Danielle ReidProfessor PalmeriShort Response

There are positives to both the perspectives of Mr. Thomas Gradgrind and that of Sissy Julep. The issue here lies in the inability of either party to appreciate and comprehend not only the advantages of the other side, but how dismissal of varying opinions contributes to weakness as well. Sissy lacks practicality and ability to rationalize, while Gradgrind and his peers have minimal understanding of sentiment, irrationality rooted in love or other extreme emotions, and other facets that distinguish men from hardware.

Sissy’s dismissal of the opposite’s disposition can be more easily excused than Gradgrind’s. Growing up without an education and enjoying literature that solely starred mythical creatures, Sissy Julep has no understanding of the realm of logic and reason. They are facets of learning that must be studied and intensely investigated to truly understand, and Sissy never had such opportunities. When Sissy is afforded the opportunity, even though she is not the most astute student, displays a genuine desire to be knowledgeable in the way that the Gradgrind method of education requires. This is shown during a conversation she has with Sissy through this interaction she has with Louisa.

“‘It would be a fine thing to be you, Miss Louisa!’ she said, one night, when Louisa had endeavoured to make her perplexities for next day something clearer to her.

‘Do you think so?’

‘I should know so much, Miss Louisa.  All that is difficult to me now, would be so easy then.’

This shows a flexibility and willingness to balance her person that is not apparent with Mr. Thomas Gradgrind, who is purposefully ignorant. In fact, one might argue that in actuality, he is very knowledgeable of the powers that govern Sissy. He makes a conscious effort to avoid wisdoms that cater to them. This is a very unnatural way to live, and in doing to, bypasses some of the most important things life has to offer. As I read, I personally wondered how he viewed his wedding day, the birth of his children, and things of that nature. Certainly, one has to allow for “fun” and “fancy” during such occasions? Reading of his displeasure at his children watching a circus from afar was so ridiculous that I felt as if I was reading satire. While I understand his reasoning, I think it almost contradictory to his perspective. Wouldn’t someone who seeks to reach the pinnacle of wisdom pursue all their curiosities? Deep down, however, I do believe even Thomas Gradgrind knows that compassion, whims, feelings, (and their opposites), are essential to the human condition. He submits to them on several occasions, most notably when he allows Sissy to stay with him and guide her upbringing. Taking solely logic and reason into account, there was no purpose for keeping Sissy. The girl had already proved to be

an ‘uncouth and corruptive’ force. I can only describe this as a moment when Gradgrind submitted to the part of himself he wished to suppress.