The Mayor of Casterbridge as a tragedy
Significance of the title of The Mayor of Casterbridge
Michael Henchard as a tragic character
Hardy’s Tragic Vision: Aristotelian and Shakespearean Influences
Thomas Hardy’s The Mayor of Casterbridge exemplifies his experimentation with Aristotelian and Shakespearean tragic models to explore the tragic dimensions of contemporary life. By weaving these classical elements into his novel, Hardy not only advances the modern tragic novel but also universalizes the tragic suffering experienced by ordinary individuals.
The Modern Tragic Novel
Hardy’s work in The Mayor of Casterbridge represents a significant evolution in the tragic novel, drawing upon the frameworks established by Aristotle and Shakespeare. Aristotle’s theory of tragedy emphasizes the importance of plot structure, consisting of reversal, recognition, and final suffering. Hardy adopts these elements to craft a narrative where the protagonist, Michael Henchard, experiences a profound downfall as a result of both personal flaws and external circumstances. Hardy’s approach illustrates a deep engagement with classical notions of tragedy while adapting them to the modern context.
In the tradition of Shakespeare, Hardy’s novel aligns with the concept that “character is destiny.” Shakespeare’s tragedies often center around protagonists whose flaws lead to their ultimate downfall. Similarly, Hardy’s The Mayor of Casterbridge places significant emphasis on Henchard’s character, particularly his impulsive and wilful nature, which drives the plot and shapes his fate. Hardy’s portrayal of Henchard’s tragic flaws underscores a critical departure from a simplistic view of fate and instead highlights the interplay between personal deficiencies and external forces.
The Influence of Aristotle
Aristotle’s principles of tragedy, detailed in his Poetics, are crucial to understanding Hardy’s approach in The Mayor of Casterbridge. According to Aristotle, a tragedy should include a reversal of fortune (peripeteia), a recognition (anagnorisis), and a final suffering (pathos). Hardy integrates these elements to enhance the dramatic impact of the novel:
- Reversal of Fortune: Henchard’s life shifts dramatically from a respected mayor to a destitute and broken man. His initial success and subsequent decline epitomize the reversal of fortune central to Aristotelian tragedy.
- Recognition: The moment Henchard discovers that Elizabeth-Jane is not his biological daughter serves as a crucial recognition. This revelation further exacerbates his sense of failure and guilt, deepening his tragic suffering.
- Final Suffering: Henchard’s ultimate downfall, marked by his isolation and unmarked grave, illustrates the culmination of his suffering. His tragic end reflects the pervasive influence of his character flaws and the inexorable force of fate.
Shakespearean Tragic Model
Hardy’s novel also resonates with Shakespearean tragedy, particularly in its focus on character-driven outcomes. In Shakespeare’s tragedies, characters’ inherent flaws precipitate their downfall. Similarly, Henchard’s tragic flaws—pride, impulsiveness, and ambition—are pivotal in his downfall.
The original title of the novel, The Life and Death of the Mayor of Casterbridge: A Story of a Man of Character, underscores the centrality of Henchard’s character in the narrative. This emphasis mirrors the Shakespearean focus on character as a determinant of destiny. Henchard’s character flaws are not merely incidental but are integral to the tragic arc of his life.
The Tragic Flaw
Henchard’s tragic flaw—his wilful and impulsive nature—plays a crucial role in his downfall. His excessive pride and ambition lead him to make decisions that ultimately contribute to his ruin. For example, his jealousy of Donald Farfrae results in the loss of both a loyal employee and a trusted friend. Henchard’s impulsive actions, including his cruel treatment of Elizabeth-Jane upon discovering she is not his biological daughter, further alienate him from those he loves.
Lucetta Templeman’s involvement with Henchard and her subsequent marriage to Farfrae exemplify the consequences of his character flaws. Henchard’s past conduct and his inability to adapt to changing circumstances render him an unsuitable match for Lucetta, leading to the deterioration of their relationship.
The Role of Fate
While Henchard’s character flaws are central to his tragic fall, Hardy also explores the role of fate in shaping the protagonist’s destiny. The novel’s depiction of Henchard’s misfortunes, including the return of his wife Susan, his rivalry with Farfrae, and the scandal surrounding his past actions, suggests that his suffering transcends mere punishment for wrongdoing. Instead, it reflects the larger forces of fate that impact his life.
Henchard’s suffering often appears disproportionate to his misdeeds, reinforcing the sense that he is ensnared by fate’s design. His downfall is not solely a result of his actions but also reflects the inexorable forces that govern his life. Hardy’s portrayal of Henchard’s journey from success to ruin highlights the interplay between character and fate, presenting a nuanced view of tragedy.
Conclusion: A Universal Tragic Vision
In The Mayor of Casterbridge, Hardy presents a tragic vision that combines elements of Aristotelian and Shakespearean tragedy while addressing the universal themes of human suffering. Henchard’s story is a powerful exploration of how personal flaws and external forces converge to shape an individual’s fate. The novel’s emphasis on character as a determinant of destiny aligns with classical traditions, while its depiction of Henchard’s downfall reflects the modern experience of tragedy.
Hardy’s portrayal of Henchard’s life and ultimate demise underscores the complex interplay between character, fate, and personal flaws. The novel’s tragic arc, marked by Henchard’s rise and fall, illustrates the enduring relevance of classical tragic models in understanding the human condition. Hardy’s The Mayor of Casterbridge stands as a testament to his ability to capture the essence of tragedy, bridging the gap between classical and modern perspectives on the suffering of the common man.