Utilitarianism: Facts, Facts, Facts Utilitarianism is the philosophy that the right action is the one that produces the greatest good for the greatest number. In theory, it sounds reasonable. In practice, Dickens argued, it reduces human beings to numbers. The novel’s villain, Thomas Gradgrind, is a utilitarian. He runs a school where children are taught only facts. He says, “Stick to Facts, sir!” He raises his own children by the same principles. His daughter, Louisa, is forbidden to imagine or dream. She is taught that emotions are irrational. She marries a man she does not love because it is “practical.” She nearly has an affair. She breaks down. Gradgrind’s system destroys his family. Dickens is not arguing against reason. He is arguing against reason without heart.
Coketown: The City as a Machine Coketown is a fictional city, but it is based on real industrial towns like Manchester and Preston. Dickens describes it with horror: “It was a town of red brick, or of brick that would have been red if the smoke and ashes had allowed it; but as matters stood it was a town of unnatural red and black.” The streets are all the same. The people are all the same. The factories are like mad elephants. The river is polluted. The air is thick with smoke. Coketown is not a place for human beings. It is a place for production. The workers are not workers. They are “hands.” Dickens gives them names like “Bounderby” and “Gradgrind.” The names are symbols. The people are not people. They are functions.
Josiah Bounderby: The Self-Made Liar Bounderby is a factory owner. He claims to be a self-made man. He says he was abandoned by his mother as a child. He says he slept in a ditch. He says he worked his way up from nothing. He is lying. His mother is alive. She is a poor woman who loves him. He refuses to acknowledge her. Bounderby represents the ideology of the self-made man. He believes that the poor are poor because they are lazy. He believes that he deserves his wealth. He is cruel to his workers. He marries Louisa Gradgrind for her social status. He is a bully and a fraud. Dickens destroys him. His mother appears in public and reveals the truth. Bounderby is humiliated. He dies alone.
Stephen Blackpool: The Honest Worker Stephen Blackpool is a weaver in Bounderby’s factory. He is poor, honest, and doomed. He loves a woman named Rachael. He is trapped in a miserable marriage to an alcoholic wife. He cannot divorce because divorce is too expensive. He refuses to join a union because he believes in individual responsibility. He is fired. He is falsely accused of robbery. He tries to clear his name. He falls into a mineshaft and dies. Stephen is a Christ figure. He is innocent. He suffers. He is betrayed. Dickens uses Stephen to show that the industrial system crushes the good along with the bad. There is no justice for the poor. Only death.
The Circus: Imagination as Salvation Against the utilitarianism of Gradgrind and Bounderby, Dickens offers the circus. The circus is full of color, music, and joy. The children of the circus are raised on laughter. They are not educated in facts. They are educated in wonder. The circus master, Mr. Sleary, speaks with a lisp. He is comic. But he is also wise. He says, “People mutht be amuthed.” He takes in Sissy Jupe, a girl abandoned by her father. Sissy cannot learn facts. She is not stupid. She is imaginative. She becomes the novel’s moral center. She cares for Louisa after her breakdown. She nurses Stephen’s friend Rachael. She is the heart that Gradgrind tried to suppress. Dickens believed that imagination is as important as reason. Without it, humans become machines.
The Ending: Gradgrind’s Conversion Gradgrind loses everything. His son, Tom, robs Bounderby’s bank and escapes abroad. He dies of a fever. His daughter, Louisa, is broken. His system has failed. He converts. He renounces utilitarianism. He becomes a kind and loving father. He supports Sissy. He helps the poor. The ending is hopeful. It is also unrealistic. In real life, Gradgrinds do not convert. They continue to run factories. They continue to exploit workers. Dickens knew this. He was not writing realism. He was writing a fairy tale. He wanted to change hearts. He believed that changed hearts could change society. That belief was his faith.
Conclusion: “Hard Times” is not Dickens’s greatest novel. It is too short. It is too schematic. The characters are more symbols than people. But it is his most passionate. He wrote it in weekly installments for his magazine, “Household Words.” He was angry. He was grieving. He had seen the poverty of the industrial north. He could not forget it. “Hard Times” is a protest. It is a sermon. It is a cry for justice. It still resonates.
