Modern Criticism of Tess

Maybe I'll get the formatting right for once. Again though, the page numbers don't match up with the hard-copy of the book, but I'm certain that we're reading the same articles. Also, I can't figure out how to a block quote on Blogger's interface =(

    I chose to focus on Virginia Woolf's review of Hardy's writing as a whole. Having recently finished reading one of her own books, I was interested in how she would view Hardy's writing. Somewhat surprisingly, a lot of the things she said line up with what we discussed in class earlier today. Overall, she holds him in very high esteem, saying that it took him a while to find the right way of writing, but that talent was obvious from his first novel. She also praises his ability to create strong, complex character who exist outside of their interactions with the main character and who are very rarely mono-faceted - a trait for which we also praised Eliot. However, she notes -though not disdainfully- that Hardy lacks the "concentration and completeness" for which some of his contemporaries were loved. These oversights mainly deal with love and the human heart.

    With regards to Hardy's prose, Woolf states: "That he was a poet should have been obvious," and this sets the tone for a lot of her praise of the novelist. She compliments the way he is able to focus on small details with such precision as wasn't seen before. However, there's one phrase that I think is more important than all the others.

   "It is as if Hardy himself were not quite aware of what he did, as if his consciousness held more     than he could produce, and he left it for his readers to make out his full meaning and to supplement it from their own experience."

   This ties back to our group's discussion on how so many scenes, particularly those that we'd view as crucial (such as the rape) have the details obscured and glossed over, and we as readers are only given the outcome. Woolf cites Hardy as having said "a novel 'is an impression, not an argument,'" and thus praises his ability to not preach to his audience, and instead lets them draw their own conclusions. As a reader and as a writer, I personally admire his ability to do so. He's able to say something that's important, without informing us that it's important.

   While I don't understand any of Woolf's references to Hardy's other works, it's clear that this is a recurring trait of his work. In part, that's probably what made Tess a more enjoyable read than the other books (at least to me), as well as his less pedantic prose. We've talked a great deal, both in class and on our blogs, about Tess as a likable character and stronger heroine, and how our opinions there don't exactly match up with those of Hardy's contemporary audiences. I appreciate the fact that his ambiguity allows us to draw those sorts of conclusions.

  

Blog 6 - Tess 1

I apologize in advance that I can't properly cite page numbers - I have a      different version of the book and they don't match up with the class's.

As expected after the introduction to Hardy, critics had very mixed feelings   about Tess as a novel and as a heroine. Nearly all of the reviews describe the book as unconventional, or some synonym thereof, but disagree about whether    that's a good thing or not. Some sources, such as the Illustrated London News, laud Hardy's ability to make conventional readers think differently. Others,   like The Saturday Review, call it "an unpleasant story told in an unpleasant   way."

Like my group mates stated, one of the main issues with the books, as far as   contemporary critics were concerned, was the character of Tess herself. They   found her unlivable and, apparently, "The most disliked heroine in literature." I disagree and found her to be one of the more believable ones, and liked her more for it. Dorothea's issues largely stemmed from her desire to do good, even at personal cost. Alternatively, there was Mary, who relied a lot upon others to do things for her. Tess was a strong heroine, often taking matters into her own hands, and had her strengths as well as flaws. While her problems, such as murder, aren't exactly the sort that can be explained away or justified, we can at least understand them. Similarly, her returning to Alec, an action that    earned her a lot of flak, is yet another that's believable. As Lauren said, it makes her seem more like a person and less like a bundle of traits given a     name. Overall, I feel like Tess was the most 21-century heroine of the group,  and maybe that's why I like her more. If that's the case, then it's definitely understandable why her readers at the time, did not.