The Redemptive Power of Violence? Carlyle, Marx and Dickens

Whether the critics of the 19th century are due to the irreversible political and social consequences it accumulated (the representative government superseded the sacred monarchy, the end of rural agriculture), the French Revolution I agreed to the importance of. Collective existence formed the direction of revolutionary events. But how can a revolutionary (universal) achievement be separated from popular violence occurring at each stage? What is the cause of this violence? Can you forgive? How important is it to advance the revolution? This article analyzes the answers to these questions by three London writers, Thomas Carlyle, Carl Marx (and Friedrich Engels), and Charles Dickens in the mid-19th century. It emphasizes the importance of revolution and violence and the formation of "Sansculottism" seen in Carlyle's French Revolution (1837), and the work of Carlyle's work against the violent treats found in Engels' work in 1844 and Marx We will explore the impact. It is not that much. Finally, it compares the interpretation of the revolutionary violence seen in Dickens' two stories of the city "with the history of Carlyle. Despite Dickens praising Carlyle frankly, Dickens followed Carlyle's irrational approach, linking violence and loss of faith (partly from Herder and German primitive romanticism, partly from French clergy by). Instead, San Simmons reaffirmed the theme and discussion of the 1790s Hogies and radicals (Mary Walstone or Arthur Young), but Bark will revolutionize the violence mainly. Relationship with Fraud of French citizens by Anxi administration.

The general phenomenon of criticism of Dickensian is that the writer was influenced by the French Revolution of Carlisle's "two city story". Taking Dickens' commentary as an example, he discussed the influence that Carlyle had on several aspects of the novel, such as the technique of the story, starting with Carlisle's history "500 times" (I. Collins 46) (Friedman 481). -5), images related to the revolution (I. Collins 52; Baumgarten 166; Lodge 131-2), and a historical drama story (Lodge 134; Friedman 489). However, Dickens's view on revolutionary violence is quite different from Carlyle's view. As Eileen Collins pointed out, Dickens said, "Even though it is a general form (mob) or institutionalized form (fear), I do not like the revolutionary violence, unlike Carlisle he is no longer violent I can not see justice "(53) The most famous adaptation of the novel was made by Jack Conway in 1935.

In the 19th century, the writer was inspired by Thomas Carlyle 's book "French Revolution". Dickens wrote his novel "The story of two cities" under the influence of this book. Although he wrote this book 70 years after the French Revolution, he studied many different books from Carlisle's two tracks and used him as a joke. In the book "The Story of Two Cities", Dickens is repeating the theme of fate. Dickens shows that everyone's life is predetermined by chance of the role.

At this point, students should be introduced to Thomas Carlyle. Carlyle, Dickens' friends and admirers have shown in this brief anecdote: Carlyle actually sent two cars from the London Library when Dickens asked Carlisle about some of the material of the French Revolution! In fact, Dickens thanked Carlyle in the preface of his novels; it is said that novelists used many details of Carlyle's history, the French Revolution. Good class students may be led to several chapters of Carlyle's history. For example, the Bastille storm is particularly interesting. Carlyle wrote,