Charles dickens pro or anti french revolution

The tale of two cities written by Charles Dickens is at the time period of the French revolution. But it is not understood if Charles likes the French revolution or if he’s against it? Charles Dickens sees the poverty in all the peasants, he sees that peasants are becoming solemn and deadly the people are. Charles sees that the rich treat the poor like garbage. The French revolution made France more disorganized then before. Charles agrees that something must be done, but does not agree with the violence of the French revolution.

We see that Charles Dickens recognizes the poverty in the people. He describes the people as “… men with bare arms, matted locks, and cadaverous faces… ”[1] Bare arms, means they had no weapons and no way to protect themselves against anyone. When he says matted locks, he’s saying how untaken care of and dirty they are. With the words ‘cadaverous faces’ he is saying that they were so crushed and unfed they looked like corpses. He detects the poverty of the poor pheasants. Charles is aware that people are very unhappy.

He describes the streets of the peasants “…a gloom gathered on the scene that appeared more natural then sunlight…”[2] It is common and normal for the streets to feel purposeless and like a graveyard, Charles perceives that the French peasants are at a very low stage. Charles realizes that the rich treat the poor very unfairly “ He threw out a gold coin for the valet to pick up… the tall man called out again with a most unearthly cry, dead! ”[3] The rich driver ran over the tall man’s son. The driver did not care about a life of a peasant; to him they didn’t deserve to even be looked at.

The rich treated the poor people as if they were little animal’s and no rights at all. Charles views the rich as disgusting and inhuman of the driver to only throw down a coin, after killing the man’s son. Charles wrote this as an example of how lowly the peasants where treated by the rich. We see that Charles agrees that change must be made, to bring up the poor and bring down the rich. Rich ones acted like evil people, while the poor were not very much, like people at all; for the poor were depressed. Charles shows the bad stuff happening to peasants, to show how much of a necessity the French revolution was.

Charles views the French revolution as too bloody. People are becoming like the rich, and not valuing people’s lives – exactly the opposite of what they were trying to get out of this revolution. They acted like crazy bloodthirsty animals, “the men were terrible, in the bloody-minded anger with which they looked from windows, caught up what arms they had, and came pouring down into the streets…” all the people thought about was killing all the rich ones, making them pay. Charles finds the violence, degrading the peasants to the sick level of the people. Charles dickens does not agree with the results of what happened in the French revolution.

They were allover the place with their laws and imprisoned people for no reason. “you are consigned, evre’monde, to the prison of La Force… under what law?… we have new laws and new offences…”[4] an innocent man is sent to prison, exactly how it has been before the French revolution. The French revolution, for at least a few years after made the situation in France much worse. Freedom should not be gained through violence. Freedom should be achieved through unity of people and peace in the people’s hearts. Charles Dickens does not agree with the French revolution.

He understands how poor and horrible the situation of the peasants are, he realizes something must be done. He can spot out how mean the rich are to the poor. The violence of the French revolution is majorally over done. To many people were killing, just for the pleasure of revenge. Not too much to start their own country, but just to get back at people. The French people did not know how to run the country once the country was in their own hands. Charles dickens agrees that a change was needed in france, but the revolution should’ve been organized properly and not just a killing spree for revenge.

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply