HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE INTEGRATION: The Myth and the Reality. A Social Worker's Perspective

The Context

I have spent over 45 years in and around social care and social work. Over that time, experienced and endured countless re-structurings and re-imaginings of policy and practice developments alongside that of Health Services. Perhaps the most bizarre was that of Andrew Landsbury, Secretary of State ( 2010-12) who rightly, in the view of David Brindle, tried to "introduce enormous, and ultimately unworkable, NHS structured change." (1) For me it all started back in the 80's with a shift from direct service provision to a market based mixture of providers which favoured the private sector, underpinned by a New Right philosophy of an enabling state. Through the White Paper, Caring for People: Community Care in the Next Decade and Beyond" (DH 1989). it was for many of us driven by the erroneous belief that the public sector was costly and ineffective and required the wonderful world of capitalism to fix Social Care. What exactly was being fixed, remains for me, the key question. 

It is argued by many that Social Care remains to be "fixed". Since the mixed market of provision so dreamed of in the '80s, has failed to produce the objectives of Community Care (and here, we are in the realm of "beyond"!). Austerity and Pandemics notwithstanding, one significant debate that actually was around in the late '60s is to structurally merge Health and Social Care. At that time I recall debates about returning Heath provisions to Local Authorities, interestingly, from whenced it came! David Brindle reminds us that 'we have gone through person-centred care, systems integration, choice and control, free personal care, funding options and Dilnot'. I'd say, worn and faded deck chairs, patched up and moved around the deck....you get my drift. Brindle writes far better than I , "We have 20 years of disappointment over social care and a roll call of health ( and social care) Secretaries, who often by their own admission, have not left much of a mark." Regardless, there remains the consistent policy intention to increase the integration of health and social care, but what on earth does it mean? 

Nothing changes. Social Care and Social Work in terms of understanding what they are, remains rooted in Poor Law thinking.  How we think about its interrelationship with communities, social justice, poverty, social class, equality, Human Rights, financial security, housing, employment, leisure, transport.... I could go on. Protecting the role of Community Development and its workers has been  sacrificed on the altar of right-wing political ideology!  That said, the constant over the years has been the rhetoric of integrated health and social care which will "fix the problem", whilst at the same time, ignoring the wider socio-economic context in which Care exists, and that of Social and Community Work. The mantra of Integration makes sense and we need more of it - really? I ask what's the evidence that structural and system integration, as defined by present policy and practice, actually creates effective "partnership(s) of organisations coming together to plan and deliver joined-up health and social care services, to improve the lives of people who live and working their area"? (2)

SO WHAT IS INTEGRATED CARE?

Sarah Scobie asks what we mean by it, how has it changed, and does it work? (3) It is a good starting point. Both health and care services are broad in their scope, even purpose, governed and funded separately from and by different legal entities. In addition, individuals are means tested for care services and have to meet the pernicious rationing eligibility criteria imposed by commissioners. Sometimes called 'collaborative working '  it necessitates social workers, in particular, to work in new ways. Integrated Care also requires multi disciplinary working across the participating agencies, which in turn requires cooperation throughout the whole system. Yet we still have little consensus as to what it all means from political leaders, national and local, practitioners and their managers, let alone service users. Does it actually matter for Joe Public, providing what they require, on their terms is available, accessible and relevant? The challenge for me, is that it matters a lot for and to, everybody else! 

Again Sarah Scobie unpacks the levels of integration and hence offers a useful framework for us to measure and evidence effective and efficient collaborative working.(4)

• Organisational: this is about co-ordinating structures and governance, mergers or contractual or cooperative arrangements
• Administrative and Financial: back office support, accounting, data sharing and information systems
• Service Integration: via multi disciplinary teams and simple systems for referral and assessment
• Clinical Integration: becoming a "single and coherent process"

It is all very sensible and to be welcomed, but we need a reality check. Emeritus Professor, John Harris and independent consultant Vicky White identify factors that threaten or undermine collaborative working which, I argue, is relevant when examing Integrated Care. I recognise however that there will be some who would equally argue that collaborative working and Integrated Care are different. I disagree. Turning to threatening and undermining barriers Harris and White are instructive (5)

• Structural: Fragmented responsibilities between the agencies and practitioners. Does Integrated Care deal with this in practice? 
• Procedural and Finacial: differences in planning and budget cycles. Integrated planning and merged budgets are dependent on what resources are, in reality, released from the participating agencies where decisions about resource allocation are taken within and by the agency. In other words, the cake being cut is determined by Councils and Trust Boards etc, and thus "unified" budgets are in reality, a slice.
• Defensiveness: in response to perceived threats to professional status, autonomy, and legitimacy. For me, this, and those factors below are too frequently ignored when considering and evaluating Integration. Muti agency bodies are brought together to strategically plan, agree on priorities and carve up the slice is not an algorithm or some AI process which leads us to
• Professional and Power Differences: differences in ideologies, values and professional interests, conflicting priorities, meeting different targets and performance management systems, data collection and factors that threaten to undermine collaborative working, fostering blame and antagonism rather than goodwill.

I believe that these factors taken as a whole need to be considered when exploring Integrated Health and Social Care policy and practice. For me the jury is not out, it hasn't even been brought together. How do those directly engaged in making strategic, priority and spending decisions experience integration? How do managers and front-line care professionals experience integration? What level of engagement and participation is there with patients, social care users and their families and the community? 

For professional social workers and the Profession generally, there are concerns about identity, values and ethics. Harris and White give a prime example referencing "the conflicting beliefs and values underpinning the medical and social models of disability." (6) 

SO HOUSTON, DO WE HAVE A PROBLEM?

Here's my top Twenty:

1. The continuance of health and social care disparities
2. The predominance of a medical model that pathologises and continues to shapes social care
3. The prevalence of Human Rights violation
4.  Failure to underpin person centred approaches, with a life course foundation and perspective 
5. Poor data collection and hence tracing the effectiveness of Integrated Care against policy outcomes
6. Social care is primarily seen and perceived as direct care tasks
7. Geographical boundary differences between providers
8. The patient and service users' experience, especially in relation to long term care provision
9. Different professional roles and identities and "social workers struggling to articulate their role " (7)
10. Different organisational and professional cultures
11. Power imbalances
12. Interpersonal relationships between participants
13. Lack of political will to see the challenges through a different lens than simply funding 
14. The continuance of institutional ageism, sexism, racism, ableism, and homophobia within professional practice and organisations
15. Marginalization of small Voluntary groups 
16. Concealment of inadequate funding
17. Confronting poor support, oversite and inadequate training and development of those working within Integrated Teams
18. Political ideologies and short terminism 
19. Failure to test the effectiveness of co-production, participation, "experts by experience" and service user involvement 
20.  The 'corruption of care' 

I can hear 'off stage' some readers saying that Integrated Care systems and structures were not designed to address these issues. If that is true, then what is the point of it? For me, the very purpose of Integrated Care is to improve health and care outcomes, address social inequalities, measure and evidence productivity and VFM, access to care, and support people to stay well and independent. It therefore cannot achieve this, if it ignores those factors that undermine its very purpose. 

WHERE ARE YOU OH SOCIAL WORKER?

The key here is that social work offers a relational, not transactional approach within the care system. I am not looking for a checklist assessment, or a signpost to god knows where. I want a social worker who re-enforces my service rights and my citizenship, that does not other or commodify me. I want to be regarded as an equal with the right to self-determination, mutual respect and trust, to help me navigate the health and social care system, who is also my advocate and be responsible to me ( whatever my circumstances) and not for me. 

I do not want a relationship with a succession of workers I do not know, and whilst to have a relationship with a Department or agency is possible in broad terms, it cannot of course become a 'therapeutic' one. The individual social worker builds trust and expertise in relationship building, which includes not just talking with me, but where I can share feelings and my concerns hopes and fears. Above all helps me be optimistic. The social worker is an expert with their feet firmly on the ground, do what they say they will and becomes a partner with me. I acknowledge that they have a responsibility to their agency and the wider community. (8)  It is no easy feat. The pernicious growth of managerialism, authoritarianism and the marketization of social care, over the past decades, continues to threaten and undermine the social work relationship. 

Here's another list, this one is about Social Work taken from SHARE: A New Model for Social Work ( 2018)(9) and the social worker:

• A positive, optimistic outlook
• Understanding the reality of oppression from other professionals ( and I'd add our own )
• A belief in the possibility of change
• Commitment to a relational approach
• Supporting people to feel a sense of belonging
• An awareness of the dynamic nature of hope
• An ability to imagine a different way of doing things 
• Skills in supporting people to develop goals and look to the future 

Mirrages, Myths and Emperors' New Clothes?

Collaboration and cooperation in Multi-disciplinary teams and organisations is hard enough for all professionals working within them, social workers particularly so. I have tried to explore Integrated Care Systems, which in essence, institutionalise joint working, but is seen  by its advocates as a good and necessary development. It is a mirage, which does little, if anything, to address the threats which are a real and present danger, not just to

socialwork, but to and for communities, individuals and the causes of social inclusion and justice. Perhaps it is not a mirage, but quicksand, a swamp. 

To place Social Work and Care in their wider context, have a look at the writings of Cormac Russell and John Knight (10), Alex Fox (11) and Peter Beresford (12) all of whom provide a totally different paradigm to that presently underpinning Integrated Care Systems. 

Social Work can potentially be both powerful and transformative, rooted in communities and neighbourhoods if released from the bureaucracy and the false rhetoric of Integrated Care Systems. It cries out to be released from present day 19th-century asylum-based narratives of social care reform. Is has to be freed to enable, rather than simply process and facilitate thus recapturing  the dynamic relationship between individuals, communities and the State, and by no means least, make a reality of the radical nature of participation and involvement. 

Dr Mervyn Eastman

References:

1. David Brindle. Changing Faces of Westminster "Who was not up to the Task"? Care Management Matters CMM (2023)
2. https;/www.england.nhs.uk/integratedcare/
3. Scobie S. "Integrated Care Explained" Nuffield Trust Explainer (2021)
4. Ibid
5. Harris J, Whitew J " Collaborative Working" Dictionary of Social Work and Care. Oxford (2013) pp 101-102
6. Ibid p 102
7. Bark H, Dixon J, Lang J. "The Professional Identity of Social Workers in MentalHealth Services. A Scoping Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (2023)
8. Banks S. Ethics and Values in Social Work. Practical Social Work. (4th Ed) BASW (Mclean/ Palgrave) 1995
9. Maclean S, Finch J, & Tedam P. SHARE: A New Model for Social Work. Kerwin Maclean Associates (2018)
10. Russell C & Knight J. The Connected Community: Discovering the Health, Wealth and Power of Neighbourhoods. Berett-Koelher Publishers (2022)
11. Fox A. "A New Health and Care System: Escaping the Invisible Asylum". Policy Press. (2021)
12. Beresford P. "Participatory Ideology: From Exclusion to Involvement" Policy Press (2021)

  

 

 

  

,

 

THE PORTRAYAL OF OLDER ADULTS IN CHARLES DICKENS'S THIRD NOVEL (1838-1839) 

NICHOLAS NICKLEBY

PART THREE: THE CAST OF CHARACTERS CONTINUED [2/2]

READERS familiar with Charles Dickens's life and works would quickly become aware that his opinion and attitude to the law was, let's say, contemptuous. Our exploration of Pickwick Papers and Oliver Twist and now Nicholas Nickleby he writes of prisons, judges, tricks and lawsuits. As a young man, he toyed with the idea of becoming a lawyer. He had little sympathy for adult criminals whom he considered exploited and abused children and approved of "hard labour in prisons and felt satisfaction and witnessing a determined thief, swindler or vagrant, sweating profusely at the treadmill or the crank"(1). He was however against public hanging. Like many Victorians, he abhors child abuse, but unlike those in power, he railed against the political collusion that accepted such abuses, whether in the implementation of the Poor Law or in educational establishments. His Dotheboys Hall narrative in Nicholas Nickleby is brutal and many commentators argue was his most effective, given that it directly brought about reforms and the abolition of such practices that sent unwanted children to such schools (2)

In his early novels, the focus was on individual children, but as Andrzej Diniejko points out he later exposed and laid bare the wider Victorian social policy context, the effects of industrialization and "a bitter diagnosis of the Condition of England" (3). Our interest however is in the perpetrators. Nancy, and the proxy Rose Maylie for Mary Hogarth (see below) were victims of older adults ( eg Fagin and Bumble) and Smike was the victim of Squeers and his own father, the contemptuous, cunning and unscrupulous money lender, Ralf Nickleby. The juxtaposition of the children, Oliver Twist, Rose Marley, Smike and, later as we shall see, Jo from Bleak House, Little Nell (The Old Curiosity Shop) and Little Dorrit and their ageing abusive perpetrators, is in my view telling. Furthermore, it is worth noting that we are looking at institutional, employment and domestic/family abuse. Children and young teenagers were modelled on the seventeen-year-old Mary Hogarth who died in Dickens's arms. Innocence and purity set against old, misanthropic, ugly, deformed, grotesque, scheming, repulsive and manipulative are just a few portrayals of older adults throughout Dickens's writings. His social commentary and the economic precariousness of the Victorian working, business and middling classes are a significant backdrop to 

his literary output. He did not ignore the relative wealth of what we would call the blue and white-collar professional classes. Oppression ranged from nature, such as fog, to buildings, such as workhouses, streets, and rookeries, through to industrialisation, railways, the law and the commodification of labour. So yes, Dickens was a powerful social critic even in his early writings ( today would be classed as an influencer), but he also throughout his life monetized his writing and his public-speaking and social critique. He penned vast numbers of cast characters, minor and major with multi-layered plots and storylines, but he was never arrogant. As Tony Schwab says about Dickens's vision in Nicholas Nickleby

" he sees morality and refined sentiment in any harsh condition and always envisions a future state of altruism" (4) -unless of course, they were unrepentant older adults! 

As we explore the final older characters I am reminded, and therefore stress again, of Dickens's child and adolescent experiences. His sense of abandonment, poverty, rejection, prisons, his father's debts, homelessness, lack of education,  and of sibling jealousy and thus, his drive "to make something of himself" which is portrayed in this third novel. We need also to ponder his young adult workload, his obsessions, his fatherhood, his controlling behaviour and his business dealings. All these experiences impacted Dickens and his sense of self throughout his life course and arguably at the time he was writing Nicholas Nickleby he had an underdeveloped sense of self, which indeed Nicholas reflected. Dickens's older characters also lacked nuance. Viewed by some literary critics and a few Dickens scholars the characters generally were seen as one-dimensional and the older ones particularly as odious and stereotyped. Yet we conceded that the Cheerble twins, Tim Linkwater, and even Norman Noggs are seen as kindly, jolly, affectionate idolizing older adults. But they, alongside the likes of Brownlow and Pickwick are also stereotypes. Villans by and large are demonized. Children are sanctified. The demons were killed off, and the children were rescued, even if we regard death as a release.

 

Time to continue our portrayals. I have again used aged 50plus as my definition of an older adult (explained in previous blogs), and whilst Dickens very helpfully frequently evidence "old age/elderly" and even specific ages, there are others whom we can only say are of  an"uncertain age." Arguably I have taken liberties but my rationale for inclusion is explained in the narrative.

MR AND MRS CURDLE (of Uncertain Age): The question I asked myself was, what do I have in mind about this couple? Dickens does not give a specific age, but the description and portrayal indicate that Mrs Curdle is the patroness of the Crummles Company "dressed in a morning wrapper, with a little cap stuck upon her head"(5) She "was supposed by those who knew her best informed on such points, to possess quite the London taste in matters related to literature and the drama" (6) 

Mr Curdle had authored a 64-page pamphlet on the character of the Nurse's deceased husband in Romeo and Juliet. In addition "he wore a loose robe on his back, and his right forefinger on his forehead, after the portraits of Sterne.. to whom somebody said he bore a striking resemblance." (7) The illustration below may say far more than simply his mannerism, but does not evidence that Curdle was not at least in his middle years. Dr Jacqueline Banerjee reminds us that Dickens was attracted to the theatre and those performers who populated it. The rather pantomime nature of the Crummles was a commentary on society itself being a pantomime (8). One could get carried away with the notion that they and the Curdles were simply offering a "subversive purpose, providing a diversity of responses, producing fluidity, liberation and change" (9) They are pantomime characters and perhaps we should not dwell too much on their characterisation or age. The description of their dress and mannerisms remind us that Dickens himself was a dandy dresser and took particular attention to how he looked, but that said, pantomimes by their very nature ridicule and exaggerate the characters, especially through their costumes. At the end of the day, Dickens may simply be having a laugh, and padding the storyline/narrative as Victorian authors did when writing in serialised form. Old age, even today is ridiculed in Christmas pantos both in terms of costume and script. 

                                         Lawrence Sterne (novelist) painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds     

                           (1760) Dickens may be saying more about mannerisms than age

                                         

 

MR PUGSTYLES: Described as a "plump old gentleman in a violent heat" He heads a deputation to Mt Gregsbury MP concerning his behaviour. (see above). Note " plump and violent heat"

MISS BROWNDOCK: Difficult to call. She was however the focus of Mrs Nickleby's rambling remembrances and referenced "Why, your poor dear papa's cousin's sister-in-law -taken into partnership by a lady that kept a school in Hammersmith and made a fortune in no time at all". According to Nicholas's mother, she won £10,000 on the lottery ( £1,142,949 today), so rambling indeed! This says more about the portrayal of Mrs Nickleby which is discussed below.

DR LUMBEY: Again it is unclear as to determine whether he was an older adult, but the narrative description is worth examining. If we follow Chi Luu's analysis of Dickens and the linguistic art of the minor characters we ask what image do we have in mind? "He was a stout bluff looking gentleman, with no shirt collar to speak of, and a beard that had been growing since yesterday morning, for Dr Lumby was popular, and the neighbourhood was prolific." Erring on the side of caution let's again say he was of uncertain age, but caution too, as we discussed in Oliver Twist, our question is whether Dickens's portrayals are both negative and positive and descriptions, therefore, may not have been evidence of gerontopobia at all. Being of an 'uncertain age' in and of itself could be quite meaningless on its own terms. But we are not looking at it on its own terms but in the context of Victorian attitudes to ageing, the language used related to older people and Dickens's propensity to exaggerate, stereotype, idealize and romanticize young and old alike. We know the model related to children and possibly pre and post-pubescent girls, but we continue our search for a model(s) underpinning his portrayals for older adults. The reason for including those adult characters of uncertain age is to discover any clues or evidence of lifelong gerontopobia.

MR SHAWLEY: Here we have another interesting character in that again, we do not have stated his chronological age, but we do have the context and his involvement with Squeers and Ralf Nickleby which allows for some speculation for fitting within our definition of an older adult.  Firstly he is either the father-in-law or stepfather of two boys placed at Dotheboys Hall; he is a friend of Squeers and "a man of a similar kidney to Squeers and the future of the boys is well understood between them" (10). One of the best portrayals I came across was that of Rodney Dale and explains far better than I just how obnoxious he was, including the fraud he and Ralf Nickleby with Squeers attempted to perpetrate. I quote at length - "A sanctimonious, hypocritical rascal, who places his stepsons in the care of Squeers at Dotheboys Hall, with the tacit understanding that they have no vacations, and to 'rough it a little'. Acting as the tool of Ralf Nickleby, he afterwards claims Smike, his son, for the purpose of separating him from Nicholas and restoring him to the custody of Squeers; but his villainy is discovered and, to secure his own safety he divulges the whole scheme, naming Rolf Nickleby as his employer, and implicating Squeers as a confederate" (11) The illustration below would possibly indicate an older adult or of late middle age.

 

               "Mr Snawley Entarges on Parental Instinct"  (May 1838) Habot Browne

               The Victorian Webb. Source J.A Hammerton, The Dickens Picture Book p 164

                    Scanned image and text by Philip V Allinghan

MR TRIMMERS: Here we have a close and probably long-term friend of the Cheeryble brothers which is implied in their trust in Mr Trimmers's judgement and of Dicken's own narrative of him being "a good creature" and "kind soul". They all shared the same value base and charitable endeavours (12) and whilst no age is given I think we are on safe ground in assuming that such relationships, though not rare between generations, are common within the same. Furthermore, Dickens frequently refers to a number of older characters (eg Pickwick) as kindly or warm-hearted.  

MR WATKINS: Another minor character of uncertain age, but being the godfather of Kate Nickleby, allegedly, according to the unreliable Mrs Nickleby owed £50 to her husband. He jumped bail, absconded to America, and "sent the family a pair of snow shoes" He was an old friend of Nicholas's father who had put up the security for his debt. Again we are left with a very subjective opinion that his relationship with Mr Nickleby, being Kate's godfather and sufficiently trusted to pay him back, and having the means to travel to the United States implies at least he was middle-aged if not over 50 years. 

I have left two central portrayals to last. Readers familiar with the novel and its some 146 cast members, 13% of whom are older by my reckoning (with the health warning of supposition) they are all profoundly significant in terms of depiction. Taken as a whole we have collectively, shabby, sanctimonious, fat, drab, wrinkled, cunning, pompous, tyrannical,  and criminal on the one hand and benevolent, kind, furry, charitable and generous on the other. As for the likes of the Cheeryble twins' portrayal, one could argue they reflect an ageist narrative by today's understanding. This may seem unfair to Dickens given he was writing in the mid-1800s, using literary, dramatic and exaggerated narratives across all age groups, classes and circumstances. 

The older characters in Dickens's novels are portrayed the way they were for a whole range of reasons and we are exploring why in the context of both the 19th and 21st Centuries. We recognise today children adopt age stereotypes but did they during Dickens's childhood and boyhood. He undoubtedly had an understanding of the lived experience of those older people with whom he would have been in contact, be they family, acquaintances of his parents or those living around Mile End Road, Portsmouth, St Pancras, London and Chatham in Kent, plus his trauma years back in London of 1820-24. We also know he was an avid childhood reader and observer thus learning about how older people were portrayed and behaved. These influenced his sense of self and esteem and moulded him as all our childhoods do. Dickens transitioned from childhood, boyhood and into early adulthood with an awareness of class and status, rejection, poverty, and of family secrets. Age, it is said, is "a social construct and people have different notions of 'old age' depending on their own age" (13). Evidence today on children's attitudes towards older adults suggests they are "complex, and mostly negative" yet on the other hand children also have "strong affectionate feelings toward older people, describing them as wonderful, kind and rich" (14) 

Dickens took with him into his journalism, his Court Reporting and early creative writing his own notions of age and ageing. Both the personal and professional come together in these early novels, and certainly in Nicholas Nickleby whether he was conscious of it or not. It is not surprising therefore there is a rich and exaggerated portrayal of characterization and caricature, but in my view, they cannot be uncoupled. Pickwick and Fagin were, in many ways, a reflection of his imagined future self - one desired, but the other feared. He did not kill off Pickwick, he reformed Scrooge as we will note when exploring his first Christmas Book, and he as he so often did, used death by suicide for those whose crimes that were so heinous even by Victorian standards.

It is time finally to look at Mrs Nickleby and Ralf Nickleby et al as they are central to this discussion.

MRS CATHERINE NICKLEBY: It has generally been accepted that she was based on Dickens's own mother, Elizabeth. Herein lies Pandora's box of emotions from angst, resentment, pity, and anger through to affection and care. The challenge we face is to disentangle the Dickens/mother relationship and whether that relationship affected his view of old age. 

David Paroissien says of Mrs Nickleby that her "distinctive 'scatter gabble' " was not based on Elizabeth Dickens at all, who was recorded and remembered by those who knew her as having "had a good stock of common sense and a matter of fact manner." Others however remembered her as " incoherent in her speech and vain about her wasp waist" (15). Nursemaid Mary Weller supported Elizabeth describing her as "a dear good mother and a fine woman" teaching Dickens to read, learn a bit of Latin and "generally instilling in him a love of reading and a desire of knowledge."(16) The relationship between Charles and his mother up until the age of seven, appeared positive. The fracture and thus resentment and sense of abandonment came when she refused to allow him to leave the Blackening factory, and return to school and favoured the needs and preference of his sister Fanny over his. He never forgave her. Did this underpin his portrayal of the eccentric clown that is Mrs Nickleby? Did he, as a child perceive his mother as old?  The clue may be that Mrs E Dickens's experience of her husband's imprisonment changed her from the time Mary Weller knew her? Returning to the renowned Dickensian scholar Schlicke, he concedes that "the likeness between her and Mrs Nickleby is simply the exaggeration of some slight peculiarities."(17) 

In her later widowhood years, Dickens comments that she had "a strong objection to be considered in the least old! (18) Like mother like son. In his response to Elizabeth's final years when she was living with dementia, Charles showed nothing but care and support of and for her. Schlicke acknowledges resentment existed and that that resentment "doubtless influenced the creation of so many unsatisfactory mothers throughout Dickens's fiction."(19) Donald Hawes's commentary re-enforces that of Schickes' in that of Elizabeth she is a harsh caricature of some aspects of the real woman's character  - her ebullience, her little vanities and wordiness and her often ill grounded optimism".(20). Elizabeth was in her late 40's early 50's when her son was writing Nicholas Nickleby and thus not perhaps unreasonable that any modelling on his own mother would reflect a woman in her late middle age early old age. That said, Nicholas was about 19 years old which implies Dickens was not relating chronological age to her, but more personality and character. The discussion therefore on children's and young people's perceptions of old age comes into play. It was however of an ageing woman described as weak, opinionated, rambling, and the precursor to the character Flora Finching in David Copperfield. 

It is said that many readers of Dickens at the time recognised themselves in his characterizations, some took offence and it may be reasonable to assume Dickens used them as payback, in Transactional Analysis terms, he was "cashing in stamps"!(21) Regardless, one cannot ignore the absolute probability that in part he reflected his mother in Mrs Nickleby given our understanding of a child's view of old age and offering a provocation the possibility of unconscious bias regarding the association between old age and parental power and control. It is the perception of age and ageing that is important, rather than necessarily chronological age, and herein lies the point regarding all those "of uncertain age" portrayals throughout. We do not always know what was in this young writer's mind about old age as he penned these early novels, but our exploration and pondering make for a torturous, yet fascinating journey.

             Illustration by Phiz [Note Mrs Nickleby being assisted by her daughter Kate]

 

              

          Stock photos of Victorian Older Women. The importance of images influencing perceptions and attitudes?

MR RALF NICKLEBY (Jnr), GODFREY( his father) and NICHOLAS ( Snr): Again we need to revisit the issue of realism v's reality in Dickens's portrayals. In these early novels, he was learning his craft and can be forgiven for failing to "recreate in terms of art, the reality which moved him."(22) But that said, are we, asking as did George Santagana in 1922  believe that "individuals like Quilp, or Squeers or Serjeant Buzfuz exist?"(23). Does it even matter?

The descriptions of Dickens's characters bother many a literary critic and even within two years of his death, he was accused of failing "to apply realism, and creations so fantastic that one is at a loss to understand how he could, without hallucination, believe them to be like reality." The source goes on to include the Mantalinies and Arthur Gride as "monstrous failures" on account of their lack of "fluctuating spontaneity."(24) Given the importance of the older Nickleby tribe, as characterized by Dickens, we now focus our attention. 

Ralf Nickleby as far as we know was not based on a real person and therefore a creation of Dickens's imagination and pure fiction. He was portrayed as a " cunning and unscrupulous money lender with a cold restless eye, which tells of cunning that would announce itself in spite of him."(25)  Howes goes on to add "people trapped in his tenacles include the members of the Nickleby family, the Mantalini's, Squeers, Gride and the Brays."(26)

Unlike Squeers and Gride, however, we also have an aristocratic cast and social class specifically is of central concern throughout the novel as is the precariousness of social position, which as Schlike points out "resulted from the tension between the new wealth of the emerging middle classes  and the continuing political and social power of the  aristocracy." Furthermore "Noggs is a failed gentleman and Nicholas the son of a failed gentleman"  - whereas Ralf owes his status to the accumulation of wealth rather than gentility. (27) He, we are told " had the face of the old man was stern, had features and forbidding...The old man's eye was keen with twinklings of avarice and cunning" (28)

Ralf Nickleby's brother Godfrey, known as Nicholas the Elder speculated his little capital losing both his heart, went to bed and died.

The grandfather of Nicholas is portrayed as "a worthy gentleman, who taking it into his head rather late in life that he must get married, and not being young enough, or rich enough to aspire to the hand of a lady of fortune, had wedded an old flame out of mere attachment"(29). The father of Nicholas ( brother of Ralf) is described as of a "timid and retiring disposition. Embraced his wife and children - solemnly commended them to the one who never deserted his widow and her fatherless children, and smilingly gently on them - observes that he thought he could fall asleep."(30)

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS AND QUESTIONS

Is the association of class, wealth and cunning, duplicity, child abuse, bankruptcy and the various portrayals we have highlighted actually tell us whether Dickens had an issue, not just about family relationships, but old age? If these characters are taken individually, it appears not, but when viewed as a whole we can see the narratives are stereotypes of old age and ageing by today's definitions. Teresa Mangum writes that "Dickens carries the image of the rapacious old person to grotesque extremes- where even grandchildren are being prematurely aged by their obsession with family money." (31)

The Nickleby family relationships and household structures demonstrate how families can become fractured when the determinants of customary practice, economic status and demographic factors threaten to undermine traditional values of care, support and kinship. Ralf Nickleby benefited and exploited and broke those values. That is why for me, his portrayal as a son, uncle, and father is so powerful. Was this Dickens's intention aided and abetted by a cohort of older people?  Ralf Nickeby was a poisonous spider. For Dickens, there was only one consequence. He could have been killed off by a third party, or some supernatural intervention, or shipped off to Australia, but he opts for suicide "in a mood of frenzy, hatred and despair". Was this simply reflecting the 19th-century view that an older person's life course of wickedness, exploitation and the betrayal of the social contract mean a very torrid end? The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby, Containing a Faithful account of the Misfortunes, Uprising, Downfallings, and Complete Career of the Nickleby Family says it all, in that it is a family saga ending with a poor nineteen-year-old eventually experiencing a happy, contented warm family life, whilst many of the older members and cast were alone, miserable or dead. (32)

John Varese writes "Ralf's fate at the end of a rope, in the very place where his dejected son Smike once rested, delivers the novel's final verdict on the guilt of those who refuse to see beyond their own financial gain and inflexibility."(33) But the final message is the contrast between the young Nickleby and the ageing Ralf. He dies intestate, the money could have gone to Nicholas and the family but is rejected because of how it was gained. Youth equals integrity and old age equals greed and cruelty. 

REFERENCES:

1. Christian R. "CD's Great Expectations: Dickens Attitude to the Law. A New Interpretation for Students. ( unsourced or dated)

2. Diniejko. A. " Charles Dickens as a Social Commentator and Critic."  The Victorian Web. (Feb 2012)

3. Ibid

4. Schwab.T. "Dickens's Vision in Nicholas Nickleby.1: What the Wayfare Sees'. The Victorian Web ( March 2020)

5. Philip A.J & Laurence Gadd. V.D "A Dickens Dictionary" Cresent Books 1989 ed p78

6. Hawes D ."Who's Who in Dickens"  Routledge. London and New York (2002) p53

7. Ibid ( Philip/Gadd) p78

8. Banerjee. J. "Self Preservation and Self Realization in Dickens's NN ( Victorian Web) Sept 2021

9. Eigner. E. " The Dickens Pantomime" Berkely. UCP (1989) Quoted in Banergee (ibid)

10. Ibid (Philip & Gadd. L (p 208)

11. Dale. Rodney " The Wordsworth Dickens Directory" Wordsworth Reference (20050 p 88

12 Ibid ( Philip and Gadd.L) p296

13. Robinson S and Howatson-Jones, quoting Levy and McDonald (2010) remind us that "age is a social construct and people have different notions of old age depending on their own age" Children's Views of Older People" Journal of Research in Childhood Education ( June 2014). Referencing Levy and McDonald. ( source unknown)

14. Seefeld et al. " Children's Attitude Towards the Elderly" (1977) [Source Unknown]

15. Paroissien D. "Chacter" Originals in Schlike P (Ed) Schlike P. (Ed) pOxford Readers Companion to Dickens. OUP (1999) p 82

16. Schlike. P (ed) Ibid p 170

17. Ibid p 171

18. Ibid p 171

19. Ibid. p 171

20. Ibid (Howes) p164

21. Transactional Analysis is a model related to personality. Best know regarding Parent: (Critical and Nurturing). Adult: (Rational and Objective) and Child: (Compliant or Free) Ego States

22. Paroissen (Ibid) p76

23. Ibid p 76

24. Lewis. G.H. " Bleak House" Critism and scholarship: the first 100 years. In Schilike (ibid) p 81

25. Hawes p 166-5

26. Ibid p 166-5

27 Schilike P. Ibid p415

28. Philp and Gadd Ibid p 208

29. Ibid p 207

30 Ibid p 207

[ THE PORTRAYAL OF OLDER ADULTS IN THE WRITINGS OF CHARLES DICKENS CONTINUES WITH THE OLD CURIOSITY SHOP (PART ONE) TO FOLLOW ]  

  

      

THE PORTRAYAL OF OLDER ADULTS IN CHARLES DICKENS'S THIRD NOVEL (1838-1839)

NICHOLAS NICKLEBY

A Ruined Gentleman, A Cruel Schoolmaster, A Melodramatic Thesbian, A Ruthless Moneylender and a Kindly Old Clerk

PART TWO: THE CAST OF CHARACTERS [1/2]

                           "The characters in Dickens's novels are real in the same way that characters in plays are real, and in the same way, perhaps, that living people seem real to each other. Their true identities are masked even from themselves under conventionally prescribed poses, yet declare themselves through all kinds of surface clues; not only in the overt act but in its accompanying gesture on facial expression, not just in the spoken word, but in the intonation and turn of speech which it is uttered"  [ E.D.H Johnson. The Victorian Web (2000)] (1)

I have never been a great fan of Dickens's first biographer John Forster (1812-1876) (2) a close and intimate friend and whilst he drew heavily from Dickens's letters, he also drew upon his own personal and lifelong relationship with him, and thus biased. As an aside, Forster airbrushed the person and role of Catherine Dickens and in the scant references he did make, they were condescending in the extreme. That said, the influence of his three-volume biography, coming so quickly after Dickens's passing, cannot be overestimated, as it shaped successive views of the man and author for a generation. It also, not unreasonably, framed how the characters Dickens created were interpreted and perceived. This is important, as the Forster/Dickens relationship spanned not just their social interactions, but he was in many ways a sounding board for Dickens in their formation and portrayals and even storylines. To say that Forster's naturally bloated ego took on an even greater dimension following his commodification and marketing of Dickens would be an understatement. 

In exploring the portrayals of older adults, we have to concede that Dickens was a master of character creation, be they humorous, comic, tragic, kind-hearted, compassionate, cruel or downright evil or grotesque. He was however still learning his craft and it is argued that the characters in his early novels were stunted, dramatically constructed and underdeveloped. Johnson references Gilbert Chesterton's book published in 1906 about Dickens at this time of his career applying to Pickwick, Oliver Twist and Nicholas right up to Martin Chuzzelwit ) "...the moving machinery exits only to display entirely static character. Things in Dickens's story shift and change only to give us glimpses of great characters that do not change at all". (3)  Johnson is more charitable, stating that Chesterton makes little or no "allowance for the surprise and pleasure of attending progressive revelation. While characters do not change in the sense that they are physically transformed, their experience leads them to behave so unpredictably that growing familiarity is attended by a constant sense of discovery." (4) By the time Dickens penned A Christmas Carol (1843) perhaps Scrooge bucked the trend! What is clear however is that many of the major and minor older cast characters, be they comic or foolish "exhibit(ed) .....extraordinary resilience and imaginative supremacy over adversity, born of an unquenchable inclination to idealised reality" (5)- which includes Mrs Nickleby!

So what of the older grotesque villains, which include Wackford Squeers or of the philanthropic Brownlow of Oliver Twist and in this third novel, the Cheeryble twins? As far as the brothers are concerned, Johnson posits that "Dicken's portrayal of this type is so deliberately lacking in realism that one may doubt whether exemplars were ever actual to their creator in other than a symbolic sense." (6)   Dickens said they were based on real characters! Arguably by the time he was in his early and mid-thirties working on Domby and Son and David Copperfield, he had developed greater insights "into the organic constitution of Victorian society (which) led to important developments in his methods of presenting character." (7)  Certainly by the time he was himself middle-aged, let's say ( 1852-1861) he increased his social, and some would claim radicalism. He was not in my view ever a radical - but many would claim otherwise!

                               John Forster, painted by Charles E. Perugini (top)

                                         Gilbert E Chesterton  (bottom)

It is here that we look specifically at older adults, both principal and minor. Some are clearly referred to as "old" or "elderly, others are of uncertain age, but given their stated familial relationship with other characters, or their role with them we can reliably assume they are fifty-plus. Regardless, of their descriptions and role we need to examine them through the prism of ageism, gerontophobia and Victorian assumptions and presumptions that we explored in Part One. The casual ageist descriptions of some, as we would judge them today, are quite telling. Walter Bray, Madeline's father "scarce fifty years, looked older" and was described as "emaciated"; Mr Crow was "elderly and shabby"; Arthur Gride was "lean and bent"; Tim Linkinwater was "fat elderly and large faced"; Mr Pugstyles was "a plump old gentleman in a violent head"; Peg Stiderskes, the housekeeper of Arthur Gride as "short, thin weasen bleary-eyed old woman palsy stricken and hideously ugly" ( see below) - whatever would I do without Donald Hawes! (8) 

How far are the descriptions of these static characters a reflection and evidence of commonly held Victorian attitudes? Teresa Mangum's excellent contribution to A Companion to Victorian Literature and Culture (1999) (9)  explores the "contradiction between the rhetoric of age demanding respect, and even veneration and the reality experiencing contempt, ridicule, and neglect." (10) Victorians, and not surprisingly including Dickens, were diverse and often contradictory. The common speech of the day says Mangum "reveals a fascination with old people and their experience of ageing" and used derogatory terms as we just referenced from Nicholas Nickelby. We already know that before the Victorian age, little regard was paid to dates of birth or chronological age, but increasingly in the 19th Century, Victorians loved to classify, list and label everything from bugs and moths to homo sapiens! If you were, however, infirm or frail ( even today a medical term) and/or physically deteriorating you were also classified as elderly, or the aged ( nothing changes). Several older adult characters in Nicholas Nickelby were, on the one hand, described negatively, yet on the other...we'll see as we ponder Dickens's portrayals. What is evident is the interrelationships between gender and growing older; being productive or non-productive; rich, poor or destitute, and social class. Dickens's life course took him through all these either personally or as a journalist and as an astute observer of humankind, and their living conditions as he walked the streets of London

ENCOUNTERING THE OLDER CHARACTERS

                       " The linguistic richness of character names we find in Dickens is something we'll probably never see the like again in literature.....Remarkably, it's Dickens inventive construction of the names themselves that can round out the story of a character's motivations, nature or background....Even for minor characters who are briefly mentioned, in the Dickensian world, knowing just their names is something enough to know the most important features about them....Dickens was adept at linguistically manipulating a name in different memorable ways to persuade readers in one direction or the other"  [Chi Luu: 04.05.2016 ] (11)

We have briefly encountered a number previously, and it is necessary at this point for me to select both principal and minor characters. I have been aided by those references in either Study guides or highlighted in the mainstream, non-academic articles or literature (12)(13)

WALTER BRAY: Whilst referenced earlier, what is interesting is Dickens's contrast between Bray's younger and older self. As a younger adult, he was handsome, fit and full of energy wooing Madeline's mother whom he "swept off her feet". Now in later life, he has become self-centred and in debt. Gales Study Guide says " Dickens's portrayal of this narcissistic, self-deluded man is one of the most subtle depictions of evil in all his works."(14) I probably wouldn't go that far, but take the point! My ever-faithful source, Donald Hawes states that Bray " reluctantly agrees" to the marriage of Madeline to Gride (15) whilst Gales says he "forced" her (16). I concede I may be overly picky here! What is not in doubt however is the contrast between the description of Madeline, and no surprise here, his description of her as "a beautiful young girl" and her father which is stark. Nicholas rescues her from her fate, aided and abetted by the sudden death of her father on the wedding day and eventually marries her himself (17). Don't you just love Dickens!

                        

       Walter Bray and Madeline - Sol Eytinge, Jr's twelfth illustration for Nicholas Nickleby (1867)

          (Published in The Victorian Web)

OLD BOBSTER: At one level a pretty minor character, but he is the tyrannical father of young Cecilia and we have yet another Nicholas rescue mission when Newman Noggs mistakes her for Madeline Bray. Dickens's narrative contrasts a wicked father, driven by debt and a young innocent daughter suffering from his physical abuse ( ie "he frequently boxes her ears"). 

MR CROWL: " Shabby and elderly and hard-featured". He is portrayed as a comic, even foolish man "who wears a wig which he takes off with his hat". Dickens frequently found people funny and his literature peppered with them. Victorian humour writ large! It is the juxtaposition of old age, being funny and yet at the same time foolish which I find interesting. Are there just too many examples?

MR BROOKER: Tracking an illustration in order to estimate his "chronological" age was a challenge. Given his life course and role within the novel there is no doubt he was an older adult. The part in the TV adaption 2001 was actor Donald Sumpter and we are reminded of Chi Luu's point above. Mr Brooker in the novel is portrayed as a beggar and was previously Ralf Nickleby's former clerk. It was he who took Smike and dumped him at Dotherboys Hall. Hawes writes: "Returning to England having served an eight-year sentence of transportation, he is angered by Ralf Nickleby's refusal to help him, and in revenge, reveals the story of Smike's origin" namely, Smike was the son of Ralf Nickleby (18). He is at the end of the day a sinister presence.

COLONEL CHOWSER: Here we have a crony of Ralf Nickleby and a gambling, villainous sycophant of Sir Mulberry Hawk. What's the clue to the age of this despicable character?  - " A white-haired person"! 

MR GREGSBURY MP: What image do we have? He is described as " a tough, burly, thick-headed gentleman, with a loud voice, pompous manner, a tolerable command of sentences with no meaning in them, and in short, every requisite for being a very good member indeed."(19)  He basically wanted to exploit Nicholas. As a minor character, we again reference Chi Luu and ask ourselves what image do we have? I include him as I know what I have in mind. Regardless, it is important to remember that Dickens was never enamoured with the Members of Parliament. His characterization may well be a reflection of this rather than a reflection of Gregsbury's age! 

ARTHUR GRIDE: We are on much firmer ground here. Dickens is explicit: " ...a little old man, much bent and slightly twisted. His hair was of stealthy, cat-like obsequiousness, his expression a wrinkled leer of cunning, slyness, and avarice. He sat in a low chair looking up into the face of Ralf Nickleby." The character in literary terms is important given his relationship with a number of central players and the developing storyline. It is a pantomime performance with the Victorian reader hissing and booing. The written imagery and the original illustration endorsed and approved by Dickens are uncompromising ( "Phiz" - Hablot Knight Browne). His comeuppance is typical of Dickens and reflects the Victorian belief that unless the older adult repents the end will be a dramatic and justified death. In Gride's case, he was murdered in his nightgown whilst in bed. (20) In short, this moneylender is repulsive and old.

                Arthur Gride (Harry Furness 1910) Scanned Image -Philip Allington [The                                                Charles Dickens Library facing 1V. p624] The Victorian Web 

SIR THOMAS GRIMBLE: At one level there is perhaps nothing to see here. He is described as a "very proud man...with six grown up and most lovely daughters and the finest park in the country."(21)  A Victorian male with charming daughters, social status with standing and respect. Old age at its Victorian finest! There was much to see after all. 

THOMAS LENVILLE: The primary point to make here is that " his age did not appear to exceed thirty, though many at first sight would consider him much older, as his face was long, and very pale from the constant application of paint"

A secondary point, and forgive the indulgence, Nicholas again showed his more unconstrained temperament in that he confronts Lenville. He "knocks him down, and compels him to apologise humbly and submissively."(22) The first had been Wackford Squeers!

MR LILLYVICK: A minor character who collected water rates and is described as "a short old gentleman in drabs and gaiters, with a face that might have been carved out of "lignum vitae" ( wood of life)  for anything that appeared to the contrary" (23)  Was this a stereotype of an ageing, belligerent and wooden personality? As I have questioned previously with a number of portrayals is whether Dickens was conflating age with the employment of a character? Was it the character being a job worth and therefore unrelated to age? I am leaning toward the view that the Lillyvick portrayal reflected a Victorian attitude towards old age. I could, of course, be overreaching!

TIM LINKINWATER: Bookkeeper for the saintly Cheeryble Twins for over forty years. Described as "fat, elderly, large-faced..with silver spectacles and a powered head." Linkwater is fussed over and seen as a family member of both his employers and Nickleby. A good old age in Victorian terms. 

Dickens could not resist including that Linkwater owned a blackbird called Dick, "blind, sleepy and dreaming of ending his days in a large savvy cage, and had lost his voice from old age" (24)

In passing note the name - ' Leekin'-water'

                                          Tim Linkinwater overseeing the work of Nicholas

 Cheeryble Brothers and Tim Linkinwater. Sol Eytinge, Jr.Wood-engraving (1867) Scanned by Philip v. Allingham [ Victorian Web ]

MR AND MRS V CRUMMLES: This couple was difficult to call. The original illustration by Phiz, and agreed by Dickens, says of Mrs Crummles, that she was a "stout, portly female, apparently between forty and fifty, in a tarnished silk cloak, with her bonnet dangling from by strings in her hand, and her hair  ( of which she had a great quantity) braided in a large festoon over each temple." Of her husband Vincent, who befriends Nicholas and Smike and is clearly a hugger, Dickens writes that "he had a very full under lip, a hoarse voice, as though he were in the habit of shouting very much, and very short black hair, shaved off nearly to the crown of his head -to-admit ...of his more easily wearing character wigs of any shape or pattern." (25) The acting troupe of which he owned and led, called him "old bricks and mortar because his acting style is rather in the heavy and ponderous way" (26) 

Dickens had great fun with the theatre setting in general and the Crummles in particular. We should not be fooled by their having a '10-year-old' daughter called Ninetta promoted as "The Infant Phenomenon." The Crummles despite their rather benign public portrayal would today have had Children's Services all over their parenting when in fact the infant was an infant! 

I was in two minds about whether to include them, but overall thought it would be unreasonable not to. The narrative descriptions; the original and subsequent illustrations; plus film and theatre adaptations to say nothing of  Kay Heath's seminal book "Ageing By the Book - The Emergence of Midlife in Victorian Britain ( 2009) (27) provided the rationale. The Crummles were by no means physically frail or infirm, quite the contrary, they were ambitious and certainly adventurous, hence their emigration to America, yet they commodified and monetised Ninetta to the point of abuse. One can, with this early or late middle-aged couple detect in the young adult Dickens if not a Pickwickian ageing utopia but, in the words of Professor Karen Chase a belief in the  "retention of youth throughout older years" ( 28)    

(Top) Mr and Mrs Crumbles: Sol Eytinge Jr (1867) Wood-engraving. Dickens in Nicholas Nickleby ( Diamond edition) facing 1V. 163. Scanned by Philip V Allingham. [ The Victorian Web]

( Bottom) Vincent Crumble by Phiz ( Hablot Knight Browne)

LORD MALLOWFORD: A brief reference made by Arthur Gride to his housekeeper Peg Sliderskew when they were discussing what he should wear for his wedding day. He considered a bottle-green suit lucky. Why? When he first put it on " old Lord Mallowford was burnt to death in his bed, and all the post-orbits fell in" (29) What is more interesting to us, is in fact, the character of the housekeeper

PEG SLIDERSKEW: Here, Dickens does not hold back, partly to reinforce the dismal relationship ( employee/employer) between Gride and his housekeeper, and the coming together of a couple of grotesque and vile individuals in a pretty vile house! She sees herself as a victim of Grides' unpleasantness towards her - though they were well matched. It is worth noting that Sliderskew takes revenge on Gride by stealing " his box of documents related to Madeline Grey's fortune".  Squeers is sent to search for her to get them back, but foiled by Nicholas and Frank Cheeryble. 

So how does Dickens portray her? "A short, thin,  weasen , blear-eyed old woman, palsy ridden and hideously ugly, wiping her shrivelled face upon her dirty apron"

Her fate, as does Squeers (below), illustrates yet again, the comeuppance of unrepentant older people. They are convicted and transported in chains, where they die across the other side of the world. Today, as in Victorian times, and hence novels, the notion of reaping and sowing is writ large! Dickens was the master.

       Mr Squeers and Mrs Sliderskew are unconscious of Visitors. Hablot Knight                   Browne (Phiz). Etching on steel. (1839)    

MR AND MRS WACKFORD SQUEERS: 

                    Mr Squeers: Furniss's 4th illustration (1910) . The CD Library                                  Edition, facing 1V.33. Scanned by Philip V Allingham. Victorian Webb

Perhaps of all the characters portrayed as young, middle-aged or older throughout the book, it is Wackford Squeers, the Master of the Yorkshire school, Dotheboys, who is the most memorable. As Pickwick dominated Dickens's first, and Fagin the second, here we have in his third, a 52/53-year-old brute. The brutishness did not suddenly come upon Squeers in later life, nor did the paedophilia of Fagin, but it is interesting that Dickens introduces two of the three in terms of moral corruptness, inhumanity and the exploitation of children. This is in total contrast to Pickwick who is the complete anthesis, but nevertheless, he was portrayed as silly, immature and needed protecting from himself - but, here it is, lovable! 

Wackord Sqeeres is described thus: "He had but one eye - unquestionably useful; being of a greenish-grey, and in shape resembling the fanlight of a front door. The blank side of his face was much wrinkled and puckered up, which gave him a very sinister appearance, especially when he smiled. His hair was very flat and shiny, save at the ends - brushed up very stiffly from a low protruding forehead. He was about two or three and fifty - a trifle below the middle size- wore a white handkerchief with long ends, and a suit of scholastic black - his coat sleeves  a great deal too long, and his trousers a great deal too short" (30) In addition he had a "harsh voice and coarse manner" (31)

His cruelty is well known and not even Lionel Bart would have turned him into a rather mischievous character singing 

"C-l-e-a-n,clean: W-i-n-win"! The repressiveness of Squeers was further made explicit by not just his association with Ralf Nickleby but his treatment of the vulnerable and utterly fragile boy Smike. Dickens frequently throughout his writings contrasted evil and cruel older adults with the pure, innocent and exploited children they abused. It is also interesting to note that there is frequently a familial relationship as in the case of Smike. 

It is thought that Squeers was based on William Shaw the proprietor of Bows Academy in Yorkshire when he and Phiz researched Yorkshire schools. But as Hawes points out, Dickens claimed that Squeers was not based on an individual but as a representative of his class. (32)  This raises an interesting question in regard to his portrayal of older adults. Rather than based on "actual" people ( eg Pickwick and Fagin) were they primarily representatives of a class or of old age and older people? Was this a case of othering, stereotyping and prejudice against older adults?  Indeed, was it evidence of gerontophobia? 

Squeers and Gride at least enjoyed their "Saga" cruise together when arrested, convicted and transported! 

Mrs Squeers herself was, by no means, a bystander given the level of cruelty and abuse she inflicted on the unfortunate "pupils" at Dothboys. She was "of a large, raw-boned figure, about half a head taller than Mr Squeers, dressed in a dimity night-jacket; with her hair in papers - she had also a dirty nightcap on, relieved 

by a yellow cotton handkerchief, which tied under her chin" (33) " She periodically dosed them with brimstone and treacle, partly because if they hadn't something or other in the ways of medicine they'd be always ailing or giving a world of trouble, and partly because it spoils their appetites and comes cheaper than breakfast and dinner." (34)  The boys, following the removal of her husband get their revenge by forcing her to kneel in humiliation and swallow the very brimstone and treacle she had forced on them. Dickens rescues her through the character of young John Browdie a 6-foot strong, kindly jolly local farmer and friend of Nicholas. 

Dotheboys, together with Ralf Nicklby, and Gride have all colluded in the institutionalised abuse of children. They were commissioners and perpetrators as were the parent(s) guardians of the children. It was an industry and Dickens powerfully and effectively exposed the inhumane practice and policy as he did with the policy and practice in many Workhouses. The Squeers and the Bumbles, the Guardians and Parishes, the rich and affluent classes were in the crosshairs of this twenty-seven-year-old author and he didn't miss.

                   The internal economy of Dotheboy's Hall. Hablot Knight Brown (Phiz)

                          Etching on Steel, first published in monthly parts by Chapman & Hall                            in May 1838

TO BE CONTINUED IN PART THREE: THE CAST OF CHARACTERS (2/2)