论文部分内容阅读
Vanity Fair is a masterpiece produced by William Makepeace Thackeray in the Victorian age， and is also the one of greatest stamina and vitality among all his other works. It is aimed at satirizing the depraved upper class and utilitarian bourgeois upstarts in 19th century’s England.
The story of Vanity Fair was constructed on two lines， severally told the fortune of Amelia Sedley who was beautiful kind-hearted， innocent and born in a wealthy family， and Rebecca （Becky） Sharp， a nimble， unrestrained but calculating， sophisticated， selfish orphan of low birth.
Both Becky and Amelia， respectively represented rebellious and obedient women， were victims of the society， or of the age. The reason for their adversity was deeply rooted in the social atmosphere of the worship of money.
People’s worship of money was firstly reflected in their relationship with each other， which was actually bounded with money. It could especially be seen in marriage. Money is of the first concern in the decision of a marriage.
For men， ladies from wealthy families were first choice of wife. That’s why Amelia and Becky’s marriage twisted. As soon as Amelia’s father， Mr. Sedley bankrupted， Mr. Osborne couldn’t wait to break off the match between Amelia and his son George and menaced that he would cease to consider his son as a member of his family if they dared to get married. And he ruthlessly did so， even the fact that they got married could not change his mind. For the part of Becky， her marriage was also not approved by Rawdon’ s family because she was a penniless girl of a low birth.
It conforms even more to women. According to the custom and common practice then， young ladies in the middle class only received lady’s education in private school or with the guidance of household governess. It would not be possible for them to be qualified and they were also not expected to work outside as men do. Being not independent in finance， they had to rely on men to live. Hence， to acquire an affluent life， girls must try hard making themselves outstanding so that they would have better choices of husband.
A provoking remark quoted from women who were active in social engagement in the beginning chapter may work to illustrate it. These dear Moralists ask， and hint wisely that “ the gifts of genius， the accomplishments of the mind， the mastery of Mangnalls’ s questions， and a ladylike knowledge of botany and geology， the knack of making poetry， the power of rattling sonatas in the Herz manner， and so forth， are far more valuable endowments for a female， than those fugitive charms which a few years will inevitably tarnish”. Outwardly， those women seemed to attach great importance to women’ s learning， intelligence and talents， take less count of beauty and shows an inclination for capable women. Actually， it was Thackeray’ s less detectable satire on them. Because in deed， they would hardly admire and become intimate with women who lived up to that standard. They wished themselves to be so， but not others. In pursuit of a “happier life”， she had to walk against all odds to squeeze into the upper class. The first obstacle was the obvious boundary between the wealthy and the poor. Upper class looked down upon penniless people and did not marry the poor readily. As the daughter of a poor artist and a dancing girl， she could not receive equal treatment from the upper class. Coming from the lowest class， without money， without supporters to help her， the only way of acquiring what she was longing for is to marry a man from upper class. As a result， she schemed， calculated， deceived people to win trust and love from them. She was deeply aware of the importance of women’ s beauty， capability and made a full and extraordinary use of it. Ironically， she made it to get married with Mr. Rawdon， the second son of a baronet. But things didn’t go smoothly as she had expected， their union was not acknowledged by his family. What’s worse， her husband was not capable enough to give her the life she wanted. Thus she， a capable woman， substituted his husband，just as she had replaced her father to support the family， to make interaction with men. But what could they expect on a woman？ Out of desire for money， She started to seduce and have affair with men which finally made her lost everything she had got.
Why was she desperately in pursuit of wealth， higher social status， and fame？ Was it because she liked to？ No， because they were the requisites and assurance for a desirable life. Becky once thought to herself， “If I had an income of five thousand pound per year， I would also be a righteous woman.” No one can confute her. Why should she be different from those righteous women？ In deed， in the last chapter， when she had a considerable income， she became a kind woman and devoted herself to charity.
Then Our sympathy for her may build up. Her pains were burdened by the society. She was the victim of the unfair society where money weighed most. Owning to the society， the poor girl was kept from living a standard life and badly need happiness. Owning to the society， she gradually reduced to an unscrupulous woman in accumulating money. Without money， she led a miserable life. Chasing for money， she paid a high price of her body and soul. The character Becky had received a wide criticism for being unscrupulous. However， to examine her in scrutiny， we;ll find it unfair to put all blames on her. Actually， in the final analysis， the fault wasn’t on her， but on the society.
The end of the novel stroke a similar chord with the novel A Dream in Red Mansion. Thackeray sighed “Ah！Vanitas Vanitatum！ Which of us is happy in the world？ Which of us has his desire？ Or， having it， is satisfied？” By telling the story of Amelia and Becky， Thackeray actually intended to expose the evil “vanity fair” that made people suffered a great deal. Having experienced ups and downs in the vanity fair， when Becky met Amelia in the fair， would she recollect and sigh on the “glorious” life she had spared no effort to acquire and live？ Will the bourgeois who finish reading the book stop and throw himself into the thought of his life？
The story of Vanity Fair was constructed on two lines， severally told the fortune of Amelia Sedley who was beautiful kind-hearted， innocent and born in a wealthy family， and Rebecca （Becky） Sharp， a nimble， unrestrained but calculating， sophisticated， selfish orphan of low birth.
Both Becky and Amelia， respectively represented rebellious and obedient women， were victims of the society， or of the age. The reason for their adversity was deeply rooted in the social atmosphere of the worship of money.
People’s worship of money was firstly reflected in their relationship with each other， which was actually bounded with money. It could especially be seen in marriage. Money is of the first concern in the decision of a marriage.
For men， ladies from wealthy families were first choice of wife. That’s why Amelia and Becky’s marriage twisted. As soon as Amelia’s father， Mr. Sedley bankrupted， Mr. Osborne couldn’t wait to break off the match between Amelia and his son George and menaced that he would cease to consider his son as a member of his family if they dared to get married. And he ruthlessly did so， even the fact that they got married could not change his mind. For the part of Becky， her marriage was also not approved by Rawdon’ s family because she was a penniless girl of a low birth.
It conforms even more to women. According to the custom and common practice then， young ladies in the middle class only received lady’s education in private school or with the guidance of household governess. It would not be possible for them to be qualified and they were also not expected to work outside as men do. Being not independent in finance， they had to rely on men to live. Hence， to acquire an affluent life， girls must try hard making themselves outstanding so that they would have better choices of husband.
A provoking remark quoted from women who were active in social engagement in the beginning chapter may work to illustrate it. These dear Moralists ask， and hint wisely that “ the gifts of genius， the accomplishments of the mind， the mastery of Mangnalls’ s questions， and a ladylike knowledge of botany and geology， the knack of making poetry， the power of rattling sonatas in the Herz manner， and so forth， are far more valuable endowments for a female， than those fugitive charms which a few years will inevitably tarnish”. Outwardly， those women seemed to attach great importance to women’ s learning， intelligence and talents， take less count of beauty and shows an inclination for capable women. Actually， it was Thackeray’ s less detectable satire on them. Because in deed， they would hardly admire and become intimate with women who lived up to that standard. They wished themselves to be so， but not others. In pursuit of a “happier life”， she had to walk against all odds to squeeze into the upper class. The first obstacle was the obvious boundary between the wealthy and the poor. Upper class looked down upon penniless people and did not marry the poor readily. As the daughter of a poor artist and a dancing girl， she could not receive equal treatment from the upper class. Coming from the lowest class， without money， without supporters to help her， the only way of acquiring what she was longing for is to marry a man from upper class. As a result， she schemed， calculated， deceived people to win trust and love from them. She was deeply aware of the importance of women’ s beauty， capability and made a full and extraordinary use of it. Ironically， she made it to get married with Mr. Rawdon， the second son of a baronet. But things didn’t go smoothly as she had expected， their union was not acknowledged by his family. What’s worse， her husband was not capable enough to give her the life she wanted. Thus she， a capable woman， substituted his husband，just as she had replaced her father to support the family， to make interaction with men. But what could they expect on a woman？ Out of desire for money， She started to seduce and have affair with men which finally made her lost everything she had got.
Why was she desperately in pursuit of wealth， higher social status， and fame？ Was it because she liked to？ No， because they were the requisites and assurance for a desirable life. Becky once thought to herself， “If I had an income of five thousand pound per year， I would also be a righteous woman.” No one can confute her. Why should she be different from those righteous women？ In deed， in the last chapter， when she had a considerable income， she became a kind woman and devoted herself to charity.
Then Our sympathy for her may build up. Her pains were burdened by the society. She was the victim of the unfair society where money weighed most. Owning to the society， the poor girl was kept from living a standard life and badly need happiness. Owning to the society， she gradually reduced to an unscrupulous woman in accumulating money. Without money， she led a miserable life. Chasing for money， she paid a high price of her body and soul. The character Becky had received a wide criticism for being unscrupulous. However， to examine her in scrutiny， we;ll find it unfair to put all blames on her. Actually， in the final analysis， the fault wasn’t on her， but on the society.
The end of the novel stroke a similar chord with the novel A Dream in Red Mansion. Thackeray sighed “Ah！Vanitas Vanitatum！ Which of us is happy in the world？ Which of us has his desire？ Or， having it， is satisfied？” By telling the story of Amelia and Becky， Thackeray actually intended to expose the evil “vanity fair” that made people suffered a great deal. Having experienced ups and downs in the vanity fair， when Becky met Amelia in the fair， would she recollect and sigh on the “glorious” life she had spared no effort to acquire and live？ Will the bourgeois who finish reading the book stop and throw himself into the thought of his life？