Though this novel is usually called Caleb Williams (after the protagonist and narrator who appears only briefly in the first volume), its original title was Things As They Are, suggesting that William Godwin meant the novel to provide a commentary on contemporary life. We’ll talk more about the political conditions surrounding the publication of the novel next week when we’re back together again, but for now, I want you to take a closer look at Godwin’s preface to the novel. You’ll see from the preface to the second edition that this preface, though written by Godwin, wasn’t published with the first edition because booksellers were afraid of the response. I don’t expect you to have knowledge of the period yet, but even without it, I think you can make some inferences about the kinds of problems Godwin is trying to diagnose.
For this assignment, due by the end of the day on Thursday 9/19, write a comment to this post explaining what you understand Godwin to be saying in the preface. Your comment should be around 250 words and should make reference to a specific moment or line in the first volume of the novel. Where in that volume do you see an illustration of the message Godwin is outlining in his short preface? This is a short response, so make your sentences count and remove all fluff. (Please cite quotations by both page number in the edition you’re using and also by chapter.) This assignment will count as your attendance for Thursday’s class.
By next Tuesday’s class (9/24), read volume II of the novel and also read through all of the comments on this post. Be prepared to discuss the responses. If you run into any problems with the assignment, send me an email.
Godwin seems to be explicating on the reality of a society on the frightening precipice of revolution, as “one party pleads for reformation and change” and the other “extols in the warmest terms the existing constitution of society” when it comes to what William Godwin calls “the moral world” (Godwin 4). Something has occurred in English society to which citizens are reacting with either complacency or indignation, and it is something beyond the scope of understanding by the average or uneducated person (“persons whom books of philosophy and science are never likely to reach”) (Godwin 4). Regardless, because “Government intrudes itself into every rank of society”, the truth of the issue and “its practical effects” should be communicated to all people, according to Godwin (Godwin 4). I can imagine how the prospect of an informed (and thus, likely enraged) populous may have alarmed booksellers and their – presumably – government constituents alike: if you really want to start a revolution, get the average man involved. Godwin wanted the values of law and morality to transcend class!!!
Godwin wants to use a relatively simple, straight-forward narrative like Caleb Williams/Things as They Are to effectively illustrate what should be enraging the public about… something, be it morality, law, the Government or a conflation of all three, relating to class. In Chapter Twelve of Caleb Williams Volume I, Godwin depicts the selfsame tension of complacency and indignation afflicting English society with Collins’ account of Mr. Falkland’s acquittal for the murder of Mr. Tyrell: Collins asks, “Did any man, and, least of all, a man of the purest honour, ever pass in a moment, from a life unstained by a single act of injury, to the consummation of human depravity?” (Godwin 102). As the reader, we know the answer is a resounding “yes” (or at least I suspect it strongly) but see that Mr. Falkland’s class, and Mr. Tyrell’s removal from said class following the death of his cousin (thus making him lower class, and thus a less valuable life), allow Mr. Falkland to be acquitted despite evidence and circumstance against him. Even the fact that Hawkins and his son are executed for Mr. Tyrell’s murder instead of Falkland, and the discrepancy in classes therein illustrate the different ways in which the law/Government/moral society interacts with citizens. I think Godwin wants us to respond; “wouldn’t a man of who is perceived of having the purest honor do anything – even murder – to keep it that way?”. Maybe it turns out he’s innocent in Volume II, in which case I am wholly mistaken.
Although annoyingly complicated in nature, much like the novel itself, the preface appears to be highlighting how important it is that knowledge not be prejudice in it’s accessibility, especially in a time where political change is imminent. It’s understandable as to why the preface was removed from the first edition, as it almost acts as a call to action for those who’ve been robbed of their necessary access to “books of philosophy and science” (Godwin, Preface). The access to knowledge is only necessary because, contrary to what people may have believed at the time, “the spirit and character of the Government intrudes itself into every rank of society” (Godwin, Preface). This is at first primarily demonstrated in the dispute Tyrrel and Falkland have over Hawkins. Falkland believes that because of his and Tyrrell’s privilege and status they must “do everything in our power to lighten the yoke of these unfortunate people” (Godwin, 46). Godwin is saying through Falkland that because there is such a gap between how the wealthy live in comparison to how the poor live, that the rich should not abuse their privilege just because it is easy to do so. Tyrrel is an example of how easily a wealthier individual can torture someone like Hawkins just because he feels like doing so. The injustice here that Godwin highlights in the novel is that Hawkins, because of his status, has not been given the necessary tools by society (i.e. access to a proper education or wealth) to properly defend himself against Tyrrel’s onslaught.
As mentioned in class, the novel was published during the height of the French Revolution. This revolution was generated to overthrow the French government and the system of Estates in France. There was the First Estate, the Second Estate, and the Third Estate. The First Estate included the nobility while the Third Estate included the poor commoners–yet, it was the Third Estate that had to pay most of the taxes. Amidst the decade-long French revolution that struggled against the government, William Godwin published his novel, /Caleb Williams./
As stated in his preface, Godwin’s novel is “both a critique of the English social order and a study of the inward life of an individual.” (Godwin, Preface) Throughout his life, he criticized the political authority and claimed that humans are capable of rational justice based on reason. The evidence can be seen when it is written: “In /Political Justice/ he argued that individuals, by the exercise of reason and judgement, have the power to emancipate themselves from the false opinion on which government is based, leading to the gradual dissolution of all legislative restraints. Godwin’s view of humanity as inevitably overcoming the vices, errors, and prejudices that obstructed the progress of reason provided intellectual stability at a time of historical flux.” (Godwin, Preface) Godwin takes a stance that is very critical to political ideologies–though it is certainly powerful, the government does not always make moral decisions because it can be corrupt, yet humans are coherent enough to self-govern.
At the end of the first volume of /Caleb Williams,/ Mr. Falkland is acquitted for the murder for Mr. Tyrrel. The last moment of his acquittal is described as such: “It may be granted indeed that Mr. Falkland had his faults, but those very faults placed him at a still farther distance from the criminality in question. He was the fool of honour and fame; a man whom in the pursuit of reputation nothing could divert; who would have purchased the character of a true, gallant and undaunted hero at the expense of the worlds, and who thought every calamity nominal but a stain upon his honour.” (Godwin, 100) Mr. Falkland’s words won over the legal system, who had decided that a man of his reputation and prestigious social standing (he is, after all, a squire) could not possibly be capable of such a crime. Instead, the legal system decided that Hawkins, a common man from the village, was more suitable to be a condemned murderer. Hawkins was not granted any compassion after the legal system had decided he was guilty. Thus, this example relates to Godwin’s statement in the preface that the government can be unrighteous and mistaken, ruining lives of those who may be innocent.
Caleb William character is meant to model the most universal citizen during the late 1700s: he’s poor, self-educated although he’s a bit more apprehensive than the common person. This is most evident when Mr. Falkland accuses Caleb of being common – “The death of a hundred thousand men is at first sight very shocking; but what in reality are a hundred thousand such men, more than a hundred thousand sheep?” (Second Volume, Ch. 1 *I read a little ahead :)* In other words, Caleb represents the consensus. And is anyone who is not educated enough or in a “lesser class” than Mr. Falkner, immediately be persecuted as Hawkins and his son were even if they are innocent? It’s appropriate that the author wrote someone like Caleb – so many injustices happen to him. In the preface, Godwin is intentionally calling for reform, “While one party pleads for reformation and change,” and then he commences with the preferred class’ favor towards the injustice in society, “the other extols in the warmest terms the existing constitution of society.” (orig. preface) This is in fact a danger to a society whose ideology on government practices is non-widely spoken of. Goodwin brings light to class and societal standards and what to expect of law as, “things as they are” (pref.) is just common, and never challenged due to a fear in the retaliation of the government. Most importantly, the law destroys “common” people, “man becomes the destroyer of man.” We see this throughout, even so- when Caleb is a prisoner to Mr. Falkland through his employment with him.
Quotes were taken from [https://tinyurl.com/CalebWilliams]
as I do not have the physical copy on hand. 🙂
In my interpretation of Godwin’s preface, the author is stating that in writing this novel he hopes to not only provide “a general review of the modes of domestic and unrecorded despotism, by which man becomes the destroyer of man” (Godwin, 312) but also push the general public, including the uneducated, to join the debate of “reformation and change” verses “the existing constitution of society” (Godwin 312). We see what may be assumed as Godwin’s opinion regarding this question when Hawkins reflects that “law was better adapted for a weapon of tyranny in the hands of the rich, than for a shield to protect the humbler part of the community against their usurpations” (Godwin 42). Here the author clearly puts into words what some if not a majority of the population must have been enduring and feeling as a result of their experiences with the law.
Other examples such as when Mr. Tyrrel ironically says “order and subordination are very good things; but people should know how much to require” (Godwin, 37), when Hawkins retorts to Mr. Tyrell “ I hope there is some law for rich folk, as well as for poor ones” (Godwin, 41), and when Mr. Falkland implores Mr. Tyrrel saying “we must not use the advantage that accident has given us, with an unmerciful hand” referring to Mr. Tyrrel’s ill treatment of the poor (Godwin, 46) all contribute to this question that Godwin raises. He addresses the social and legal aspects of the despotism that characters such as Hawkins and Miss Emily are subjected to with the intention of sparking the conversation of whether changes must be made and how the public bring about such a revolution.
On reading William Godwin’s preface to Caleb Williams, I expected it to be an uncritical celebration of radical views, considering his preface was originally withheld from the public. Nevertheless, Godwin does not sound radical at all. If anything, he sounds practical. Godwin takes neither the radical position of Thomas Paine nor the conservative position of Edmund Burke. His main concern is how to implement political change within the world as it is or, as Godwin puts it, “things as they are.” As I read it, Godwin seems to say that political change can occur if we focus on “domestic and unrecorded despotism,” instead of pleading anarchy. For example, consider the character of Mr. Hawkins. When Mr. Hawkins is tormented by Mr. Tyrell, he tries to seek justice through the legal system. Unfortunately, however, Mr. Hawkins is disappointed by the results:
“Hawkins had hitherto carefully avoided, notwithstanding the injuries he had suffered, attempting to right himself by a legal process, being of the opinion that law was better adapted for a weapon of tyranny in the hands of the rich, than for a shield to protect the humbler part of the community against their usurpations. In this last instance however he conceived that the offense was so atrocious as to make it impossible that any rank could protect the culprit against the severity of justice. In the sequel he saw reason to applaud himself for his former inactivity in this respect, and to repent that any motive had been strong enough to persuade him into a contrary system” (Godwin 42).
In making this comment, Godwin leads us to understand that the story’s central point is that the law is unjust and only accommodates the rich. Yet, Godwin does not suggest Mr. Hawkins should have revolted. In fact, Mr. Hawkins’s should not have revolted, because when his son revolted he went to jail. Before reading the preface, I thought this passage indicated Godwin’s ambivalence on the issue of despotism. After reading the preface, however, I realized that Godwin encourages readers to try the best with what they have and to navigate the world as it is. Mr. Hawkins had sought help through the legal system and he had failed and he had to just accept it.
Within the preface of William Godwin ‘ Things as they are we learn of his direct intention in this work of fiction and what he seeks to address. As he states on line two of his preface, “While one party pleads for reformation and change, the other extols in the warmest terms the existing constitution of society.” This excerpt explains the foretelling of the events that take place in volume I of the novel. This quote shows that even though the laws and customs may seem fair and well suited for some, there are others in a society under the same laws that suffer from an unfair prejudice . Godwin uses the structure of the old Italian society to show how the aristocracy believed they were above the law and in many cases they were. We see proof of this in the very first sentence of chapter seven, “Mr. Tyrrel consulted his old confident respecting the plan he should pursue; who, sympathising as he did in the brutality and insolence of his friend, had no idea that an insignificant girl, without either wealth or beauty, ought to be allowed for a moment to stand in the way of the gratifications of a man of Mr. Tyrrel’s importance. ” Godwin illustrates the common belief of the time that the wealthy were above regular society and operated and a different set of codes. In the case of Mr. Tyrell, once he set his mind on something, not even the law could protect the subject. we later see this when he tries to acquire Hawkin’s son and when rejected he performs horrible deeds to the poor farmer and his assets. When this farmer decided to seek legal justice we are reminded of just what William Godwin wrote about in his preface which showed how the same law could be unjust for some and in favor of others at the same time. Godwin writes in the middle of chapter 9 that, being of opinion that law was better adapted for a weapon of tyranny in the hands of the rich, than for a shield to protect the humbler part of the community against their usurpations.” this set meant helps to further clarify the common belief of the people in society at which this novel was written and effectively draws us back to the function of law for different members of a society.
quotes taken from a version of the novel in which there are no numbered pages.
Caleb Williams’s preface highlights the injustices of the law in context, and its ability to pit man against one another in the face of power. William Godwin plays on perspective to switch the roles of the protagonist and the antagonist (Godwin, og. preface) which serves as a platform to emphasize human error, specifically in characters who hold positions of high status within the society’s “government”. The significance of the motif of reputation is seen in Falkland’s testimony: “Reputation has been the idol, the jewel of my life” (Godwin, 99); it bore status regardless of wealth. Here Godwin seems to draw a relation of ‘reputation’ in the novel to the era’s known importance of being born into the aristocracy and the monarchy, as being educated was regarded of high rank or wealth.
He claims in his preface that the story is meant to represent a bigger political argument, which seems to me regards the question of who should be in power (in context). Tyrrell’s tyranny throughout the volume is executed in an attitude that says “because I can,” which seems to me a critique of the monarchy during the time. While one reason the revolution sparked was a question of the monarchy’s rulers, their ethics and if it was really working out for the general good, another was how society regarded the lower classes. A symbol of that regard was the death of Emily, who was a poor orphaned maiden, alongside the conviction of Hawkins, who was a poor tenant. In context it seems Godwin was trying to reveal not only the abuse of power but also which groups in society it seemed to affect the most.
The short and sweet response to what Godwin is trying to address in the preface, is the idea of “THINGS AS THEY ARE”, and how it relates to human thought and philosophy. The longer answer, however, is that Godwin is trying to convey the idea of not simply observing “THINGS AS THEY ARE”, but rather, observing how people interact with the way things are. Godwin suggest that there are often two groups to consider when observing this idea. The two groups consist of those, who seek to change the way things are to benefit their well-being and another group of people whom are content with “things as they are”, and does not seek to change them. He further goes on to explain that this idea, and its relation to society, is a pondering of moral grounds. Relating, the preface to volume one of Caleb Williams, one can observe the economic/social classes in 16th century England. We see the likes of Falkland and Tyrrel use their power for either better (Falkland) or worse (Tyrrel) of the poorer class of people that surrounded them. It seems clear that the author, Godwin, wants the reader to pick a side, or choose where we draw our moral line, but through deciding which aristocrat is better, one must realize that they are still observing instances where people have too much power. With this observation, the sentiment of viewing “things as they are”, causes the reader to ask themselves if things are good or bad, and if things should change.
William Godwin in his preface expresses that the book is supposed to entertain, be enjoyable, it should be taken with a certain degree of seriousness. It seems that Godwin is trying to portray the main division at the time. He further explains that one group/ one party is fighting to keep “things as they are,” a classical life of sorts, which most likely meant that those in power (the rich), wanted to find a way to grow the country to be economically competitive with the rest of the world, while still keeping the poor, poor/ beneath them. The second party, was fighting for innovation which meant change in all kinds of ways, including the tipping of the social/ hierarchical “boat”.
In the book the view of the preface is represented mainly by Mr. Falkland and Mr. Tyrrel. Mr. Tyrrel is described as a stereotypical strong man, a Hercules or a strong caveman even of sorts, not only in looks but in manner, this represents the old view on man, that they have to be strong, short in manners, and in temper. Before the arrival of Mr. Falkland, Mr. Tyrrel was the “king” of sorts of that county, he was respected by all, and accepted as a leader, but “They had hitherto submitted not from love, but fear (William 18).” Upon the arrival of Mr. Falkland, however, the town people saw how different this man was, this man who was bringing manners and ideas shaped by his many travels was, short in stature, and delicate looking with no apparent physical strength but also kinder and less conceited than Mr. Tyrrel. Mr. Falkland is representing not only foreign brought innovation but also a new way of thinking of men, as delicate, mannered, well tempered, even timid people. The town people seemed to actually be open to change before Mr. Falkland arrived but, “…if they had not rebelled, it was only for want of a leader” (William 18). So far in the book Mr. Tyrrel is the old way of thinking, the classic, unfairly hierarchical way of thought, and Mr. Falkland while still representing the elite, is representing the change that the common people, the majority of the population, are fighting for in the political events of that time in England.