"Can my prayers be heard? No!"

We can see Carlyle’s concerns about the condition of the impoverished working class erupt within the tenth chapter of Gaskell’s novel. We find John Barton with little to no work and Mary having to sustain herself with two meals a day. Gaskell’s biblical allusion in the title of this chapter drew my attention to the way she addresses her Christian readers. While Barton finds himself in a state of distress, he follows the teaching of Christ through his self sacrifices. He refuses any help from the Trades Union and tells them to give their “assistance” to his “enemy” Tom Darbyshire who apparently is in more need than Barton (78). Barton follows Christian moral by showing some compassion towards his enemy; however, he has his limits, and his moral begins to disintegrate. We find him looking like an “animal” because the hunger has taken a hold of him, and his stress has also caused him to abuse Mary (78-9). However, both Barton and Mary show their “repentance” towards one another (80). It seems as though Gaskell is warning her readers (similar to Carlyle’s outcry) that this working class population can only endure so much. Using the Bartons, who are a little closer to the class of her readership in comparison to the other laboring families in the novel, Gaskell may even be attempting to demonstrate how this family with similar beliefs/morals as her readers can lose faith in their values when enduring severe deprivation.

(Being a student of postmodern/structuralist thought, it is very difficult for me to throw around those terms of values/morals/faith—even digesting Carlyle was a bit painful because of his elitist attitude. Anyways, when I use those terms, I am referring to the common Christian beliefs embedded within most of our own ideologies, such as: generosity, forgiveness, etc.)

When Barton reunites with Esther, however, he is unwilling to forgive her. At the same time, we also find Esther attempting to redeem her sins by trying to save Mary. Barton’s unwillingness to listen to Esther reflects the way the more privileged classes, parliament, and perhaps Gaskell’s readers have turned their backs upon the working class. As Carlyle explains, “the condition of the great body of people in a country is the condition of the country itself” (2). In that case, these people of power and prestige have turned their backs upon the country. After Barton abandons her, Esther asks if her “prayers” will “be heard” and cries that “he would not listen to”  her (85). This “he” is not only Barton, but is possibly also referring to the State or God (or religious institutions).  Esther’s outcry, however, is described as a summary of her incoherent “words, repeated in various forms” that are “always” in “the same anxious, muttering way—.“ Esther’s clumsy language reflects the way in which Carlyle describes how the working class lacks an articulate language that would allow them to express their needs and concerns (2). While Carlyle does reduce the working class to inarticulate, animal-like beings (that’s what I gathered from the OED’s definition of “dumb”), he does argue that these people have “hearts created by Heaven too.” Both Barton and Carlyle, therefore,  not only give voice to these shunned beings, but also reveal to their readers that it is their moral/religious obligation to not let this working class population continue to endure  this turmoil.

I am now curious to see how Gaskell works forgiveness, redemption, generosity, and providence throughout the rest of her novel.