Jude The Obscure And Dead Essay, Research Paper

Guilt, Duty, and Unrequited Love: Deconstructing the Love Triangles in James

Joyce?s The Dead and Thomas Hardy?s Jude the Obscure ?It?s no problem of

mine but it?s a problem I fight, living a life that I can?t leave behind.

But there?s no sense in telling me, the wisdom of the cruel words that you

speak. But that?s the way that it goes and nobody knows, while everyday my

confusion grows.? –New Order, Bizarre Love Triangle, from Substance, 1987

Most people who have watched a soap opera can recognize that the love triangle

is a crucial element to the plot. In fact, the original radio broadcasted soap

operas seemed to consist almost entirely of love triangles. The love triangle,

for plot purposes, seems to be a popular technique employed to change the

dynamic, add dimension, and generally ?spice up? an otherwise stagnant

monogamous relationship. It would make for a pretty dull and quite unpopular

show if such popular daytime soap characters as Luke and Laura or Bo and Hope

had enjoyed a smooth courtship, uncomplicated marriage and then grew old and

gray together without a single conflict. The viewers watched them go through

many conflicts, some of which involved the classic love triangle. Such conflicts

as the love triangle keep the story moving. Common elements of triangles in

today?s soaps consist of lust, greed, jealousy, any of which are

interchangeable with the conflicts resulting from situations involving lovers

coming back from the dead or paternity uncertainties. Yet love triangles,

whether in the soap opera or in the novel, are not all uniformly constructed.

James Joyce?s The Dead and Thomas Hardy?s Jude the Obscure, both modernist

novels, each contain love triangles as an integral element of the story. The key

triangles I will focus on are comprised of Michael, Greta and Gabriel, and,

Philotson, Sue, and Jude. Although not absolutely identical, deconstruction

reveals guilt, duty, and unrequited love as essential components to the

construction of both. Besides the most obvious similarity that both triangles

are composed of one woman and two men, guilt also figures prominently. Although

the men of the triangles may have their own guilt-related issues, it seems as

though it is the guilt felt by the women that presents the most conflict. In The

Dead, Greta has to live with the knowledge that it is because of her, although

indirectly, that Michael died. It is likely that because of this guilt that she

pauses on the staircase to listen to The Lass of Aughrim, a song that, as she

tells Gabriel later, reminds her of Michael. At the time, her husband interprets

her expression on the staircase as one of ?grace and mystery?as if she were

a symbol of something.?(Joyce 2028). He was correct, except not in the way

that he thought. All the way to the hotel, the lingering memory of that sight of

her incites his passion. However, he experiences a terrible upset as Greta tells

him about the song and what it means to her. This is the critical moment where

Michael, or rather his memory, enters and completes the triangle, although he

may have been there all along without Gabriel?s knowledge. To Gabriel, this

turn of events casts a different light on his entire marriage to Greta as he

?thought of how she who lay beside him had locked in her heart for so many

years that image of her lover?s eyes when he told her that he did not wish to

live?(Joyce 2035). He wonders ?how poor a part he, her husband, had played

in her life?(Joyce 2035). Although it is a bit peculiar for one of the members

of this bizarre love triangle to reside beyond the grave, we see here that

Michael plays a significant role, perhaps altering Gabriel and Greta?s

relationship forever, with Greta?s guilt as the instigating factor. As for

Sue, in Jude, her guilt operates on a completely different level, a religious

one. Like Greta, Sue also had a sick man die after braving the elements just to

see her. Yet, unlike The Dead, this event has no great impact on the love

triangle between Jude, Sue and Philotson. This three-cornered romantic disaster,

because of Sue?s return to Philotson, had already reached it?s climax. If

anything, Jude?s death made Sue?s promise never to see him again easier. But

because Jude?s death happens at the end of novel, the reader does not find out

if this adds to or detracts from her guilt. All we are told is that she is

?tired and miserable,? ?years and years older,? ?quite a staid worn

woman,? and still absolutely repulsed by Philotson (Hardy 431). Sue?s guilt

originates from societal pressures, and then surfaces after the death of the

children. She knows that shacking up with Jude after her divorce from Philotson

is frowned upon, yet she does not share the same morals and values as the

society in which she lived, thus, does not expect any sort of punishment. She

takes the horrifying death of her children as a sign of divine admonishment.

?I see marriage differently now!?My babies have been taken from me to show

me this!?(Hardy 369). Therefore, so that their death?s would not have been

in vain, Sue becomes religious and returns to Philotson, adding more complexity

to the triangle. Sue?s last words to Jude before he dies are: ?Don?t

follow me?don?t look at me. Leave me, for pity?s sake!?(Hardy 412). This

bizarre love triangle may not be broken even after Jude?s death, for it is he

whom she really loves. For Philotson, Sue only feels a sense of duty. Richard

Philotson is not a bad guy, not at all the villain of the story. He is just as

much a victim as Sue and Jude. Actually, the role of the villain seems to

co-star Sue?s sense of guilt and the judgmental society that causes her to

perform such maddening acts of senseless duty that construct the love triangle

between them. One chief act of duty is when she becomes engaged to Philotson,

despite her feelings for Jude. Another major one occurs when she actually

marries Philotson, although it is completely against her principles. Philotson,

as a mentor, had ingratiated himself to Sue and she had to appease him somehow

when the scandalous rumors about her and Jude emerged. Sue writes to Jude about

the impending marriage, ?It is so good of him, because the awkwardness of my

situation has really come about my fault in getting expelled?(Hardy 176). Yet,

Jude fears that the real reason behind her marriage to Philotson stemmed from

his confession regarding his marital status. Regardless of the convoluted

reasoning, Sue was able to perform the duty of marriage but not the duty of the

bedroom. Philotson finds that she would rather sleep in the closet than with

him. As her repulsion grows, so does her longing for Jude and freedom from

marital constraint. Poor Philotson, aware of Sue?s affections for Jude and her

aversion to himself, allows her to leave the marriage. So Sue gets her freedom,

yet despite her unconventional values, she just can not seem to go long without

this sense of duty that overwhelms her. She is torn between her own values and

those that society has not only instilled in her, but reminds her of daily. She

takes deeply to heart such instances as when she and Jude were not seen fit to

complete their job of painting of the Ten Commandments. ?I can?t bear that

they, and everybody, should think people wicked because they may have chosen to

live their own way!?(Hardy 318). This together with Father Time?s arrival

intensifies her torment over the marriage dilemma. But this is one act of duty

that she can never bring herself to perform which makes it much simpler for her,

after the death of her children, to return to Philotson whom she dutifully,

though illogically, regards as her true husband. On the other hand, Greta is

able to fulfill all of her wifely duties for Gabriel, including bearing his

children. He even thinks, until he realizes her attachment to Michael, that she

performs these duties blissfully. Greta plays the part of the doting ornament at

his aunt?s party, appearing as though Gabriel were the center of her universe.

As they danced Gabriel felt ?proud and happy?proud of her grace and wifely

carriage?(Joyce 2031). As they are leaving, Greta ?turned towards them and

Gabriel saw that there was color on her cheeks and that her eyes were

shining?(Joyce 2029). But it was Michael, not Gabriel, who was the reason for

the expression. Despite Greta?s anguish over the song and the memory it

brought, she was not too distraught to attempt to stroke her husband?s ego.

She kissed him and said, ?You are a very generous person, Gabriel?(Joyce

2032). But Gabriel?s joy at this attention is later crushed as it is made

apparent to him that all along ?she had been comparing him in her mind to

another? (Joyce 2033). Greta?s sense of wifely duty toward Gabriel had

protected him from this knowledge all the years of their marriage. With the

truth out, Gabriel may never return to the comfortable illusion that Greta had

allowed him to live him for so long. Michael may now always be a haunting

presence in their marriage, and the reader is not told if Greta will favor her

sense of duty to her marriage or to his memory. While Greta sleeps, recovering

from the memories brought by The Lass of Aughrim, Gabriel contemplates the

relationship between his wife and Michael. He realizes the enormity of

Michael?s love for Greta as something he ?had never felt like that himself

towards any woman but he knew such feeling must be love? (Joyce 2035). This

must leave him to wonder whether Greta had felt the same for Michael or whether

the love, on that level at least, was unrequited. Greta had answered ambiguously

that she had been ?great with him at that time?(Joyce 2034). Gabriel wonders

if she is being completely truthful. He knows that he does not love Greta the

way that Michael did, but throughout their marriage he seems to have been under

the delusion that her love was greater for him, than his for her. Perhaps,

because of Greta?s deep attachment to Michael, it was really his love for her

that was unrequited. Gabriel seems confident in his role as supreme husband and

lover until after Greta?s confession when he looks into the mirror and sees

?a ludicrous figure, acting as a pennyboy for his aunts, a nervous

well-meaning sentimentalist, orating to vulgarians and idealizing his own

clownish lusts?? (Joyce 2033-34). The knowledge of Michael and fear of

comparison has reduced him to this state of inferiority and self-doubt. This may

be how Philotson felt when he found that his love for Sue was so undeniably

unrequited. How damaging it must be for a man?s ego to find that his wife

would rather brave sleeping in a closet than with him. Philotson wonders wry,

?What must a woman?s aversion be when it is stronger than her fear of

spiders!?(Hardy 232). The poor man had normal expectations for his marriage,

only to find that the mere suggestion of intimacy prompted her leap to what

could have been her death. He explains to his friend Gillingham, ?She jumped

out the window?so strong was her dread of me!?(Hardy 241). This is the final

straw and Philotson grants her a divorce. Yet, he is not the only one to

experience unrequited love. Jude does also, but definitely not to such a severe

degree. Although, Sue loves Jude, she does not seem to love him enough to stay

with him, at least not in the way he loves her. He wants her as a wife and she

is content to go back to just friendship. ?We?ll be dear friends just the

same Jude, won?t we??(Hardy 374). She asks him, as if Jude could so easily

dissolve his romantic feelings for her. Sue?s only real true love appear to be

her own values and moral urges, which seem to change with the tide throughout

the novel. Love, with its power to create agony or ecstasy, is a dependable

source of drama, whether it be for the novel or the soap opera. As we see in

Jude the Obscure and The Dead, the tension of the love relationship is increased

with the addition of a third party. Jude and Sue?s relationship may likely

have been quite simpler without the presence of Philotson. He would not have

been an option for Sue?s need to rectify the death of the children. In fact,

she may have seen marriage to Jude as the right thing to do. They may have

actually gotten married and been very happy. But for some reason, Hardy did not

allow this to happen. Instead, he preferred to leave the reader with the dark

view of love, where there is not always a happy ending. As for Gabriel and

Greta?s relationship, if Greta had not told of Michael, Gabriel?s evening

may have ended much differently. He would most likely have satisfied his lust,

yet the novel would lack the epiphany Greta?s confession causes him to have.

The components of guilt, duty, and unrequited love, though not universal traits,

do well to maintain the complexity and efficacy of these particular love

triangles.

33a