The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1912-05-07
as thoroughly as does TO Wa
terloc: that DobbiR would have be-

as thoroughly as does n~earness TO Wa
terloc: that DobbiR would have been
awkward. ungainly. plain. and thor
oughly honest and generous in ais
place and any period-that. in short.
the setting Of Vanity Fair in the Lon
don OF the early nineteenth century
was merely accidental and incidental
The plot of Vanity Fair is nothing
more nor less than the stretch Of floor
upon which the mechanical dolls i,
their stunts To be sure. the floor
space is very necessary: for no mat
ter how we'll the clock-work may ta
wound. ne matter what intrinsic pos
sibilities the doll may have. its pe-
tential energy cannot be converted
into kinetic. unless we set the precious
toy down upon the carpet. Blu iet
anyone try to formulate the plot u
Vanity Fair in a concise paragraph.
as for instance he might formulate
the plot of The Moonstonc or Of The
Woman in White: and he Will ind
himself involved in a difficulty IS
serious as he would have
ed. if he had tried to make a critical
ANALYSIS of one Of Wilkie CotiinS's
characters. The objection has been
raised that not content with allowla.
the plot of Vanity all to be tiimsy.
~Thackeray has still further weakened
it by a bewildering maze of byplot-
that, for example, the Osbornes and
the Sedleys continue to do things
which have no connection with Re
becca or RaWdon: and that almost
side by side are chronicled events OF
Hampshire and happenings of Rus
sell Square which have absolutely
nothing to do with each other. But
the person who makes such obiec-
ton loses sight Of the fact that in
Vanity Fair. as in Italy. ALI roads
lead to Rome: namely Gin the case of
the rme to the vindicatiOn of
Becky. the heroine: and the mar
rage Of Amelia. the near-heroine. t,
Dobbin. the only man who has re-
NAMED unswervingly true to her.
| ADrOpOS of plot. also, the reader OF
Vanity Fair should be grateful TO the
author for plunging into his story at
the beginning, instead OF haranguing
for a page or two tas he does AT tho
ouset Of Esmond) about piping lam
bics. the Tragic Muse. Queen Medea.
King AgameInnon, Louis XIV. and al
most everything else under the sun.
except matters pertinent to the story.
How shall we classify Vanity Fair.
Perhaps the easiest way to dispose Of
It would be to say that it is not n
novel OF purpose-that the only nur-
pose which can be aScribed TO it IS
the affixing Of . ED to the very alb
stIact proposition that all mortals
are fools, especially those mortals
who are social "climbers."' But that
is merely stating What Vanity Fair il
not. On the other hand, it may y,
an historical tale. a novel Of man
ners. or a psychological story. 1t is.
| think. all three of these: it is an
historical tale. in that it deals witt,
a generation prior to that in which
~Ihackeray wrote; it is a novel OF
manners. in that it p~Ortrays with con
summate artistry the fads and fan
cies. follies and foibles OF the gildcd
set Of a century ago; and it is a
psychological story in that its char
acters are deeply interesting psyche
logically. That. it is not a dramatic
novel is the impression one would
get from q superficial glance at its
pages. but a more careful amir
ton reveals the fact that this illusion
has been produced by the very large
amount Of indirect discourse. More
over. vanity Fair is a realistic nOyei
clad in the guise Of romanticism; for
no matter how glittering its gilt and
unsel may appear to us of this
prosa1c age. We nevertheless reco:
nize that its characters are not tn,
embodiment of certain ideals and
~theories of 1hackeray; but they ar.
living. moving beings. tremendousl
awe and tremendously real.
5 @RET