MASTER'S THESIS EMILIA BOCZKOWSKA

Υνιωερσψτετ ω Βιαłymstoku
Wydział Filologiczny
Filologia angielska
Emilia Boczkowska
Nr albumu 39625
Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray as a historical novel
Targowisko Próżności Williama Makepeace’a Thackeray’ego jako powieść historyczna
Praca magisterska napisana pod kierunkiem dr Nadzieji Monachowicz

Białystok 2010
Table of contents
Table of contents .......................................................................................................2
Abstract .....................................................................................................................4
Streszczenie ...............................................................................................................5
Chapter I Historical novel .........................................................................................6
1.1 Definition of historical novel and historicism .....................................................6
1.2 Rise of historical fiction ......................................................................................8
1.3 Historical novel in Victorian Era .........................................................................12
Chapter II W.M. Thackeray in the context of his epoch ..........................................14
2.1 William Makepeace Thackeray and the events of his time .................................14
2.2 The condition in Britain in the early nineteenth century .....................................17
2.2.1 Social and economic condition in Britain in the early nineteenth century .......17
2.2.2. Political condition in Britain in the early nineteenth century ..........................21
Chapter III Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray as a historical novel .....23
3.1 General notes on Vanity Fair ...............................................................................23
3.2 Vanity Fair as a historical novel ..........................................................................26
3.2.1 Time frames in Vanity Fair ..............................................................................27
3.2.2 Description of people’s mentality and society of the early nineteenth century in

Vanity Fair .................................................................................................................27
3.2.3 Historical events in Vanity Fair ........................................................................35
3.3 Mary Hammond’s critical overview of history in Vanity Fair ............................39
Chapter IV Film adaptation of Vanity Fair by Mira Nair of 2004 and BBC TV series by
Marc Munden of 1998................................................................................................43
4.1 Approaches to film adaptations ...........................................................................43
4.1.1 Fidelity in film adaptation ................................................................................44
4.1.2 Film adaptation hostilities ................................................................................46
4.2 Film adaptation of Vanity Fair by Mira Nair of 2004 and BBC TV series by Marc
Munden of 1998 ........................................................................................................47
4.2.1 Summary of the plot .........................................................................................47
4.2.2 Comments on film. Film adaptation in comparison to novel in terms of historical
issues presented .........................................................................................................48
Conclusion .................................................................................................................51
Bibliography ..............................................................................................................52
Abstract

The master thesis chiefly deals with Vanity Fair by William Makepeace
Thackeray, which is considered to be a historical novel. The aim of the thesis is to
analyze the novel for belonging to the genre.
Thus, the literary term – historical novel – is explained in the first chapter, as well
as development of the genre is presented.
In further chapters the author of the thesis introduces William Makepeace
Thackeray as a man of his epoch and discusses his characteristics as a novelist. Also,
there is description of social, economic and political conditions of the early nineteenth
century Britain, since the plot of the novel is set at that times.
Furthermore, some general notes on Vanity Fair are made. The main part of the
thesis focuses on Vanity Fair as a historical novel. Therefore, the analysis of the novel has
been conducted and as a result, characteristics of historical novel have been found.
The excerpts of the work are cited to present social and economic states common in early
nineteenth century. Moreover, one can find the description of the crucial historical event
of the time, that is Battle of Waterloo, in which fictional characters of the novel are
involved. Nevertheless, some critical overviews concerning the presenting history in the
novel are discussed.
The final chapter additionally comments on the film adaptation of Vanity Fair by
Mira Noir in 2004. Here, film adaptation approaches and hostilities are enumerated and
the historical issues transferred from the novel to the film are dealt with.
All things considered, the master thesis analyzes the novel Vanity Fair by William
Makepeace Thackeray in terms of being historical novel and in conclusion it appears to
be one.
Streszczenie

Niniejsza praca magisterska skupia się głównie na książce Williama Thackeray’a
pod tytułem Targowisko Próżności, którą uważa się za powieść historyczną. Celem pracy
jest przeprowadzenie analizy powieści pod kątem przynależności do tego gatunku.
W pierwszym rozdziale zatem zostaje wyjaśnione literackie pojęcie powieści
historycznej, a także zaprezentowany jest rozwój tego gatunku.
W kolejnych rozdziałach autorka pracy przedstawia Williama Makepeace’a
Thackeray’ego jako człowieka swojej epoki, a także jego cechy jako powieściopisarza.
Oprócz tego, ponieważ fabuła analizowanej powieści dzieje się we wczesnym
dziewiętnastym wieku w Wielkiej Brytanii, opisana zostaje społeczna, ekonomiczna i
polityczna sytuacja kraju.
Co więcej, zaprezentowanych jest kilka ogólnych uwag dotyczących Targowiska
Prózności. Główna część pracy skupia sie na Targowisku Próżności jako powieści
historycznej. Przeprowadzona jest więc analiza i w rezultacie znaleziono cechy
charakterystyczne dla powieści historycznej. Cytowane fragmenty powieści prezentują
społeczną i ekonomiczną sytuację wczesnego dziewiętnastego wieku. Poza tym, znajduje
się tu opis niezmiernie ważnego wydarzenia historycznego, bitwy pod Waterloo, w której
biorą udział fikcyjni bohaterowie książki. Nie mniej jednak, zaprezentowane są również
krytyczne uwagi autorki Mary Hammond dotyczące ujęcia historii w powieści.
Ostatni rozdział dodatkowo komentuje filmową adaptację Targowiska Próżności
wyreżyserowaną przez Mirę Nair w 2004 roku, a także telewizyjny serial BBC
wyreżyserowany przez Marca Mundena w 1998 . Opisane tu zostają podejścia oraz
krytyczne uwagi dotyczące adaptacji, a także historyczne wątki przeniesione z powieści
na ekran.
Biorąc wszystko pod uwagę, praca magisterska analizuje Targowisko Próżności
Williama Thackeray’ego pod kątem bycia powieścią historyczną i w końcowym wniosku
okazuję się, iż rzeczywiście nią jest.
Chapter I
Historical novel

1.1 Definition of historical novel and historicism
Historical novel is usually set amidst well-defined historical context well before
the time of writing. Therefore, it is often based on other literary or historical sources
rather than on the author’s own experience. This form of narrative fiction reconstructs
history and re-creates it in an imaginative way. Historical novel attempts “to depict
accurately the customs and mentality of the period” (Baldick 1991: 99). According to
A Dictionary of Modern Critical Terms, in historical novel “past tense may be employed
in the narration, the account may purport to have been written in that past time, or in
some intervening time. The subject-matter of historical novel tends to encompass both
public and private events and the protagonist may be either an actual figure from the past
or an intended figure whose destiny is involved with accrual events” (Fowler 1973: 88).
Moreover, there may appear the descriptions of social conditions, social customs,
clothing and buildings. All these are to strive for verisimilitude, that is, in its literary
context, the appearance of being true or real, bearing resemblance and likeness of what is
depicted to the truth. The concept of verisimilitude implies that either the action which is
represented in a piece of art should be acceptable or convincing according to the
audience’s own knowledge or experience, or must be enticed into willingly suspending
disbelief and accepting improbable actions as true within the framework of the narrative.
As far as the historical novel is concerned, we should also consider the term
‘historicism’. Many different branches of literary study involve the use of historical
evidence, however, the term historicism is usually reserved for the approach to literature
which searches for the context of the ideas, conventions and attitudes of the period.
A Dictionary of Modern Critical Terms explains:
Although good literature is ‘not of an age, but for all time’, the social
and intellectual climate within which every writer has to work, and
which his writing reflects in some degree, is subject to change. The
uninformed modern reader is therefore likely to bring to the literature of
the past assumptions and associations that may be quite alien to the
frame of reference from which that literature derives its form and

meaning. The aim of historicism is to make works of different periods
more accessible to the modern reader by reconstructing the historically
appropriate background as it affects an understanding and judgment of
the work concerned (Fowler 1973: 89).
There are two attitudes concerning historicism. The first one means that “the past should
be studied not as a collection of moral exempla and in terms of its applicability to the
present, but “intrinsically”, in its own right and in its own moral and epistemic frame of
reference”. For others, “historicism meant the study of human culture as a diachronic
growth process” (Leersen 2004: 229). What is common is the fact that there is a reliance
on historical precedents in the practice of art. This also concerns the belief in uniqueness
of historical periods: it is the theory that each period of history has its own unique beliefs
and values and can only be understood in its historical context. Thus, it is essential for
historicism to be “selective and interpretative in treating what evidence it is concerning
standards and habits of mind that differ from our own” (Fowler 1973: 89). J. Leersen also
suggests that thanks to literary historicism “we gain a fresh perspective on certain key
figures whose importance and mutual connections have been neglected and relegated to
specialist, nonliterary studies” (2004: 243). The same author also underscores that it is
historicism which was first and foremost a new development in the history of literary
reception, as he says that “the rise of literary historicism was of cardinal importance. Its
emergence and impact present us with a field of inquiry of considerable interest,
magnitude and relevance“ (2004: 242). Also, David Mikics mentions that “the historicist
critic emphasizes the qualities of a specific era or cultural situation, often by describing
customary beliefs and daily habits in a particular place and time.(Mikics 2007: 144)
The historical novel in which action takes place during specific historical period well
before the time of writing should be traced for the factors of verisimilitude which literary
historicism deals with.
1.2 Rise of historical fiction
Historical fiction is a sub-genre of fiction that often gives the portrayal of fictional

accounts or dramatization of historical events or figures. Reader is presented with a story
taking place during the notable period of history, and actual events are shown from the
point of view of people living in that time period. While writing a story in this genre, an
attempt to capture the spirit, social conditions, manners and customs is made with due
attention to details of the period and fidelity. A wide range of artistic means is used to
engage its readers in acts of historical cognition. According to Harry E. Shaw, the
historical fiction is as old as literature itself, bringing as the examples the Iliad that
recounts the history of the fall of Troy, or the Bible which tells the history of the Jews.
Speaking of historical novel, however, one tends to be thinking of something more
recent. Shaw underscores that “the ‘modern’ historical novel begins in the early
nineteenth century, with a major shift in the awareness of history itself and with a single
author, Sir Walter Scott” (Shaw 1991: 531). By all means, novels with historical themes
can be found also in Medieval Ages, as well as in the seventeenth and the eighteenth
centuries prose, however, an expert on historical novels, Georg Lukács claims that “what
is lacking in the so-called historical novel before Sir Walter Scott is precisely the
specifically historical, that is, derivation of the individuality of characters from the
historical peculiarities of their age” (1983: 19). What he meant was that psychology of
characters, manners, costumes and choice of themes depicted in earlier than nineteenth
century novels are of writer’s own days. An insight into the emergence of the historical
novel has been made by G. Lukács, who, in his prominent book Historical Novel,
explains social and historical conditions for the rise of the historical novel, although
generic identity of historical fiction is rather unstable. It is due to lack of its formal
resources, “it has always been parasitic on the forms of the novel in general. Another
reason is that recent theorists both of literature and historiography have eroded the
boundaries between fiction and fact, in favour of larger textuality and a heightened
awareness of the rhetorical nature of language and thought (Shaw 1991: 541). Despite the
fact that genre is quite problematic and without clear boundaries, some attempts had been
made to solve the issue of its rise. According to Henry E. Shaw studying G. Lukács
researches,
For Georg Lukács, history finds a place in European realistic fiction
through the emergence of the historical novel, an emergence made
inevitable by certain historical movements, especially the eruption of

palpable historical processes during the French revolution and its
Napoleonic aftermath. According to Lukács, all great art is realistic,
but as society moves towards ever greater complexity, the reality it
seeks to master becomes increasingly complex. The eighteenth- century
novel had begun to achieve a successful representation of the intricacies
of class society. Then, with Scott, the historical novel, branching from
realist mainstream, moved such representation into the past, where it
could more easily incorporate the historical determinants of social
being. (1991: 532-533).
G. Lukács also recognizes the influence of Enlightenment on the history of writing as
well as on the transformations in the attitudes and minds. He explains:
The often superb historical construction, with its discovery of numerous
new facts and connections, serves to demonstrate the necessity for
transforming the ‘unreasonable’ society of feudal absolutism; and the
lessons of history provide the principles with whose help a ‘reasonable’
society, a ‘reasonable’ state may be created. For this reason the classical
world is central both the historical theory and the practice of
Enlightenment. To ascertain the causes of greatness and decline of the
classical states is one of the most important theoretical preliminaries for
the future transformation of society (1983:, 20).
This was the first step for writers to turn to more realistic writing, giving the portrayal of
contemporaries and presenting true-to- life image of the historical period. What later
affected the whole understanding of the world and influenced historical writing,
according to G. Lukács, was the Industrial Revolution, which played an enormous role
especially on developing England where economic and social preconditions for it were
created well in the eighteenth century. Industrial revolution was a great point in working
out political economy and arising viewpoint of capitalism which has become a historical
issue.
Moreover, G. Lukács brings about another important fact which is taken into
consideration while discussing the rise of historical novel:
It was the French Revolution, the revolutionary wars and the rise and
fall of Napoleon, which for the first time made history a mass
experience, and moreover on a European scale. During the decades
between 1789-1814 each nation of Europe underwent more upheavals
than they had previously experienced in centuries. And the quick

succession of these upheavals gives them a qualitatively distinct
character, it makes their historical character far more visible than would
be the case in isolated, individual instances: the masses no longer have
the impression of a ‘natural occurrence’. (…) Now if experiences such
as these are linked with the knowledge that similar upheavals are taking
place all over the world, this must enormously strengthen the feeling
first that there is such a thing as history, that it is uninterrupted process
of changes and finally that it has a direct effect upon the life of every
individual (1983: 23).
To follow this, as the Europe had become the war arena and people’s horizons were
broadening, G. Lukács points out: “Hence the concrete possibilities for men to
comprehend their own existence as something historically conditioned, for them to see in
history something which deeply affects their daily life and immediately concerns them.
(…) It is quite obvious the extent to which the economic and cultural life of the entire
nation was disrupted by the huge, rapidly successive changes of the period” (1983: 24).
Not only had the awareness of historical events and their immense influence on people’s
lives, countries’ politics and economics risen, but also national sensibility had been
awakened, as well as increased consciousness of historical character began to influence
on economic conditions and class struggle. Writers could notice the necessity of depicting
that not only in historical books, but also to transfer this knowledge by creating a
historical fiction.
Harry E. Shaw explains that “during the eighteenth century there arose in Europe a vision
of history with two principal aspects. On the one hand, it was realized that different ages
and cultures are systematic wholes obeying their own internal laws. (…) On the other
hand, there arose an interest in the ways in which one kind of society gives way to
another” (2000: 536). Here Sir Walter Scott, mentioned as a leading figure in rising the
historical novel, serves an example, as Shaw writes: “When Scott looked at Highlands, he
was interested in Highland society as a synchronic, systematic whole, but also he wished
to grasp the diachronic mechanisms by which it had given way to the society of his own
day – and to determine what place if any the virtues of the old society might find in the
new” (1991: 536). By synchronic it is meant that it is analyzed only at one point in time,
whereas diachronic regards a phenomenon in terms of developments through time.

As far as Sir Walter Scott and his influence on development of historical novel are
concerned, G. Lukács claims that “Scott’s historical novel is the direct continuation of the
great realistic novel of the eighteenth century. Scott’s studies on the eighteenth century
writers, on the whole not very penetrating theoretically, reveal an intensive knowledge
and detailed study of this literature. Yet his work, in comparison with theirs, signifies
something entirely new” (1983: 31). In this connections G. Lukács refers to Walter Scott:
His great contemporaries quickly recognized this new quality. Pushkin
writes of him: “The influence of Walter Scott can be felt in every
province of the literature of his age. The new school of French
historians formed itself under the influence of the Scottish novelist. He
showed them entirely new sources which had so far remained unknown
despite the existence of historical drama of Shakespeare and Goethe…”
and Balzac, in his criticism of Stendhal’s La Chartreuse de Parme,
emphasizes the new artistic features which Scott’s novels introduced
into epic literature: the broad delineation of manners and circumstances
attendant upon the events, the dramatic character of action and, in close
connection with this, the new and important role of the dialogue in the
novel. (1983: 31).
Realistic features of the eighteenth century novel, which were necessary consequence of
the post-revolutionary character of England’s development, needed to stand out with
more than usual distinctiveness due to fact that there was a period of time when the whole
of Europe was swayed by a post- revolutionary ideology which affected particularly the
progressive classes. G. Lukács continues as follows “England has now once more
become the model land of development for the majority of continental ideologists, though
of course in a different sense from that of eighteenth century. (…) Now, in the eyes of
historical ideologists of progress, England appears as the classic example of historical
development in their sense” (1983: 31). It means that stability of English development
made it possible for newly- awoken historical feeling transform to into broad, objective,
epic form. Thus, the new form of historical fiction arose, which set an example to follow
for other writers. The reason why Scott is perceived as the most prominent leading figure
of that genre is that he was honest and keenly observant of the real facts including
enormous social and economical transformations as well as never- ending class struggle.
As G. Lukács explains,

This objectivity is further heightened by Scott’s conservatism. His
world-view ties him very closely to those sections of society which had
been precipitated into ruin by the industrial revolution and the rapid
growth of capitalism. Scott belong neither with ardent enthusiasts of
this development, nor with its pathetic, passionate indicters. He
attempts by fathoming historically the whole of English development to
find a ‘middle way’ for himself between the warring extremes. He finds
in English history the consolation that the most violent vicissitudes of
class struggle have always finally calmed down into glorious ‘middle
way’ (1983: 32).
That is why Scott’s conception of history in novels involves giving perspective of future
development, but only in its author’s sense. Therefore, rarely did raise contemporary
social issues, but he attempted to include the earliest stages of English history into his
writing. Also, by seeking previously mentioned ‘middle way’, Scott tended to express it
in the way he constructed the plot as well as by the choice of hero, who “is always more
or less mediocre, average English gentleman. He generally possesses a certain, though
never outstanding, degree of practical intelligence, a certain moral fortitude and decency
which even rises to capacity for self-sacrifice, but which never grows into sweeping
human passion, is never the enraptured devotion to a great cause” (Lukács 1983: 33). The
choice of hero proves Scott’s exceptional epic gift, though also some aristocratic and
conservative prejudices can be noticed.
The very first of Scott’s novels that regarded historical facts in terms of modern
account and set an example for other writes is Waverley published in 1814. Firstly, the
idea of the novel was inspired by the tales heard from veterans of 1745 rebellion, and also
it was encouraged by Scott’s own youthful travels to Highlands. Observing the clash of
the cultures, seeing people of high spirit who lived in a civilized age and country, but who
retained strongly to ancient traditions, Scott noticed fictional potential and the basis for
the excellent story that may be placed at certain historical period. It took some years to
complete the novel, which eventually became a cultural phenomenon.
1.3 Historical novel in Victorian Era

As Liliana Sikorska informs, “the period in English literary history usually
labelled as Victorian corresponds roughly to the reign of queen Victoria, beginning in
1837 and lasting until her death in 1901” (Sikorska 2002: 265). As the time frames for the
term Victorian have been established, John Bowen believes that “by rights, the historical
novel should be one of the glories of the Victorian age. Almost every major novelist of
the period, with the exception of Bröntes, made at least one attempt on the form (…) No
form of novel-writing in the period had more prestige, and of none were hopes higher –
hopes of dignity, seriousness and moral insight; historical novels should have flourished
in what was a deeply sympathetic environment” (Bowen 2002: 244). As J. Bowen argues:
“It is because Victorians were acutely aware of past, and ‘in almost every area of
Victorian intellectual life, one encounters a preoccupation with ancestry and descent, with
tracing the genealogy of the present in the past, and with discovering or creating links to
a formative history’ (Bowen 2002: 244). This caused an important nineteenth century
strand in culture, historicism, which was drawn to search for something that could resist
the power of time, and thus, historical fiction of Victorian era was created. According to
Bowen, who cites other researcher of the matter,
Literature of the nineteenth century had a complex and fruitful
relationship to the writing of history , which grew in the course of the
century into a professionalized discipline, on the one hand drawn to
literary models and forms of writing, on the other seeking to distance
itself from the merely “literary”. There were historians, most notably
Thomas Carlyle and Thomas Babington Macaulay, who were major
literary figures in their own right, and whose works were devoured by a
public eager for history. Indeed, “it was to the narrative and descriptive
precedents of the novel, and particularly the work of Scott, that he
[Macaulay] most turned for examples of what a modern historian might
accomplish” (Burrow 1981:36). Historical novels, however, were by no
means a matter for the elite. Together with the Gothic and the tale of
terror, the historical novels of Walter Scott and Ainsworth were major
influences on working-class and popular literature (Bowen 2002: 244-
245).
Thus, historical novels can be described as the most successful form of the century, or

can be called a key genre. J. Bowen also underscores once again the fact, that “at the
beginning of the Victorian period, the novel was dominated, overawed almost, by the
achievement of Scott, who had been, by some distance, the most successful of all
novelists writing in English and had raised the novel to a new seriousness and dignity”
(2002: 246). The most prominent writers of the era rested upon the Scott’s legacy.
It is also important to emphasize the fact that it was the Victorian era that established
novel as a leading form of literature in English. Following the development of society, the
majority of writers were concerned to attract a large middle-class reading public rather
than to please aristocratic patrons. It was directed to middle class in order to incite
sympathy and push for moral and social change. Dominant feature of Victorian historical
novels was the issue of verisimilitude, that is close representation of to the actual state of
the age depicted.
The rise of historical fiction has its roots in the increased awareness of the impact
of history, historical events and figures on people’s life, way of thinking and attitudes.
There were writers who noticed the change and who were willing to describe the events
with due consideration to the history, and the leading figure was Sir Walter Scott who
established the role model for modern historical novel. The form of novel was highly
developed in the Victorian era.

Chapter II
W.M. Thackeray in the context of his epoch
2.1 William Makepeace Thackeray and the events of his time
The nineteenth century was the great age of the English novel. It was because of
the rise of middle-class which was the reason for middle-class literary art flourish
increasingly (Daiches 1960: 1049). With the growth of democracy elementary education
was generally accessible, which resulted in rapid increase people’s ability to read. That is
why many Victorian writers attempted to move, instruct and inspire the society.
William Makepeace Thackeray is one of the most prominent authors of the nineteenth
century. He was born on 18 July 1811 in Calcutta, India as the only child of Richmond
and Anne Thackeray, both of whom were of Anglo- Indian descent. As far as the family
background is concerned, according to Alexandra Mullen “Thackeray's family included
soldiers, sailors, clerics, scholars and civil servants, many of whom were associated with
either the Indian Civil Service or the East India Company” and that is why “a far-better-
than-average family, education, opportunity and fortune.” (Mullen 2002: 581) His father,
promoted to a lucrative position in the Collectorship of Calcutta districts, was able to
made the fortune in British East India Company, the greatest stock created for improving
trade with British colonies. After father's death in 1815, William stayed in India with his
mother until 1816 when he was sent to England to be educated. On their journey there
was a short stopover at St. Helena island, where imprisoned Napoleon was pointed to
little boy. Lewis Saul Benjamin, the author of Thackeray's biography, cites Thackeray's
own words concerning this experience:
“I came from India as a child, and our ship touched at an island on the
way home, where my black servant took me a long walk over the rocks
and hills until we reached a garden, where we saw a man walking. 'That
is he', said the black man; 'that is Bonaparte! He eats three sheep every
day and all the little children he can lay hands on!' There were people of
the British dominions besides that poor Calcutta serving-man, of an

equal horror of the Corsican ogre.” (2009: 14)
Thackeray knew the story of the end of French domination over Europe due to defeat in
the Battle of Waterloo from the stories rambling through victorious England.
Initially he stayed partly with his grand- uncle Moore at the Manor House at Hedley and
partly at Chiswick with aunt Ritchie. (see: Benjamin 2009: 14) Meanwhile his widowed
mother married Major Carmichael Smyth who later on developed a close relationship
with William. At an early age he was sent to public school where he received an
education of a gentleman. Benjamin notices some traces of Thackeray's school
experience in his writings. It appears that William's stay at school made him feel
miserable as Benjamin notices that “at a very early age he was sent to a school in
Chiswick Mall, of which, it is suggested, he wrote in the opening chapters of Vanity Fair
when he described Miss Pinkerton's establishment. (…)
The little boy was not happy there.” (Benjamin 2009:15) The same is mentioned by
Alexandra Mullen who brings Thackeray's memories of “hard bed, hard words, strange
boys bullying and laughing, and jarring you with their hateful merriment” (2002: 582). At
the age of eleven, further education was given to Thackeray at prestigious Charterhouse
School, which was much detested by the boy, who later in his fiction ironically called it
Slaughterhouse. Much of the experience gained in so popular in nineteenth century public
schools served well for the descriptions in the historical novels as he himself was the
witness of the conditions of early nineteenth century schools.
These days, Thackeray is chiefly known for Vanity Fair and less securely for his other
historical novels. Many of them are considered to be realistic, which means they
attempted to depict subjects in accordance to objective reality. In Thackeray’s own view,
realism is that of the observer, not that of the analyst (see: Moody, Lovett 1964: 355).
Proof for that is presented in Cambridge Guide to Literature in English, which states that
“Thackeray remains a central figure in the history of Victorian realism, and his skeptical,
ironic but compassionate vision of human conduct in society dominated by the power of
money and class gives his best work the authority of major arts” (Ousby 1988: 982).
Nevertheless, it was Vanity Fair that made Thackeray’s name. In terms of Vanity Fair
being a historical novel, Peter Shillingsburg turns our attention to the fact that
“Thackeray’s knowledge of history was tremendous and his view of his own time was

richly entwined with his view of history. The fictional worlds of his imagination coexist
with historical and contemporary worlds” (Shillingsburg 2001: 5-6). It is said that
“Vanity Fair established Thackeray as Dickens’s major rival” (Krueger 2003:338). It was
because “Thackeray was once considered the great counterpart to Charles Dickens in the
mid- Victorian novel. Dickens conveyed a panorama of the lower half of society and
Thackeray of the upper half” (Wynne – Davis, 1994). Although critical of society,
Thackeray remained basically conservative with his writing in the realistic tradition and
distinguished from the exaggerations and sentimentality. Also, Robert Gower underscores
that “the satirical novels of William Makepeace Thackeray show the upper classes of his
day to be dominated by materialistic interests. Like Dickens, Thackeray was opposed to
utilitarian beliefs and deplored the absence of spontaneous affection in daily life. He was,
however, more resistant to Romantic influence than Dickens and looked for support in an
eighteenth- century sense of proportion and elegance” (Gower 1999:403). His aim was to
present the society the way it truly was. Thackeray himself once said that “To describe it
otherwise than it seems to me would be falsehood in that calling in which it has pleased
heaven to place me; treason to that conscience which says that men are weak; that truth
must be told; that faults must be owned; that pardon must be prayed for; and that love
reigns supreme over all” (Benjamin 2009:210). Critics often praise Thackeray for his
ability to satirize the whole humanity while retaining a light touch. Also some say that
“Thackeray’s works hearken back to earlier fictional modes but also anticipate some
postmodern literary techniques. The critic James Phelan argues that Thackeray’s narrative
voices are “characteristically complex” (Krueger 2003:339). In the book William
Makepeace Thackeray: Literary Life by Peter Shillingburg the image emerges of
Thackeray as an intellectual and demanding author, sensitive to the complexities of
contemporary Victorian life, and challenging middleclass Victorian assumptions about
identity and class. Also, he is seen as a sophisticated writer when his use of narrative
voice is concerned, and critical of his contemporaries’ superficial use of stereotypes and
conventions. Thus, as Pat Rogers suggests, “ reading Thackeray we have to be
perpetually alert not just to his comic variety, but to a questioning intelligence and a
narrative method which bids us scrutinize the very nature of the story and its telling”
(2001:349). Moreover, W.E Henley notices that in Thackeray’s style “his manner is the

perfection of conversational writing. Graceful yet vigorous; adorably artificial yet
incomparably sound; touched with modishness yet informed with distinction; easily and
happily rhythmical yet full of colour and quick with malice and with meaning; instinct
with urbanity and instinct with chart, it is a type of high-bred English, a climax of literary
art”. All those remarks confirm the uniqueness of Thackeray as an author. In addition to
that, Thackeray is considered to be principal satirist of the nineteenth century. The
Penguin Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory gives the definition of a
satirist: “the satirist is a kind of self-appointed guardian of standards, ideals, and truth; of
moral as well as aesthetic values. He is a man (women satirists are very rare) who takes
it upon himself to correct, censure, and ridicule the follies and vices of society and thus to
bring contempt and derision upon aberrations from a desirable and civilized norm. Thus
satire is a kind of protest, a sublimation and refinement of anger and indignation”
(Cuddon 1999:780).
Thackeray’s role as a satirist is widely seen especially in his leading novel Vanity Fair,
where his satire often takes the form of irony. His wish was to reconcile and improve the
society, nevertheless, he is far from serious moralizing and expresses his opinions using
light humour. It is because he saw himself as the writer serving necessary function of
teaching and amusing.
2.2 The condition of Britain in the early nineteenth century
2.2.1 Social and economic condition of Britain in the early
nineteenth century
The early nineteenth century in Britain was the time of enormous changes
concerning politics, economy and society. It established Britain very powerful and self-
confident empire that held more production than any other country. As David McDowall

notices, “Britain used this empire to control large areas of the world. The empire gave the
British a feeling of their own importance” (2006: 131). The changes that in a result
created powerful Britain should be enumerated.
In terms of economic changes and social changes, the country was transformed by
the Industrial Revolution which began in the eighteenth century, and which is now
considered as a turning point in human history, since it influenced almost every aspect of
daily life. The impact of industrialization, which started in Britain and was spread around
the whole of Europe, was enormous.
There are numerous reasons for occurrences of the Industrial Revolution in Great
Britain and the massive impact it had over other countries. To start with, in comparison to
other European countries, British society was more willing to accept some changes. As a
result of Enlightenment philosophies, their receptiveness towards new steps in improving
their lives was greater than in other societies. Also, the crucial issue was the end of
feudalism which opened the way for the growth of social and institutional changes.
Furthermore, another important factor was that Britain received enormous financial and
natural sources support from the overseas colonies they had previously established. Due
to this fact Britain was able to produce and use developing technologies more effectively.
Also it is believed that Britain was able to take advantage of its geographical features.
First of all, it was an island separated from the mainland, with dense population on small
area. Thus, the available labour power was strong and effective. In addition, the land of
England was rich in natural supplies such as coal, iron, tin, copper, lead, limestone and
water power, which had its consequences in excellent conditions for industrial
development. Last, but not least, crucial factor favouring the Industrial Revolution in
Britain was the fact that it helped Britain to have been the only European nation
remained safe from the financial and economic ravage of Napoleonic wars; thus, it
accelerated the onset of technological development. Professor Kenneth O. Morgan
explains that:
For the first time in the history of the world a country was being
revolutionized by its industries. Iron, coal and textiles were changing the
pattern of the country’s wealth and population. Lancashire and Yorkshire
replaced East Anglia and the south- west of England as the major cloth-
making regions. The iron industry moved north from Sussex and the

Forest of Dean to the coalfields of the midlands, Scotland and Wales. The
regions which had traditionally been the poor, underpopulated fringes of
British life were transformed; they became the crowded centers of wealth
and vitality.
Britain’s industries poured out cannon, muskets and
ammunition to help her to win the war against France. Other nations
bought her textiles, pottery, iron-ware and even steam engines. (2006:
287).
Such an increase in trade and wealth resulted in new patterns of working. In the
beginning, the majority of population worked in agriculture and related industries,
however, the number of people living in towns had begun to increase. This led to
enormous urbanization and the rise of new cities. Nevertheless, it resulted in
overcrowded and unhealthy cities, as proper drains and water supplies were still limited
in the beginning of nineteenth century. Professor Kenneth O. Morgan explains the
situation as follows:
Despite the harsh working conditions, families flocked to work in the
developing industries. Wages were higher and employment more regular
than in the countryside. However, their new homes in the growing centers
of the new industries were often as grim as the worst factories. The long
hours demanded by the owners left little time to walk long distances each
morning, so they lived crammed together, close to the factories or
workshops. Many young newcomers were forced to settle for cheap
lodging house. In Leeds such houses averaged nine beds to a room and, it
was reported, five lodgers to a bed. Water came from taps at streets
corners and sewage was piled high against house walls. (Morgan
2006:292-3)
Due to such conditions the epidemics of different diseases such as typhus, dysentery,
measles, influenza and others killing thousands of people come as no surprise.
What was important, the living conditions in the course of nineteenth century started to
improve. Government and local plans aimed to make towns cleaner places, and the
construction of housing was innovated to prevent people from living in cramped streets.
It was because “towns began to appoint health officers and to provide proper drains and
clear water, which quickly reduced the level of disease, particularly cholera. These health
officers also tried to make sure that new housing was less crowded. (…) The better town

councils provided parks in newly built areas, as well as libraries, public baths where
people could wash and even concert halls.” (McDowall 2006: 140) Also, medicine
developed, changing the hygiene awareness and prolonging the life expectancy.
Nevertheless, due to the Industrial Revolution workers died because of diseases spread in
workplaces, such as chest diseases in the mines, typhoid and cholera.
However, thanks to industrialization manual labour was transited towards machine- based
manufacturing. There was mechanization of industries, development of iron making
techniques and also the introduction of steam power, which resulted in the increase of
production capacity. Moreover, roads and railways were highly improved, and colonial
expansion led to introducing canals which enabled international trade to flourish. All
these facts improved the economic state of the country. McDowall mentions that “Britain
enjoyed a strong place in European councils after the defeat of Napoleon. Its strength was
not in a larger population (…) It lay in industry and trade, and the navy which protected
this trade.” (McDowall 2006: 131) To protect its trading position, Britain kept its navy
ships in almost every ocean in the world, which was possible due to having taken and
occupied a number of places during the war against Napoleon. Having obtained such a
strong position, Britain attempted to develop its trading posts and to control world traffic
and world market to its own advantage, so that other countries could be prevented from
expansion. It is explained by McDowall that “Britain wanted two main things in Europe:
a ‘balance of power’ which would prevent any single nation from becoming too strong,
and a free market in which its own industrial and trade superiority would give Britain a
clear advantage.” (McDowall 2006: 131) This established Britain’s empire strength. The
crucial issue in terms of expanding British power was taking control in Indian
subcontinent, where British were able to gain wealth and power.
As far as social changes are concerned, the Industrial Revolution made the middle
class a leading power in the society. Middle class consisted so far from merchants, traders
and farmers. Since ordinary people were given an opportunity for being employed in new
mines and factories due to industrialization, there came the rapid growth in number of
industrialists and factory owners. With the growth of industry, middle class people were
able to develop their own businesses and improve their status in the society. McDowall
rightly states:

In the nineteenth century the middle class grew more quickly than ever
before and included greater differences of wealth, social position and kind
of work. It included those who worked in the professions such as the
church, the law, medicine, the civil service, the diplomatic service,
merchant banking and the army and the navy. It also included the
commercial classes, however, who were the real creators of wealth in
country. Industrialists were often ‘self-made’ men who came from poor
beginnings. They believed in hard work, a regular style of life and being
careful with the money. This class included both the very successful and
rich industrialists and the small shopkeepers and office workers of the
growing towns and suburbs. (2006: 139)
Nevertheless, in spite of growth of the middle class, it was British aristocracy that
dominated in the Parliament. Gentlemen did not deal with manual working; usually they
held the position in law, politics or they were priests. The early nineteenth century Britain
was an oligarchy, which means that only minority of men were able to vote. However, it
is working class that established majority of society.
The Industrial Revolution had other effects on society, namely, due to innovative
steam power used in improvement of processes of printing, people encountered massive
expansion of book publishing and newspapers, which reinforced the flourishing of
literacy and rising demand for mass political participation. Increased number of literate
people resulted in the development of literary genres, especially the novel. Furthermore,
people were able to afford to send their children to public schools. These schools were
aimed to give girls good education as far as proper behavior and housekeeping, they were
taught how to sing, play musical instruments, sew and embroider. Upper class girls
received their education from the governess, which was popular work for women at that
time. In terms of boys, “schools aimed not only to give boys good education, but to train
them in leadership by taking them away from home and making their living conditions
hard. These public schools provided many of the officers for the armed forces, the
colonial administration and the civil service.” (McDowall 2006: 140)

2.2.2 Political condition of Britain in the early nineteenth century
As far as political state of the early nineteenth century England is concerned, the
major issue to consider is the war with Napoleonic France. Napoleonic wars resulted in
overrunning many of continental Europe countries and Britain also was under the threat
as Napoleon’s wish was to conquer all the Europe. Britain with its power was the one
country that invested great amounts of resources and money in fighting back the French,
especially with the use of Royal Navy which was irreplaceable in winning against French
fleet and taking back occupied colonies. In coalition with European armies Britain gained
fame by defeating Napoleon in the battle of Waterloo in Belgium on 18 June 1815.
The battle of Waterloo was considered a crucial point in the history of the
nineteenth century, and it is main historical event dealt with in the novel Vanity Fair by
William Makepeace Thackeray.
The battle of Waterloo was fought between French who were commanded by the
Emperor Napoleon and the Allied armies that included the British army under the
command of Duke of Wellington and Prussian army led by Gebhard von Blücher. The
combined armies were called Seventh Coalition which was created by many states
opposed to Napoleon’s expansion to break French power. After brief absence due to
forced abdication, Napoleon came back motivated by unstable economic and social
condition of France and unpopularity of Louis XVIII. He was wishing to regain his
power and make France European Empire. The mightiest forces of Europe, England and
Prussia, were to put an end to Napoleonic rule. Nevertheless, the victory was not instant
and easy to come. Professor Kenneth O. Morgan comments on the situation:
On 18 June 1815 Wellington’s 67,000 men faced Napoleon’s army of
72,000 near the village of Waterloo in Belgium.
The battle lasted from midday to late evening, ‘the most
desperate business I ever was in’ said Wellington. (…)
A French victory seemed likely, until General Blücher’s
Prussian army arrived. The vital moment came when Napoleon’s Imperial
Guard attacked but were forced to retreat. ‘La Garde recule!’ gasped the
rest of the French army in disbelief. From that moment the battle was won
but it had been, in Wellington’s words, ‘the nearest run thing you ever saw

in your life’. (2006: 284)
The tremendous victory was even more relieving due to treaties negotiated by Britain’s
Foreign Secretary, Viscont Castlereagh. Professor Morgan enumerates the benefits Britain
had gained as it follows:
Castlereagh built up strong buffer states on France’s borders to prevent her
from further military adventures. He also insisted that France was not
severely punished. He did not want an angry France declaring war once
more, in revenge. Further afield, Britain’s trade had been successfully
defended and the empire had grown, giving new opportunities for
colonization and trade. Britain gained Malta- a major base in the
Mediterranean- the islands of Trinidad and Tobago in the West Indies, the
Cape of Good, Hope and Ceylon- two vital staging posts in the trade
routes to the east. (Morgan 2006: 285)
The victory of Allied army over the rule of Emperor Napoleon confirmed Britain as the
greatest trading, industrial and military nation in the world in the nineteenth century.

Chapter III
Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray as a historical novel
3.1 General notes on Vanity Fair
Vanity Fair, written by W.M. Thackeray in years 1847-8, was first published in 20
monthly issues. The action of the book is set a generation earlier than its author lived.
The novel begins with two young ladies, Amelia Sedley, of good family, and Rebecca
Sharp, an orphan, leaving Miss Pinkerton's academy on Chiswick Mall to live out their
lives in ‘Vanity Fair’ — the world of social climbing and search for wealth. Amelia does
not esteem the values of ‘Vanity Fair’ while Rebecca seems to care for nothing else.
Becky’s first attempts to enter the upper class include inducing Joseph Sedley, Amelia's
brother, to marry her. However, the plan is foiled by George Osborne who intends to
marry Amelia and does not want a governess for a sister-in-law. Rebecca takes a position
as governess at Queen's Crawley, and secretly marries Rawdon Crawley, second son of
Sir Pitt Crawley. Due to his marriage, Rawdon's rich aunt disinherits him. A friend of
George Osborne, William Dobbin helps George to marry Amelia, after George's father
has forbidden the marriage on account of the Sedley's loss of fortune. Because of
George's marriage, old Osborne disinherits him. Both young couples endeavor to live
without sufficient funds. When George dies at Waterloo, Amelia would have starved if it
was not for William Dobbin who anonymously contributed to her welfare. Joseph goes
back to his post in India, claiming such valor at Waterloo and meanwhile both Rebecca
and Amelia give birth to sons. Becky, disappointed of her social status, becomes the
favorite of the great Lord Steyne, she accumulates some money. When Rawdon discovers
Rebecca in her treachery, he is more than convinced that money means more to her than
he or the son whom she has always hated. He refuses to see her again and takes a post in
Coventry Island, where unfortunately he dies of yellow fever. Amelia gives up her son to
his grandfather Osborne due to the fact that her parents are starving and she can neither

provide for them nor give little George what a child needs. When William Dobbin comes
back from the service, he convinces old Osborne to make a will leaving George half of
his fortune and providing for Amelia. Meanwhile, Rebecca, having lost the respectability
of a husband, wanders in Europe for a couple of years. Finally, she meets Joseph, George,
Amelia, and William on the Continent. Rebecca once again tries to ensnare Joseph.
Although eventually she does not marry him, she manages to swindle all his money. At
the end of the book Rebecca has the money necessary to live in Vanity Fair and she
appears to be respectable. William eventually has won Amelia’s love due to Rebecca’s
explaination to Amelia that, her first love George Osborne wasn't worthy. Little Rawdon,
upon the death of his uncle Pitt and his cousin Pitt, becomes the heir of Queen's Crawley.
As far as the title is concerned, Thackeray's original title was Pen and Pencil Sketches
of English Society, which indicated his intention to describe a succession of social
situations. As he was writing his novel, the idea of society as a Vanity Fair came to him,
and he changed both his plan for the novel and the title. Vanity Fair refers to a stop along
the pilgrim's progress: a never-ending fair held in a town called Vanity, which is meant to
represent man's sinful attachment to worldly things. The novel is now considered a
classic, and has inspired several film adaptations, one of which is discussed later in the
thesis.
In her An Outline of History of English Literature Liliana Sikorska informs readers
that
“Vanity Fair (1847-1848) is considered his masterpiece. The title of the
book comes from John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress. It is subtitled “a
novel without hero”, which presupposes a larger perspective and a more
comprehensive view of society. Yet, the spectrum of the society he
describes is limited to the middle and the upper classes. Bunyan dealt
with the sins of individual using allegory, whereas Thackeray portrays
male and female vices providing a poignant social satire.” (2002:280).
The reason for subtitling the novel as a novel without hero is also explained by another
critic of Thackeray’s writing, Arnold Kettle, who claims that
The core of Vanity Fair is not a developing emotional situation
involving the intense experience of a limited number of characters. We
do not get ‘inside’ one particular character and see the action through
the imprint upon his consciousness, nor do we become so closely

involved in a concrete situation (seeing it, so to speak, backward and
forward and from many angles) that we have a sense of encompassing
the whole complex of forces that makes such a situation vital.
(2008:156).
Due to such a multi-plot, the novel was innovative. The unique subtitle may be also
understood by readers that actually there was nothing heroic about the society Thackeray
ventured to depict from the point of view of the realist of his times. It is said that:
Thackeray saw how capitalism and imperialism with their emphasis on
wealth, material goods and ostentation had corrupted society and how
the inherited social order and institutions, including the aristocracy, the
church, the military, the foreign service, regarded only family, rank,
power and appearance. These values morally crippled and emotionally
bankrupted every social class from servants through the middle class to
the aristocracy. High and low, individuals were selfish and incapable of
loving.
That is to imply the fact that heroism actually did not exist. Although the lack of heroism
may seem disappointing, in his review of the book Edwin Percy Whipple convinces that
“Yet the fascination of the book is indisputable, and it is due to a variety of causes besides
its mere exhibition of the worldly side of life. Among these, the perfect intellectual
honesty of the writer, the sad or satirical sincerity with which he gives in his evidence
against human nature, is the most prominent”.
Due to the fact that during the Victorian period a novel became a dominant form
of literary writing and Vanity Fair is considered to be one of the classic example of the
era, some general characteristics of Victorian novel should be listed. To begin with,
writers became more realistic and began using the realities of everyday life in their work
feeling that they had social and moral responsibility to present society the way it really
functioned. Moreover, social and economic conditions were used as the themes,
especially reasons for women getting married, as well as their plight and fight for
equality (see: Armstrong 2001: 97). Also, there was a concept of authorial intrusion and
idea to addressing to the reader. It is seen when in the book W.M. Thackeray often
interrupts his narrative to express his own opinion and after a while exclaims “Dear
Reader” to inform or remind some other issues. Here is a short example from the book

itself, where Thackeray comments on Sedley’s loss of fortune: “You and I, my dear
reader, may drop into this condition one day; for have not many of our friends attained it?
Our luck may fail” (Thackeray 1992: 522). Furthermore, it is the narrator who is
omniscient and is able to distinguish what is right or wrong by making comments on the
plot. Last but not least, Victorian novel features include setting of the story in the city as a
symbol of industrial civilization, anonymous lives and lost identity. Thus, Vanity Fair’s
setting moves from London to Brighton, to the continent including Paris, Rome Brussels
and "Pumpernickel," a small German principality.
As far as the technique and style of Vanity Fair is concerned, one can easily notice
that the story is presented by summarized narrative, where it is an author who makes
appropriate comments on the characters’ behaviour in case a reader doubts how to judge
an individual. Usually Thackeray simply describes what happens, however, sometimes he
refrains from telling the reader directly how the character feels or thinks. Rather the
author describes what situation is instead of showing it. As an example, in case when
Becky and George talk about how Becky is going to regain Miss Crawley’s favour for
Rawdon and when Becky amuses George by telling him she will find out when her
maid’s have a bath, dive in under her awning and ask for reconciliation, W.M.Thackeray
does not say Amelia is jealous. Instead, he writes: “Amelia was making a fool of herself
in an absurd hysterical manner, and retired to her own room to whimper in private”
(Thackeray 1992: 321). Also, it is often for the author to call his characters either ironic
or patronizing names such as “our poor Amelia” or “our darling Rebecca”. Such
expressions are rather used ironically. As for the sentence structure in the novel, it may
range from a few words to a whole paragraph. This is used not to make a reader bored,
and it is also done by slowing or quickening the pace of the plot. Thackeray's concern
with time has caused him to be called the novelist of memory. The action is set in the
past, and the narrator compares and contrasts the past with the present as he moves
between them; occasionally he tells us a future event or outcome. The characters'
memories of the past help to characterize them in the present. Thackeray also shows the
effect which the passage of time has on the characters. His concern with time is reflected
in the structure; the narrator occasionally interrupts the chronology, jumps back in time,
and returns to the point where he stopped the chronology. Moreover, witty dialogues and

dramatic actions are alternated with essays and narration to make the whole story
readable.
3.2 Vanity Fair as a historical novel
In a historical novel one can find well- defined historical context which sets the
background for the plot events and adventures of characters both fictional and actual.
Moreover, there is an attempt to depict accurately the mentality, customs, social,
economic and political states of the period. Since Vanity Fair is considered to be a
historical novel, some research has been made to prove it.
3.2.1 Time frames in Vanity Fair
Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray was published in serial form in
London in years 1847- 1848.
Time frames are not exact. The action of the novel is assumed to begin in the
early nineteenth century, although there is no specific date, however, the very first
sentence of the first chapter only indicates “the present century was in its teens”
(Thackeray,1992, 1). The plot of the book continues to develop with its peak in historical
event, namely the invasion of Napoleon on Europe and Waterloo battle in 1815. Around
the same year the two heroines of the book, Rebecca Sharp and Amelia Sedley, give birth
to their sons. In further development of the story readers meet boys at school age, and in
final chapters one can learn about Amelia’s travels with her child who is already grown-
up. Thus, it can be assumed that the action closes somewhere in the thirties of the
nineteenth century

3.2.2 Description of mentality and social state of the early
nineteenth century in Vanity Fair
Walter Allen claims that “ no novelist of genius has given us an analysis of man of
society based on so trivial view of life” (1960: 176). The prominent novel of the author
embraces some crucial themes of these times. The most essential is one suggested in the
title, that is vanity. Generally, vanity is understood as excessive pride in one’s appearance,
abilities, qualities or achievements, as well the term is synonymous to lack of real value,
worthlessness, hollowness. This vanity, attached to each character to different extents, is
strongly connected with another theme of the book, that is society’s values. The book is
actually saturated with the vanity of some characters described as social climbers, great
example of whom is Becky Sharp. She is obsessed with the idea of gaining higher social
status which provides the position and wealth. To satisfy her desires she is able to marry
anyone who has money on his disposal, since her slyness and greediness is stronger than
ability to love. Even if one of her plans fails, she quickly comes with another ideas to
achieve her goals. Her way insensate of thinking is presented in the following passage:
If the mere chance of becoming a baronet’s daughter can procure a lady
such a homage in the world, surely, surely we may respect the agonies
of a young woman who has lost the opportunity of becoming a
baronet’s wife. Who would have dreamed of Lady Crawley dying so
soon? She was one of those sickly women that might have lasted these
ten years- Rebecca thought to herself, in all the woes of repentance- and
I might have been my lady! I might have led that old man whither I
would. I might have thanked Mrs. Bute for her patronage, and Mr. Pitt
for his insufferable condescension. I would have had the town house
newly furnished and decorated. I would have had the handsomest
carriage in London, and a box at the opera; and I would have been
presented next season. All this might have been; and now- now all was
doubt and mystery.
But Rebecca was a young lady of too much resolution and energy of
character to permit herself much useless and unseemly sorrow for the
irrevocable past; so, having devoted only the proper portion of regret to

it, she wisely turned her whole attention towards the future which was
now vastly more important to her.
(Thackeray, 1992, 197).
One of the observers of Becky’s transformations from an orphan to a lady, Mrs. Sedley ,
comments on her behaviour by saying: "I had thought her a mere social climber. I see
now she's a mountaineer." (Thackeray 1992:). Such an ironic comment suggests that
some people are capable of sacrifices and plotting intrigues to achieve a position in the
society. Moreover, another characters of the story, as for example Mrs. Bute Crawley, are
aware of the girls mischievousness since “she knew Rebecca to be too clever, and
spirited, and desperate woman to submit without a struggle” (Thackeray 1992: 240). It
is clear that the author does not underestimate the necessity of having a home, food,
clothes; rather he exposes the cruelty, the futility and the deception of making possessions
and having power as the only life aim. Individual’s actions and behaviour or particular
situations described by Thackeray are to generalize the values of society; the connection
between individual’s value and society’s value is clear. Regarding others as commodities
or objects to be used for one's own ends is widespread, almost universal, in this society,
not only within marriage. For instance, Miss Crawley, the old spinster, uses Miss Briggs,
Becky, and her relatives to amuse herself, she enjoys having fun from the stories they tell
or make fun of their behaviours, however, she does not hesitate to leave them in case they
no longer suit her needs.
As far as the issue of marriage in nineteenth century is concerned, Julia Kent explains
that there was “the view that the Victorian world was divided into “separate spheres”, a
private domestic space regulated by women and a public market operated by man” (2008:
127). She also informs that Vanity Fair explores the view that all forms of emotion and
motivation may be evaluated according to economic calculus. According to W.M.
Thackeray’s descriptions, marriage is clearly is money- oriented and status- conscious.
What is worse, it appears that few marriages are truly happy. Marriage of Sir Pitt Crawley
may serve as an example of representing the marriage as a relation between humans and
objects. In the chapter entitled “Family Portraits”, the narrator tells the story of Sir Pitt
Crawley and his second marriage which is portrayed as a union made of furniture rather
than of feeling. When it comes to the second Lady Crawley, it is the narrator who asks to
“Let us down the items of her happiness” (Thackeray 1992: 101) and he goes on to

designate new Lady Crawley as one of these items, as he says “her roses faded out of her
cheeks, and the pretty freshness left her figure after the birth of a couple of children, and
she became a mere machine in her husband’s house, of no more use than the late Lady
Crawley’s old grand piano” (Thackeray 1992: 102). Kent sadly concludes that “the
marriage market would appear to mechanize middle-class sentiment, transforming a
husband into a factory worker, his wife into machine, and their sexual labour into a form
of industrial production” (2008: 135).
In the early nineteenth century it was crucial for young girls to get married to preserve the
future for themselves, as one can observe “Becky Sharp’s remarkable success in using
marriage to negotiate her social ascent” (Kent, 2008, 129). It was often that the decision
belonged to parents rather than children. It is explained in the following passage:
If Miss Rebecca Sharp had determined in her heart upon making the
conquest of this big beau, I don’t think, ladies, we have any right to
blame her; for though the task of husband hunting is generally, and with
becoming modesty, entrusted by young persons to their mammas,
recollect that Miss Sharp had no kind parent to arrange these delicate
matters for her, and if she did not get a husband for herself, there was
no o ne else in the wide world who would take the trouble off her hands
(…) is it sheer love of their species, and an unadulterated wish to see
young people happy and dancing? Psha! They want to marry their
daughters; and, as honest Mrs. Sedley has, in the depths of her kind
heart, already arranged a score of little schemes for the settlement of her
Amelia, so also had our beloved but unprotected Rebecca determined to
do her very best to secure the husband, who was even more necessary
for her than for her friend (Thackeray, 1992, 24-25).
Once again the importance of getting married is underscored since it brings the respect,
and the urgency to be respected strongly echoes in Becky’s famous remark upon
considering her marriage options: “I think I could be a good woman if I had five thousand
a year” (Thackeray 1992:575).
Furthermore, the importance of social status is shown in the case of Amelia Sedley and
George Osborne. In this case there is also an issue of nineteenth century attitude towards
marriage. Although Amelia truly loves George and their marriage was set in their
childhood, she is considered by his father to be wealthy not enough to become his son’s
wife. This attitude is clearly shown during father’s and son’s conversation:

“But to return to the other business about Amelia: why shouldn’t you
marry higher than a stockbroker’s daughter, George, that’s what I want
to know?”
“It’s family business, sir”, says George, cracking filberts. “You and Mr.
Sedley made the match a hundred years ago”.
“I don’t deny it; but people’s positions alter, sir. I don’t deny that Sedley
made my fortune- or rather put me in the way of acquiring, by my own
talents and genius, that proud position which, I may say, I occupy in the
tallow trade and the City of London. I’ve shown my gratitude to
Sedley; and he’s tried it of late, sir, as my cheque-book can show.
George! I tell you in confidence I don’t like the looks of Mr. Sedley’s
affairs. My chief clerk, Mr. Chopper, does not like look of them, and
he’s an old file, and knows change as well as any man in London.
Hulker &Bullock are looking shy at him. He’s been dabbling on his
own account, I fear. They say the Jeune amelie was his, which was
taken by the Yankee privateer Molasses. And that’s flat- unless I see
Amelia’s ten thousand down you don’t marry her. I’ll have no lame
duck’s daughter in my family”. (Thackeray 1992: 161-162).
Therefore, knowing the attitude, lovers marry secretly with the help of Dobbin and
consequently are rejected by the old Osborne. Also, the Sedleys eventually lose their
status after the loss of their fortune. After George’s death Amelia is so poor that she is
forced to give away her only son under his grandfather’s care, who still disregards the
widow and her family due to their position. Another case of misalliance concerns
Rebecca and Rawdon Crawley who, by their secret marriage, exposed themselves to aunt
Matilda’s anger and disappointment. Although initially she is charmed by Becky and
feels happy to hear the girl is married, eventually, she is furious when Mrs. Bute reveals
that the husband is her nephew, as one can see:
“She’s married to whom?” cries the spinster in a nervous fury.
“To- to a relation of-“
“she refused Mr. Pitt,” cried the victim. “Speak at once, don’t drive me
mad.”
“Oh, Ma’am – prepare her, Miss Briggs- she’s married to Rawdon
Crawley.”
“Rawdon married- Rebecca- governess- nobody!” (Thackeray 1992:
208).
Once again the vanity and importance of social status is underscored in the novel.
As far as the title suggest, the themes include heroism, or rather lack of one. No one in

the book may serve as an example to follow and the whole impression of society’s value
appear gloomy and disappointing.
Another theme dealt with in the novel is selfishness and inability to love. Once
again character of Becky Sharp serves as a good example. As her first husband, Rawdon
Crawley, goes off to the Battle of Waterloo, Becky muses that she will be free to marry a
wealthier man if Rawdon is killed. When he is not killed, Becky makes the best of it,
using his aristocratic pedigree to win entrance to the social circles she seeks and to help
her avoid paying her bills. Meanwhile, she uses other men, especially Lord Steyne, to get
what she cannot get from her husband (money), carrying on public relationships that
humiliate him, and ignoring him and their son. Furthermore, Amelia Sedley is far from
being unselfish. She is self-centered enough to accept Dobbin's devotion and his generous
gifts without thinking of his feelings and without even expressing much gratitude. One of
selfish characters is George Osborne who is loved by Amelia, but actually he does not
requite her feeling and spends much time indulging himself. Almost each character of
Vanity Fair is selfish to different extent.
In addition to that, novel concerns the married and parental relationships, which,
due to ubiquitous egotism, selfishness, folly, and false values of individuals and of
society, there are few happy marriages, as well as relationship child- parent is strongly
affected. Seldom were marriages based on love, rather it was cool calculation of balance
of gains and losses. It was often procedure to set up marriages between wealthy families
in the early childhood of future spouses like it was in the case of George and Amelia.
Another example sets the story of sir Pitt Crawley:
His first marriage with the daughter of the noble Binkie had been made
under the auspices of his Barents; and as he often told Lady Crawley in
her lifetime she was such a confounded quarrelsome high-bred jade that
when she died he was hanged if he would ever take another of her sort,
at her ladyship’s demise he kept his promise, and selected for a second
wife Miss rose Dawson.(…) He had his pretty rose, and what more
need a man require than to please himself? So he used to get drunk
every night; to beat his pretty Rose sometimes; to leave her at
Hampshire when he went to London for parliamentary sessions
(Thackeray 1992: 100-101).
From the description it appears that hardly ever were the set marriages happy and what is

more, usually it was man who was in charge of everything. A woman was supposed to be
submissive and willing to fulfill husband’s ordinances, as well as to take care of the house
and bringing up children with the help of servants and governesses. Married for love or
reason, it was always a way to avoid poverty or increase family wealth, and marriages
between the lovers from different social classes were seen highly improper and
incongruous.
As far as parents and children’s relationships are concerned, one can observe various
attitudes. The aim of each parent was to provide a child with proper future, thus, young
women were sent to school where they were thoroughly prepared for their future role as a
wife and mother and young men were sent to schools to acquire knowledge and were
prepared to manage family’s heritage. As it was mentioned before, often parents
associated marriage to be the most profitable for the child and family. The children were
supposed to deeply respect their wills and any kind of disregard was equal with
disinheritance.
Since Vanity Fair is a historical novel, it largely embraces the economic and
social state of the period depicted. The dominant class depicted in the novel is middle-
class which is strongly affected by capitalism, new economic system in which the means
of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned. Due to colonization
that Britain had conducted in previous years, people became wealthier by using them.
Especially it was East India Company that was profitable. As example in the novel serves
the older brother of Amelia Sedley, Joseph, who is described in the following way:
Joseph Sedley was twelve years older than his sister Amelia. He was in
the East India Company’s Civil Service, and his name appeared, at the
period of which we write, in the Bengal division of the East India
Register, as collector of Boogley Wollah, an honourable and lucrative
post, as everybody knows: in order to know to what higher post Joseph
rose in the service the reader is referred to the same periodical.
Boogley Wollah is situated in a fine, lonely, marshy, jungly
district, famous for snipe-shooting, and where not unfrequently you
may flush a tiger. Ramgunge, where there is a magistrate, is only forty
miles off, and there is a cavalry station about thirty miles further; (…)
He had lived for about eight years of his life, quite alone, at this
charming place, scarcely seeing a Christian face except twice a year,
when the detachment arrived to carry off the revenues which he had

collected, to Calcutta.
Luckily, at this time he caught a liver complaint, for the cure of
which he returned to Europe and which was the source of great comfort
and amusement to him in his native country. He did not live with his
family while in London, but had lodgings of his own, like gay young
bachelor. Before he went to India he was too young to partake of the
delightful pleasures of a man about town, and plunged into them on his
return with considerable assiduity. (Thackeray 1992: 25-26)
Therefore, he was a perfect example of upper middle-class man who gained his fortune
due to the use of benefits of colonies and trade market that was developing at that time.
To attach this to the whole society of, also, development is proportionate to the
accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market. Thus, the predominant
middle class value is money which makes the whole society mercantile and money-
oriented. The consequences of this focus are spiritual and intellectual emptiness, a twisted
morality, and corrupted emotions, particularly the inability to love and an incapacity for
friendship. The great example in the book is Mr. Osborne. Having been long-time friend
of Mr. Sedley and having arranged their children’s marriage, Mr. Osborne bitterly turns
his back on old friend after his unfortunate losing of money. As it was mentioned before,
he refuses to support George and Amelia’s marriage, not to mention the fact that his utter
anger and disapproval towards his son is intransigent and long- lasting. His daughters
wonder if he is ever going to forgive him, even when George dies and leaves behind a
young widow with little child. It is seen in the situation when Captain Dobbin visits old
Osborne, as is described in the following:
“I am here as his closest friend” the Major resumed, “and the executor
of his will. He made it before he went into action. Are you aware how
small his means are, and of the straitened circumstances of his widow?’
“I don’t know his widow, sir”, Osborne said. “Let her go back to her
father”. But the gentleman whom he addressed was determined to
remain in a good temper, and went on without heeding the interruption.
“Do you know, sir, Mrs. Osborne’s condition? Her life and her reason
almost have been shaken by the blow which has fallen on her. It is very
doubtful whether she will rally. There is a chance left for her, however,
and it is about this I came to speak to you. She will be a mother soon.
Will you visit the parent’s offence upon the child’s head? Or will you
forgive the child for poor George’s sake?”

Osborne broke out into a rhapsody of self-praise and imprecations- by
the first, excusing himself to his own conscience for his conduct; by the
second, exaggerating the undutifulness of George. No father in all
England could have behaved more generously to a son who had
rebelled against him so wickedly. He had died without even so much as
confessing he was wrong. Let him take the consequences of his
undutifulness and folly. As for himself, Mr. Osborne was a man of his
word. He had sworn never to speak to that woman or to recognize her
as his son’s wife. “and that’s what you may tell her,” he concluded, with
an oath; “and that’s what I will stick to the last day of my life.”
(Thackeray 1992: 484-485).
From this passage it appears that the representant of capitalist society is dreary and
soulless, who is only able to display his wealth and lack of love and who uses his children
as objects to fulfill his own needs, particularly George, his favorite child, is to fulfill his
social ambitions by marrying wealth.
Moreover, the author of the novel deals with the volatility of the economic system and
the unpredictability of financial markets, which is illustrated by Mr. Sedley's unpredicted
bankruptcy which is some way excluded him from society.
As far as economic status is concerned, it was a common procedure in the nineteenth
century to live upon the credit which was the only way out for those who do not have
fortunes but want to live a fashionable life. Credit is such an important feature of society
that Thackeray devotes two chapters on "How to Live Well on Nothing a Year" (Chapters
XXXVI and XXXVII). Here the attention is focused on Becky’s and Rawdon’s sharp
practices which refer to other individuals who also live on credit and who typify the
middle and upper classes. Rebecca and Rawdon, settled now in Mayfair, where they
entertain all the time, yet have no money, except what Rawdon makes by gambling. It is
Rebecca who makes Crawley sell the Guards and return to England in the pursue of the
fortune. Skipping out her hotel bills, she arranges with her husband's creditors to settle
for a percentage of what is owed. On coming back to England they hire a house from Mr.
Raggles, who eventually ends up in Fleet Prisons due to Becky’s intrigues leading to his
downfall and inability to pay his debts. Thackeray moralizes on how the gentry rob the
servants. Rawdon and Rebecca patronize all Miss Crawley's former tradesmen and pay
nobody. When it turns out that Rawdon’s brother inherited aunt’s money, Becky is ready

to do everything to ingratiate into his good graces and hopes for Lady Jane to sponsor her
in London society. From Thackeray’s descriptions it appears that what really credit is in
‘Vanity Fair’ is spending other people’s money without any attention to how much misery
such a defaulting causes. Once again the hypocrisy and selfishness of society is exposed
since people willingly attend small parties arranged by Becky although they keep
gossiping about the way she pays for them.
All things considered, some of themes raised throughout the novel can be applied
to modern world. However the attitudes towards marriage and upbringing of the children
have by all odds changed, the vanity and selfishness of human nature stay timeless.
3.2.3 Historical events in Vanity Fair
The core of historical novel are events of both fictional and historical figures set
in well defined historical context. As for Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray,
the main historical issue concerns Napoleonic wars that Britain led with France, and in
particular the main event is the battle of Waterloo in which main male characters are
involved. In her article Thackeray’s Waterloo: History and War in Vanity Fair Mary
Hammond argues that “when contemplating the writing of the Waterloo sequence in
Vanity Fair, he wrote to a friend to request a copy of the newly-released The Story of The
Battle of Waterloo by George Robert Gleig and that he read it, since a reference to it
appears in one of his footnotes to the first serialized edition” (2002: 30) Furthermore,
Thackeray refers to a sight-seeing tour through the battlefield. Therefore, he was given a
background knowledge and he did some research on the subject.
As far as the political anxieties are concerned, readers are informed about the situation
straightforwardly in the beginning of chapter XVIII:
Our surprised story now finds itself for a moment among very famous

events and personages, and hanging on to the skirts of history. When the
eagles of Napoleon Bonaparte, the Corsican upstart, were flying from
Provence, where they have perched after a brief sojourn in Elba, and
from steeple to steeple until they reached the towers of Notre Dame, I
wonder whether the Imperial birds had an eye for a little corner of the
parish of Bloomsbury, London, which you might have thought so quiet,
that even the whirring and flapping of those mighty wings would pass
unobserved there? (Thackeray 1992: 222)
In the short passage one can see an indication that the protagonists of the novel are
exposed to the historical events coming, especially when “in month of March, Anno
Domini 1815, Napoleon landed at Cannes, and Louis XVIII fled, and all Europe was in
alarm, and the funds fell, and old John Sedley was ruined.” (Thackeray 1992: 225)
Thackeray clearly underscores the impact of the historical events on the lives of heroes
and heroines of the novel by stating:
French Emperor comes in to perform a part in this domestic comedy of
Vanity Fair which we are now playing, and which would never have
been enacted without the intervention of this august mute personage. It
was he that ruined the Bourbons and Mr. John Sedley. It was he whose
arrival in his capital called up all France in arms to defend him there,
and all Europe to oust him. While the French nation and army were
swearing fidelity round the eagles in the champ de Mars, four mighty
European hosts were getting in motion for the great chasse á l’aigle;
and one of these was a British army, of which two heroes of ours,
Captain Dobbin and Captain Osborne, formed a portion. (…)
Our two friends (Dobbin and Osborne) were quite as much excited as
the rest; and each in his way – Mr. Dobbin very quietly, Mr. Osborne
very loudly and energetically – was bent upon his duty and gaining his
share of honour and distinction. (Thackeray 1992: 232-233)
Moreover, the author of the book presents accurate political situation of the time:
Those who like to lay down the history-book, and to speculate upon
what might have happened in the world, but for fatal occurrence of
what actually did take place (a most puzzling, amusing, ingenious, and
profitable kind of meditation), have no doubt often thought to
themselves what a specially bad time Napoleon took to come back from
Elba, and to let loose his eagle from Gulf San Juan to Notre dame. The
historians on our side tell us that the armies of the allied powers were

all providentially on a war footing, and ready to bear down at a
moment’s notice upon the Elban Emperor. (Thackeray 1992 365-366)
Such a situation of war closing greatly influences fortunes of characters. Therefore,
having been ordered to march to Brussels, male protagonists and their wives leave the
town to stay in the place they have been deployed to. Nevertheless, apart from being
summoned to take part in historically important issues, they are dealing with personal
events, as it is said:
In the meanwhile the business of life and living, and the pursuits of
pleasure, especially, went on as if no end were to be expected to them,
and no enemy in front. When our travelers arrived at Brussels, in which
their regiment was quartered – a great piece of good fortune, as all said
– they found themselves in one of the gayest and most brilliant capitals
in Europe, and where all the Vanity Fair booths were laid out with the
most temping liveliness and splendor. (Thackeray 1992: 366)
Thus, the protagonists of the novel live their lives in the background of closing war, still
bearing in mind the importance of social status. They attend balls, spend time on dancing,
going to theatres, sightseeing and gambling. In the meantime, some events occurred and
readers are given the picture of political state of the time when the war was nearing its
end:
We of peaceful London City have never beheld – and please God shall
never witness – such a scene of hurry and alarm as that which Brussels
presented. Crowds rushed to the Namur gate, from which direction the
noise proceeded, and many rode along the level chaussée, to be in
advance of any intelligence from the army. Each man asked his
neighbour for news; and even great English lords and ladies
condescended to speak to persons whom they did not know. The friends
of the French went abroad, wild with excitement, and prophesying the
triumph of their Emperor. The merchants closed their shops, and came
out to swell the general chorus of alarm and clamour. (...) The
prophecies of the French partisans began to pass for facts. “He has cut
the armies in two”, it was said. “He is marching straight on Brussels.
He will overpower the English and be here to-night.” (Thackeray
1992:417)
Thus, at the closing of the failure, British and allied armies were to prevent French from
overtaking Europe. Troops were mobilized to counterattack the enemy. Thackeray

describes it as follows:
When Ney dashed upon the advance of the allied troops, carrying one
position after the other, until the arrival of the great body of the British
army from Brussels changed the aspect of the combat of Quatre Bras,
the squadrons among which Regulus rode showed the greatest activity
in retreating before the French, and were dislodged from one post and
another, which they occupied with perfect alacrity on their part. Their
movement were only checked by the advance of the British in their rear.
(Thackeray 1992: 420)
Such a course of events has led to the major historical point of the novel. Male
protagonist of the book, that is Captain George Osborne, Captain William Dobbin and
Captain Rawdon Crawley are sent to march to the battlefield, where troops of allied
armies and their French enemy are to meet in Waterloo. The author comments on the
situation in the following way:
All that day, from morning until past sunset, the cannon never
ceased to roar. It was dark when the cannonading stopped all of a
sudden.
All of us have read of what occurred during that interval. The tale
is in every Englishman’s mouth; and you and I, who were children
when the great battle was won and lost, are never tired of hearing and
recounting the history of that famous action. Its remembrance rankles
still in the bosoms of millions of the countrymen of those brave men
who lost the day. They pant for an opportunity of revenging that
humiliation; and if a contest, ending of a victory on their part , should
ensue, elating them in their turn, and leaving its cursed legacy of hatred
and rage behind to us, there is no end to the so- called glory and shame,
and to the alternations of successful and unsuccessful murder, in which
two high-spirited nations might engage. Centuries hence, we
Frenchmen and Englishmen might be boasting and killing each other
still, carrying out bravely the Devils code of honour.
All our friends took their share and fought like men in the great
field. All day long, whilst the women were praying ten miles away, the
lines of the dauntless English infantry were receiving and repelling the
furious charges of the French horsemen. Guns which were heard at
Brussels were ploughing up their ranks, and comrades falling, and the
resolute survivors closing in. towards evening, the attack of the French,
repeated and resisted so bravely, slackened in its fury. They had other
foes besides the British to engage, or were preparing for a final onset. It

came at last: the columns of the Imperial Guard marched up the hill of
Saint Jean, at length and at once to sweep the English from the height
which they had maintained all day and spite of all. Unscared by the
thunder of the artillery, which hurled death from the English line, the
dark rolling column pressed on and up the hill. It seemed almost to crest
the eminence, when it began to wave and falter. Then it stopped, still
facing the shot. Then at last the English troops rushed from the post
from which no enemy was had been able to dislodge them, and the
Guard turned and fled.
No more firing was heard at Brussels – the pursuit rolled miles
away. Darkness came down on the field and the city; and Amelia was
praying for George, who was lying on his face, dead, with a bullet
through his heart. (Thackeray 1992: 437-438)
Not only does this passage give detailed description of historical event that Thackeray
based on his own knowledge, but also it shows what impact it has on the fortunes of
fictional characters. After the death of George, Amelia breaks down and remains faithful
to his memory for a long time, raising up their only son by herself and refusing the
feelings of Dobbin. Meanwhile, Rawdon Crawley comes back from the battle as a hero,
while Becky remains imperturbable by the events and cares only about her social
climbing and gaining fame and fortune. Also, she uses her husband’s honours to win back
the favours of their wealthy aunt. Their attempts are presented in the following passage
which also describes how the war influenced other people:
The kind reader must please to remember – while the army is marching
from Flanders, and, after its heroic actions there, is advancing to take
fortifications on the frontiers of France, previous to an occupation of
that country – that there are a number of persons living peaceably in
England who have to do with the history at present in hand, and must
come in for their share of chronicle. During the time of these battles and
dangers old Miss Crawley was living at Brighton, very moderately
moved by the great events that were going on. The great events
rendered the newspapers rather interesting to be sure; and Briggs read
out the Gazette, in which Rawdon Crawley’s gallantry was mentioned
with honour, and his promotion was presently recorded. (…)
Yet Miss Crawley’s relatives afar off did not forget their beloved
kinswoman, and by a number of tokens, presents, and kind, affectionate
messages, strove to keep themselves alive in her recollection.
In the first place, let us mention her nephew, Rawdon Crawley. A

few weeks after the famous fight of Waterloo, and after the Gazette had
made known to her the promotion and gallantry of that distinguished
officer, the Dieppe packet brought over to Miss Crawley at Brighton a
box containing presents, and a dutiful letter, from the Colonel her
nephew. (Thackeray 1992: 438-440)
Here, there is a picture of how people behaved during the war and as well of some
characteristics of nineteenth century money- oriented society.
All things considered, there are numerous characteristics of historical novel found
in Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray. Firstly, there is well- defined historical
period in which the story of fictional characters revolves. The main event concern
Napoleonic Wars in early nineteenth century, especially Battle of Waterloo which
occurred in 1815 and which male protagonist take part in. Furthermore, the author
presents the whole profile of English society including poor Becky Sharp or aristocratic
Lord Steyne. Nevertheless, the novel greatly presents economic state of the nineteenth
century society in which middle class grew in strength, and it is upper- middle class that
most of the characters come from.
3.3 Mary Hammond’s critical overview of history in Vanity Fair
Some critics find it troublesome to acknowledge the Vanity Fair by William
Makepeace Thackeray as a historical novel. It is due to fact that they believe there is a
confusing mixture of historical references in the novel. The book was written in 1847,
while the plot revolves around 1815 when the Battle of Waterloo victorious for the
British took place. Thus, W.M. Thackeray’s reliability as a storyteller has been discussed.
In her article entitled Thackeray’s Waterloo: History and War in Vanity Fair Mary
Hammond presents some critical views on the novel and explains the connections of
history of Waterloo with the 1840’s.
Ever since the appearance of Vanity Fair in January 1847 different voices were
raised. Hammond cites Robert Bell who reviewed the novel in September 1848.
According to him, the novel could be perceived as the allegory of contemporaneity and
universality since such ‘Vanity Fair’ could be always found in the world and the book is

its faithful image (Hammond 2002: 20). However, as Hammond further says, George
Henry Lewes, other critic of Thackeray’s masterpiece, accuses him of lack of attention to
the historical accuracy (Hammond 2002: 20).
Furthermore, another critical overview is presented in the article. In 1848 critic Abraham
Hayward recognized the novel as ‘a plain old-fashioned love story’ that happens during
the time when the war fever was at its height. Hammond explains that “for Hayward, the
pleasure of this text resides in what he sees as its invocation of a simpler, prouder, more
youthfully confident Britain, a Britain with a passion, a purpose and a real monster to
fight with” (2002: 20). Thus, he prefers to overlook the historical inaccuracies of the
novel.
What Hammond finds worth noticing is the fact that “other critics have seen the
interplay of relations between narrative and history in this novel as an exciting departure,
or as evidence of contemporary social, political and economic anxieties” (Hammond
2002: 20). She mentions that David Musselwhite notices that by being enacted in the
novel’s time frame – Thackeray was born in 1811 and the book concerns the events of
1815 – Thackeray could use the remembered past as part of an autobiography. He
underscores that the significance of Waterloo in the novel may have connections with the
author himself. Another critic, Joan Stevens, provides different reading of the Waterloo’s
importance. Hammond explains Stevens’ view as follows:
It might, then, be possible to suggest that Waterloo itself was a subject
which, far from seeming historically distant to most of Thackeray’s
readers, may have occupied a conspicuous and important in their sense
of their own time. Seen in the light of this possibility, Thackeray’s
narrative and illustrations – so consistently drawing on Waterloo
imagery – might provide more than a contextual clue for his readers or
setting for his story. The battle which Stevens rightly sees as ‘the
preoccupation, the hinge’ of the narrative might, in fact, serve a still
more important if now somewhat arcane purpose in Thackeray’s overall
design. (2002: 22)
This is the view that Hammond does not fully agree with. Having analyzed different
critical approaches Mary Hammond ventures firstly “to place Vanity Fair in the context
both of its time and of other contemporary references to the Napoleonic Wars in the belief
that this will help to illuminate Thackeray’s own position within or against a particular,

MASTER'S THESIS EMILIA BOCZKOWSKA

MASTER'S THESIS EMILIA BOCZKOWSKA

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to MASTER'S THESIS EMILIA BOCZKOWSKA

Similar to MASTER'S THESIS EMILIA BOCZKOWSKA (15)

MASTER'S THESIS EMILIA BOCZKOWSKA