irirlc irrcn. irrrri iir sLrcii li iuictl'o1 a:pccts. as bruill r
to IcilYC iil1ic nrt[i trr itc ':trirl. ]l()r'1ll\i p1(r\ircci oi crcr groriltirrg tlrc liicts irr lL |rett [riIclrrng
anri lloi.' :tnkirr!. lirlri" ("-i-ir; i)lrilrirttlrtoirr ol thc ,\sc" {17). l'hc \crlsL- ()l'\utili'a rlchltlc.
tion llitl ircr'r builrirn! lirr'.i lont ti;rLr. \iolc titirrt u riccittlc clrtlict'. I:tlriuld ('hcn.'r 1o tlrc li
conrpluiricri ihat "iirclc nc\ ii \\ u: .t iir,re u ir.lr tir.' e oirtlition ()i tlrc p()or cirgligcrl so iLttrl tlr.'
nrtrcir tri ilrc lL'Llcniion ol tltc icgisliilur.c. oi rlccLrt-\ictl so llirgc ir |ortion ril iinrc itncl At ic
L-jtcrgi,-'\ o1 inciili,-lulis" (108). iiri' inrn'ri:r.isi rnicll,.:ctlral lurrl poliiieul cliirrt rtas irttl l)or,
ntltclrctl oli\'lt.r tircliniurciirl i'ipcntiiiiu'c:c,.ir.rii,l11 lrrlLlrr:rLllt:ririLiorrol'ltorcrlr'.,,\: tllirt rhc
llcrrlr'\,larirc'upoilicriotrt.iirihilir''1.111gqr1r111111a nlriiti\ojirnre ctiitionol'ltrtttlott linti r ie
ltrlttttt rrtttl tltt' lpnrlort y')oor'. irrrlrii'lrcti iir l.\5i :ll. "lirc rirlrunilLttlc oi tllc sLnl ntti otti
tilrt u'e !tirc r'rrirurilu ilY ionlrlti' tir.' suPlrori rrnrl crlLrcltion ol llrc porx'cl classcs" is lic poii,
uirPlrllrilclcri in lltc lti:iorr r)i lurr oiirrl nil'!ion. oi'rri lin)' oiirri'trrirc" (3:-i-5 1.' itr Ii.c1r
\lirrlrcrr's ourr rrriplrrlril.-icti lllirit 1() llcrctl,lic thc tic|th. ol ru-hlrn 1lo\clt\ iur(i chlirilr:
",jl,gilrpucililr oi ilrc irrr.iLr'ir'). tirc r., lrnl. rurri lirc r.ie .' oi lhc qlc'at !letrLrp- itllcrrc.'
1-rlor itlc 1
olis" l.-l) cnnrc on tlrr llcal\ ol rice ;itl:s oi'instillriionrri uctivitl' rirrcl pLrblic rliscLrs-
( nriurrr I
siorr. 'l'hc inteirsc intcrc\t in ihc poor ircakcri tiLriirrg lhc ircutctl tichatcs u'hiclt lcrl sinrrIlri'
up to thc Poor l.lru \nrciirir.ncnl \ci oi i8.ri. lrtrl tlrr'se cuit irr tulil bc (r.recri irt il\ il bil
icu.t;rs lal blek us.lclcnrr Ilcniiturrr': *r-itinr: llont tltc rrritl-1790: rtttcl .loscplr iill iil'!'l
Torr nscnti's Di.s.st rttttiott ott tltL' l)tsrtt'l-rrrr r. llr-:l PLrlrlirlteLl irr ITli(r.' Iit)r' it itor)cl rrin ctcc
hr-rrrtlrcrl veals. llrr pooi'ant[ tlie ri'olliing cius:cs ii'crc ob.jccts ol'intensc puhlic
scrLrtir)\,. scientiiic r)r'ps311ii1l-';sicntrlic stil([ .r'. tcu,. conclciunlrtion. s1'nr1'lith\'. uncl ii i'
iclcolosicul inrloetlinliiort. all cLrlrrtinrtills iir rr !r'cirt lur()rLnt rrl lroth lcgislltirc l11lro1

ancl churitablc ilcti\it\,. \1athc* \ o\\rr riretoliclr] lll)iluulri\ rcrcul: scllc ol 1ltc ihc
purarlorcs of tiiis cpi:tcrnologicui iirirtioii on tlrc loncr ortlcrs: ri hilc untlLrcrlit,rt- tii 'l i:
abl1,synrputhctic to thc plight ol thc urbarr poor'. lrc lppnrpriatcrl the lanquugc tltcir'
ol'ctrlonial erpltlnrlion. prcscntinr. hinrseli lrs "ihc tlalcllel in the Lrncliscovcrctl ir i..'
collntr\'ol thL- Jloor'" irrtrl pronti:irtq to illLrnrinatc lr "bocl\ ol l)L-r'\ons. ol ri'ltorn tltc
pul.riic hucl lcss knou lcdg.- tltrn ol thc rnost tli:lrini tribcs ol tlrc c-rirth" ( l:-l). In
orclcr to hc nrarlc visitrlc. thc ioucr cllrsscs alc lrlso tirorourhll,cxoticizctl. sinrul-
tancousll,in pllin sighl in thc Ircrrli of lhc nrctlopolis uirrl lirnrlrrrncntally ulicn:
as il tlLrll li tullu'uv tlihc. llrc Il()ol lirc kccnl,r' crarninctl. tircir hirlrit: obse :sir cl)'
obscrr crl. .rnri lirct irlc. in thc linrLl irrstarcc. nruticLr]()u\lv clrllilolrrc(I.
Prctlictabll,. thc Pnrrrincirt irosition riirieh thc \tirtLls ()l tlrc Poor occuPiccl in
tlrc public cliscoulsc lrirs also tulncti it iirlo thc ccntlul point ol laging irlcolrrgicll
cortllicl:. Social Iristoliurts likc I)ulitl Ori'u'n. {)crck lrlr'er.. arrtl []. Davicl lltrhcrts .iii(

hur,c ckrnc nruch to rlcsclrbc ihc eorrplcr inicr.rction [retuce n tlrc rising tli:cipline :ili.r,.
ol political ec()nolu\. iirc tlariitionrrl Lr1'r1-r.'r'-cllr's pulclirrriisnr. r'cli!iou: atllrck' ()ir r.igg \)

povcltv ls a c()nsc(lucrrcc ol siir. lintl tirr- striLe in lrrirnlrnitllilrnisnr in thc clrrll, \ i.:1,,
ninctccnth Ccnturl,." Arrcl ihc cioscr-oua lool,s ut thcsc dcvclol)nlcnts. thc rtiorc irl ilr
al)llarcnt it [rc'conre s tlrut thi irlcologicili cii:ILrtc: lirout tlrc pooI rclic'{'cluIing tlrc .rll.i .,
lirst lrlll o1'thc niirclccnth ccrtlttrv stc.m fl'r)ril lr lurqu-r'con1lrc1 lrc[ru-en clisplttittr' ''il r.
notiol)\ ol inclir itlrurl irltcllcl unrl Pcr''onui rc:pon:ibi1i1r'. u conllict tirat I)iclicns's ..rll -i:
 D i < kt' tt.s i ttr t B iI I t t tt.q : t't,trt t r tt 67

It novels obsessively t-'nact. Focusing on neslectecl chilclren placed in the care of

as brutal _suardians. anonymous benefhctors. ancl ruthless criminals. tlic Dickensian
bildr"rngsron.ran as a lbrm seeks to recorrsidcr the central concerns of the poverty
clebates: like contemporary sociaI commentators. his novels u'ill repcateclly return
r)' to the limits of autonomous action ancl the rclationship bctrvccn individual choice
io and tl.re pl'cssurc of e xternal structures.
rd At least since the litte ei-rrhteenth century, the ce-ntral o['rjection against the exist-
AS ing Poor Lnu'arransements. establishccl durin-s the rei-sn of Queen Elizabeth. *'as
\s that they prclvided too much relief too indiscriminately. thus promoting "idlencss
)il and vice" (Tou'nsencl 2).r The char-uc originally lix\\,arcl b1' 'fori,nsend ri,as llut
m not only reiteratecl in the ensuing debates. hLrt also constituted the basis of pub-
is lic polic1,. Follou'ing this eract line o1-reasoning. thc authurs of the 1,323 Char-
ity Report severely criticized those who engage in thc practice of indisclirninute
rd charity: "Such a man by un incliscrinrinatc alms--lirin_u u.ra1,be the prornoter of
p- iclleness and bcg-eary. a patron ot'cleccption and vice. arrd so tur as he holcls a pre-
s- mium tbr u,hat is bacl. an actr,ral rlin.rinishc'r of thc sum of soocl" (Ellis 9tt). A very
:d sinrilar linc of iirglrmerlt was tuken in the 1834 Pool Law Ileport which servecl
at as a basis lbl the nerv legislation (Rohelts 110). As l'on,nsencl u,rites. oflt'eling
rh an argunrent rvhich rvill be rcstatecl ccluntlcss tinrcs ilurinsr the lirst half of the
rd nineteenth century:
ic
rd It is universully fbund thal \\'here brearl can be nbtainc-cl u'ithout care or
labour. it lcacls throu-eh icilencss ancl vicc to povcrty. Belirle thc1, discllvsrg4
he the gold tncl silver rnines of Peru and Mcxico. thc Spaniarcls werc
lt- distinguishcd among thc' nations of Euxrpe lilr thcir inclustry and arts. tbr'
qe their manutirctures ancl their commclce. Bnt u'lrat arc they norv'? l lazy, poor.
:d n.riserable people. ( l4)
''te

In For early Victorians. like tor-Torvnse-nd. to be hclpecl is to be relieved ot'a-eency.

rl- ln the words of Sarnuel Smiles, the best-knorvn Victorian popuiarizer ot'the rvicle-
n: spread ideolo-uy ol'selt-hclp. "Whatcver is clonc.lbi-nrcn or classcs. to a certrrin
ly extent takes away the stinruhls tud nccessity of doing lirr thcmse lvcs: and rvhere
nren are subjected to ovc'r-guidance and ovcr
-govcrnlrc-nt. the inevitablc tenclency
ln is to rencler them cornparatively helpless" (Smiles 1). Atthou-rrh thcrc is no reason
al to take a recluctionist vieu' of the rathcr divcrse bocll, of Victorian sclf-hclp litcla-
tS ture-not everyone rvoulcl subscribe to thc Smilcsean creL'd according to whicl.r
te reliance on others is outright cletrimental-the tirscination rvith sell-reliance in the
)n lhce o1' adversil.y nevertheless was a clor.ninant theme. This is plecisely why the
ly Victorians liave lelt us such an astounding nunrbcr of terms that clescribc the care
re lirr the self. incluclingscff-c'ttlt vutiort. sel.f-edrtt'utiorr.sel.l'-tt'uirt'tt,q. sall-t-ttlture,
1e and s e lf.-fb nrtet i ot t."
te "But Selt'-culture is possible." writes William Channing. "not only because rve
's can enter into and scarch ourseives: we l.rave a still nobler pou,er. that ot acting on.
 D i c k e r t.s i tttt [] iI tl r t r t g,s ru rrt cu t 69

the incon'"'c-r.riences that necessarily attencl a state of presnancy. and -sruide

against theur betbre-hand. (Ellis I l4)

With such intense fear of the negative el'lects of charitable action, it rvas abso-
lutcly imperative lbr legislators who clraltcd the Neu,Poor l-aw to ensure that
*'eltare benefits \\,cre not easil;'acccssible.r" The most important rneilsure put
in place so that no unwan'anted rclief was ot-feled rvas thc so-called workl.rouse
test, rvhich severe ly lirnited the ilmount and kind of lcliel'available to able-bodied
men. hr orcler to cleter the laborcrs fiorn seekin-g poor relief instead of employ-
mcnt, the only relicf oll'erecl Io those able to work was to be housed in the work-
houses. As W. R. Greg notcd in an i853 alticle. "it *,as perceived by the authors
ol'that acln.rirable measure. that the only rvay of discouragin-e paupelism. and pro-
moting ener-qy ancl sell-reliance. was by renderin-s the position of the pauper less
comtbrtable and less clesirable than that o1'the independent labourer' (63). With
such argumcnts put tirrrvard. the reasoning of Mr. Bumble, Dickens's intarnous
rvorkhouse administrator tl'orn O/i |er'7l|i.!/. seems somervhat less caricatural than
it is usually consiclerecl. "Jhc' -srcat principle of out-ot'-dool relief is." argues Mr.
Bumble. "to give the paupcrs exactly what they don't rvant: and then they get tired
of coming" (179: ch.23).
Undcr thL-se circumstances the arguments fbr poor relief, whether through state
interventiou or throu,sh private charity. hacl to take into account this pen,asive
indiviclualistic pliilosophy. One necessary step was to suggest that there is such
a thing as untbreseeable circumstances. but such sug-gestions wcre made timidly.
ancl rvere r,rsually prelirced by assurances that the charitable activity will not pro-
mote irnpruclence :

We are by no means advocatcs fbr impruclencc': on the contrary. rve hold selt'-
leliance to be one of the principal ingreclients tbr making a goocl and useful
citizcn : but thcre arc sonle acciclents against rvhich no tbresi-eht can guard.
Thele arc but a firvored t'erv who al'e not liablc tbr sudden reverses l and all of
us may be suclclenll, stricker.r b5, cleath. or visited. u,ith rnutilation and clisease
in thc vely vigour ol'our clays. ("Reports ofthe Society. 1838-1839" 343)

In fact. gii,en the pervasivenc'ss of thc ideology of self--reliance. early nine-

tecnth-ccntury philanthropy hacl very limited rhetorical resources at its disposal
when nraking the case lbr charitable intervention. unless. of course. it cspoused
moral and reli-sious activism and explicit aclvocacy of sclf'-hclp as a central part
ot' the charitablc eftort. Atter all. il- indigence is alrvays a matter of individual
failure. the lrrimary lbrm of helping the poor (and lbr many. the only acceptable
lbrm) ivas to help therr.r acquire the moral qualities and the practical skills that
in,ould enable them to help then.rselves (Fraser 12tl).1i And il'one to avoicl
"vas
rvhat u,as in cssence a missionary approach which dictated that the urban poor
bc saved from the state ol'r.noral depravity. one haci to argr.re tbrcetully that the
I")

l,',. (l

\l'i il,\,r11

i)..),,1

)r)it; .''. \\, i.'.

l,r\ i_ii,.r \t,L ,,. r r;: .11.,:t .,!:i) l:u i I

. .1. . t.i r',..:.1. llt. ltlll)., t.... rll. I

l.r,'i. i .'il-. \' \ .l ..,, 11.). I

il' ji:l.tr \- 1., \ r'\,'. '..... r.(,, -'.1..\
i r it- rlti tl(i. ,'l:;,.1;t.r,,1

ti: ,. .,.!
 D i cke n s i arr B i I dwt g,s roman 7l

ok the situations in which relief could be administered without promoting imprudence.

However, in practice the tendency of the legislators was to limit severely the defi-
:ularly nition of helplessness. and to attribute absolute responsibility to almost anyone:
mem- hence the insistence of the writers of the Charity Report that the availability of
:ss. Of healthcare promotes recklessness. For the exact same reason, an enormous efTort
objec- was necessary in order to put at least some limits on child labor and acknowledge
taking that children are "not free agents."rr
y were Clearly, to truly subvert this powerful ideological machinery, was to introduce
there- an alternative understanding of agency. The most well-known (though by no
l prac- means the most interesting) argument was put forward by Robert Owen, who sim-
ion fbr ply decided to reverse the dominant ideological paradigm by denying all agency
in the to individuals: "In those characters that now exhibit crime. the fault is obviously
:volent not in the individual, but the defect proceeds from the system in which the indi-
rphasis vidual has been trained. Withdraw those circumstances which tend to create crime
3n pru- in the human character, and crime will not be created" (Owen 59).13 Owen's view
:half of relieved the poor not only of the ability to act. but also to exert moral judgment.
in sub- By midcentury. one didn't have to be a utopian socialist to acknowledge the
lf have role of environment in perpetuating poverty and the many social evils associated
'ecom- with it. As Norris Pope has argued in Dickens and Clnritv, evangelical views have
)arlyle, also evolved from an almost unanimous insistence that poverty is self-inflicted
luritius towards recognizing that "the connexion between the moral and physical condi-
Lowes tion of the poor was most intimate and inevitable" (Lord Ashley, Qtd. in Pope
women 202). And yet, as Pope's analysis shows, this shift in argument has only managed
worked to displace the causes of sinfulness of the poor into the environment, without truly
gentle- removing the stigma usually placed on the population of urban slums: "poverty,
)nduct; it would appear, could still be understood as a result of moral infirmity; but moral
degree infirmity, evangelical reformers increasingly recognized, was largely unavoid-
r hand- able for the bulk of those individuals living in the worst slum environments"
e want (203). The acknowledgment of environmental factors complicated the evangelical
rle, or, understanding of charity but did not do away with an essentially paternalist vision
extenI of the industrial poor as a class in dire need of a moral intervention fiom above.
erative A more far-reaching argument in favor of helping the poor was not that the cir-
unt for cumstances have rendered them incapable of passing moral judgments, but rather
that the poor were unable to escape their circumstances itl spite of exercising
David proper moral judgment. It was Hugo Reid who provided this more sophisticated
w was critique of both political economy and the New Poor Law, of'fering what will
:litical become a classical argument in favor of the welf'are state, without completely
1 other obliterating individual agency. For Reid, it was precisely the failure of laissez-
ons to faire economics to create jobs and reduce poverty that invited state intervention:
tnwar- "if the natural operation of the law of demand and supply cannot supply to the
ith the people the bare necessities of existence, they ought to be interfered with" ( l6) As
lowed for the New Poor Law, Reid has essentially turned the tables on the deterence
:re are argument: a brutal and essentially punitive poor law is in fact hurting the sense
12 DICKENS STLIDIES ANNUAL

ol'self-respect and indepenclence among the poor' ( l -5). Pcrhaps rnost irnportantly. hy cart-'ful *u

Reid u'ent on to re.jcct lorcL-fully thc notion tlriit citlrcl'Iailure or succcss is sL-lf-- o1' protiruncl
i ncurrecl: killed in no t
who was rct
But thousancls-hunclreds ol'thousanrls-are lronr ol ilrcsistilrly fblcetl ir.rto parish sur9e,
thc condition rve cleplore. sulrounclcd bl,cilcr-rrnstance's u,l.ticl.t -qive them no out the point
possible chance of en-rancipation. ancl cloonrecl to a painlirl stlug-ule ri'ith thc
horrols o1'u,ant. monrl and phi,sical sulf'ering. discasc-. ancl crinrc. until they Since thele u'ar
miserablt, sink-unlc-ss rescLrecl b1, thc stnrne ann of thc statc. This is a reduc
-[he
rvorlcl is not all conrposccl of "clever pushing l'ellows who ,set on." just iibout anyo
ancl "nevcr-clo-rvells" rvho clon't tlescrvc to set on. The glcat ma.jority of medical assista
oldinaly ploclclers rvho lemiLin u'hc'r'e thc1, havc bccn sct. r'isc by good tortuue ploper carc u il
thcl' har,c done nothine to clescrvc.-or sink [r1' the plessurL' ol'tbrces they notion of ll'ec- r
coLrld neither tblc'see nor \\'ithstan(1. It is lilr tliesc-lhc'lllass-that \\/e Inust rvill cscapc the
1c-sislatc. (l-l) the compcting
ot'David Copp
The casc in point: Oliver Tti.st.,\ltlioLrgl'r Dickens rvas b1, no nreans silcnt on or acccptecl hr
the tirrmative el't'ects o1-dcplolablc surrounclir.rgs. tht'piot ol the nor,cl lrinqes orr no possibilitl r

the abilitl,of bcricvolcnt ligLrles to r-rnclcrslurrd tlrat Oliver is hclpless. iunoct'nt. factors.rr For lt
and in need ol'protection. clespitc- all su-ugestions to thc colltrary. Othcl Dicken- wl.rich fbrces rr
sian heroes. like Davicl ancl Pip. arc- not cclrrally enclanserccl. but their worldly Nonetheless
prospects are cclually clepcnclcirt on <lutsiclc intervcntion. Ilr llct. in the rnidst ol' man lies not in
thesc conllicting accoLrnts of agency ancl incliviiliral rcsponsibility. the Dickensian d<lnrinanl uncle
bilclun-tsronran repcatcclll, rehcarscs clillcrent scL'nurios in u'hich crtelnal f nctors. is not sinrplr,tr
variousll, unclerstoocl as \tatc bureaucracy. carins benctirctols. nralcvolc'nt con- rather of thc ci
spirators. or sirrpll,the biza|rc inraeinalion of stranqers. rlcnronst|ate the power orvn stanclins i
to shapc the hero's latc. In thc facc ol'so rnuch irtsistcucc on sclt-rcliance and the moral efl'ccts t',
cletrirrcntal eft'ccts ot'rvhat is clccrncd to bc unrvarlantcd hclp. Dickens rL'nrlins lvith clependcn
1ascinatcd ri,ith thc pou er ot'l-rencvolcnl intcrl'entitln. moral rationali

Tht-'liberrl 1

II. 'I'he Polver of Benevolence falsely imas

to supposc
proviclc iirr
At the bc-einning of Olivtr Ttri:t, Dickcns rnounts a rathcl obvious parodic indepe ndu'rr
assault on Ihe noti<ln that help clinrinishes capacitl,lor inclividual action: not obscure
of antor-rclnr
The lirct is. that there rvas considerablc clifticLrlty in inclucing Oliver to
take upon himsclf thc ollice o1 rcspiration.-a troLrblesorne practice. but And if dcpcn
one rvhich cllstom lras renderecl neccssary 10 our easy eristcncc; ancl lirr individual chr
some tinre he lay gusping on a little tiock mattrcss. ratlrer uneclualll,poised reasoning tha
betr.r,een this u,orld ancl the ncxt: thc balancc- bcin-sr deciclcclly in lavour of same onc tr ir
the latter. Norv. if. cluring this bricl' pcriocl. Olivcl had becn surroundccl have secn- in
 Dicken sian B ild utt g,s rrnnatr 73

tly. by caretirl -grandmothers, anxious aunts. experienced nurses. and doctors

:lt'- of profound wisdont. he u,ould most inevitably and indubitably have been
killed in no tirne. There being nobody by. horvever. but a pauper old rvoman.
who was rendered rather misty by an unwonted allowtnce of beer: and a
) parish sur,eeon rvho dicl such matters by contract: Oliver ancl Nature fbught
) out the point betrveen them. (2-3)
l
Since there \\/as no one to help neu,born Oliver. he will have to fi-cht tbr himself.
This is a reductio ad absurdum o1'the position rvhich advocated self'-reliance of
just about anyone. The authors of the Charity Report believed that the absence of
f medical assistance mi-uht promote prudence amon-g women: here. the absence of
) proper care will force Oliver to fi-uht tbr his lit-e. This parodic underrnining of the
notion o1'free will is reintbrced by the very structurc of the novel's plot: the hero
t rvill escape the workhouse only to become an object of intense stru_ugle between
the competing worlds of Fagin and Brownlow. Mucl'r in the same u'iiy. the fate
of David Copperfield hin-ses on rvhether he will be -eiven up to the Murdstones
on or accepted by Betsey Trotu,ood. In Hugil Reid's terminology. these heroes have
on no possibility of "emancipation" unless saved by il "strong arm" of their bene-
lnt. factors.r+ For both Oliver Twist and David Copperfield. the decisive question is
en- which fbrces will take control over thcir lives.
dlv Nonetheless" the central ideological intervention o1'thc Dickensian bildungsro-
: o1' man lies not in its insistence on tl.re lack of agency. but in the subversion of the
ian dominant understanding of relationship betwcen agency ancl rnorality. The issue
)rs, is not simply one of passivity ancl porver to change one's owtl circumstances. but
cn- rather of the ethical benefits of charitable intervention. If one cannot control his
ver own standing in the r,vorld. otlering help and care is an imperativc with beneficial
the morai eft'ects lbr both the receiver and the giver of this care, hence the tascination
ins with dependence on benetactors. This position anticipates the critique of liberal
moral rationalism in the u'ork of contemporary care ethicists:

The liberal portrayal of the self -suflicicnt individual enables the privile-ued to
talsely ima-sine that dependencies haldly exist. and rvhen they are obvious.
to supposc they can be dealt with as private prei'crences, as when parents
provide tor their intants. The illusion that society is contpttsed of ti'ee. equal.
lic indepcndent indivicluals whcl can choose to be associated u,ith one anotlter or
not obscures the reality that social cooperation is requirecl as a precondition
of autonomy. (Held 86;

And il dependency is. in fact. a crucial aspect of social reality, the ethics of
individual choice no lclnser hcllds. or. at least. pl'oves insufficient. The iine of
reasonin-9 that contemporary proponents of care ethics seek to clisplace is the
same one which has dominated the Victorian debates about the poor. As rve
have seen. indiscrirninate cor.npassion for the rvretched was routinely attacked
 t..\ I r'tl {, :\

t-i).'\,!,\
(\.: ,,li

(r .!r_.,r' i:lL

I r\ !,i r, I !

,'.i. " i

\\ ii\ 'i r.) :!r!

llI! .,.il(i(" .'r;l:ll:I:l:l

r.l Lli'. t'1,!

, i .,,r .i;i-

\ i:\ 'i)1. \
), )

it,lllLl
 Dicken s ian Bildurt g sronmn 75

Charity psychological. Both Oliver and David understand this very well, and both are in
abolish active search fbr guardians who will acknowledge the need to care and to establish
seen as a close relationship. "God help me," cries David, "I might have been improved
tson the tor my whole life, I might have been made another creature perhaps, for life, by a
) are not kind word at that season." (40; ch. 4) To become something else, David will have
:ure the to acquire a new guardian.
aritable Significantly, the care both Oliver and David will find is not entirely devoid
is 105). of rational scrutiny. In both novels, the hero must account for himself and per-
ting on suade the prospective benefactor that he is an innocent victim and should be res-
:n Mar- cued. Oliver pleads with Mr. Brownlow, "Don't turn me out of doors to wander
can be the streets again. Let me stay here, and be a servant. Don't send me back to the
ii-prag- wretched place I came from. Have mercy upon the poor boy, sir!" (104; ch. 14).
o often David will face Betsey Trotwood with a very similar plea:
ile try-
ividual I am David Copperfield, of Blunderstone, in Suffolk-where you came,
on the night when I was born, and saw my dear mama. I have been very
cus on unhappy since she died. I have been slighted, and taught nothing, and thrown
'ing. In
upon myself, and put to work not fit for me. It made me run away to you. I
central was robbed at first setting out, and have walked all the way, and have never
ureau- slept in a bed since I began thejourney. (163; ch. l3)
:s Nell
rlernal Although such professions of innocence and helplessness will not go untested-
would Brownlow will test Oliver by trusting him with money and books (a test he will
rnding fail, because he will be abducted by Fagin), while Betsey Trotwood will defer her
David judgment on David's tate until she consults the Murdstones-what the benevolent
.est
to figures in these novels will decisively refuse to do is to operate under the assump-
tion of guilt. Their reaction is rooted precisely in the "desire to respond positively
to need" that Noddings has in mind. As we have seen. the association of need and
guilt is the modus operandi of both malevolent characters in Dickens's novels,
and of the prevailing moral philosophy: if you are in dire need of assistance you
must have brought this need on yourself, most likely through some form of moral
defect. As Mr. Lambkins, a member of the workhouse board, comments after
Oliver Twist has asked for more food, "I never was more convinced of anything
in my life. than I am, that that boy will come to be hung" (15; ch. 2). Contrary to
this, benevolent figures have an intuitively different response to need, even ifthey
express some reservations. Mr. Brownlow: "You say you are an orphan, without
a friend in the world; all the inquiries I have been able to make, conflrm the state-
ment. Let me hear your story; where you come from; who brought you up; and
how you got into the company in which I found you. Speak the truth, and you
shall not be fiiendless while I live" (104: ch. 14). Later in the novel, when Oliver
tble, is caught after he was forced to take part in a break-in, Rose Maylie will afford
irm- him the same benefit of the doubt:
.l or
t(,

,- l),- \,il (.1 .: t

j\r,i

lt. I
)1 " , .i. . .-.,,i \.,11.\i

)t;
{_\' I ' .)

, r, )'- . , i"_ll

,,i l, 1'
It l\ i. \\ \ \\!' t :-\l
-

\\'1.i ". \

'I l,: r

,., r rif:.. '. )tt, ,.'

l,l i- r 1l:

), 1iq '. 1,r1 t.'i ,:,r,.:,:;1

lr.':i i!':',\: :\',rr,l

i, tt,l,,,\- i)
\ ():., \'. r.r
 Di cken si an B ild urt g sronun '77

S 692; ch.48). The formation is not only a failure but. more importantly. it offers
S a terrifying echo of Murdstone's words: "Yes, I had a satisfaction in the thought
It of marrying an inexperienced and artless person, and fbrming her character, and
d infusing into it some amount of that firmness and decision of which it stood in
e need" (43; ch. 4). The lessons David Copperfield is to learn will be concemed pre-
cisely with the limits of formative domination: "I found myself in the condition of
a schoolmaster, a trap, a pitfall; of always playing spider to Dora's fly. and always
rary pouncing out of my hole to her infinite disturbance" (593; ch. 48). Shaping others
is the work of the Murdstones of this world, and the hero should have known bet-
dif- ter, especially given the fact that he has escaped Murdstone's formative efforts.
rich When Betsey Trotwood decides to take David out of Murdstone's hands, she
Lf to does so precisely on the grounds of saving the boy from the fate that has bef'allen
lns, his mother: "'Mr. Murdstone.' she said. shaking her finger at him, 'you were a
gis tyrant to the simple baby, and you broke her heart. She was a loving baby-I
ires. know that; I knew it, years before you ever saw her-and through the best part of
ility her weakness you gave her the wounds she died of'(1821 ch. 14). Since shaping
tans means domination, rescuers in both Oliver Twist and David Copperfield offer
am- the heroes benevolence and the promise ofrespectable tuture, but never have the
/, to ambition of engineering their selves. Both Mr. Brownlow and Betsey Trotwood
hich are really facilitators of self-realization.
ielf- The distinction is far-reaching, and seems to have something to do with Dick-
nof ens's ambivalent attitude towards the ambition of the privileged and purportedly
lf to morally superior upper classes to discipline and shape the less fbrtunate. F. David
ll be Roberts has noted,
om-
asI Dickens, the many-sided reflector of lif'e, could hardly not reflect paternalism,
rl to but he did so in a different manner and with strong doubts. His Cheerybles
vard fin Nicholas Nickleby] and Pickwicks are not strictly paternalist. Their
benevolence is diffuse and individual, not linked to the spheres ofthe lord's
estate and the vicar's parish. It is a humanitarian, not authoritarian part of
N London's democratic life. (42).
IS

o To engage in extensive formative work on others, as Murdstone does with Clara

t, Copperfield, is to slip into an authoritarian intervention.
t, One of the consequences of Dickens's fear of tyrannical fbrmation is that the
question of self-fashioning, so central to much of the bildungsroman tradition, is
significantly displaced. For Balzac, Stendhal, Eliot, Hardy, and Joyce. the inten-
rhip sive work on the self constitutes the natural course of events. even if in some
'hat instances it ends in utter failure. From Lucien de Rubempr6 and Vautrin in Balzac
:of to Daniel Deronda and Mordecai, bildungsroman heroes will often put themselves
nd. at the disposal of mentors who will shape and discipline them. Dickens, on the
:ely other hand, is far too wary of the detrimental consequences of subjection to allow
)o" dominant mentors to step in.
/6 DICKENS STUDIES ANNUAL

III. The Great Evasion wishecl hi

that awal
sweet an(
The rejection of self--fushioning is. however, only the first in aseries of evasive its lesson
gestures prontpted by Dickens's commitrncnt to a velsictn of moral selltilnen- r.vho hacl I

talism. The bildungsroman hero is lifted ll'om his previous position clefined by to be told
poverty and sutl'ering by external fbrces that act as agents of cale. As a conse-
quence, active search tbrone's place ir.r the rvorld is dispiaced. rnarginalized, and They nec
sometimes completely suspericlcd. Pelhaps the ad'r,ocates o1' selt:help were not low's adclpt
cornpletely wrong: once the hero is saved. the qucstions of l.ris education and a series of I
prol'ession are no lon-9er lelevant. The intensity of Dickens's commitntent to care his tate is s,
suppresses those elements which typically define the hero^s socialization and opment ancl
drive the bildungsronran plot. But u,ith
In Oliyer Iu,i.ir. which most explicitly explolcs victinihoocl and helplessness. as he becor
such questions are barely asked. Agency exists in the novel primarily as lesis- chan-ee in g
tance. As J. Hillis Millcl writes. "Oliver' 'uvills to live. ar.rd therelbre resists vio- narrative 1o
lently all attempts of the rvclrlcl to crrLsh hint or burl,him or make him into a thief. ing the hert
But at the centerof this fierce will" there is passit,ity. the passivity of expect;-rtion. is adopted r

of 'great expectations'" (43). Olivet'rvill. of course. ask lbr more tbod (12). stand r.vill contint
up tbr hiri'iself in the face of Noiih Claypole's bLrllying (44). rind cscape to London diflicLrlt to
to seek his lbrtune (54). But. rnore irnpoilantly. lie rvill be auctioned by the parish. plea to "bef
be taken by the Artful Doclger to Fagin. then be kidnappecl by r.r-ancy and Sikes in which sli
and sought by Brownlorv r,vl.ro will even oil'cr a rervu'cl il'the boy is tbund. Beyond thct. the co
the broaclly dc-linecl strllg-glc between the disreputable ancl rcputable worlds. thele of his rreu g
are very f'erv details as tu rvhat Oliver will beconte: the sccret of his lirturc is imply "anot
replaced r.vith the sccret of l"ris origin. rvhich r.r,ill eventually attract most of the boy in mor,
plot's ener-uies. the Murdstr
Surely. Oliver's acloption by Brownlorv contains a vasue ancl unspcciliecl has beconrc
promise o1'eclucation (439: ctr. -53). rnet. on thc ctrher side. by Fagin's attempt only tbr a n
to shapc Oliver into a crirninal. But Brorvnlor,v's eclucation of Olivel u,ill never the Bakhtin
be described. ancl Fa-gin's attelnpt to tunr him into a criminal lvill fail spectacu- It is tlue
larly precisely becausc Oliver cannot bc shaped (20-5: ch.24). In the colorfirl prospect oi
description of Steven Malcirs. "he is activc in tht lvay that a ball batted back and takes otf. tl
fblth betr.vcen ol.lposing sidcs is active: he is tnovecl through space" (80). Bccause of poetry a
OIiver's self cannot be lirshionecl. the battlc ovel his firture rvill soou tllnt into ii what corne
strtrgglc firr sheer physical control over the boy. Oliver is. as Dickcns scholars below me.
have beett noting lbr a lon-t time. unchangcable. ancl a bildungsrornan clescribing boy I u,as i
his developn.rL'nt or education rvoulcl be superfluous.rs Dickcns's narrator admits again. the I
as much as lre sketches a bildungsroman that coulcl have been r,vritten: tor that the
u,ith plentl
Horv Mr. Brorvnlou, went on, lror.n cliiy to clay. {illing the rlind ot'his adopted already ins
child rvith stores of knorvlecige. ancl becoming iittacl.red to hirl. more nncl surprise thr
more . as his natule clcvelopecl itsell'. ancl shoivecl the thriving seeds of all he the openinl
 D i c ke tt.s i ttrr B i I d un g s ro nt u tt 19

tr ished hirn to become-how he tracecl in him new traits of his early friend,
Ihat awakened in his own bosom old remembrances. melancholy and yet
:\\'eet and soothing-how the two orphans. triecl by adversity. reurembered
its lessons in mercy to others. and mutual love. and t'ervent thanks to Him
u ho had protected and preservecl them-these arc all matters which need not
to be told. (439; ch. 53)

They need not to be told because ever),thing is already settled. With Mr. Brorvn-
.rr\\"s adoption of Oliver (437: ch. 53), the respectable world has triurnphed. Atier
r series of talse protectors. Olir,er has tbLrnd a proper guarclian. He is reclaimed.
:is fate is sealed. and it will suthce to vaguely gesture towards his future. Devel-
.rpment and education can tind their rvay into the novel only as an afierthought.
But with Dickens. even as he leaves behind this notoriously static hero, even
as he becomes interested in moral grorvth and psycholo-eical development. the
change in guardianship continues to command a curiously prominent place in the
nilrrative krgic of his bildun-esromans. In O/u lrr frll.sr. the fascinaticln '"vith rescu-
ing the hero will simply preclucle the possihility of a novel of education. Oliver
is adopted and the novel ends. A decade later. in Dat'id Coppeifelr/. the novel
u ill continue firr another five hundred pa-ues afier David changes hands. but it is
ditficult to miss that the moment in rvhich Betsey Trotwood responds to David's
plea to "betiiend and protect" hirn in thc face of the Murdstones ( l8l I ch. l4). and
in which she takes over as his guardian. is the real perilteteia. This reversal is. in
tact" the condition of the bildungsroman to corne: only under the benevolent eye
of his new protectress can David hope to becorue someone. And although this will
imply "another beginning" ( 184: ch. 15). and although David will become "a new
boy in more senses than one" (193; ch. i6). the triurnph of Betsey Trotwood over
the Murdstones rvill also mark a moment of disinterest and disorientation. David
has become a bit too rnuch of a neu, boy. so new in tact that for a moment (thou-eh
only tbr a moment) the question of his further development-of becoming. to use
the Bakhtinian term-will seem as obsolete as it rvas in Oliyer Twist.
It is tme. once he is taken up by Aunt Betsey. that David will again face the
prospect of proper schoolin_e. Yet. as his education in Doctor Strong's school
takes off. the narrative rapidly accelerates: "A blank. thlough which the walriors
of poetry and history march on in stately hosts thnt seer.n to have no end-and
rvhat comes next! 1 am the head-boy. r.row: and look down on the line of boys
below me. with a condescending interest in such of them as bring to rny mind the
boy I was mysell. when I first came there" (229: ch. l8). A blank. indeed. Once
again. the Dickc'nsian education is contentless. and will sirnply serve as an indica-
tor that the hero has achieved the proper status-"well educated. well dlessed. and
with plenty of money in my pocket" (243: ch. l9). This triumpli is a lnit accon.rpli.
already inscribed in Betsey Trotwood's def'eat of the Murdstones. and it is no
surprise that David will step into the world with no distinct desires: "l suppose
the opening prospect confused rne. I know that my juvenile experiences went fbr
80 DICKENS STUDIES ANNUAL

little or nothing then; and that lit'e was more like a great fairy story, which I was obscure and ob:
just about to begin to read, than anything else" (233; ch. l9). David is not only rian England's i

confused or unsure: he is clevoid of any vision of the future. Facing his prospects ally seen as tht
with no ideas of his own. David will be sent on ajourney, an "expedition" (235; one must begin
ch. l9) to see the world. In fact. Davir
In many ways this is the oldest trick in the book (especially if the book is a the opportunity
bildungsroman): to truly enter a process of education (or disillusionment, tbr that invited to a clinr
matter) you must step into the world. Wilhelm Meister, Lucien de Rubempr6, in Balzac or ev
Lucy Snowe, Jane Eyre. Roderick Hudson. Jude Fawley: all these bildr-rngsroman Writing about l
heroes and heroines will en-rbark on a voyage towards self-realization, however bourgeois drau
miserably such a voyage might end fbr some of them. Yet in David Coppetfield and the public:
the great journey towards self-understanding is really a trip to David's childhood private intrigue
maid Peggotty (234: ch. 19). a trip fiom one surrogate mother to the next. from sequences with
one caregiver to another. The journey will involve a brief stop in London, but the nities such spac
detour only reinfbrces the sense that David's world is limited. In London he will for the occasior
go to the theater to see Jlrllu.r Cesar,brt Dickens will allow his hero to enjoy the my attention be
metropolis for no more than a few passages before finding a way to evacuate him. Traddles! My r
David barely has had the time to express his fascination with the perfbrmance thought, who us
when Steerforth. a childliood fiiend. walks in ar.rd drags the hero and the story meeting old frie
back to the predetelrnined path towards Peggotty (243; ch. 19). It is not teribly Among tl.re n
surprising that after this journey David will ha.ve no better vision of his life path ary career. Des
than befbre it started: "My aunt and I had held many grave deliberations on the recently. Jennif
calling to which I should be devoted. For a year or more I had endeavoured to find of mid-Victoria
a satisf-actory answer to her ofien-repeated question, 'What I would like to be?' fact that in the r
But I had no particular liking, that I could discover, tbr anything" (233; ch. 19). or analyzed.r" "
This indecisiveness rvill mean that a prof-ession will have to be suggested by the allowing it to in
aunt, who thinks that David should become a proctor. came out and u,
this sentence Di
"What ls a proctor, Steerforth?" said I. less ethical or e
"Why, he is a sort of monkish attorney," replied Steerforth. "He is, to One wonders. ir
some faded courts held in Doctors' Commons,-a lazy old nook near St. of profession, o
Paul's Churchyard-what solicitors are to the collrts of law and equity. He The scandal ,

is a functionary whose existence. in the natural course of things, would have but no content. l
terminated about two hundred years ago. I can tell you best what he is. by five hundred pa
telling you what Doctors' Commons is. It's a little out-of-the-way place, and doing well.
where they administer what is called ecclesiastical law. and play all kinds of Davicl Coppe(t
tricks with obsolete old monsters of acts of Parliament, which three-fourths bildungsromans
ofthe world know nothing about. and the other fourth supposes to have been the poems of L
dug up. in a tossil state, in the days of the Edwards." (292; ch. 23) about the unsuc
bert's L'Eclucctt
Once David gets the opportunity to examine Doctors' Commons, he will only Roderick Huds
add that he is "very well satisfied with the dreamy nature of this retreat" (301; ch. David Copperfi
23). A little out-ot--the-way place and a dreamy retreat, in other words, the most preoccupations.
 Di cke n s i an B i I dwt g sronnn 81

was .,bscnre and obsolete of bureaucratic positions: such are the aspirations of Victo-
only ::.rn England's indispensable bildun-usroman hero. If the bildungsroman is habitu-
)ects :,1r seen as the -senre which explores the encounter rvith capitalist modernity.
7?5. ,.rne must begin to wonder whether David Copperlielr/ refuses such an encounter.
In lact. David will make something of a habit to turn the situations which off'er
isa :ile opportunity to extend his world into venues tbr turning to the past. When
that invited to a dinner pafty-the quintessential moment of entering the social world
rpr6, in Balzac or even Tolstoy-he shows very little interest in what he linds there.
man Writing about the French realist tradition. Bakhtin has famously described the
ever i'rourgeois drawing room as the site of the great encounter betrveen the private
fielcl und the puhlic: "the interweaving of petty, private intrigues with political and
rood private intrigues, the interpenetration of state with boudoir secrets, of historical
rom \equences with the everyday and biographical sequences" (247). On the opportu-
: the nities such spaces of1'er. David has this to say: "There were other guests-all iced
will tbr the occasion. as it struck me. like the wine. But. there was one who attracted
'the my attention betore he came in, on account of my hearin-e him announced as Mr.
rim. Traddlesl My mind flew birck to the Salem House: and could it be Tommy, I
lnce thought. rvho used to drarv the skeletonsl" (317-18: Ch. 25) ln David Copperfielcl,
tory meetirlg old fiiends unmistakably displaces new prospects.
ibly Among the most important victims of this evasive movement is David's liter-
lath ary career. Despite significant etforts by scholars like Mary Poovey and. more
the recently. Jennif'er Ruth, to read David Coppetfield as a representative instance
find of mid-Victorian interest in authorship as vocation, it is ditficult to escape the
re'!' tact that in the novel itself, literary profession is ref'erenced rather than described
19). or analyzecl.16 "I labored hard at my book." reports David Copperfield. "without
the allowing it to intert'ere rvith the punctual dischar-ee of my newspaper duties: and it
came out and was very successful" (588; ch. 48). It is very diflicult to extract fiom
this sentence David's (and Dickens's) understanding of literary production, much
less ethical or economic viervs on which such an understanding might be based.
o One wonders, in tact. u,hether scattered ret'erences to hard work reflect any theory
:. of prot'ession, or indeed, any interest in the literary profession.
The scandal of Dat,id Copperfield is precisely that the prot'ession has a name
but no content. David's authorship will emerge suddenly in chapter 43. after some
v iive hundred pages of text, and save for the fact that he has been working hard
and doing well, it will remain a mystery. The status of the artistic profession in
f Davitl CopperJteld is essentially without precedent among the major European
S bildungsromans: we know about Stephen Dedalus's aesthetic theories, we read
1 the poems of Lucien de Rubempr6 in Balzac's lllusiorts pertlues, we even learn
about the unsuccesstul literary and artistic projects of Fr6d6ric Moreau in Flau-
bert's L'Etlucotion sentimentule.We also rvitness the creative crises of James's
nly Roderick Hudson. not to mention Thomas Mann's Adrian Leverktihn. With
ch. David Copperfield. we know nothing: no titles, no aesthetic theories, no literary
ost preoccupations. except for a handful of references which su-egest that David's
82 DICKENS STUDIES ANNUAL

penchant for storytelling can be traced to his schooldays and that his writing arises I no plans for the fr
from personal experience (see e.g., 801 ch. 7,699; ch. 58). As Alexander Welsh denied us a psych
noted, "so slightly does the narrator of his own life touch upon his career that as ment within a pre
readers we are a little taken aback and we have to remind ourselves that this is a Mr. Micawber. Sr
novel about a novelist" (109). Nor is Dickens more interested in the practical side who appear in chi
of a literary career that occupies such a prominent place in a novel like Balzac's duced to us by ch
Illusions: equally remote from the fbrces of the market and liom internal develop- and his trip to tht
ment. "profession" in David Coppeiield is an empty space. world of Dat,id (
There is. however, at least one familiar intervention that Victorianists routinely friends, and teach
perform when faced with a passive hero-the equation of outward passivity with simply stops expi
internal dynamism and moral reform. In a recent iteration of this view, Stefanie one wonders whe
Markovits writes: "My claim is that in literature at least, if not in life, we are It is hardly suq
who we are. not by the virtue of what we do, but by what we have failed to do. with Dickens. Ha
Frustrated action-inaction-we is character building" (6). Or, in the words of onciliation of the
Jerome Buckley, "[David's] autobiography describes the education, through time ideal, with concrt
remembered, of the affections; his growth lies in the ordering of his 'undisci- Dickens altogethr
plined heart"' (37). The novel's ending certainly can be read in terms of moral with the bourgeo
self-realization: David has tried to turn the "undisciplined" youthf'ul infatuation round the qualitit
with Dora, who was to become his "child-wife," into an emotionally and intel- poetic glow" (10;
lectually fullilling relationship. This attempt has brought David dangerously close a conflict with sor
to the kind of tyranny Murdstone previously exerted over his mother; by now, sacrifices even mr
however, David has learned that he cannot turn Dora into a projection of his own tion of bourgeois
desires: "It remained for me to adapt myself to Dora; to share with her what I active engagemer
could, and be happy; to bear on my own shoulders what I must, and be happy still" tion. The interpre
(595; ch. l4). This realization is almost immediately followed by Dora's death, cation of the prot
allowing for the prospect of a mature commitment to Agnes, with whom David precisely because
will be able to share far more. tbrm of growth h
But before we are fully seduced by the sense of closure the novel offers, and And yet, Daur
before we surrender David Coppeiield to the traditional definitions of the bil- erploration of se
dungsroman as a chronicle of the journey towards maturity, we may want to take rional and ethical
a more critical view of this decisive theme. Commenting on the moment in which tiom her inabilit
David simultaneously realizes the inadequacy of his mariage to Dora and makes been better tbr n
a renewed commitment to this man iage, Barbara Hardy writes: "Dickens is really rhoughts in rvhic
only approaching, and then retreating from the idea of showing the disenchanted ;h. -18). It will s(
life. . . . He is touching on a marvelous subject for the psychological novel, but :he absence of th
only touching on it. He chose to summarize, to evade. and then cut the knot with David's obvious
Dora's death" (l3l). The supposed attainment of maturity takes its place next to a :ns makes it ver
series of evasive moves through which the narative has already tried to suppress :rperiences. Agl
and even obliterate both the encounter with the outside world and the exploration :rrison sith her
of the hero's psychology. As we have seen. Da,v,id Copperfield has demonstrated :::.58). She uill
a profound lack of interest in artistic and intellectual development. it has refused :' , and rescue h
to articulate the problem of professional ambition (unless the vague desire to be -J encoura-9em,
educated and avoid manual labor counts as ambition), it has offered us a hero with --erorelslept. It
 Dic ke tr.siun Bi I tl rt u,gs rcntutt 83

. , plans for the future and rvith no unrealistic youthlll projects. and it has finally
:;nied us a psychological drama. What is lett is a hero trapped in a circular muve-
::.-nt within a predeflned circle of friencls and relatives-Aunt Betsey. Pe-cgotty.
\1r. Nlicawber, Steertbrth. In tnct. except lbr Dora ancl her father. Mr. Spenlorv.
.,.iro uppear in chapter 23, practically all ol'the novel's chief characters ure intro-
:ucecl to us by chirpter 15. David's work as a parliamentary reporter and author.
.rd his trip to the Continent late in the novel. inh'odlrcc no new characters: the
'.,.orlcl o1' David Coppcrlielrl consists almost exclusively ot'relatives" childhood
rell' -:iencls. and teachers. In other words. the world of the novel rethses to extend: it
rith .inrply stops expanding clnce David up. The hero rnay have matured. but
-crrlrvs
rnie rne rvonders whether he has tacecl the world at all.
are It is hardly surprising that a critic like Lukircs was rlore than a little impatient
do. ,.iith Dickens. Having described the bilclungsrornan's central problem rls "the rec-
sof .rnciliation of the problematic individual. -ruided by his lived experience of the
inre :deal. with concrete social reality" (132). Lukdcs had little choice but to clisrniss
sci- Dickens altogether: "He hacl to make his heroes corne to terms. withoLrt conflict.
oral ri ith the bour,seois society of his time ancl. lil' the sake of poetic eftect. to sur-
tion round the qualities needed lbr this purpose with a tirlse. or anyway inadequate,
rtel- poetic -slorv" (107: see also Moretti 200). But reconciliation must be preceded by
lose .r conflict rvith social structures. a conflict David never enters. Dickens. however.
o\v. sacrifices even more than mere olltward action and the conflict rvith the organizu-
JWn tion of bourgeois society. The plot actually severely limits not only the fbrms of
rat I active engagement rvith capitalist moclernity. but also the tbrrns of self-explora-
ti 11" tion. The interpretation according to which Duvicl Copperfield chronicles the edu-
ath. cation of the protagonist's "undisciplined heart" has ,uained considerable tllction
rvid precisely because a readirrg u,hich rvould likc to insist that the novel tracks some
tbrm o1'grorvth has very little else to cling to.
and And yet, Dttvitl Copperfield's elaborate flight liorn the rvorld ancl t}om the
bil- exploration of self--fashionin-s. reveals the profound stability of the novel's emo-
.ake tional and ethical coordinates. The difficulties of David's marriage to Dora stem
rich tiom hcr inability to tully participate in his encleavors: "but that it rvould l.rave
Lke s been better tbr me if rny wit'e could have helped lne more, and shared the many
ally thoughts in which I had no partner: ancl that this rni-uht have beent I kner.v" (595:
rted ch. 48). It will soon become clear that this lack ol'"partnership" really indicates
but the absence of tl're caring relation: Dora is thr too helpless to be able to respond to
vith David's obvious need for care. The "child-wit-e" may not lack empathy. but Dick-
toa ens makes it very clear that she cannot share in David's intellectual und artistic
:CSS experiences. Agnes will fill this void: "l hacl always t'elt my weakness. in com-
.ion parison with her constancy and fbrtitucle: and now I l'elt it more and more" (700;
rted ch. 58). She rvill take up the role of David's "guide and best slrpport" (738; ch.
sed 62) and rescue him from the misery of his continental tour by erpressing support
,be and encoura-rement. His response cletrrly outlines this dependency: "l wrote tcl her
rith befbre I slept. I told her that I had been in sure need of her help: that without her
84 I)iCKtrNS Sf iiDItrs AN\ti,\l-

I u,as nclt. ancl I ncvcr irad hecn. \\irai she thoirght urc: llut that she inspirecl rne to the Fagin:
be that. anci I u'oLrkl tr1," ((r99: ch. -iE).'I'irc reirct,cct coilniitrr,-'nt to Agnes u'ill oppositior
leini,igorate Davicl's iit.'rary carecr. us hc u,ill proclucc ye'i anothct^u'olk ol'liction lenclers to
rvith no kno$'u content ancl no knowr] nanrc: "Aite| s()nrc rcst ancl changc. I t'ell to Irttiou.s tle
u,ork. in ln1,61ti ardent s'a1,. on lr nc\\ lnncy. ri'irich took sirortg piisscssion oi'tnc. goclmothe
As I aclvancccl in thc e\ecution oi this ta:;l<. I lclt it inole ancl rlorc. and roused iny nightr.nale
utmost energies to clo it rveli" (699. ch.5E). Iror Davicl. to havc A!'ncs ncxt to hirn He is the I

is to accept oncc again thc status ot"'thc calccl lbr." and to conrplele his pantheon protecting
olguarclians by tinally hnclin-c tirc onc il'l.rocan lirlly participatc in his intellectual over his r i
ancl enrotional Iif'c. of a cliabo
At the encl o1'tlrc novcl. u'e linci David sun'ouncieci ri,ith protcctivc ficurcs: taken as rr
-frotn,oorl.
Agnes. Bctsey lntl Pcggotll, (7-lli; ch. (r-1). In thc linal chaptc-rs. he has thmiliar al
slippecl into "1anre ancl tiirtunc" (7-i1: ch. (r3). into a vagLlc strrtc ()t'prospcrit1". as ii' Darid Coi
this ri,as a natural elt'ect ol the trenevoience Ihat sulrounclccl Irinr. As Calol Gilligart hetoes anr
vn,Litu's" "tlre icicai ol cru'e is tirus un activitl' ol r'clationship. o1'seeine ancl respond- hou,cver.
ing to ncccl. taliing care trf thc ri,olicl lry srrsiainin-t thc ri,cb ol'coi.rircction so that no oi'ttpr.,,artl
one is lcli alonc" (61). But such an idcal is cxtrcmcly rlillicLrlt to lnaintain ontsicle Pip n il
trrnriliirl relations ancl clornestic spacc. and I)uvil Copl:erfield will have to lirnit Vatecl-th
the hc-ro's relations to thosc with u,hich culc is tratlitionally associatcrl: a rnaicl. a but in orci
great-aunt. ancl a u,i1c.rr.r\s thc uovci dLrru's to an cnrl. tirc circle of carc has closccl. Ilathcr thr
obliteratin-g iu thc proccss ull othcr realitics oi'lilL'. cxtcrnal ancl intclnal. suflcrccl i i

t'ith a nre
\\'cfe thL-
IY. Ilpilogue: F-atal Irxtraction House. pc
nrent Lril\\
Irr\': I \Lr
Yet not is carecl ior. -lhe conclusion ol Drtvirl Coltltcrfield stutd.
e\/L-r'yone ,t ant ,U .-
in stark conirast to tirc closc ttl'(irt,ttt li.tltct ttrtiort.s. At thc cncl o1r this novcl- rrf hcr ric]
in tlie sLrpposerlll, mr-.rc optin.ristic t,crsion o1' tirc cncling sLrg-rcstcd b1, 3u,t '.r- The ilo
Lytton--Pip ancl Estcllrr mcct at tirc sitc ol tirc bui'ned clori,n Salis Fiouse. What irein_g intr',
is lcl't bchincl by Miss Havislrani is cluitc ulrololrriaicll, a *,ustclancl. r\t this sitc .iiristcr fir
o1'E,stella's lt,rannicul eciucation. tlro iriace u'irelc sire'"r,ns "L.rlcxrght up bl,Miss Su-lllCC illl
Havishanr to u,reah levense orr all the nriilc -ci--x" (i79: ch.22). iil'e can coutiuuc .\s EstclLL
onll,aiier thc lessons havc been lbrgoiten. ol latirci. supersccleci tly the agony ot 'LlCCess i:
hcr luicl lilc: " uou,. n,l.tcn sirlicring Itas ber.'r.t \trongcl'than aii othel"tcaching. -lS ). \iL'ni(
ancl has tauqht r-nc io uiicierstrllri ri'liat 1,11111 hcalt r"lsecl to bc. I hulc been beut anrl ''t ith nrr
blokerr. hLrl I iropt'- into a bctir-r slrape. Bc ir\ consiclclate ancl g<.rocl to n]c as r,rck ancl r

yoll \\,crc. and 1ell nre \\'c alc 1l'icnrls" (-17|i: ch.59).1'l'.r'en rs iit thc very enci Pip -1(_l ). Scii -i
anrl Estellli icavc'bchind rvhai is lcit ol Sltis lloLrsc^ "thc niiricri piace" (479: ch. j.'t-c tillrn
-59). ancl sr'crninril,:tcp irrto a ncn Iilc. u'c ictl thal u'c ixr',,c u,i1r'rcssccl a scenc of '.r'rmlrilr
n'totn nirtL Iirtlter Iltlrrl ol' itr,rnrir.' ]t i-: t.ttri
Gretrt li.tltct talir,rri,s sccLi.ts io rlcttl, irs rtot ortlv tlre linal plonrisc o1' scrt-nit1 . ,ll111l()f Cr\
[riit lrlso t]rc i'rrccctlins ihunrir: iirtrc *'iil l'rc no ciccisivc confi'orrtations bctri,ccrr '.d .Itre iL'
 Di c' kerts ian B il cltut g s ronrutt 85

:re Fagins and Brownlows of this world, as the novel has replaced the reassuring
-.ppositions between rescuers and malevolent agents with much more opaque pre-
:enders to the role of the hero's benet'actor. It can easily seem that it Great Expec-
:tttiott.s destructive ligures have risen to new prominence, uncontested by lairy
_rodmothers and rvell-meaning old men. "Magrvitch." writes J. Hillis Miller. "is a
rightmare permutation of Mr. Brorvnlorv and Mr. Jarndyce lftom Bleak Housel.
He is the benevolent guardian, secretly manipulatin-e the forlunes of the hero and
rrotecting him, turned into a condemned felon who, like a horrible old dog, gloats
.rr er his victim" (255). Pip's unlikely benefactor certainly ernbodies some qualities
trl a diabolic demiurge. and his insistence that he "clwns" Pip (317: ch. 39) may be
irken as sufficient indication that Dickens's final bildungsroman has dissolved the
iamiliar alignment between upward mobility and parental care. In Oliver Twist and
David Coppe(ield, care is administered by surogate parents who will rescue the
heroes and secure for them a promise of respectable lit'e. In Great Expec'tations,
horvever. benefactors are not in any obvious way figures of care, and the promise
of upward social movement has little to do with responding to need.
Pip will enter the world of Miss Havisham not in order to be educated or ele-
vated-the lady of the Satis House has absolutely no interest in his education-
but in order to serve as an instrument in her fbrmative efforts directed at Estella.
Rather than being saved fiom difficulty. Pip is to serve as a circus animai: "I only
sut'fered in Satis House as a convenience. a sting for the greedy relations. a model
u ith a mechanical heart to practise on when no other practice at hand; those
"vas
uere the first smarts I had" (319; ch. 39).re Pip's entry into the world of Satis
House, perceived by Pip and everyone uround him as the beginning of his move-
ment upwards, is really the moment in which he is turned into Miss Havisham's
toy: "'l sometimes have sick fancies.' she went on. 'and I have a sick fancy that I
\\'ant to see sollle play. There. there !' with an impatient movement of the fingers
of her right hand; 'play. play, play!"' (58: ch. 8).
The irony here lies not in the fact that Pip was abused when he thought he was
being introduced to the world. but in the fact that he was a tool in an even more
sinister form of abuse. Miss Havisham's fashioning of Estella into a figure of ven-
(394: ch. 49) confirms Dickens's suspicion of apprenticeship.
-qeance and hatred
As Estella self--consciously points out, "l must be taken as I have been made. The
success is not mine, the failure is not mine, but the two to-sether make me" (302: ch.
38). Mentoring is, once again. a dehumanizing activity; as Miss Havisham reveals,
"with my teachings. and with this figure of myself always before her, a warning to
back and point my lessons, I stole her heart away. and put ice in its place" (395; ch.
49). Self'-fashioning and care are decisively opposed. perhaps even more strongly
here than in David Copperfield. as Miss Havisham's education oi'Estella consists
primarily in destroying her capacity to empathize with others.
It is not an accident that Joe. the central figr"rre of caring in the novel, literally
cannot communicate with Miss Havisham: "I could hardly have imagined dear
old Joe looking so unlike himself or so like some extraordinary bird; standing
86 I)l( KtrNS Sl t,l)lFS .\N\t ,\1.

as hc (li(l \l)ccchlcss. ri'ith ltis luit ()l lcuihcr': r'riillcrl- .ut(i itis rrrouiit oltctr us if
he rilntccl ir \\()nlr (9fi: cir. l3). Corirpiclclv tlrrnrhlirrrnricd lrr,thc illll)cal'ancc
ol' Satis I-[oLtsc. .loc u ill lur\\\'cr rili rr1 \'li:s Illrr jslranr's (lLrcsiions bv tulking
to Prp. irnrl hc will lrLllr,rccovcl orrlv rritcr tlrr'r'ltnc lc'11 ((X) 100: ch. I-l)..1o.-
Galgct'\'is. ol coursc. gl()tr'\(lLlclv inlriticrLlrrtc. irLrt iiurt sirotilrl not i)rclenl Lrs
l'r'onr uppr-ccilrtirtg tltc lLllcgrrlrcai Pole ntiul ol tlri: sce rrc hctt c.'r'r hir clu ing
it.tttoccttcc anrMiss Ilavislrirrl't plo jcct ol' rrri'ricct'cnginr-crirrg. tlrcrr- cun hc- no
con'r r.n rrn ical ion.
TIrc 1r'olrlcru ol' Pip's posiiion is prt'cisclv Llurt in (irt,rrl l-"\'l)(,( tution\ clrre is
associutt'cl ri ith ihc prror untl illitcllitc sulr'()glilc Iullrcr'. ri hilc tirc plonrisc ol socirrl
nrobilitY lics clsc\\,h.'r'r'. ,,\s \,irrcctrt [)r'Cr)rl] r',r'iicr. "l)i1.)': nlLlirc gLrilt. iilcLllcated
b)' hi\ r'c\.ntfttl :i:tci'. is Intrltiplierl nllnv iinrc\ ()\ ci' lt\ hc coirrcs to rcnlizc ]tou,
1'lrr his 'c\pcctati()ns u\ an hcii to \,1isr iluri:llrnr irrirc liinto\t clL'srro\e(l thc
olrc rL'laf ionship irr lris Iilc tllLt sirggcsts ucnuinc kiirsirilr lnil liliou -lccling -his
l'r'icntlship uith tirc illitcliitc irlricl'srniilr untl rhlirrr!onccl i'lthr'i'liqLllc..loc" (ifilt.
l-he llict thlrt i)in ir noi t'cuilv llrc ircir to \li:'r illrrishunr i: of coirulLnrtircly littlc
'l-lrc itlcntitY oi ihc hcricluct()r' \\ ill irc :our-cc ol
c()r)sL'quL-r)cc. ir nluclt n.rr-l'ilti\c
c-\cilcnrcnl lntl inrnic tcnsirrn. hrrt. nrolc irnptirilntlr'. Pip has irLii'cctl in udrancc
trl be cie r ltc(l 1l\' llll ln()!rvnr()tLs liri cc lctl lrl onlrclu': ll()ti\,c\. IIc hlr acccl)t!'cl lo
hccon.rc lr I)upl)ct helirr'.'urccrtlinirr!r tlrc irlcrrtitr ot tlrc prrppctccr'. tilLrs acknou,l-
eclging tlrc: inrpelsonai lrlrtrrrc ol thc rclltionsirrp ri itlr t!rc bcricflrclor'.
Irt Olit'tr 7lllr1 iurtl l)tl'itl Coltltt'i-/lr'lr/ sonrc lirlrr ol arnoli()nili coilrlittnr'nt.
ol at lcilst lt ticsitc liu suclt lr c()ir)1)lilr)rcrri ri ill qo hiLncl in Irarrtl ol L-\cn Ili'L-cL-rlc
social crpcctutions. lJtincti in ilrc bottlinS luctorr,. l)uvicl ri,ill luntlisize ubout
gonl "hv sr)ilte iltciut\ or otltcr'. rlol;r rnlo tlrc corrrrlr'-r.lo tllc oltl1 tcllrtioit I ltirrl
in tlrc norltl. rrrrcl tcil ur\,\t()l \, io n11, ',,.,,,,. \,lirs lletscr" (150: ch. ll)" anrl irc ri ill
stttt-uulc to inltginc thc aunt hc rrcrcr knc\\ un(l tti sc-c har us a calir.rr: ligLrrc (15 t:
clt. il). ln (]rt,trt [:t]tt't ttrtirttts.lrou'cr cr. io conrnrii onc:cll to soe iltl lrclrlrrrcctncr.tt
is to 1iu-go li'rc prrrnrisc ol clirc.
l-rxi'at'tl llre erid. lhe norel uili nonctlrclcss \\rL'k to untclioriitc tlli\ stlltc o1
rLl lairs: it ri ill irlltxr' lirl ihc rrs:unrptiolr tirat thc unlike-lr, bcnciactor is ltot sirnpll,

a I'naclnrrrt nitlr l "lircrl irlcl" (.119. ch."1 lt anti thc otircr of ir gclltlcnuur (317:
cir. -19). bttt r-uthcr lr lrrurtcci rrlln in nerr(i ()f r'aseuc. In iacl. tllc llticnlpt to silvc
Magnitch l.nrrl thc ccttuin tlclttit irc ri,rr: llicirir iri lingllrrrrl as lrn cscullc(l conrict
ri,ill bc l'rr'f iit'Pip's nro:1 signilicrLni rrnclcrtirking. ,\nrl il thc 1r'igirtcning rLnrl rtrorr-
stt'otts cortvict clrn bc hrinlrnizeil. ihcrc n-rtrsl hc ii lc\\ol) lllcrc:

I;ot' ltot," r'lr\' r-cr)ugnancc io lrinr hritl lrll rucltcrl lru lt\ : aitrl in tltr huntctl.
n ounrlccl. :hircklctl clcliiulc ri iro ircld 1'n\, lriur(i in his. I onlv slrs' ir r.r.rint lr jto
hitcl tttciLlrt to [rc nr)'bcnciuctot'. unri ulro ]riirl lclt lLilcctiorlrtcll,. glutelirllr,.
artcl qcrtcnruslr'. ion,u-rls nrc u'ith glcirt c()n\lllncv lhrl)uuh a scries o1 \'cirrs.
I onlt'srrri iu hirr lr rtttrclr br'ttct lllxil illiiil I hiLtl bccit to.loc. (-i-ll: ch. .5-1)
 Di c' ket t.s i cut Bi I d wr g,s nnru tt 8l

rasrt Follorving this realizatiorr. the novel oft'ers a prolit-eration of gestures of carc: Pip
rance '.'.ill care tbr his ailin_q benefactor. and. atier Magrvitcli's death. he will simulta-
rlking ::cously tall into poverty and illness. only to be attended by Joe: "l was slow to
). Joe _.ain stren-eth. but I clid slowly and surely become less weak. and Joe stayed with
)nt us rre. and I fanciecl I lvas little Pip again. For the tenclerness of Joe was so beauti-
:arin-s .ully proportioned to n.ry need, that I was like a child in his liands" (461;ch. 57).
be no This re-crcssion seems to turn the novel into sornething akin to a morality play:
:L't\\'een lbrces ol'mobility and care. Pip chooscs the fbrmer. only to lose every-
are is :hing and recognize the value of care.:" The realization. however, comes too late
social io avL'rt tl.re clismal ending. Mecldiing rvith selves has already gone too far with
lcated \liss Havisham's toying rvith Pip and Estella. and with Pip's initially mysterious
: hou, .trcial elevation.
:d the The prospect of creating the circle of care such as the one at the end oI Dat,icl
,-his Coppcrfiald rvill be denied to Pip. Atter his de{'eat in London, he will attempt
182). io -so back homc ancl rnarry his childhood fiiencl Bicldy. who throughout the
,littlc nuvel represcnted thc obvious irlternative to Estella: "Biddy was nevel'insulting.
rative or capricious" or Bicldy to-day and somebody else to-rnorrow; she would have
vance tlerived only pain. and no pleasure. frour givin-u nre pain: she wouid thr rather
ted to have rvounded her own breast than mine'^ (12t3: ch. l7). Biddy has, however,
norvl- already married Joe. entering a caring relation that rvill exclude Pip. This exclu-
sion is underlinecl by the fact that their son wilI also be named Pip. symbolically
rnent. clisplacing thc novel's hero as the ob.lect of care.
ccecle Given such an outcome. nothing could be easier than ar-uuing lhat Greut E.rpec'-
about tution:;. rvith its somber ending and -grotesque benethctors. indicates an ideological
I had shift in Dickens's understanding of benevolent intervention. Orwell has claimed
e will lhat "Grcut Erpectutiorr.r is. in fact. definitely arl attack on patrona-qe" (35), and
(l5l: this clair.n is ot'lbred precisely in tl.re contexl of a discussion about the benevolent
)menI figures in Dickens: "Hence that rccurrent Dickens tigure. the rich man. This
-sood
character belongs especialll,to Dickens's early optimistic period. . . and he is
tte of alrvays a superhumanly kincl-hearted old gentler.nan who 'trots' to and tio, rais-
mply ing his ernployees' wages. patting chilclren on the head, getting debtors out of
(317; jail and in general. acting the 1'airy godn.rother" t35). For Orwell. the absence of
save srrch figtrres from Great E.rltcc'trrtiott.t indicates a nerv social vision: "The seeming
,l.lvict int'ercnce tiom the rather despondent books that Dickens wrote iu the fiff ies is that
n-lol]- by that time he had grasped the helplessness of well-meaning individuals in a cor-
rupt society" (36). However. Dickens and his ori-einal readers thought differently.
It seenrs that neither Dickcns nor his early rc'viewers sa\\, Great Expectatiotts
:d. as a particularly unsettlin-e text. Dickens clid clescribe the story as "grotesque"
ho and "tragi-comic." but didn't think that these qiralitics distinguish it sharply tiom
ly" the n.ruclr taner David Coppefiielcl. which he dccided to relead in urder to avoid
l's. rcpeatin-g himself (Forster. 3: 362-63). Forster apparently agreed: "but the satire
that thus enlbrces the olcl r.varnin-9 against livinu upon vague hopes. and payin,u
luncient debts bl,conttirctinq ne\\'olles. neverpl'eselrterl itseIl'in more amusing or
i,ittti. .itlrr:" (.1: .l(r'/1. i. ,l lir'.'jr,l.' lirl;l (i;r tt! !-t.l,t r ttuirtii' -it,t:.r t;ttt ; r'. ill
-littie :0l Oi.',t'l rritti l-l.,rrr, 1]tlt:t tr t.t \.\rr'.,it-: |()t.r'llili\ .i\\lit!u.)
\{) iirri,iii. 1) (tir ttI i.,,tir t it!!ittii r ijici,citr ut:. 1.ltili;.:ll:.1 it :r'.'iti:r';() \\.lt:cit clr,t
eltsiit i-..' lcil(! il: :i r'r\.i\ill lri iri: r:,ltl ,-'r'ir:lrii:irrrsrtrirrllii:.'i iiu r]()\ai ilit\ oiicieli i:iiI.,ririull
.i ;l(\\ ...'.i'.1:' i, r..,,,. ','..:.i ,"1,:, .!. ir,r. ..il.\ '):rrr\,.:f;,::. ;r, 1 ;;i lr,':.. trll)it\ : il
'( !

.,i:..,:. .r',.. .,:i... i ,:.-,1.. i..i .,:.:,:,..;.'rt,l....:)t ..tiil-'i ti.:_il,..r:..:-

'\l;:: ii.lr.rittii]] i: ;t;t ;lt;t,,irul., ,tiil;t'iircr! rci'
irLliiilai rlllr\i-':-\. iir r'l[]\ 1',11r:.
:itltt ,ti 1r(i\',iit11 )ii:,tl:1r,. t. ur) --r'ril:i.,1 :r.,:,'i,tltli'1:rt iai'i(ii lt()1lJ \\ ii(i. )'ai iitt
-rrlcr'-!e;lL. ol'i,-ill.ri;ie l()r'\ i:\ qi(lia.(iii; rlll)il();ililrllilcs (io,j:!l : :,o !iltiull lliltitrrl:irtr:
r.1. .;'.1,.,;:; '',-,.':.. i'\ ) -..;' ,1 .\..,.i:. r.r:. i ., ,,:.-..,," ..\,/-.:ir)\\ \.'li
i]tutr'lliltt.IIt1t,,r,!.aiti)..1e\.1)ir:rtet.ltitr,iiiriLtr:\'r,i,,te,!,.1.,!tt)\\!ir:iI()irtlil\
rlliri,u.: ra:,.1 tl:llr li.i t;il .iti.'li:it. I cIt'letl !], i.tit'.
i)ip r', i,i lll:. rtcl ir,ri;l:;r. i)i,:,...';t. .. .t\\liili)1i(\,1\ :li)oLLi rol;itl iiloi,.ilii\ ltii\il
citl:lti,cti. irt:, lt,t,tlili:,.'iitr.'t' l:ttri ilt)1. i li"' oitiel:1r,.' :r ti-licl.titt llti. iitir,- ,li-i!ii!t(l
:)laei\ri\ i',.'Cltli\J irtl ,trtLlci-:tl:lt r',i'L'\Ii-ri-,l.iriiilr|..;iirititl lt;::I:.,irtlr. r'11t:-ri. r.y1

i)ai'i.'\l\,i,'l i,iiu,r,:;t,ii,.t itll,,-,'.1.i.,.',: i:t,..tl:t,,:. Ii:i,.'i','r,',,,'ai tt:.0,:ili| iI()iliiii\

ll()\.'. -u.'irt.;irtitiz.rl;l.rc,.ti;-.i,.tli. ;. l, i,itl,, ir.'Jti l.,t i,):elr't:. it.l\,1 \\lt\\.r'! r',.t.,,
li r;::;., l.,li,-iicllil:f .:1.. i. (t1,):t),1;.i\ ()i ilt:rt. i't0,,: li ,. 1)!tsi)tcrl\r: itl :-,t()tlll satrii
ritallllli;'.!rl. ()tt{-r.i Lirir l,:lltiii;;t:.-riit i,'i:rrr'trt rltoitilii\'it:lri clIi) ic tii'solvcri. iti',u'littl
ill(]i'illi', ,..1.'1,,.1.illtriz, li. liu':r'rut: l;l li;r'lr,-i'0.1t:-.lt;tt,ii! cii;;clrl lll:r'litui"':. -rrcr,ri
l:(i\llllc-'illarli i',lii ll-'cUlll iill..1'i,l l(rr-'r)i ri;\it'LLei;ri i:);Lrillint:. lt ililtti (t\i!.lLi ()|.
il.re. lrr..,' .rtiLl'.r r,r.,;',. 1 11,..'lti,..' tt:i0.r (,ol rtt ,llii. iit it l()\ul iikr 01ir'.i
7-)ll\1. ilti ,r1;11;r,1,1.,11,1,t:t \\..\ '1. rrt,! I ti() .i .:.a rti ia'c-ia. \, ei irtliit 1l!l\iiiia\
;.ii'C r'(;li:!i1\':'LiCtrli\1il!'il liii'illllll iilu ilio,'s i(le'.,. ,,t,. ,\ ,ir.,rt "t, ,,,.'ri:llltisnts rrl

i',i,1 r:rlt I'r lrr r1;r.iritr,' 'r,11,.i --,n',),r-: i.t. ltrt.;riti;iit i.tililirt-:, .]tc r.,lr. o1
;]t;, rq''litirlrii:. \ 1.r ir'iis .tililelii,(rit t.;1ir,,i1,.1 lt., aiii\i\r,lr. iil-.:rr,tti,. or i_liiftci ('rtlt-
r)el;ial(i.\'C,i: alili\l:'l,ir llll.l.ttlll..lri;lllei:.irrLir.r,r,rt,,;,,,,,.r111,-f1.Ii,,,iltCit't
rl()r.i:.r' ;l] aiititltlii._' i.,,:,1 ,:. r,il,-. .'; r' . r-.ltlIirt;il po:ilirln li-, l. ,litilr,Ci.t.lti()ll ii:lli
ii;,-i:..1r(\;)iir,,'r)r\.lit_rtl: t.tL:r.ri \.i.':lili..t,:,:llt i1l/ :i{):clt. l,r) il-.r,r,.rr1,,,:o.irL,
.iri\lir'(iIl('Ii 1.:t';:q-;11 l[tt:ll .it.'.irt:'rie;: ()l;:ti rlit^rt()\\,,t lilillt.):l\. litu,i0rii. . ll .

r()LlLi\ ill()\..5.i111';.ir r\\;t-' iiitir', i,r.r itt,-'c]llt;]i'1I\ t.llifit tto\U I lLlli\t-. i1...-Ltil ()r
socl,ii lt()f.ilir)tt. :ili ilol,, :lri i',oi l. ()ll i:rt .al: tlr;eit iL:illl,) loiloit. :i,tr-!'l il prri
:,irii. i irr iit\'.1at\ .r1111.r1,;,1i;r1- \,i:'r illtri.ltirir. ilrlri .t,1itcGi;ijlit r)i (jrirrr i trt, L

;.tri,';1,. .i..r,.,, ,'i\ r',, '.1:.',2.. '.. ,t:.:,1:(1.r,; rr. ,,.\\..1\\ \i .',. ,.;.:1,r1,r,;.
iiL'ilir\()1.'lti ()i !1r)ia\i,i !' .,.rr,.:- ,. - l, !,., -:,t,t,illliir ciitci-'Ii ]r'rier. iirt-a\lt(litr.!
lir,,' lretLltil ii\ ;lLillt:,-\ ol ..rrirlii ;IOirilil\.
 D ic ken sian B ildun gs roman 89

,with NOTES
h can
lfered I am grateful to Maurice Samuels, Katie Trumpener, Alexander Welsh, and to the anony-
bene- mous readers of this essay for their helpful suggestions.
ening
I ver- l. For the purposes of this essay, I understand the bildungsroman as European moder-
et the nity's central literary tool for exploring the process of entering adulthood, or, in more
rmine technical terms, the processes of individuation and socialization. In emphasizing this
r vital dual focus of the genre I follow the conceptualizations of the bildungsroman offered
rbility by Georg Luk6cs and Franco Moretti (see Luk6cs 132 and Moretti 15). I do, however,
maintain some reservations with respect to their insistence on the opposition between
have self-realization and socialization as the defining characteristic ofthe genre. [n my view,
round the relationship between these two processes has shifted throughout the history of the
ms of genre, and the emphasis on their conflict-although unquestionably justifled in many
rbility instances-unnecessarily limits the range of problems the bildungsroman addresses.
:epted As this essay demonstrates, the vitality of the bildungsroman lies precisely in its ability
senti- constantly to reconceptualize the relationship between development and immutability,
pward internal impulses and external pressures, and action and passivity.
social 2. See, for instance, Miller 252, Gilmour I14, Welsh 159, Peters 39ff., and in particular
rction. Wachs and Hochman.
Oliver 3. Dickens's opposition to the New Poor Law was well known. See, for instance, Forster
rstures l: 250. The view of OliverTwist as explicitly concerned with the New Poor Law has
ims of gone virtually uncontested for the past century and a half. See for instance Gissing
)ocket 67-68; House 92-93; Marcus 58; Schlicke 149-56; Fielding 49-65; Stokes 711-27.
ays of For various accounts of Dickens's ability to grasp fully social issues his novels were
t Cop- addressing, see Crotch 24,Orwell 34ff., House 50, and Eagleton 157-58.
bert's 4. Mayhew was, however, acutely aware of the flipside of this argument: "If the poorer
n that classes require fifteen millions to be added in charity every year to their aggregate in-
social come in order to relieve their pains and privations, and the richer can afford to have the
rvel's same immense sum taken from theirs, and yet scarcely feel the loss, it shows, at once
uit of how much the one class must have in excess and the other in deficiency" (3: 35).
r pur- 5. For a detailed account ofthe eighteenth-century sources ofthese debates, see Fideler.
'xpec- 6. There is still considerable controversy about the exact role that strictly religious ar-
polis. guments, Bentham's pleasure/pain principle, or the work of political economists like
ading Smith, Malthus, and Ricardo played in the poverty debates. I will, of course, seek to
convey the complexity of this intellectual field, but the exact sources of particular argu-
ments are not my primary concern.
7. On the views ofvice as a cause ofpoverty, see Hollen Lees 88-93.
8. Fora view that help and guidance should naturally follow work on the self, see Taylor 38.

9. Only self-formation can be traced back to 1700s, while other terms originated in the
mid-nineteenth century. Victorian publications on the topic of self-reliance include
Taylor's Self-cubivation Recommended, Capel Lofft's, SelJ-formation: or, The History
90 DICKENS STUDIES ANNUAL

of an Individual Mirul: Intended as a Guidefor rhe Intellect through Dfficulties to Suc- also Ruth 59. On
cess, Edwin Paxton Hood's, Self-Forntation: Twelve Chapter,s.fbr Young Thinkers, and 17. It clearly follows
William E. Channing, SelJ'-rrlrrrrrtArt Address Introductory to tlrc Franklin Lectures, social role of wo
Delivered at Bostott, United S/ales; Channing was, of course, American, but his lecture issue, it is outsidr
went through at least four English editions before the mid- I 840s. Dickens imposes
10. I am much indebted to the detailed discussion ofthe New Poor Law provided in Fraser 18. This sentence apl
(31-55). See also Roberts l45ff., and Laybourn, in particular chapter 2. 19. Wachs and Hocl
I L Of course, this approach only revealed the inevitable paradox produced by the mixture level.'about' the t
of paternalism and individualism. The poor were simultaneously seen as free agents primarily as a ser
and as objects of paternalist intervention: the poor need to work on themselves, but in a sense of guilt, e
order to do so they must be pushed to internalize the ideology of self-help brought to the novel.
them from above. Paradoxically, the very forces that promoted self-reliance saw the 20. This realization i
poor and the working classes as objects to be fashioned through the inculcation of the bert Pocket, takir
ideology of self-help. The paladox is obviousinPrinciples of Polirical Economy,where
Mill postulated two approaches to poor reliei "the theory of dependence and protec-
tion," and the theory of "selt'-dependence." According to the first, Mill argued, "the
rich should be in loco parenris to the poor. guiding and restraining them like children.
Of spontaneous action on their part there should be no need. They should be called on
for nothing but to do their day's work, and to be moral and religious" (314). Accord- Bakhtin, Mikhail. "F
ing to the second, "the poor have come out of leading-strings. and cannot any longer Four Essays. Ec
be govemed or treated like children. To their own qualities must now be commended Austin: U of Ter
the care of their destiny" (318). But even as he recognizes that the former approach Baldridge, Cates. "T
will become increasingly untenable, Mill continues to treat the poor paternalistically. 25.2 (1993): 184
While acknowledging that "whatever advice, exhortation or guidance is held out to the Bentham, Jeremy. t
labouring classes, must henceforth be tendered to them as equals, and accepted by them Clarendon,200l
with their eyes open," Mill nonetheless immediately adds: "The prospect of the future Buckley, Jerome Har
depends on the degree in which they can be made rational beings" (3 19, my emphasis). Cambridge: Hal
12. The conclusion ofthe Sadler Report of 1833, rptd. in Fraser 257. Channing, William
13. For the classical analysis of the tension between the notions of individual freedom and Delivered at Bo:
social determinism in the early nineteenth century, see Callagher 3-35. Cheney, Edward. "T
14. When he speaks of the "strong arm" Reid. of course, has in mind state intervention, and and Religious Ir
Dickens took a similar view, suggesting that "a Public Charity is immeasurably better Quarterly Retie
than a Private Foundation, no matter how munificently the latter may be endowed" A.ge. Ed. A. W. I
(Anterican Notes 36).In tact, Dickens himself argued in favor of "a Bill for taking into Coliins, Philip. Cftr
custody by the strong arm, of every neglected or abandoned child of either sex, found t97 t.
in the streets of any town in this kingdom" (Qtd. in Pope 180). The novels, however, Craik, George Lillie
never imagine a viable tbrm of state intervention. London: Charle
15. For a discussion of Oliver's incomrptibility, see, for instance, Gilmour 114 and Bal- Crotch, W. Walter.
dridge l84ff. Great Novelist.
16. "While novels like David Copperfield and Pendenris tended to formulate their respons- Dickens, Charles. r1
es to the writer's market situation less directly than the essays in Blackwood's or North copp
British Review, all of these discussions of literary men struggled to define the place the f,rps,
writer occupied in Britain's increasingly secular, capitalist society" (Poovey 102). See -David
1998.
-Qygay
 D i t' ke tr si urt B i I cl ur t g.s ron rcut 9t

.rlso Rirth 59. On Doyid Copperfield and literary prol-essionalism, see Salmon. 35fl'.
--. It clearly fbllorvs from this reuding that Dat'id Cry4terfield radically circumscribcs the
.ocial role of rvomen by leclucin-u it to that of a caregiver'. While this is a significant
jssue. it is outside the scope of this cssay to explore the irnplications of the Iimit that
Dickr'ni impo:cr on Icrnininitl .

-r. This serltence appears in a sornervhirt clifferent lirrm in the original ending (,182).
-r. \\raclrs ancl Hochman have arguecl pcrsuasivcly thttt "Grcut Expeclations is, at one
lcvc-l 'about' thc ethics ofinstrumentality" (17.i). Horvever. tlrey seem to read the novel
primarily as a series of atten'rpts to nranipulate Pip psychologically by instillin-g in him
a -scnsc of guilt. a vier.v that overemphasizes and simplifies the psychological thrust ot
thc novcl.
l,r. This realization is. hos'cvcr. tbreshadoued b1,Pip's rvillinsness to sclflessly aid Her-
bert Pocket. taking up thc role of Herbert's anonyntous benelactor in chapter 37.

WORKS CITED

3.ikhtin. Mikhail. "Forms of Time ancl Clilonotopc in the Novel." Dialogic Inrugirturittn:
I;our Essut'.s. Ed. Michael Holquist. Trans. Micl.raet Holquist and Caryl Emerson.
Austin: U of Tcxas P. 198 1.84-2-59.
B.rldridgc'. Cates. "The Instabilities of Inheritance in Oliver 7'yi.st." Stutlie.; irt the Not,el
l-5.2(1993): lt34-95.
Benthant. Jeremy. Writings on tlrc Ptxtr Lal,.i. Vol. l. Ed. Michael Quinn. Oxtbrd:
Clarendon. 2(X) l.
Buckley, Jerome Hamilton. Scusott o.f Youtlt: Tlrc Biltlurtgsronrurt.fi'om Dicken.t to Goklin.q.
Carnbridge: Harvald UP. 1974.
Channinc, William E-. Sel.f-t'rtlture: An tlldress liltroducto^' to tlrc Fnurklin Lectures,
Daliyert d ut l)o.\ton, Uttitad Stute :;. Lonclon: J. Cleave. t I U3U'll.
Cheney. Eclwarcl. "The Charities o1'Londun: Currprchcndin-q the Benevolcnt, Educational.
Their Origin and Design. Progrcss. and Present Position."
ancl Reli-eior-rs Institutions.
Quurterlr Re|i.rr'97 (Se'ptcmber 1tl-55): .107-.19. Rptd. in Povertt iu Tlrc \/idoriart
A,,{c. Ed. A. W. Coats. vol. -1. Westnreacl, UK: Gle-rg. 1973.
Collins, Phllip. Clrurlc.s DiL'kcrt.t:'flte Critital Hcrituge. London: Routlcdge & K. Paul,
t91 t.
Craik, Gcorse L|rlic.Tlrc Pursuit ol Krtottladge uriler Di.ffir'ultie.t: lllustrated lty ArrcL'dotes.
London: Challcs Kni-qht. Ili30.
Crotch. W. Waltcr'. Clrurle.s DiL.krlls Sot'iul Re.fttnttar: Tlrc Socitl 'featlin.u,s of Etrgluntl's
Greut Notcli,st. London: Chapman and Hall. 191.3.
Dickens. Charles. Arnerictttt Nr.rres. Ecl. Patricia Inghanr. London: Penguin. 2000.
Co1t1tctfield. Ed. Nina Br"rrgis. Oxtbrcl: Clarendon. 198 l.
E.rltactotiorts. Ed. Mar_qaret Carduell. Oxlbrd and Nerv York: Oxfbrd UP.
-Dorid
199n.
-(irg111
92 DICKENS STUDIES ANNUAL

Twist,Ed. Kathleen Tillotson. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1999. Luk6cs, Georg. Tftt
The Speeches ofCltarles Dickens. Ed. K. J. Fielding. Oxford: Clarendon, 1960. Mayhew, Henry. I
-Oliver
Eagleton, Teny. The English Novel: An Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005. and Eanings o-

Ellis, William. "Eight Reports of the Commissioners appointed by Parliament to inquire Not Work.3 Yc
respecting Charities." Westtilinster Review 2 (Jlly 1824),97-121. Rptd. in Poverty in Marcus, Steven. Dr
The Victorian Age. A. W. Coats, ed. vol. 3. Westmead, UK: Gregg, 1973. Markovits, Stefani
Fideler, Paul. Social Welfure in Pre-Industial England: The Old Poor ktw Tradition. Columbus: Ohi
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006. Mill,John Stuart.
Fielding, K. J. "Benthamite Utilitarianism and Oli'er Twist: A Novel of Ideas." Dickens Sdcial PhilosoT
Quarterly 4 (1987): 49-65. Miller, J. Hillis. C/t
Fielding, K.J., Ed. The Speeches of Charles Dickens. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1960. Moretti, Franco. I
Finlayson, Geoffrey. Citizen, State, and Social Welfure in Britain, 1830-1990. Oxford: Albert Sbragia.
Clarendon, 1993. Nixon, Jude V. "'
Ford, Richard. "Oliver Twist; or, the Parish Boy's Progress." Quarterly Review 64 (June Samuel Johnso
1839):83-102. Noddings, Nel. Cc
Forster, John. The Life of Charles Dickens.3 vols. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1872. of California P
Fraser, Derek. The Evolution of the British Welfare State: A History of Social Policy Since Maten
the Industial Revolution. London: Macmillan, 1984. Orwell, George. C
Ed. The New Poor Law in the Nineteenth Century. New York: St. Martin's, 1976. -The
Owen, David. Eng
-,
Gallagher, Catherine. The Industial Reformation of English Fiction: Social Discourse and Owen, Robert. A
Narrative Form 1832-1867.Chicago: U ofChicago P, 1985. Character.3rd
Gilligan, Carol. 1lr a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Paxton Hood, Ed
Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1993. London: Jude .

Gilmour, Robin. Ihe ldea of the Gentlemen in the Victorian Novel. London: Allen & Pecora, Vincent P
Unwin, 1981. r77-96.
Gissing, George. The Immortal Dickens. London: Cecil Palmer, 1925. Peters, Laura. O
Greg, W. R. "Charity, Noxious and Beneficent." Westminster Review 59 (January1853): Manchester U
62-88. Rptd. in Poverty inThe Victorian Age.Ed. A. W. Coats. vol. 3. Westmead, UK: "The Philanthrop'
Gregg,1973. (April 1869):,
"Great Expectations." Times 17 Oct. 1861: 6. Westmead. Ul
Hardy, Barbara. The Moral Art of Dickens. New York: Oxford UP, 1970. Poovey, Mary. U,
Held, Virginia. The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, and Global. Oxford: Oxford UP, England. Chi<
2006. Pope, Norris. Dic.
Highmore, A. Pietas l-ondinensis: The History, Design and Present State of the Various Reid, Hugo. Mrc
Public Charities in and near l,ondon. London: R. Phillips, 1810. United Kingd
Hollen Lees, Lynn. The Solidarities of Stangers: The English Poor Lows and the People Nottingham: I
1700-1848. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998. "Reports of the S
House, Humphry. The Dickens World. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1979. 64 (October I
Laybourn, Keith. Tlrc Evolutiort of Britislt Social Policl, and The We$are State c. 1800- vol. 3. Westn
1993.Keele: Ryburn Publishing; Keele UP, 1995. Roberts, F. Davic
Lofft, Capel. Self-formatiort; or, The History of art Individual Mind: Intended as a Guide 2002.
for the Intellect througlt Dfficulties to Success. By a Felkru of a College. Boston: Ruth. Jennifer. M
Crosby and Nichols, 1 846. ( l st ed., 1 837). irt the Victori
 D i ckt' tt.t i tr tt Bi I d rrtr u.s rot tttt tt 93

Lukdcs. Georg. I/re Tlteorl, o.f rhe Nolt,1. Trans. Anna Bostock. Cambridge: MIT P. 1971.
o. \liryhew, Henry. Lcnulort Lubour atul tlrc Lotttl<n Poor. A Ct'clopetlitt o.f thc Cortditions
attd Euntirrgs ot T'ln:;e Tlurt lVill Work,T-ltosa Tlut Cuutot Work, uul Those'flrut Will
luire Nor Work.3 Vols. London: Gritfin. Bohn. l86l-62.
'tf in \lirrcus, Steven. Dickerts: Fronr Pichrick to Dontbat'. Lonckrn: Chatto and Windus, 1965.
\larkovits, Stetanie. Tlte Cri.sis of t\ctiort irt Nineteentlt-Cantu4'Ertglish Litcrnturc.
'itiott. Columbus: Ohio State UP. 2006.
\'lill.John Stuart. PlincrTtles ol Politicul Etonont\': Witlt Sonte o.f rheir Atrtltlit'utiorts to
tckens Sociul Philosopln', r'ol.2. London: Palker. 1848.
\liller. J. Hillis. C/rarles Dickut.s: The World oJ'Hrs Nolel.s. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1965.
J. lloretti, Frarrco. Thc Wat,ol tlte World: Tlte Bildurtgtrontort itr Europeut Culture.Trans.
)xford: Albert Sbragia. London: Verso. 2000.
Nixon, Jude V. "'Proud possession to the English nation': Victorian Philanthropy and
4 (June Samuel Johnson's Goddaughter." Dickerts Studie,y Anttuul 32 (2002):247-75.
Noddin-ss, Nel. Carirg.' A Fentirtine Approuc'lt to Caring & Moral Etluc'atiori. Berkeley: U
of Califbrnia P. 1984.
ct,Sittce Mutenrul Fuctor: Tn'o Putlt.s ro Morulitv. Berkeley: U of Calitbrnia P, 2010.
Orwell. George. Collected Essctls. London: Secker and Warburg, 1975.
t976. -Tlrc
Orven. David. Ettgli:;h Pltilantltropt, 1660-1960. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1964.
urse artd Owen. Robert. A Nal Viev, o.l' Societl,: Or', Es.srn's on tlte Fornkttion of tlte Hmnart
Clrurutter.3rd ed. London: Lon-qman. I817.
:lopnrent. Paxton Hood. Edrvin. SclllFontrutiott:T'u'elve Chqttcrs.frtr Youtg Thit:l/tetr.3rd ed.
London: Jude and Glass. 1858.
Allen & Pecora. Vincent P. "lnheritances. Gifis, and Expectations." lau, & Literature 20.2 (2008):
t'7'7-96.
Peters. Laura. Orplrurt te-tls: Vic'toritut Orplruts, Culture und Ettrpire. Manchester:
uy I 853): Manchesrer UP, 2000.
ead, UK: "The Philanthlopy o1'the Age ancl its Relation to Social Evils," I4le,srrnirt.ster Review 35
(April ltt69): 131-57. Rptd. in Povertt'inTlrc Vicrnritut Age. A. W. Coats. ed. vol.3.
Westmead. UK: Gre_eg, 1973.
Poovey, Mary. Urteretr Davalopnrertt: Tlte ldeologit'ctl Work ol Gertder itt Mitl-Victctricut
.tbrd UP, Engluttl. Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1988.
Pope, Norris. Dit'kerts artd Cltarirt'. New Yolk: Columbia UP. 1978.
' Various Reid, Hugo. Whur Slnuld Be Dorte .fbr tlte People: Atr Appeul ro tlte Electors ol'tlrc
Uuired Kirtgdorr. London: Simpkin. Marshall; Edinburgh: Black: Liverpool: Webb:
e People Nottinghirm: Dearden. l84tl.
"Reports of the Society tirr the Suppression of Mendicity. 1838-1839," Quarrerlt, Reviev,
64 (October 1839): 341-69. Rptd. in Povertv inThe VictoricurAgc. Ed. A. W. Coats.
c.1800- vol. 3. Westmead. UK: Gregg. 197.j.
Roberts. F. David. Tlte Sociol Cottsciettca of thc Earlr l/ittoriurt,r. Stantbrd: Stanfbrd UP.
a Guide 2002.
Boston: Ruth, Jennif'er. Novel Pnles.sions: hfiere.sted Di.yitte re :;t utrl the Mukhtg of tlte Prolessiottal
itt tltc Vit'toriutt Novel. Columbus: C)hio State tJP- 2m6.
94 DIC KhNS S'f LrDI hS Ar\NLIAI-

Sulmon. Iiichurcl. ''Prolcssiorrs ol [-ahoLri: I)rrvitl Coppclliclci rncl thc 'l)ignitl' ot

"
Nin(tL,(ntlt-C( tttrrrt ('otntrts 19.1 t1007): .15 -51.
I-itcrattrle .
Sclrlickc. [)rrtt]. "BLrnrlrle anrl thc l)oot I-arr Sutire ol OIircr'luist." 7/rc l)itkcttsitttt ll
( 1()75 ): l-19 -56.

Snriles. Srrrttttcl. .\t'll-lttllt: vitlt llltt:tttttiotr: ttf ('lttrtutt('t nn(l Cottthrtt. I-ontlon: John
\4rirrar . i ll5().
Strrkcs. l)ctcr'\rl. "[]cnllltrrr. Dickcrts. lrncl tltc Lises ol the Workhouse.",tL1-. Studics itt
I:ttqli:lt Lilt'tttrtrtL. l5(X) l9(X) ll (l(X)I ):1 ll-17.
ttFeet
'fitlltrr. Isrtitc.,\tll-r'rrltirtrti,ttl ll((ontnt(tllttl: Or, llirttt to tt 1'otrtlt [t'ttiuq Stltoo!.

'Iort
I-ontlon: Fcrrncr'. lS 17. The I
nscncl. .lo.cph .-1 1)lr ir t ttttiort ort tlt( [)o()t 1-rols. Bt u ll/cll-y i:ltcr lo Motrl;itrtl.
Ittrtrlon: I)illr,. I 7S(r.
Wachs. Il.ja. lrrtl []artrclr Iloclrmirn. l)itkLrtt: 'l lta Orpltrtrt (;otrtlirion (Vladison. NJ:
lirir Icigh Dickinron LP. l9()()).
\\ielsh. .\lcrrrritlct'. lt t t r (', t 1t.t ri q I t to ( t ltl tt rl i t I tl : '[ ltt' Itlt'tttir.t ol Dit l;ttts. Clnibridg..:
rt t t t

[{rtn rrnl t. P. 19S7.

l)
\ iLl.