Tess’ Purity from Different Perspectives

           

Tess’ Purity from Different Perspectives

Anitosh Goswami, Department of English, Vidyasagar University, 1^st Semester, Roll- 026

                                                                                                * Copyright Protected 

Abstract: This paper pays tribute to Thomas Hardy’s courage to speak against the mindset of Victorian people. Tess’ ‘purity’ has been glorified here. Indian Ancient philosophy of Spirituality plays a major role in this paper to justify Tess’ ‘purity’. Young country girl Tess is here presented as a victim to the standard Victorian morality which didn’t offer Tess the minimum space of individuality. This paper attempts a questioning of the constructed idea of ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ that serves as the main cause behind the heroine’s fall.

Keywords: Pure, Impure, Mind, Moralistic definitions, Existence.

          When we hear these words ‘Purity’ and  ‘Impurity’ , the first question arises in our mind is that how these words come in to existence? Why we have to call someone or something as ‘good’ or ‘evil’ or as ‘pure’ or ‘impure’? The reason is that it is because of our Mind. Our mind is such a device which wants to judge each and everything. It wants to give a label to each and everything. If someone is holding something in his hand he has to call that ‘something’ with any name. As an example we can say that in our daily life from the morning to night we meet many people but our approach towards them is different. Why? Because our mind also judges them as ‘good’ or ‘bad’, or as ‘friend’ or ‘foe’. So it is natural to our mind to distinguish anyone as ‘good’ or ‘evil’ or as ‘pure’ or ‘impure’. What is interesting here is that everyone’s view about what is ‘purity’ and what is ‘impurity’ is not the same. But when in a society more than 50% people have the same idea about what is ‘purity’ and what is ‘impurity’, what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’ then unknowingly and unwittingly a certain rules begins to act in the society to clarify what is ‘purity’ and what is ‘impurity’.

           In Tess of the D’Urbervilles we get to know about such society which is called Victorian Society. Thomas Hardy’s Tess of the D’Urbervilles is the most outspoken of his novels in its treatment of women and sexuality. Hardy as a philosopher here mocks the Victorian notions of morality. He wants to present all human beings with common weakness and virtues. For Hardy nobody is perfect except Mother Nature. Hardy finds Mother Nature as the symbol of ‘purity’. And he creates the character of Tess as a replica of Nature. For Hardy Tess is a girl who is in touch with Mother Nature. Hardy wants to portrait Tess neither as a feminist and nor as a misogynist, but as Tess really is.

            In the Victorian age, there were two standards of morality one for man and other for woman. Angel Clare represents this outlook. According to this standard of morality a young peasant girl who had fallen though unwillingly, had no right to call pure and was not entitled to  lead an honourable life. It was on this ground that the people of Hardy’s age disputed the subtitle. They believed that Tess had lost her chastity. The standard of morality in the case of woman was very narrow. In the Victorian age men might play false with as many women as they liked but if a woman once lost her virginity , she forfeited all claims to purity. She was not allowed to read books dealing with sex. We know that Fielding’s novel Tom Jones was banned in Victorian Society on this ground.

        The critics accuse Tess of impurity basically on two accounts. Firstly, the seduction scene presupposes Tess’ consent as she never showed any sign of disapproval as she did when Alec first tried to kiss her. And Secondly being a wife of Angel how a Tess like girl could surrender herself to an improper person like Alec.

             So,the first thing first. If we look at the word ‘purity’ here we can understand that this word is used in a narrow sense. In Victorian society ‘purity’ means ‘sexual purity’. As far as the meaning is concerned Tess is perfectly pure. Hardy’s view is that virtue is not located not in the body but in the soul, in one’s spirit, in one’s desire, in one’s thought, in one’s will. The virtue of the soul is expressed through the wilful acts of the body. It involves one’s whole being. In India there is a bengali proverb that Iswar kaaj dakhen na, mon dakhen . Sri Ramkrishna Paramhansa used to utter these words. What this means ? It means God does not see your work but the intention behind it. One can do any kind of charitable work but if his intention is bad ,his total work will be a waste. But what happens in our society is that we see only the work not the intention behind it. If I have to put it in bengali I have to say that Amra kaaj dekhi, mon dekhina. And this is the root cause of calling Tess impure. She has lost her virginity but has done so as a victim of a man, as a victim of a culture characterized by sexual repression and hypocrisy. What is the problem with us is that we don’t want to consider publically that we all have some kind of flaws in us. You know if all kind of sexuality related rules have been applied in our society ,in our life, then almost 90% people will be in the jail.

          What sin does Tess commit? None at all, for she is the helpless by the male dominated industrial society. Alec is fascinated by Tess’ physical beauty. But on the other hand Tess is never happy in his company. She always tries to disapproves his advances. When Tess is seduced, her unfortunate circumstances should not be ignored. She is physically exhausted and mentally weary because of her quarrel with her companions. When half asleep, she is neither physically nor mentally in a condition to resist Alec’s action. But after watching such circumstances also, some critics raise questions on Tess’ ‘purity’. Now two things are important  here . When someone accuses another about their ‘purity’ they actually hint two things. Take an example that if I say that ‘that boy is bad’, then what I am doing ? On one hand I am calling ‘that boy a bad’  and in another hand I am indicating that ‘I am good’. By giving a contradiction I am showing that I am good. And these types of smartness are going on through the ages.

             The second accusation on Tess is that being a wife of Angle how a Tess-like girl can surrender herself to Alec, an improper man. The answer is that to give her family a living. Now what she is doing? She is sacrificing her life for her family. She is sacrificing her happiness for the sake of her family. Sacrificing is an act of virtue. She should be called virtuous rather than impure. Sunirmal Basu has said in his poem Sabar Ami Chatra that Akash amay sikkha dilo/Udar hote bhaire . Hardy again shows us that Tess is the replica of sacrificing mother Nature. Bruce Lee has said that Real living is living for others. Even Jesus Christ also had to sacrifice his life for the sake of human beings.

                But there is an another point that strikes our mind that how a Tess-like girl can kill someone. We have to understand that there may be many vital reasons but one have no right to take one’s life. Because this body is not created by us, neither our mothers have created it. Our mothers were just the medium through which Nature has played its role and created this body. So we have no right to take one’s life. To give the answer we have to apply Indian ancient philosophy of spirituality. According to spirituality if you say something is ‘bad’, there is ‘evil’, No reply will be given to you from the universe, because as far as existence is concerned there is no ‘good’ or ‘evil’. Take an example of any flower. I can say that ‘this flower is ugly and the fragrance of the flower is not attractive’. But anyone else also can say that ‘No, this flower is beautiful and the fragrance of the flower is also good’. What are these? These are just our opinions. The flower is not ‘ugly’ or ‘beautiful’ but it is just the flower. It is just the existence of this flower in this universe. It is just the existence of the fragrance of that flower in this universe. Good or evil depends on our attitudes; it depends on our moralistic definitions. For example I can call someone ‘ugly’ but there is no ugliness in the existence itself as there is no beauty. We have made the definition. We have defined something as beauty and something as ugliness, something as purity, something as impurity.

           There is no way to decide what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’. If there were no human beings on earth, would there be anything ‘good’ or ‘bad’? There would be no good and no bad because goodness and badness are human distinctions , mental distinctions. If there were no human beings on earth would there be any flower that was ‘ugly’ or any flower that was ‘beautiful’? No. There would only be flowers flowering, only trees growing, only wind blowing.

            We can say  ‘this is evil and that is good’. But if for example, Adolf Hitler’s mother had killed her son Adolf Hitler during his childhood. Would it have been good or bad ? She would have been a criminal and they would punished her for it. But now, looking back we can say that it would have been a most moral act: by killing her child in the childhood, she could have saved the whole world.

            Words such as ‘good’ and ‘bad’ or ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ are just utilitarian. They are not existential. But what is important here that we can not exist without classifying things as either ‘good’ or ‘bad’ because otherwise society would be impossible. We can’t exist without differentiating others.

             But this must be clearly understood Definitions are not ultimate truths. A good deed can be bad in one context and a bad deed may be good in another. This has been true through out history. We Indians adore Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose as a great hero but Britishers see him as a criminal. A person is only a thief if he is a small thief. If he is a great thief, then he becomes an Alexander the Great, a hero. What is the difference between a small thief and Alexander the Great?  There is no qualitative difference between the two, There is only a quantitative difference. Alexander the Great has also attacked other countries and looted there. His character is also of a thief but no one will call Alexander the Great, a great thief. Because in our society one’s goodness is measured by one’s success: the more successful you are, the more good. Means are only questioned if you are a failure;then you will be called both corrupt and a fool. A King also kills thousands people during war for his personal gain but he always be called by us as King. But if I or You kill someone we will be called  murderers.

                 Hardy also  indicates this attitude of the then society. If this is the condition of a society to judge people, If this is the attitude of a society to clarify who is ‘good’ ,who is ‘evil’, who is ‘pure’ and who is ‘impure’, then Tess-like girl’s ‘purity’ can’t be judge by this immoral society’s improper definitions of ‘good’ and ‘evil’.

            

Works Cited:

Osho, The Great Challenge, 2010. Print.

Morgen, Rosamarie, Women and sexuality in the novels of Thomas Hardy, USA,1988. Print.

Sadhguru, Sexuality and the Divine, eBook, 2006.