On Respectability (and IBS)

            I found Dickens’ satire in “Attorney and Client” very amusing when setting up a criteria for what defines one, or just Mr. Vholes, as respectable. In order to be considered respectable, one must: not “mis[s] a chance in his practice;” “never take pleasure;” be “reserved and serious;” and have “impaired digestion” (I think today we would just call that too much processed food or irritable bowel syndrome) (540).  The best definition I could find in the OED for this type of “respect” was “deferential regard or esteem felt or shown towards a person, thing, or quality” which seems to still give us a vague notion of what “respectability” really means. The narrator’s goofy description of Mr. Vholes’ “respectability” reflects what Nietzsche later describes when discussing the unstable meaning of works like “honesty.” According to Nietzsche, we do not really know what these abstract words mean allowing cultures to create their own unstable definitions.  We can see this instability of meaning throughout the novel with its preoccupation with skewed information and valuable secrets.

            In regards to this notion of “respectability,” it appears that Dickens is also critiquing men who Carlyle may have mistakenly regarded as respectable. We see this clearly when the narrator describes how “private authorities…will remark that they don’t know what this place is coming to” echoing Carlyle’s concern with this age of machines (541). Dickens reveals the false notion of particular people having a certain respectability when the narrator expresses “that these changes are death to people like Vholes” who maintain the greatest respectability. We also hear an echo of Carlyle when the narrator claims that Mr. Vholes is “continually doing duty,” so just like the notion of his respectability, we really do not know what exactly is his “duty.” We do find out, however, that within his duty as a lawyer, he scams Richard. So I guess Dickens’ narrator is asking: if the assumed man of respectability is a crook, then who do we consider as respectable? It is obvious who we as readers find as respectable in the novel; however, I think the more important point the text is illuminating is the way in which certain men could use their assumed respectability in order to manipulate others for their own self interest.

            Speaking of self interest, Dickens also appears to be critiquing Adam Smith’s idea of the “invisible hand” in this same chapter. The narrator expresses that “the one great principle of the English law is, to make business for itself” and “viewed in this light it becomes a coherent scheme” (540). In that sense, it seems that there is no “invisible hand” that allows the economy to work itself out as Smith explains, but instead it is driven by selfish self interest. We see this specifically with Mr. Vholes making “business for” himself by persuading Richard (with his respectability and commitment to duty) that he can help him with the case. In the larger sense, I think the text may be critiquing English economy and imperialism. As seen through out the novel, many, and specifically Mrs. Jellyby, are concerned with the “cause” (sorry to use Conradian language) not realizing how it is only to help England capitalize on other country’s resources while also neglecting their own families. I may have over-worked this Smith allusion, but it is worthy to discuss they ways the narrative reveals the instability of meaning.