Contemporary Critical Reception

As we have discussed in class, the contemporary critiques of Tess of the D'Urbervilles were fairly mixed between those who loves the novel, those who appreciated the Hardy's style but did not particularly like the story, and those who hated the novel. One critic in from The Athenaeum ends his essay on Hardy's bleak and sometimes unpleasant style by stating, "Tess of the D'Ubervilles is well in front of Mr. Hardey's previous work, and is destined, there can be no doubt, to rank high among the achievements of Victorian novelists," (382). The first line of the next essay, from The Illustrated London News, reiterates the previous authors statement by saying, "Mr. Hardy's new novel is in many respects the finest work which he has yet produced," (382). Also like in the previous essay, this author criticizes Hardy's dark and pessimistic style and says many readers will be disapproving of the book because they do not want to be disturbed by what they are reading (I think we can all agree that Tess is more than a little disturbing). This author mentions that many readers to not like unhappy ending because unhappy ending cause them to "appeal to the conscience" which is always looking for the "the traditional pattern of right and wrong," (383). Because of Hardy's successful attempt to accentuate the fact that the purest of women are the easiest victims, this author declares hardy to be "one of [the] brave and clear-sighted minority," (383). The essay from The Spectator states that "Mr. Hardy has written one of his most powerful novels," (384). This essay talks about the idea of naturalism and the idea that there is no "higher power" that saves the characters from a cruel life. From the side of the reviewers who did not like the novel, we have an article from The Saturday Review. The opening line of the essay states, "Let it at once be said that their is not one single touch of nature either in John Durbyfield or in any other character in the book," (383). Seeing as this novel's central theme seems to be one about naturalism, this is a pretty big statement. The essay goes on to discuss how Hardy's detailed description of Tess's physical attributes do nothing for the readers. The author gives another lofty statement when he says, "t matters much less what a story is about than how that story is told, and Mr. Hardy, it must be conceded, tells an unpleasant story in a very unpleasant way," (384). The last review I will mention (in this part of the blog at least) is the letters sent between Stevenson Discuss and Henry James. Stevenson wrote to James, "The good little Thomas Hardy has scored a great success with Tess of the D'Ubervilles, which is chock-full of faults and falsity and yet ha a singular beauty and charm," (387). James replies, "I do not know that I am exaggerative in criticism; but I will say that Tess is one of the worst, weakest, least sane, most ovule books I have yet read," (387). 

It seems to me that the mere fact that there are so many mixed feeling about this novel means that it had the effect that Hardy might have wanted it to have. If he wanted everyone to love it, he might have added some positive plot twists or at least given the story a happy ending; however, it does not seem to me that Hardy cared much of people liked the novel. It seems like a statement about he, himself, feels about life and that's all that really mattered. I am no expert, but that is what I got from the interview. 

The review I loved the most was the interview with Mr. Hardy. There is nothing I love more than to hear an authors explanations behind their work. I love to know what made them decide to create the world in their novels and to be aware of the small details that they had in mind while they were writing, even if they did not share them in the story. My favorite quote from the interview was, "But indeed I little or nothing to do with it. When I got to the middle of the story the characters took their fates into their own hands, and I literally had no power," (388). When I read this quote for the first time, I was deeply moved by it.I think that great authors don't just think of a story than write it. They start with one simple idea and feed and nurture it until it grows into what it is supposed to be. The second time I read the quote, I saw a bit of irony in it. We have talked several times about naturalism and how hardy wanted to get the point across that people do not have "free will" and cannot make their own choices. Yet, he said that his characters "took their fates into their own hands," and he had no choice but to write it that way. This is a complete contradiction to a major theme of the novel itself. I don't know if Hardy did this on purpose but I see it as very ironic.