Content introduction Main body

The practical value of the course work. The gloomy house, the line separating public law and private society, has been violated. Dickens' entire novel is built around an event that permeates the public sphere and therefore penetrates the private sphere: the Jarndyce and Jarndyce Jarndyce court case. The case is based on a will that has been kept in the chancery for many years. This legal quagmire affects all the characters in Dickens' novel and, in addition, connects most of the plot. The office, which is dominated by men, completely controls the personal life of the characters. Instead of maintaining a separation between the spheres, the Jarndyce and Jarndyce public case dominates the work of the private sphere."
The structure of the coursework. The course work consists of an introduction, the main part, a conclusion and a bibliography.

1. 
   Charles Dickens' life and experience.
   

He was a great English novelist and one of the most popular writers of all time. Among his most famous books are "A Christmas Carol", "David Copperfield", "Great Expectations", "Oliver Twist", "Pickwick Papers" and "A Tale of Two Cities". Dickens created some of the most famous characters in English literature. He also created descriptions of places that delighted readers for a long time. Dickens was an astute observer of life and understood humanity perfectly, especially young people. He sympathized with the poor and helpless, ridiculed and criticized the selfish, greedy and cruel.
Dickens was also a surprisingly inventive comic artist. The warmth and humor of his personality are evident in all his works. Perhaps in no other major work of fiction does the reader get such strong and pleasant impressions about the person behind this story.
Charles John Huffam Dickens was born in Portsmouth, England, on February 7, 1812. He moved with his family to London when he was about two years old. Many events and people in Dickens' books are based on events and people from his life. Dickens' father, John Dickens, was a poor and good-natured clerk who worked for the Navy. John in some ways served as a model for Wilkins Micawber in the movie "David Copperfield". He spent some time in prison for debt, an event that Charles recreated in "Baby Dorrit." Even when John was free, he didn't have enough money to properly support his family. At the age of 12, Charles worked in a London factory, pasting labels on bottles of shoe polish. He only worked at this job for a few months, but the miser or that experience stayed with him for life. ¹
Dickens attended school from time to time until he was 15, and then left for good. He loved horseback riding and was especially fond of adventure stories, fairy tales and novels. He was influenced by such early English writers as William Shakespeare, Tobias Smollett and Henry Fielding. However, most of the knowledge that he later used as an author was gleaned from his observations of the surrounding life.
Dickens became a newspaper reporter in the late 1820s. He specialized in covering debates in parliament, and also wrote feature articles. Working as a reporter sharpened his naturally keen ear for conversation and helped develop the ability to realistically convey the speech of his characters. It also improved his ability to observe and write quickly and clearly. Dickens' first book, Sketches of Boz (1836), consisted of articles he wrote for the Monthly magazine and the London Evening Chronicle. These descriptions, fictional portraits and short stories reflected the mores and conditions of the time.
Personal misfortune overshadowed Dickens' public success. In 1836 he married Catherine Hogarth. Catherine had a sister, Mary, who died in 1837. Dickens' "If" in connection with Mary's death led some scholars to believe that he loved Mary more than his wife. Catherine was a good woman, but she lacked a great mind. She and Dickens had 10 children. The couple separated in 1858.
Dickens had remarkable mental and physical energy. He described his activities in thousands of letters, many of which are pleasant to read. He spent most of his busy social life with friends from the world of art and literature. Dickens loved drama and went to the theater as often as he could. When he became rich and famous, he got a hobby - producing and acting in amateur theatrical productions. He enjoyed great success by conducting public readings of his works. Dickens' gift for creating dramatic scenes in his novels can be traced to his love of the theater.²
In addition to writing, editing, and touring as a dramatic reader, Dickens has collaborated with various charities. When Frodo, Tolkien's feminized character, steps outside of his private home, discord arises.
While there is no structured legal system in Tolkien's Middle-Earth, men are expected to mitigate conflicts and maintain justice in the public sphere. When feminized characters are introduced into the public sphere, individual spheres disintegrate, and society cannot function properly. This ideal echoes the sentiments of those who opposed the changes in England in 1937, when women began to enter the legal sphere to claim additional rights under marriage laws. Tolkien links his text to the 1937 laws that deal with negligence, divorce and property.
In the "Cold House" and the "Brotherhood of the Ring" there is tension regarding mutual expectations and cooperation between the spheres. Instead of reinforcing each other's strengths, in the world of each novel, each sphere tries to fight separately from the other. On the one hand, the power of the public sphere does not extend far enough to help individuals, but, on the other hand, legal rights extend too far to the private sphere, so that individuals may mistakenly dictate actions to others. In the end, this tension paralyzes every sphere, and sufficient help is provided to a few.³
The regulation of female characters in The Cold House and The Brotherhood of the Ring is illustrated by comparing their situations with those of female colleagues and the legal norms of their time. The approach of the new historicism describes the ways in which women interact with the law in novels that reflect the reality of each author's time. Referring to the legal statutes, case law and social commentary of the respective eras of Dickens and Tolkien, it is possible to establish the connection of representation and criticism between the "Cold House", the "Brotherhood of the Ring" and the English laws on marriage and property of 1853 and 1937. Specific examples of each text reveal the complex relationship between literature and law, and also help to understand the holistic relationship between law and society

2.Construction of feminine identity through Charles Dickens’.

As Dickens wrote in The Gloomy House, breaking a promise was the original area in which the law was in force to protect a woman in the process of marriage. According to this law, “the promise to marry is in the nature of a contract, in case of any violation or non-fulfillment of which the law provides for a remedy.” Even before the marriage contract is signed, both the man and the woman must be held accountable by law. As soon as the parties reach an oral or written agreement on marriage, legal relations are also formed. The purpose of breaking a promise is to seek compensation for a personal injury, which may probably be irreparable, to receive compensation, possibly for loss of health, or loss of happiness,... or the loss of hitherto impeccable honor (this is a complete measure of the ruin of a woman), and sometimes, in addition to all this, the loss of property in the case of life imprisonment.
Simply put, if one of the parties expects to receive something from the proposed marriage, and these expectations are not met, then a lawsuit may be taken to return full restitution to this party.
Even modern readers are aware of this legitimacy, as it is conveyed through the text of Dickens. Mr. Guppy's suggestion to Esther is an example of Dickens' use of Bleak House as a legal satire. Esther's insistence on giving up Guppies is so frequent that it reaches an almost comical level. In addition, Guppy's use of legal jargon makes fun of this love event when he proposes to Esther, stating, “Would you be so kind as to let me (as I may put it) apply—propose!". His proposal deprives this private event of all romance, which, in turn, translates the marriage directly into the public, legal sphere. Both Esther and Guppy seem to be struggling with the generally accepted legal ideal known as breaking a promise, which was popular in their time; Esther rejects this concept, while Guppy accepts the law and is afraid of it. Using the situation with the breach of promise between Esther and Guppy as a satire, Dickens challenges the authority of English law, which regulated personal, domestic relations in the 1850s.
Esther could find support for her possible breach of promise in a modern court case. As noted in Wilde v. Harris (UK), power is granted to a woman, such as Esther, if a breach of promise is considered valid. Having sufficient legal status, she can file a lawsuit against a man for breach of promise. In the plaintiff's argument, Wilde noted that both she and the defendant Harris agreed to marry. Taking into account this promise, Wilde will remain “unmarried and.. ready and willing to marry [Harris]” within a reasonable period of time.11 At the moment, both Wilde and Harris have entered into an oral agreement, or contract. Harris did not fulfill his part of the contract for two reasons: firstly, Harris was never married to Wilde; secondly, at the time of the agreement, Harris was currently married. Harris' failure to fulfill his part of the oral contract gave Wilde legal force, and, consequently, she was able to successfully file a claim for breach of promise. The court ruled that “although the plaintiff was never bound by her promise to marry the defendant [because of his current marriage]... her promise included an additional promise that she would remain unmarried for a reasonable period of time.”
Therefore, this is a further statement — to make an offer!”9 His proposal deprives this private event of all romance, which, in turn, translates the marriage directly into the public, legal sphere. Both Esther and Guppy seem to be struggling with the generally accepted legal ideal known as breaking a promise, which was popular in their time; Esther rejects this concept, while Guppy accepts the law and is afraid of it. Using the situation with the breach of promise between Esther and Guppy as a satire, Dickens challenges the authority of English law, which regulated personal, domestic relations in the 1850s.⁴
Esther could find support for her possible breach of promise in a modern court case. As noted in Wilde v. Harris (UK), power is granted to a woman, such as Esther, if a breach of promise is considered valid. Having sufficient legal status, she can file a lawsuit against a man for breach of promise. In the plaintiff's argument, Wilde noted that both she and the defendant Harris agreed to marry. Taking into account this promise, Wilde will remain “unmarried and.. ready and willing to marry [Harris]” within a reasonable period of time.11 At the moment, both Wilde and Harris have entered into an oral agreement, or contract. Harris did not fulfill his part of the contract for two reasons: firstly, Harris was never married to Wilde; secondly, at the time of the agreement, Harris was currently married. Harris' failure to fulfill his part of the oral contract gave Wilde legal force, and, consequently, she was able to successfully file a claim for breach of promise. The court ruled that “although the plaintiff was never bound by her promise to marry the defendant [because of his current marriage]... her promise included an additional promise that she would remain unmarried for a reasonable period of time.” Thus, this further promise on behalf of Wild “represented sufficient remuneration giving her the right to sue the contract and recover [10 pounds] for its violation.”
The case of Wilde v. Harris (UK) allows Victorian women like Esther to recognize the ways in which they can obtain legal mobility and compensation for unmet expectations from marriage. In Esther's case, her legal position is due to the potential “loss of property.”15 The marriage proposal from Guppy Esther is based on the material objects that Guppy could offer Esther. This is a legal error on Guppy's part, because then Esther will be fully informed of the damages she could claim if she decided to file a breach of promise lawsuit against Guppy. At that time, Esther's lost property could include “two pounds a week... a small lifetime annuity... and accommodation in Penton Place.”
In the Cold House, Guppy is well aware that after his marriage proposal, Esther can sue him for breaking a promise. He precedes his proposal by asking Esther whether their subsequent interaction should take place without “prejudice".17 When Esther doesn't understand what Guppy is talking about, his explanation of breaking a promise informs her that: [She] won't use [their conversation] to harm [Guppy] at Kenge, Karboy, or anywhere else. If [their] conversation leads to nothing, [Guppy should] be the way [he] was, and [should not] be biased in [his] situation or worldly prospects. In short, this is done in full confidence.⁵
During this conversation, Guppy asks that no claim for breach of promise be filed on behalf of Esther. His request for trust reflects a desire for their communication to be considered private — a sign that legally this is not the case.
When Guppy proposes for the second time in the presence of Mr. Jarndyce, Esther's legal guardian rejects Guppy for her sake. As before, Guppy approaches the offer as a legal contract, asking about “acceptance, rejection or consideration” on behalf of Esther.19 witnesses were present at this scene, including Mr. Guppy's mother and Jobling, a friend of Guppy. Witnesses could hear Esther rejecting Guppy's offer; therefore, Guppy's claim for breach of promise is not admissible in court.
As soon as Guppy makes his initial offer, Esther quickly declares that she “can't agree to hear another word.”20 She continues to reject his offer, begging him to complete his plea.⁶
Guppy gets out of the situation, again stating that their conversation “was without prejudice”21. Dickens gives Esther additional power in the public sphere when he allows her to have the last word regarding her interaction with Guppy. Esther agrees that the conversation should not lead to a breach of promise lawsuit, but warns that she has the right to act against him if “[Guppy] gives [her] a reason to do so in the future.”
When Dickens creates a satire on the subject of breaking a promise, he questions the role of the law in this area of private life and suggests appealing to Victorian women.
By allowing women to gain additional power through the law, Dickens challenges the ideal that women should not receive compensation outside the private sphere. Breaking a promise gives women the opportunity to move their personal relationships into the public sphere, but only if the male-dominated public sphere deems their legal status valid. The loss of what should be personal, the romance surrounding an engagement, makes fun of the intrusion of the public sphere into personal relationships. In this case, the power of the legal system extends too far into the private sphere, which creates tension between private intentions and private actions.⁷ Perhaps Guppy intended to demonstrate his affection for Esther through a romantic engagement, but his experience in the legal system influenced his decision to approach this situation from the point of view of breaking a promise. Such a public approach to a private issue has not been successful. By bringing humor to this cycle and removing all romance from the situation, Dickens questions the authority and construction of claims for breach of promise and, in turn, questions the role of English law.

3.