Charles Dickens Sympathizes, but nonetheless Requires Organized Revolution

From WikiPhilosophy
Revision as of 11:56, 23 May 2023 by 76.140.46.180 (talk)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

"By the end of Barnaby Rudge Dickens has indeed made it clear that, if he has little time for the order which provoked the tumults of 1780, he has no sympathy either for the rioters who have attempted to overthrow it." Introduction to Barnaby Rudge

Why doesn't he tolerate violent overthrow and rebellion?

"...the rioters themselves were only...interested in destruction, not reform." "They were...in revolt against authority, against a society which so shamefully abused them. [But] they rose up incoherently in protest, unprepared and inarticulate, unsure of what they wanted or hoped to attain. Encouraged by fanatics and criminals, they themselves became criminals, rebels without a cause and without a leader." Introduction to Barnaby Rudge

Who personifies the criminal rioter?

Sim Tappertit. "His ability to disguise from himself the defects in his unprepossessing body is combined with an ambitious and aspiring soul; and this makes it impossible for him to accept either his master's authority over him or Dolly Varden's indifference to his imagined charms. He turns to the revolutionary society of apprentices for the satisfaction of his [imagined] grievances and revenge for the wrongs he has been made to endure." Introduction to Barnaby Rudge

What is the proper way to bring revolutionary change?

If the revolution is not carefully created spiritually before it is implemented physically (e.g. Martin Luther King, Jr.), then the movement will be subject to violent winds and evil spirits who will gladly usurp the confused effort for their own purposes (e.g. Gordon Riots and French Revolution).