Many factors may prompt people to make poor decisions, such as love or hate, but there is one emotion that overpowers all in the case of driving someone to do something pivotal. Within the novel A Tale of Two Cities, which takes place during the French Revolution, there is one element that allows the rebellion to progress: greed. When someone acquires a high status of wealth, they become even more avaricious, wanting more than they already possess. This is the main factor that causes the class of Monseigneur to become completely corrupt and then the victims of the Revolution. Also, greed influences the decisions of many characters in the book, making them do things that they don’t always want or should do. The central idea of this captivating …show more content…
Competition between individuals is natural. Everyone has the urge to be better than the rest, and in a place such as France during the time period, being considered the best entailed possessing the most. Therefore, the noblemen thought very highly of themselves, while the French peasants suffered in the lives everyone believed were dreadful. However, the French peasants, although they may have not made it as obvious as the noblemen, aspired to be just as, if not more, successful. The noblemen of this time were portrayed as, “Monseigneur (often a most worthy individual gentleman) was a national blessing, gave a chivalrous tone to things, was a polite example of luxurious and shining life, and a great deal more to equal purpose; nevertheless, Monseigneur as a class had, somehow or other, brought things to this. Strange that Creation, designed expressly for Monseigneur, should be so soon wrung dry and squeezed out!” (Dickens 257). The class of noblemen misused their power because of their immense greed. They were always lingering for more, which caused the peasants to become very upset with them. However, since the peasants were so beneath them, they were always yearning for equality. This sparks the deadly revolution, which shocks the noblemen as their world is now topsy turny and they are living the lives of the lower class. Since Monseigneur is not ready to lose all of his fortunes, the noblemen result to fleeing France because they cannot bare to be more worthless than the
The major factor that pushes the French Revolution forward is greed, and without it, this may never have taken place. The largest element that causes the class of Monseigneur to become cruel and egoist is also greed, because without it they never would have become obsessed with gaining more. Strong feelings of greed also has the capability to lead characters of this novel to do tasks that they wouldn’t have done without this odd feeling. The primary message of A Tale of Two Cities is the power that greed has over individuals because it is what truly drives the actions of every character in the
Money can cause people to act selfish and arrogant, especially when they have so much money they do noteven know what to spend it on. In the novel,
The social condition in France before the French Revolution was very poor. The society was divided into three estates: first estate, second estate, and third Estate. The first and the second estates were made up of the Clergy
The aspect of greed shows itself as the heart of the many immoral acts committed by fictional characters and real people. From Adam and Eve’s betrayal to Macbeth’s collapse portrays what greed can produce as a result: destruction. Whether it destroys one’s health, it inherently portrays as a force to the path of corruption. The Pardoner, from The Canterbury Tales, defines greed’s purpose. This includes how greed pulls them to degeneration. No matter how subtle the fall, it still brings to distasteful events for the characters from The Importance of Being Earnest. Although the characters differ, their obsessions with their immoral acts decline their personalities. Thus, the authors portray the characters’ greed, as a pernicious force that drives
A Tale of Two Cities clearly portrays very distinct divisions in the behavior of men. The aristocrats, or upperclassmen, rule and control all of France. The members of the aristocracy never have to undergo hardships; they always have everything presented to them on a silver platter. They do whatever they want with total disregard for the peasants. On the other hand, the peasants always have to work hard for everything in life. Due to the aristocracy, the peasants are constantly starving, enough as to drink spilt wine from a filthy street (24-26). They loathe the wealthy people who have created these horrible living conditions. This drives the peasants to revolution, and the decapitation of the aristocrats via the guillotine. They have a mob mentality and kill everyone who they believe is the enemy. Neither the aristocrats nor the peasants show any compassion toward the other social class.
The unfair ways of how common people were treated compared to royalty and nobility formed the ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity, leading to the French Revolution. Unfair taxes that were only directed to the commoners, high society positions that were only to be obtained by nobles, food scarcity that only affected the poor and the royals having power over all caused the c...
During the period of 1789-1799 people lived much differently than individuals do today and there were many reasons for this. During the French Revolution there was a large amount of taxation for certain class groups, “While average tax rates were higher in Britain, the burden on the common people was greater in France” (GNU, 2008, pg. 2). Due to these large taxations on the peasants and lower class and not on the clergy and nobles it caused excessive conflict between the classes. Not only was taxation a cause of conflict between classes but so was the corrupt monarchy of France. The main causes of the French Revolution were over taxation, class conflict, and corrupt monarchy.
However, the noble-born were not ready to lose their supremacy, and there are very high chances that had they been aware of what the low-class citizens were planning, they would have retaliated with brutal force. Consequently, an upheaval was a need to change France, and anything contrary to that would need concrete proof that the Crown was ready to consider the problems of the people. On that note, contrary to Burke’s views, the people obviously had enough sense to realize that they were never going to have any privileges without force.
...n trait because it is an influential factor that causes humans to make unwise decisions in order to satisfy their beneficial needs. Voltaire’s attitude towards greed is that everyone has it within themselves to be selfish, regardless of what condition and social class the person may be in. People don’t always realize how detrimental the effects of greed can turn out until something tragic occurs in their lives. People can have greed for materials, for power, or for money. In the long run, all types of greed can lead to a corrupt society because people may end up fighting one another just to get what they want, or make sacrifices that can be harmful to not only themselves, but for others as well. If greediness in people was a puzzle, it will forever remain incomplete until the missing piece of contentment is found through whatever it is they have been longing to have.
... The greed portrayed by these characters has no explanation, at least that Fitzgerald offers, and thus should not exist; proving that these characters are simply greedy and deserve all that comes to them. And thus these two authors differ in the reasons why the greed occurs and, effectively, the difference in the short, 1-day gap from October 24 into October 25, 1929. And so greed exists in the modern period, saturating its two of its most famous novels and a theme of two of its most famous authors, portraying all evil as caused by greed, illustrating the true cynicism of the era. Works Cited Stenbeck, J. a.
The essential cause of the French revolution was the collision between a powerful, rising bourgeoisie and an entrenched aristocracy defending its privileges”. This statement is very accurate, to some extent. Although the collision between the two groups was probably the main cause of the revolution, there were two other things that also contributed to the insanity during the French revolution – the debt that France was in as well as the famine. Therefore, it was the juxtaposing of the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy as well as the debt and famine France was in that influenced the French Revolution.
The social differences in France were very unreasonable. People openly argued that “social differences should not be defined by law, as they were in the old regimes order” (2). In France, much of the inequality came from the social class system. It led to angry peasants and tons of revolting. This could have been avoided if France maintained equality for all estates, as it would have been rational. In addition, the clergy and nobles were given many rights which “included top jobs in government, the army, the courts, and the Church” (109). This was very biased as they were able to get the highest jobs, not because they earned it, but because of their social stature. Meanwhile, commoners or bourgeoisie, were not granted those jobs even if they had the ability to do them. This caused much of the third estate to become mad which led to uncivilized manner in France. If the government had just given equal rights and granted jobs by merit opposed to social class rankings, there would have been less drama between the estates and everything would have been
One cause of both Revolutions was that people from all social classes were discontented. Each social class in France had its own reasons for wanting a change in government. The aristocracy was upset by the king’s power while the Bourgeoisie was upset by the privileges of the aristocracy. The peasants and urban workers were upset by their burdensome existence. The rigid, unjust social structure meant that citizens were looking for change because “all social classes…had become uncomfortable and unhappy with the status quo.” (Nardo, 13) Many believed that a more just system was long overdue in France.
Additionally, the laziness of Monseigneur can also describe the laziness of the hierarchy of France. Even though they have all the power to change the worst parts of the society/economy, they choose not to and instead, attend artificial parties with other nobles and have 4 assistants feed them chocolate. The overwhelming power of the hierarchy is only beneficial to themselves and not to citizens of France. An example of this is when Monseigneur is being described: “Monseigneur could swallow a great many things with ease, and was by some few sullen minds supposed to be rather rapidly swallowing France.” (Dickens 78) this quotation reflects how the hierarchy’s massive consumption of all things superficial is slowly consuming the country of France itself. This passage reflects a text-to-world connection because Monseigneur is actually is a symbol to the hierarchy of France due to the description/qualities of his personality and the effect his consumption has on the
At the start of the revolution, in 1789, France’s class system changed dramatically (Giddens, 2014). Aristocrats lost wealth and status, while those who were at the bottom of the social ladder, rose in positions. The rise of sociology involved the unorthodox views regarding society and man which were once relevant during the Enlightenment (Nisbet, 2014). Medievalism in France during the eighteenth century was still prevalent in its “legal structures, powerful guilds, in its communes, in the Church, in universities, and in the patriarchal family” (Nisbet, 2014). Philosophers of that time’s had an objective to attempt to eliminate the natural law theory of society (Nisbet, 2014). The preferred outcome was a coherent order in which the mobility of individuals would be unrestricted by the autonomous state (French Revolution). According to Karl Marx, economic status is extremely important for social change. The peasants felt the excess decadence of the ancient regime was at the expense of their basic standards of living, thus fuelling Marx’s idea of class based revolutions and the transition of society (Katz, 2014). This can be observed, for example, in novels such as Les Liaisons Dangereuses, a novel that had a role for mobilizing the attitudes of the