Tess's Contemporary Reception

I knew I was forgetting something when I woke up this morning and lo and behold I did forget something. I even circled and wrote the blog assignment many times, but that's beside the point when half points are better than no points amirite. I didn't find all that much very interesting in these eight reviews because they were all very much the same and none presented a really intriguing idea besides, 'it was good', 'it was good but with flaws', or 'it was decent to bad'. I did however enjoy the interview with Hardy and the letters between James and Stevenson.



Summary
The letters between Hardy's contemporary novelists felt rather comical while reading them and then I read the footnote stating that both James and Stevenson were his friends. What jerks they were for bashing Tess. Stevenson, at least to me has no merit to extensively judge Tess since you know he never finished it and he never says exactly how far he got, but still to criticize a book is one thing and then there is what Stevenson does which just bashes on Hardy. Even James, who took an almost neutral stance in his first letter, quickly goes to point out Tess's faults as a novel.

The Hardy interview was interesting to see his stance on Tess and of her reception. He kind of denied her purity and goes on to speak of other characters that were based on real people, Why, either this interviewer is an idiot or part of the interview was lost. I would have liked a bigger explanation about Hardy's reasoning as to why he thought she was damned and atoning for her sins even with the subtitle claiming she was pure.

Analysis
The main point of analysis is with Hardy and both with what he says and what he writes. Hardy goes on record saying, "don't you see by her violent death poor Tess makes reparations for her sins, and so justice is satisfied" (388). Alright, first off in what sense of the phrase "violent death" do we as readers see implemented in the novel in any respect? Tess's death is relegated to mystery and a black flag rising high on a pole. Oh good job Hardy you're pushing the novel's rating real high with that violence. Even though it was likely a hanging its still rather low on the violence spectrum. Now my second and main qualm with this interview and quote is when Hardy flat out states Tess paid for her sins and justice was served. I don't know, maybe it's how I interpreted the novel's pivotal scenes like the rape, murder, and a few others that Hardy only mentions but doesn't actively show readers, but I saw most of these as very ambiguous as to what actually happens during them. The only real true sin that Tess commits is the murder of Alec because yes the rape was a rape and not Tess's fault and I like to think she told Angel everything about her past when they sat down to finally talk. Even the murder though could have been self-defense, premeditate, etc. The fact though is that Hardy never says one way or the other so this sin could be shifted in so many ways and so for him to come out flatly and say she wasn't pure kind of goes against the ambiguity he wrote into the novel in so many places. I feel like he's shifting his stance despite what the text shows. I don't know maybe I'm wrong, but I think what he wrote holds more credence over what he says after the fact no matter what his vision was for Tess. I don't think Tess is really impure or a sinner or any of what Hardy calls her because that's not what the text abundantly shows. I'm ranting now which is bad. Don't get me started on the subtitle of this novel either, the one place where Hardy flat-out lies to his readers after the book was published by renouncing his use of the word "pure".