Questions and Answers from "Hard Times An Analytic Note" by F.R. Leavis

1. What is FR Leavis's central argument regarding Charles Dickens's Hard Times?

FR Leavis argues that Hard Times is a profound masterpiece by Charles Dickens, possessing both the unique strength of Dickens's genius and the depth of a serious work of art. He contends that the novel has been undervalued due to a traditional, uncritical approach to English novels that prioritises realistic portrayals of life and character resemblance to actual people. Leavis believes that Hard Times transcends mere realism to offer a powerful moral and social critique, particularly of Utilitarianism, which sets it apart from many of Dickens's other works.

2. How does Leavis view the moral and critical purpose of Hard Times?

Leavis considers literature a potent force for moral and social improvement. He commends Hard Times for its strikingly forceful moral and ethical intention, which permeates all significant aspects of the story, including characters and episodes. Unlike other Dickens novels where criticism might be casual or incidental, Hard Times exhibits a comprehensive vision. Dickens uses the novel to expose the role of Utilitarian philosophy, exemplified by characters like Thomas Gradgrind, in sanctioning the inhumanities of Victorian civilisation. Leavis finds Dickens's critique of this philosophy highly inspired and creative.

3. What unique artistic qualities does Leavis identify in Dickens's Hard Times?

Leavis is deeply fascinated by the art of Hard Times, highlighting Dickens's ability to render a full critical vision without compromising his position as a great popular entertainer. He notes a rare achievement in the novel: the combination of flexibility, consistency, and depth in Dickens's art. This flexibility is evident in the effective ironic school scene at the opening and the blending of irony with flexibility to create a truly dramatic and profoundly poetic work. Dickens's art also allows for the symbolic elevation of characters like Sissy Jupe, and a unique way of rendering moral and spiritual differences in terms of sensation, making symbolic intentions clear through metaphors and concrete situations.

4. How does Hard Times critique Utilitarianism through its characters and symbolism?

The novel's critique of Utilitarianism is built on the characterisation of figures like Sissy Jupe and Bitzer. Sissy Jupe, associated with the horse riders and the circus, symbolises vitality, goodness, and the 'lustrous bliss of sun'. In contrast, Bitzer, linked to the school and Utilitarianism, represents coldness, logic, factual thinking, self-interest, and mechanical existence. The circus and its members, like Sleary, embody kindness, human vitality, and goodness, serving as a powerful symbol of art and triumphant human activity, standing in opposition to the industrialism and materialism critiqued by the novel. Leavis argues that these symbolic portrayals are not sentimental but crucial to Dickens's critique of Utilitarianism and a testament to his genius.

5. What is the significance of the "flexibility" of Dickens's art in Hard Times?

The extraordinary flexibility of Dickens's art in Hard Times is evident in various aspects, particularly the dialogues and character development. Some dialogues exhibit ordinary passages, while others possess the ironic pointedness of Jonsonian comedy, such as the schoolroom scene and Gradgrind's final exchange with Bitzer. This flexibility also allows for the realistic portrayal of an astonishing richness of life throughout the novel. Furthermore, it enables a more nuanced character arc for figures like Thomas Gradgrind, who, unlike the static, Jonsonian Bounderby, is capable of change and admits the fallibility of his philosophy, demonstrating Dickens's art to be more inclusive than Ben Jonson's.

6. How does Leavis defend Dickens's use of symbolism in Hard Times, particularly concerning the circus?

Leavis anticipates potential objections that the symbolisation of the circus and horse riding as human activity and vitality might be sentimentally false or far-fetched. He defends Dickens by explaining that the virtues and qualities presented are true and essential for the novel's criticism of Utilitarianism. He argues that Dickens does not misrepresent human nature. For instance, the portrayal of Sleary, despite his unappealing physical description, as a humane, anti-Utilitarian positive figure is seen as a testament to Dickens's genius rather than mere sentimentality. This approach highlights Dickens's openness to life and his ability to find kindness and virtue even amidst ugliness.

7. How does the development of Louisa and Tom Gradgrind contribute to the novel's refutation of Utilitarianism?

The psychological development of Louisa and Tom is crucial to the novel's central argument. Louisa, raised strictly according to Utilitarian principles, lacks emotional outlets except her love for her brother, leading her to marry Bounderby for Tom's benefit. Tom, seeking to avenge his upbringing, plots to rob the bank. Louisa's eventual breakdown and her seeking refuge with her father, informing him of the futility of his philosophy in her life, represent a pivotal moment of realisation for Gradgrind. His love for his children ultimately overpowers his ideals, effectively refuting the philosophy of Utilitarianism within the narrative. Tom's character is also a sardonic comedy, whose eventual escape, aided by Sleary and his circus performers, further reinforces the triumph of human connection and intuition over rigid logic.

8. What limitations does Leavis acknowledge in Hard Times, and how does he ultimately assess Dickens's overall achievement?

Leavis acknowledges several criticisms against Hard Times, including Dickens's limited understanding of trade unionism and industrial England, his portrayal of union leaders as manipulative, and his lack of insight into the positive role of religion in Victorian industrial society. He also notes Dickens's limited understanding of politics. However, despite these limitations, Leavis concludes that Dickens's understanding of Victorian civilisation is "adequate to his purpose." He ultimately describes Dickens as a "great poet," whose command over "word, phrase, rhythm and image" can be matched with that of Shakespeare, affirming Hard Times as a profound and artistically exceptional work.

Outline of “Hard Times An Analytic Note” by F. R. Leavis

“Hard Times An Analytic Note” is a chapter taken from the book The Great
Tradition by FR Leavis. In the chapter, FR Leavis analyzes the novel Hard Times by Charles Dickens from his critical perspective. 

F R Leavis and his Idea of Criticism

F R Leavis is a British critic who appreciates the high seriousness and moral depth of literature. He rejects the idea that literature has only aesthetic function and argues that literature should be closely related to criticism of life. Therefore, it is the duty of a literary critic to assess works according to the author's and society's moral position.

F R Leavis’ Observations on Hard Times

Leavis comments that Hard Times is a masterpiece of Charles Dickens. It has  all the strength of Dickens’ genius and also the strength of a serious work of art. He argues that the novel didn't get the critical attention it deserves because of the traditional approach to English novels. This approach assumes that novelists have to reproduce realistic portrayals of life in their works. The test of their characters is based on their resemblance with actual people living in the outside world. Leavis argues that this approach is uncritical and it has neglected significant works like Hard Times and The Europeans by Henry James.

In the following parts of the chapter, he lists out the strength of the novel and why he called it a masterpiece.

1. Leavis considers literature as a powerful force for moral and social improvement. Hence he appreciates Hard Times for making its moral and ethical intention strikingly forceful in all significant aspects of the story including character, episode etc… Though the intention or purpose is very forceful in other works of Dickens, it does not form a complete whole in organising  other texts.

2. The restraining of creative energy by profound inspiration is another distinctive feature of Hard Times. The inspiration is given in the title itself.

3. Dickens’ criticism is usually casual and incidental. His criticism of the evils of Victorian society is just another ingredient of his work. But in Hard Times, he has a comprehensive vision which enables him to expose the role of the Utilitarian philosophy formulated by John Stuart Mill in sanctioning the inhumanities of Victorian civilization. The hard philosophy of Utilitarianism is represented by Thomas Gradgrind, an Esquire and a Member of Parliament from Coke town, who strictly follows the philosophy and brings up his children as per the doctrine. Leavis further observes that he is still respectable because he follows the philosophy sincerely and impartially. Gradgrind gets his daughter Louisa married to Josiah Bounderby, a banker, merchant and manufacturer. He is presented as a crude individualist who is neither sincere nor impartial in his adherence to philosophy. He is interested in self-assertion, power and material success and shows no interest in ideas or ideals. Leavis considers Dickens’ criticism of the philosophy highly inspired and creative.

4. Levis is fascinated by the art of the novel. Dickens has rendered his full critical vision without compromising his position as a great popular entertainer. He combines flexibility with consistency and depth which is a rare achievement in his works. The flexibility of his art renders the ironic school scene at the opening of the novel quite effective.

5. The distinctive way of blending irony with flexibility creates a truly dramatic and profoundly poetic work. This enables the novelists to establish the conventional persona of Sissy Jupe to a potently symbolic role. She is part of the poetically creative operation of Dickens’ genius in Hard Times.

6. The novelist renders moral and spiritual differences in terms of sensation so that the symbolic intention comes out of metaphors and concrete situations. The novel's critique of Utilitarianism is built on the characterization of Sissy Jupe and Bitzer. The first is associated with the horse riders and the circus and the latter with the school and Utilitarianism. Sissy stands for vitality and goodness and receives lustrous bliss of sun whereas Bitz is cold, logical, factual, self interested and mechanical. The horse rider Sleary and the circus also invoke kindness, human vitality and goodness. Though the skills of the circus artists are not appreciated by Gradgrind and Bounderby, the circus represents art and the sight of triumphant human activity. By presenting the circus as a symbol of human activity, emotions and vitality, Dickens expresses his profound reaction to industrialism which resembles the critique of materialism by DH Lawrence.

7. Leavis anticipates objections of readers in portraying the circus and horse riding as symbols of human activity and vitality. They may ask whether the symbolization of the circus is sentimentally false or far fetched. He explains that the virtues and qualities that Dickens presents are true and they are necessary for his criticism of Utilitarianism. In addition, the novelist does not misrepresent human nature. Hence, the objections are invalid.

8. The extraordinary flexibility of the art of Hard Times is explicit in the dialogues. Some passages of the novel are ordinary but others have the ironic pointedness of a Jonsonian comedy. The dialogue in the school room scene and Gradgrind’s final exchange with Bitzer are supreme examples. The conversation between Gradgrind and Louisa after she left Mr. James Harthouse is an example for ‘literary’ dialogues.

9. The diversity of the novel is not limited to the dialogues alone. There is an astonishing richness of life in every part of the novel and it is presented incredibly real. According to Leavis, Dickens does not write ‘poetic prose’ but he writes with poetic force that invokes the effects of a poetic work.

10.  Leavis stresses on the symbolism of horse riding by stating that Dickens is open to life and sees human kindness and virtues even in the midst of ugliness and banality. He does not show any recoil or disgust in the portrayal of Sleary though he appeared game eyed, brandy soaked and sagging. The presentation of Sleary as a humane, anti-Utilitarian positive is not sentimentality but a testament of Dickens’ genius. The portrayal of Stephen Blackpool, the good, victimised working-man is an example of Dickens’ presentation of sentimental characters. The characterisation of Sissy jupe is different. She shares the strength of horse riding and is fully convincing in the role assigned to her. Her strength is revealed when she asks Mr James Harthouse to leave Coke town and stop bothering Louisa with his attention. In addition, her role helps Dickens to establish the difference between Gradgrind and Bounderby. Gradgrind is capable of humane feelings which is shown when he takes Sissy Jupe home whereas Bounderby is a Jonsonian character in the sense that he is incapable of change. Gradgrind shows a change in character when he admits that life has proved his philosophy wrong. This, according to Leavis, shows that Dickens’ art is much more flexible and inclusive than that of Ben Jonson.

11. Leavis considers the scene in which Gradgrind and Louisa discuss the marriage proposal of Bounderby as a triumph of ironic art. In the conversation, Louisa is cold and reserved and performs as an example of her fathers ideals. She tries in vain to understand him that she is a living creature and not an emotionless houyhnhnm.

12. The psychology of the development of Louisa and Tom is perfect in the novel. She has no emotional outlet except her love of her brother and she marries Bounderby for him. Tom plans to avenge the way he was brought up and decides to rob the bank he was employed at. Disturbed by the advances of James Harthouse, Louisa seeks refuge in her father’s house and informs him of the futility of following his philosophy in her life. This is a moment of realisation for Gradgrind as his love of children overpowers his ideals. The philosophy of Utilitarianism is effectively refuted here.

13. The character of Tom is a sardonic comedy imagined with great intensity and done with a sure touch of genius. There is a scene in which Gradgrind recognises Tom in guise of a comic negro servant and it is Sleary who helps him to escape. In the following conversation between Tom and Gradgrind, Dickens effectively blends satire and pathos. Leavis calls Dickens a poetic dramatist and associates his flexibility in the interpretation of life to that of Shakespearian dramas. Interestingly, it is Bitz, the ideal student of Gradgrind’s school, who prevents Tom's escape. The eventual escape of Tom is an example of Dicken’s high-fantastic comedy. The moral of the fable is conveyed by Mr Sleary who explains that Sissy’s father was certainly dead else his performing dog would not have returned to horse riding. The emotional tie and trust between the human and the dog can be contrasted with the objective description of the horse by Bitz in the opening scene of the novel.

14. In the following part of the chapter, Leavis lists out some of the criticisms raised against the novel. First of all, Dickens has limited understanding of trade unionism and industrial England. His portrayal of trade union leaders like Slackbridge is used to symbolise the manipulative and dogmatic side of unions rather than its positive aspects. Secondly, his lack of insights into the role of religion in Victorian industrial society. He depicts religious establishments as various places of ugliness, but does not present the moral and spiritual importance. Thirdly, his understanding of politics is also very limited.

15. In spite of all the limitations listed above, Leavis concludes the essay stating that Dickens’ understanding of Victorian civilization is adequate to his purpose. His command over word, phrase, rhythm and image can be matched with that of Shakespeare and he can be described as a great poet.