A STUDY ON CLASS STRUGGLE: THE REACTION OF WORKING CLASS TOWARD BOURGEOIS’ OPPRESSIONS IN THE 19TH CENTURY FRANCE AS SEEN IN ÉMILE ZOLA’S GERMINAL
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra in English Letters
By FRANSISKA CHANDRA LEONITA
Student Number: 054214074
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2009
A STUDY ON CLASS STRUGGLE: THE REACTION OF WORKING CLASS TOWARD BOURGEOIS’ OPPRESSIONS IN THE 19TH CENTURY FRANCE AS SEEN IN ÉMILE ZOLA’S GERMINAL
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra in English Letters
By FRANSISKA CHANDRA LEONITA
Student Number: 054214074
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2009
i
ii
This undergraduate thesis is dedicated to:
My beloved parents, Leonardus Sudarsono & Mariana Nurmayanti My brother, Thomas Pandu Brahmantya And le gagnant de mon coeur Thanks for your love and support
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First of all, my greatest gratitude goes to my Lord, Jesus Christ, for the blessings, love, strength and guidance that really help me to pass through the hard time in finishing my study.
I would like to express my deep gratitude to my advisor, Ni Luh Putu
Rosiandani, S.S, M. Hum. for her precious time, guidance, and supports that helped me in the process of writing my thesis. I thank my co-advisor, Tatang
Iskarna S.S., M.Hum. for giving his precise correction and suggestion to improve my thesis writing. I also thank my thesis examiner Dewi Widyastuti, S.Pd.,
M.Hum., for giving me questions and comments in the thesis defense. Thanks to all of the lecturers of the Departments of English Letters of Sanata Dharma
University, for their gifts of the best knowledge I got during my study.
I must record my gratitude to my grandmother, Mbah Hadisumarto, who passed away. Thanks for the love, care, and patience in taking care of me while I lived in Yogyakarta.
My special thanks go to my best friends, Cindy Abram, Elisabeth Ria
Handayani, and Galih Asri Nindita D. I would never forget the best time we had spent together in joy, happiness, and sadness. Thank you for the supports and help they gave to me. I also thank my friends in the play performance, “Wine in the
Wilderness”, Nana, Della, Greg, Adit, Efra, Aye. My gratitude also goes to my classmates: Dessy, Norie, Bayu, Alvin, Adi “Pethuk”, Risang, Ika, Pamela, and all students in “Angkatan 2005” for the chance of having socialized during my study.
I thank Ian very much for his willingness in searching the novel, Germinal,
v abroad, and also Nikodemus Wuri K. for his kindness in giving me some reviews about Émile Zola.
Particularly, I would like to express my greatest love and gratitude to
Hardian Putra Pratama, for the love, support, and care. Thank you for the encouragement he has given to me during the process of writing this thesis. He becomes a special gift from God to brighten the days.
My profound appreciations belong to my parents: Leonardus Sudarsono and Mariana Nurmayanti for their priceless love, care, patience, and supports to encourage me. Last but not least, my truly gratitude goes to everyone whom I cannot mention one by one for their involvement in the process of writing this thesis, thank you very much.
Fransiska Chandra Leonita
vi TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE……………………………………………………...... i APPROVAL PAGE……………………………………………………… ii ACCEPTANCE PAGE………………………………………………...... iii DEDICATION PAGE………………………………………………….... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………... v TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………... vii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………….... ix ABSTRAK………………………………………………………………... x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION……………………………………….. 1 A. Background of the Study…………………….……………………. 1 B. Problem Formulation…………………………………………….... 4 C. Objectives of the Study……………………………………………. 4 D. Definition of Terms……………………………………………….. 5
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW……………………………. 7 A. Review of Related Studies………………………………………… 7 B. Review of Related Theories………………………………………. 9 1. Theories of Character & Characterization……………………. 9 2. Theory of Setting……………………………………….…….. 11 3. Marxism Theory………………………………………………. 12 a. Theory of Oppression………………………………………. 13 b. Theory of Class Struggle…………………………………... 14 C. Review on Life of Working Class in the 19th Century……………. 18 D. Theoretical Framework……………………………………………. 25
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY……………………………………. 27 A. Object of the Study………………………………………………... 27 B. Approach of the Study…………………………………………….. 28 C. Method of the Study………………………………………………. 29
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS……………………………………………... 31 A. Descriptions of Characters & Settings…………………………….. 31 1. Characters Description………………………………………... 31 a. The Working Class…………………………………………. 32 b. The Bourgeois……………………………………………… 40 2. Settings Description…………………………………………... 44 B. The Oppressions Experienced by Working Class………………..... 47 1. Reflected through Characters…………………………………. 48 a. Woman and Child Labor...…………………………………. 48 b. Long Working Hours...... ………………………………. 50 c. Low Wage/ Wage Cut…………………………………….... 52 d. Insecurity of Working.……………………………………… 54 2. Reflected through Settings…………………………………….. 56
vii a. Mining Camp……………………………………………….. 56 b. Housing Condition………………………………………….. 59 C. The Reaction of Working Class toward The Oppressions……...... 61 1. Ideological Struggle…………………………………………... 62 2. Political Struggle……………………………………………… 65 3. Economic Struggle……………………………………………. 68
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION…………………………………………. 74 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………... 77 APPENDIX: Summary of Émile Zola’s Germinal ………..…………… 79
viii ABSTRACT
FRANSISKA CHANDRA LEONITA. A Study on Class Struggle: The Reaction of Working Class Toward Bourgeois’ Oppressions in the 19th Century France As Seen in Émile Zola’s Germinal. Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University, 2009.
Class struggle is the reaction of a group of people to social conflicts such as social injustices and inhuman treatments that happen in a society. In class struggle, there are two sides that are opposed each other, which are working class and the bourgeoisie. The novel, Germinal, written by Émile Zola, is suitable to be the object of the study as the characters and setting in this novel depict the life of working class in dealing with the oppressions. A study on class struggle becomes an interesting topic to discuss. Class struggle shows the efforts of the working class in getting their rights and social welfare. The aims of this research are to find out the description of working class and bourgeois through characters and settings description, to identify the oppressions experienced by the working class through the presentations of characters and settings, to find the reactions of the working class and identify the class struggle toward the bourgeois’ oppressions. This study was conducted through library research by applying the data from books and internet sources. The theories of character, characterization, setting, Marxism theory: theory of oppression and class struggle, and review of life of the working class in France in the 19th century were applied in this thesis. The writer used sociocultural historical approach to identify the social and historical background in the society. This study goes to the result that working class in France in the nineteenth century was treated unfairly by the bourgeois. They were exploited physically, mentally and economically. The company did not only employ man to work in the mining camp, but also women and children that could endanger them. The workers had to work in the coal mining company for 15 to 16 hours a day with less pay. The bourgeois cut the workers’ wage by giving them fines. The workers were also oppressed by the insecurity of workings; in this case, they did not get life insurance from the company. As the result, the working class could not stand in sufferings, and they revolt against the bourgeois. The working class reacted against the oppressions in three forms: first, they did ideological struggle in order to know their basic interests before they go on strikes, second they were united by making a union or organization and collecting provident funds to strengthen the revolt, third, they go to economic struggle in which they did strike to convey their demands of the economic interests like raising their wage, shortening the working hours, and asking for a better workplace and living condition. The novel, Germinal completely becomes the representation of the cruel system of the capitalists in treating the working class.
ix ABSTRAK
FRANSISKA CHANDRA LEONITA. A Study on Class Struggle: The Reaction of Working Class Toward Bourgeois’ Oppressions in the 19th Century France As Seen in Émile Zola’s Germinal. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2009.
Class struggle merupakan reaksi dari sekelompok masyarakat terhadap masalah sosial seperti ketidakadilan dan perlakuan yang tidak manusiawi dalam suatu masyarakat. Dalam class struggle, ada dua golongan yang bertentangan satu dengan yang lain, yakni golongan para pekerja dan golongan borjuis. Novel Germinal karya Émile Zola merupakan objek penelitian yang sesuai, karena karakter-karakter dan latar dalam novel menggambarkan dengan jelas kehidupan para perkerja yang tertindas. Studi tentang class struggle merupakan topik yang menarik untuk dibahas. Class struggle menunjukkan usaha-usaha yang dilakukan para pekerja dalam mencapai hak asasi dan kesejahteraan sosial. Tujuan analisis ini adalah untuk mengetahui deskripsi karakter antara para pekerja dan borjuis serta latarnya, untuk mengidentifikasi penindasan-penindasan yang dialami oleh para pekerja dilihat dari karakter dan latar dalam novel, untuk mengungkap reaksi dan class struggle para pekerja terhadap penindasan- penindasan kaum borjuis. Skripsi ini menggunakan metode studi pustaka dengan mengambil data dari buku-buku serta sumber internet. Teori tentang karakter, penokohan, latar, teori Marxism: tentang penindasan dan class struggle, serta ulasan tentang kehidupan para pekerja di Prancis abad ke 19 digunakan dalam mengerjakan analisis ini. Penulis menggunakan pendekatan sosio-kultural dan sejarah untuk mengetahui latar belakang di dalam masyarakat. Hasil dari analisis ini menunjukan bahwa para pekerja di Prancis pada abad ke 19 diperlakukan secara tidak adil oleh kaum borjuis. Mereka dieksploitasi secara fisik, mental dan ekonomi. Perusahaan tidak hanya memperkerjakan buruh laki-laki, tetapi juga buruh wanita dan anak-anak yang dapat membahayakan mereka. Para pekerja harus bekerja di pertambangan selama 15 sampai 16 jam sehari dengan upah sangat minim. Para borjuis memotong upah buruh dengan memberikan denda. Para pekerja juga tertindas dengan ketidakamanan pekerjaan; dalam hal ini mereka tidak mendapatkan jaminan keselamatan bekerja dari perusahaan. Akibatnya, para pekerja tidak tahan akan penderitaan, dan melakukan pemberontakan terhadap kaum borjuis. Reaksi para pekerja terhadap penindasan- penindasan ada tiga bentuk: pertama, mereka melakukan perjuangan ideologi untuk mengetahui dasar utama kepentingan mereka sebelum mereka melakukan pemogokan, kedua mereka bersatu membentuk serikat atau organisasi dan mengumpulkan dana untuk memperkuat pemberontakan, ketiga mereka melakukan perjuangan ekonomi dengan melakukan pemogokan untuk menyampaikan tuntutan-tuntutan ekonomi mereka seperti kenaikan gaji, pengurangan jam kerja, dan tuntutan akan kelayakan tempat kerja serta kondisi tempat tinggal. Novel Germinal dengan sempurna mengungkap gambaran sistem kapitalis yang kejam dalam memperlakukan para pekerja.
x
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Literature may become a reflection of the social condition. The social conditions that are reflected through the literary works can be in certain issues, but most of them indeed, deal with the conflicts in the society. A society may be divided into many classes based on the honor, the status, education, or properties they have. Langland states in his book, Society in the Novel, that “society in a literary works does not merely comprehend people and their classes but also to study upon their physical environment, their customs, culture, conventions, codes, norms, beliefs and values, religions and institution” (1984: 6).
By studying the elements of the society that Langland mentioned, it can be assumed that there are many differences on the elements that the society have in each class. Those differences will cause conflicts in the society, such as the injustices that are experienced by the lower class (working class); the low wages they earn as workers, inappropriate life, and the oppression from the middle and upper class or the bourgeoisies.
Due to the oppression from the upper class, then the class-consciousness of working class is stimulated to struggle in order to get social injustices and equality in the political-economical system. Marxism deals with this kind of issues, as stated in Peter Barry’s An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory,
Marxism sees progress as coming about the struggle for power between social classes. This view of history as class struggle (rather than as, for instance, a succession of dynasties, or as a gradual
1 2
progress toward the attainment of national identity and sovereignty) regards it as ‘motored’ by the competition for economic, social, and political advantage (Barry, 2002: 157).
Émile Zola’s Germinal, is a novel that reflects the social conflicts in
French society, in which there are many social injustices and inequalities happen here. Germinal was written in 1880 and set in France in the 1860s. In this novel, the author depicts the struggle of a mining community which, facing a collapse in the market for coal (a symptom of European-wide post-war depression) chooses to respond to the threat of wage cuts by taking refuge in the revolutionary orations of a young outsider, Étienne, the central character of the novel, and striking.
(http://mag.christis.org.uk/issues/52/germinal.html).
Fundamentally, this novel is a criticism toward bourgeois society in the late of nineteenth century. In one early chapter, Zola describes a family that is unable to find enough bread to eat, and this pathetic scene is swiftly followed by an account of an ostentatious banquet at the residence of the mine-owner. For the next chapter, Zola describes the system of working in the mining camp owned by the bourgeoisie and clearly describes the gap of social condition between miners and the mine-owner.
Emile Zola’s Germinal describes the strike done by the working class as the result of oppressions. The strike was caused by conflict over pay systems.
Miners were then not employed directly by the mine-owner. The leader of each
'gang' bid for a seam of coal in an auction. The gang was paid only for the coal it dug out, so they begrudged time wasted on putting up pit props to hold up.
Tunnels often caved in, causing bad accidents. The mining company feared the whole mine would collapse, so said they would pay gangs separately for
3
timbering work, and for coal dug out. Miners suspected it was a trick to reduce their payment, and went on strike. Zola also describes the brutalizing effects of women and children who are employed underground, to haul away the coal as the men dug it out. He is moved by the plight of pit ponies that lived permanently in the dark tunnels down the mine (http://www.gailanderson.org/2007/08/emile- zolas-germinal.html).
In writing this novel, Zola did researches. He interviewed miners and their families, visited their homes, went down a mine, and listened to strike meetings.
He soon got the feeling of how the miners were permanently hungry, living brutish lives in overcrowded cottages, often diseased through dangerous working conditions, haunted by debt, insecurity, and the risk of total ruin by a disabling accident. They were scarcely educated, knew no other life, and had neither the energy, money nor organization to do anything about it. Their violence was usually aimless and ineffective. Their main escape was in sex and alcohol - in bars provided by the management to keep them permanently stupefied.
The study about class struggle is interesting to discuss since the writer can explore the conflicts that happen in social classes that emerging struggle. This study reveals the realistic condition of the capitalism system that affects the working class life. The writer also wants to show the huge gaps between the haves and the have-nots in the society, especially in France in the 19th century when it is under the Second Empire and also to show the corruption in high places, with whole section of society being exploited. The topic is also appropriate to the object of the study which is Zola’s Germinal, because it tells about strike of the working class that relates to the class struggle and Marxism study. This study also
4
may become a social criticism in French in the nineteenth century toward the bourgeois society. By discussing the topic about class struggle, the writer hopes that the thesis will contribute some knowledge about the awareness of reaching for the justice and human rights.
B. Problem Formulation
There are three problem formulations that are raised in this analysis. They are:
1. How are the settings and characters in Zola’s Germinal described?
2. What are the oppressions experienced by working class as reflected through
the settings and characters?
3. What are the workers’ reactions to the oppressions they experienced?
C. Objectives of the Study
The objective here is the goal or aim concerned with the problem formulation. The aim of doing this thesis is to obtain a clear and satisfying explanation. The writer has three objectives or aims in doing this thesis. First aim is to find out the description of setting and historical background of the novel, and also the characters described by the author.
Those descriptions later will go to the second aim, which is to identify the oppressions through the working class life experience in the novel. These experiences deal with the oppression they get from the upper class or bourgeoisies. In this case, the writer wants to know how the working class undergoes their life under the oppression from the bourgeoisies in matters seen through the descriptions of settings and characters in the novel.
5
The third, the writer wants to find out the reaction of the workers toward the oppressions. The conflicts happen in the working class will cause struggle and labors’ strikes against the upper class. In this case, the writer wants to understand about the class struggle that appears as the impact of the oppressions.
D. Definition of Terms
To give a better understanding to the readers, the writer provides the definition of some terms used related to the topic in this thesis.
1. Bourgeoisie
This term comes from French. Campion Hall defined the bourgeoisie is the class of the owners of the basic means of production, which lives by exploiting the hired labour of the workers. It is the ruling class of capitalist society (1963:
154). Bourgeoisie was originally the name for the inhabitants of walled towns in medieval France; as artisans, the bourgeoisie occupied a socioeconomic position between the peasants and the proprietors in the countryside
(http://www.answers.com/topic/bourgeoisie-proletariat).
2. Working Class
As stated in An Encyclopedic of Marxism Socialism and Communism, the working class is one of the three main social classes, whether under capitalism (in addition to the bourgeoisie and the peasantry. The social class derives its livelihood from employment outside agriculture and the professions. The core of the working class is industrial workers, workers employed in construction, fishing, forestry, transport, communications and trade. Both economically and
6
politically, the working class or the proletariat are dominated by the ruling class – the bourgeoisie (Wilczynski, 1981: 645).
3. Class Struggle
According to Nikolai Bukharin, class struggle is a struggle in which one class has entered into action against the other class and stands opposed the other.
Usually the class struggle involves one class that is oppressed by another class and they struggle to get social justice and equality (1969: 298).
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL REVIEW
This chapter consists of some reviews related on the novel that will be discussed. The reviews may come from related studies and critiques toward the novel and the author, Émile Zola. The writer also provides some theories that latter will help the writer answering the problems formulated in the previous chapter. Therefore, it is important to comprehend and understand the literary reviews and theories before analyzing the work.
A. Review of Related Studies
There are some critiques and comments on Zola and his work Germinal, after it was published. Gail Anderson gave comment to Zola’s description of the plot. He was impressed about how Zola creates a novel as he created a series of paintings that beg the reader to visualize the settings. Gail stated that the setting was like when visiting a museum, first it is seen a beautiful but haunting painting of the early-spring landscape (April, or the germinal month), treeless with ugly slagheaps, smoke that curls into the grey sky, and grey figures that are but shadows trudging their way to the mine. It is a beautifully wrought but haunting landscape.
Repeatedly Zola portrays the mine as a living monster that devours the workers. We see the haphazard timbering, the hay, the wet walls, and the lamps that provide the only light. There is sadness to Bonnemort’s face and we detect a bond between the man and the horse. The horse and the man are both slaves
7 8
within the working mine. They bond because they suffer together. And the next painting, shows several miners at work. Their shirts are off and their bodies are glistening with sweat. The air outside is cold, but in this living hell, temperatures rise dramatically. Their arms and shoulders which have worked in the mines for all their lives should be strong and steady. Instead, they seem weak and exhausted
(http://www.gailanderson.org/2007/08/emile-zolas-germinal.html).
In this case, Zola had special strength in visualizing the characters and setting in the novel, his output is staggering, considering the depth of his characters, descriptions, and actions portrayed in his work.
Havelock Ellis also stated in the introduction part of Germinal, that the book was produced when Zola had at length achieved the full mastery of his art and before his hand had, as in his latest novels, begun to lose its firm grasp. The subject lent itself, moreover, to his special aptitude for presenting in vivid outline great human groups, and to his special sympathy with the collective emotions and social aspirations of such groups. We do not, as so often in Zola's work, become painfully conscious that he is seeking to reproduce aspects of life with which he is imperfectly acquainted, or fitting them into scientific formulas which he has imperfectly understood. He shows a masterly grip of each separate group, and each represents some essential element of the whole; they are harmoniously balanced, and their mutual action and reaction leads on inevitably to the splendid tragic dose, with yet its great promise for the future.
A critic named Paul Brians said that it is very interesting to discover the different ways of living for miners and their social and working lives. 9
We also see conditions of recruiting and working, the risks taken by employees and the true dangers of the job but also the eventual diseases that workers can catch. The conditions of lodging are also an interesting point and you can clearly see the bunch of minors is coordinated by the paternalism of the company. The promiscuity in which the minors live is quite real and shows the fine bond or even differences occurring among the nest. The book reveals the origins of the strike and the major causes, how the mining company is intending to face it. The policy of minors, what they want to get and how they want to lead the strike and make the management give them what they request. (http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/hum_303/germinal.html)
The above reviews will help the writer in analyzing the historical background of the characters, including the setting that influences them. As some critics said that Zola describe the setting as if the reader is involved and imagining the social condition by the represented visualization.
B. Review of Related Theories
1. Character & Characterization
Richard Gill stated on his book, Mastering English Literature Second
Edition, that “a character is someone in literary work who has some sort of identity, an identity which is made up by appearance, conversation, action, name and thoughts going on in the head” (1995: 127). In this case, each character in the story has their own identities and different personalities based on the way the author characterized them. The characters are made up by appearance, action, and conversation, meaning that they are come from author’s depiction and important because of their role in the story by their actions, conversations, and thoughts.
Character in the story actually has the important role to bring the plot of the story.
According to Abrams in Glossary of Literary Terms, a character is a picture that writer has in minds and character undergoes the plot of the story and 10
has different types of person (1981: 20). In order to understand the plot of the story, we need to know the characters told in the story; the name and the role of the characters. Abrams gives definition of characters in which they can be recognized by their attitude and personal qualities. In this case, the moral and dispositional qualities that are expressed in the dialogue (what they say) and the action (what they do). By those, the person in the literary work can be decided what sort of person he is and distinguishes one person to another. Moreover, the character may have stability in his attitude and his qualities of mind from the beginning to the end of a work or he may have a change through a gradual development or due to the extreme crisis (Abrams, 1981: 21).
According to Holman and Harmon in A Handbook to literature, there are two kinds of character. They are static and dynamic character. A static character is limited in changes. The action and experience of a static character are limited and has a little bit change. A dynamic character has more changes than static one. It changes the characteristic or personally by actions or experiences that influence to change. The characteristic of a person may change in the end of the story because of the influenced condition or he will not change at all through the whole story
(1986: 83).
Rohrberger explains in Reading and Writing about Literature, that characterization is “the process by which the author creates a character”. There are two ways used by the author to characterize the characters. First is Direct, means to describe physical appearance, e.g. tall, weight or to explain the intellectual or moral attributes or the degree of person’s sensitivity. Second is 11
Dramatic, means to place the person in situations to show what he/she is in the way he/she behaves or speaks (1971:20).
Another theory to understand the way characters described is stated by
Murphy in Understanding Unseen. First is personal description, in which the author describes the appearance of the characters from many sides. The reader will know about the character from his/her build, skin-color, hair, hands, face, and other personal aspects. Second way is characters as seen by another. The reader will understand the character through another character’s perception and opinions.
The third is speech. The reader will understand a character from his saying, whenever character has conversation and gives opinions. The fourth way is past life. The author gives description about the past event of the character that can help to shape a person’s character. The author can use direct comment through the person’s thought, through his conversation, and through the medium of another person. The fifth is conversation of others. The character is described through the conversation of other people and the things they say about the character. The sixth way is reactions of the character whenever he/she is facing the situation. The seventh is direct comment from the author to characters. The eighth way is thoughts. In this way, the author gives direct knowledge of what a person is thinking about. The last is mannerism in which the reader will understand the character from his/her manners, habits and behavior (Murphy, 1972: 161-173).
2. Theory of Setting
In a literary work, intrinsic elements are important to help revealing whole story. One of the intrinsic elements is setting. Setting relates to the time and place 12
where the story happens. According to Robert Stanton in his book, An
Introduction to Fiction, setting is the environment of the moment where the moment happens (1965: 18-19). Setting can be introduced with the time of day ore year, the climate or the historical period. The setting (environment and condition in the story) also can influence the characters build in the story. It helps shaping the character by the events happens in the story and other social circumstances.
Another explanation of setting is stated by William Kenney in How to
Analyze Fiction. He determined the elements of setting, which are:
i. The actual geographical location, including topography, scenery, even the
detail of room’s interior.
ii. The occupation and modes of day-to-day existence of the character. iii. The time in which the action of character takes place, e.g. historical period.
iv. The religious, moral, intellectual, social, and emotional environment of the
characters (Kenney, 1986: 40).
3. Marxism Theory
Marxism is a theory that was found by Karl Marx. Marx was a German philosopher and he was a great influential philosopher in the history of philosophy. Marxism is a theory based on a materialistic interpretation of the world history, which posits that the course of history is determined by a series of class struggle, that progress in a dialectical process (1995: 534).
The aim of Marxism is to bring about classless society, based on the common ownership of the means of production (Barry, 2002: 156). In this case, 13
Marxism sees progress through struggle for power between different social classes. The struggle can be motored by the competition for economic, social and political advantage (Barry, 2002: 157).
Marxism theory is actually associated with the idea of oppression by the bourgeoisie and the conflicts happen because of the oppression in society will cause the class struggle emerges. Therefore, the understandings of oppression and class struggle are needed and significant in this chapter.
a. Theory of Oppression
Oppression exists when one group is being dehumanized by another group or dominant group. This concept may imply injustice, because one places a heavy burden on the other one and it relates to the discrimination, degradation, exclusion, exploitation and dehumanization of the oppressed group (Becker, 1992:
921). The examples of the minority group or oppressed group are people of different color like African American; women (biological sex); gay, lesbian and bisexual people (sexual orientation or identity); working class and poor people
(class); immigrants (ethnicity or national origin). And the example of dominant group or oppressor group are white people, people of European (race, ethnicity, national origin); males (biological sex); heterosexuals (sexual orientation or identity); middle and owning class (class).
The form of oppression can be said to operate on four distinct levels, they are the personal, the interpersonal, the institutional, and societal or cultural level:
i. The personal level: it refers to an individual’s belief that members of the
oppressed group are inferior psychologically or physically. 14
ii. The interpersonal level: the interpersonal level is manifested when a bias
affects relation among individuals, transforming prejudice into its active
component—discrimination. iii. The institutional level: it refers to the ways in which governmental agencies;
businesses; and educational, religious, and professional organizations
systematically discriminate against target group (minority group).
iv. The societal level: the societal or cultural level refers to social norms or
codes of behavior that work within a society to legitimize prejudice and
discrimination (Roth, 1995: 632).
There are some reasons why the oppression happens to the minority group.
First, actually the oppressor wants to gain or enhance economic, political, or personal rewards or to avoid potential loss of such. Second, they want their own value system to be promoted or enhanced, and protect self-esteem against psychological doubts or conflicts. Third, they want to comprehend better the complex world by categorizing and stereotyping others (Roth, 1995: 633).
In socialists’ conception of oppression, it relates to inequality, especially inequality of property. Karl Marx held that property owners necessarily exploited propertyless workers.
The state’s coercive power was necessary to maintain the exploitation of subordinate classes by the dominant classes. This system constituted oppression. In the Marxist tradition, however, oppression also connotes degradation and repression of human development (Becker, 1992: 923).
b. Theory of Class Struggle
The oppression and forces that are experienced by the minority group later will cause conflicts between classes (upper class and lower class), then they bring 15
it to a class struggle. Mayo stated in his book Introduction to Marxist Theory, that class struggle is a human or social expression of the conflict of economic forces with legal forms (Mayo, 1960: 93).
Classes are divided into basic and non-basic classes according to the place they occupy in society. In slave society, the basic classes are those of the slave owners and slave, in feudal society those of the feudals and peasants, in bourgeois society those of the capitalists and workers. Then, these are classes one of which is the owner of the basic means of production and exercises power, while the other constitutes the basic mass of the exploited. The relation between these classes always remains antagonistic, based on conflicting interests (Hall, 1963:
153).
For example, the capitalist has an interest in compelling the worker to produce as much as possible while paying him as little as possible. The incompatibility of economic interests between antagonistic classes given rise to an implacable struggle between them. As in Manifesto of the Communist Party, Marx and Engels stated,
Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journey-man, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes (1959: 46).
There are various forms of class struggle of the proletariat explained in
Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism, in reaching the social welfare; they are economic, ideological and political.
16
i. Economic struggle
The economic struggle is that waged for improving the workers’ condition of life and labour: increased wages, a shorter working day, etc. The most widespread method of economic struggle is for the workers to state their demands and to carry out strikes if these demands are not satisfied. The working class creates trade unions, mutual assistance funds and other organization to defend its economic interests (Hall, 1963: 164).
However, economic struggle has definite limitation. Since it does not affect the foundations of the capitalists system it cannot bring satisfaction of the workers’ basic economic interest, it cannot free them of exploitation. Moreover, the successes of economic struggle cannot be all secure, if they are not reinforced by political gains. The bourgeoisie will seize every chance of withdrawing its concessions and launching an offensive against the economic interests of the working class.
ii. Ideological struggle
The oppression and exploitation that the working class gets actually bring them to the awareness of feeling discontent as they constantly encounter facts of injustice and economic and social inequality, and also bring them to a spontaneous protest and indignation. However, such feelings still do not amount to an awareness of class interests.
Class consciousness, as Lenin defined it, means the workers’ understanding that the only way to improve their conditions and to achieve their emancipation is to conduct a struggle against the capitalist factory-owner class. 17
Further, the workers’ class consciousness means their understanding that the interests of all the workers of any particular country are identical, that they all constitute one class, separate form all the other classes in society. Finally, the class consciousness of the workers means the workers’ understanding that to achieve their aims they have to work to influence affairs of the state (Hall, 1963:
166).
The best school of class consciousness for the workers is the day-to-day struggle, including the struggle for their immediate interest. For the working class to reach a high level of class consciousness a special, ideological form of struggle is needed. The ideological struggle of the proletariat involves the working out of a world outlook, a scientific theory which will show the working class the path to liberation.
iii. Political Struggle
The highest form of the workers’ class struggle is political struggle. The political struggle of the working class embraces the whole sphere of social life connected with its attitude to other classes and strata of bourgeois society, as well as to the bourgeois state and its activities. As Lenin wrote in Collected Works Vol.
5 that, working class consciousness cannot be genuinely political consciousness unless the workers are trained to respond to all cases, without exception, of tyranny, oppression, violence and abuse, no matter what class is affected (p. 412).
This presupposes a close connection between the defense of the interests of the working class and the fight for democratic rights and freedoms. 18
Lenin also said that, “it is not enough, that the class struggle becomes real, consistent and developed only when it embraces the sphere of politics”. The class struggle is being fully developed, only when it not merely embraces politics but when it goes to the very core of politics, in this case the system of state power
(p.97-98).
Economic and ideological forms of struggle are not an aim in themselves; both of them are subordinate to workers’ higher, political aims and tasks, to their political struggle, which alone can secure the basic economic need of the working class freedom from exploitation. The aims and methods of political struggle demand different, higher forms of working-class organization, above all the creation of a political party of the proletariat.
C. Review on Life of the Working Class in France in the Nineteenth Century
1. The French Worker in the Provinces
Paris, for workers in the nineteenth century France, was a place where work could almost always be found. Whether skilled or unskilled, most workers migrated to Paris when work needed to be found. This is not to say however that work in the provinces was hard to find or that workers forgot their provincial backgrounds. Aside from agriculture (which still dominated the countryside of
France), there were cities in the provinces where work could often be found if one was willing to travel. Often workers returned to their hometowns to spend time with their families.
By the end of the nineteenth century, industrialization had turned many towns and regions into factory towns or specialized regions. But with this, the 19
nature of the work changed. Work in the provinces was no longer dependent on a floating skilled work force that migrated according to season. With the development of industrialization, we see the decline of agriculture and skilled labor in the provinces and the rise of unskilled factory workers. The decline in the condition of these workers is seen. This led to frustrations among the working classes all over France (http://www.uky.edu/~popkin/frenchworker/chilton.htm).
Norbert Truquin and Jeanne Bouvier stated in The French Worker:
Autobiographies from the Early Industrial Era, that it was a very difficult life for male, female, and child unskilled laborers in the provinces. Starvation was always just around the corner for many of these workers. Often economic downturns were worse for the provinces. The lives of unskilled laborers could thus be very harsh because they had little to no bargaining power against the employer. Often when laborers did unite with grievances, the local government turned them away because the factory owner held more sway over their decisions.
Truquin became particularly hostile towards the government and the ownership of the silk industry in Lyon when the political upheaval of 1871 was followed by an economic depression during the 1880’s. It is no surprise that socialism became as popular in the provinces as in Paris (Traugott, 1993: 250-
308; 336-382).
2. Relations among Workers
Relations among workers varied during the nineteenth century. Through mutual aid societies, compagnonnage systems and brotherhoods, syndicalist movements and strikes, the workers of the nineteenth century worked together, 20
fighting hard to find different ways to gain respect from their masters, looking for better working and living conditions, and therefore gaining power as a working class. However, there was also competition among them because of high unemployment rates and the difficulties of surviving. There were some very competitive workers due to the lack of jobs and the difficulty of surviving
(Traugott, 1993: 137).
Overall, the relations among workers of the nineteenth century varied depending on the circumstances each worker lived under. Nevertheless, the relations among workers were mostly focused on friendship and the desire to persevere through difficult times together. Together, they organized many strikes in order to be heard by their masters and gain some power within society. Most of them had the same ideals: freedom for the workers, better standards of living and working conditions.
3. Relations with Employers
Many people in France in the nineteenth century had no choice but to work during their childhood. Due to the poor backgrounds that most of these people came from, they had no choice but to pitch in to ease the financial burden the family had. In 1813, the work came to a screeching halt. This setback reduced many workers to nothing. As a result, many people could not provide for their families. The bad fortunes did not last long. In 1814, business expanded, but the masters did not want to increase the pay of the workers. The workers pleaded with the masters for a pay increase but they refused. Many of the workers left to work in surrounding areas in hopes of earning a competitive wage. 21
The masters from the city were upset that their competitors were hiring their former workers. The masters agreed to a 3 franc increase per dozen of chairs that were produced. Many of the workers decided to move back. The increase in pay lasted only a short while, and once the market slowed down the masters took back the raise.
The workers were told that this increase was only temporary, but it was not. The masters were also forcing their workers to perform unpaid tasks. There was a push to eliminate the unpaid tasks, but it failed. From this view, the workers were the victims. The masters were taking advantage of the workers and rarely were they willing to compromise
(http://www.uky.edu/~popkin/frenchworker/duncan.htm).
4. Relations with Government
The government of France had a poor relationship with the emerging working class of the nineteenth century. Since 1791, labor unions had been illegal, thus crippling all power workers possessed to collectively bargain for higher wages and better working conditions. According to worker Norbert Truquin, the
French government only allowed French workers rights to assemble in times of particular hardship. Further, the most common tactics like strikes that workers used to achieve raises or better their conditions constituted illegal behavior until late in the century. The French government stripped workers of all their bargaining power, thus reinforcing their exploitation during the French Industrial
Revolution. 22
Despite this, the French government made a few efforts to alleviate the burdens of the French working class. These laws were, however, rarely enforced, allowing the factories to take advantage of workers, especially working women and children. A law passed in 1841 limiting children under 12 to an eight-hour workday.
The French government also failed to provide workers with any type of social protection or insurance. Working families were often devastated by work- related injuries, while workers never received compensation for lost wages.
French worker Martin Nadaud, for example, endured a debilitating injury while working as a mason. According to Nadaud, his father was overcome with anger because his family was facing possible financial ruin as a result of his injury.
Further, workers were not assisted in the event of sudden unemployment and no type of security or insurance was offered by the laissez-faire government. In comparison, workers in the neighboring Bismarckian Germany were granted a range of worker protection programs like unemployment benefits and accident insurance in the late nineteenth century. The French working class, however, worked for lower wages and endured more deplorable working conditions, but the government failed to effectively address these issues and improve conditions for the working class (http://www.uky.edu/~popkin/frenchworker/wells.htm).
5. Pay and Working Conditions in the 19th Century France
Mark Traugott’s anthology, The French Worker: Autobiographies from the Early Industrial Era stated payment in 19th century France was based on many different factors. Level of skill, gender, and workers' associations were three 23
factors that played a very important role in deciding a worker’s pay. Level of skill was very important, as there was a major difference between skilled and unskilled workers. However, even skilled workers were not well paid and could not earn enough to rise to a higher social level. Intense gender discrimination also played an important role in these times. Working women were almost always paid significantly less than men (1993: 134)
In studying working conditions of 19th century France, it is once again apparent that there exists a great disparity in how people perceived their situation.
Many workers labored in dangerous conditions that were detrimental to their health. In reading all the autobiographies, the workdays were also very long. Most workers began their day at around 5 am and usually finished around 8 or 9 pm with an hour break for lunch (1993: 136).
There is a strong correlation once again between level of skill, gender, and associations when considering working conditions. The higher the skill of a worker, the more indispensable he became to the employer and thus the employer would take care not to abuse his workers. In relation to gender, though women often worked the same hours as men, they were often confined to housework but many worked in factories in deplorable conditions. Therefore, women were often less exposed to dangerous working conditions. In conclusion, there is no one way of describing the pay and working conditions in 19th century France. However, it is clear that workers life in 19th century France were very difficult due to long hours and low pay and the chance of advancing economically and socially was very limited.
24
6. Housing Conditions of French Workers
Housing conditions for French workers during the early industrial era were significantly different from conditions of today’s workers. Living conditions for early French industrial workers were extremely unpleasant and far from a relaxing escape after a rigorous day’s work. By examining the lives of four different workers during the early industrial era in France we can get a better understanding of how bad the housing conditions actually were. Home for an early French worker meant a crowded and unsanitary dwelling where workers would return after their long day of work. Housing conditions were often cramped, with poor lighting and poor sanitation. There was no running water or indoor plumbing, which meant the nearest restroom was a good distance away, outside in the cold air.
Conditions for all French workers during this time period were harsh, but often varied from worker to worker. Migrant workers often rented a room in boarding houses similar to dormitories. Migrants would share a room with around twelve other workers and sleep on hard plank beds. Established workers in the area were more likely to live in apartments on top floors of old stone buildings in the city, consisting of one or two rooms that they shared with another family or other workers.
7. Sickness and Death
Sickness is a normal part of everyday life, but the 19th century French worker could ill afford to get sick. Being unable to work meant that there would be no income. Most workers during this time period relied on every sou or franc 25
they earned to pay for housing, food, and family. Nineteenth century French workers faced numerous difficulties in their everyday lives. Sickness and death during this time only contributed to the problems. Not only did recovering preoccupy the workers who fell sick; they were faced with the issue of paying for their family, food, and board. On top of those worries, they still had to find more work after they recovered. If the workers did not recover, the agony of their death fell on their relatives, who had to pay for the expenses of burial, but also had to take on the added responsibilities in the family. Both of these, sickness and death, created more stress in an already trying and difficult life.
D. Theoretical Framework
Those theories and reviews will help the writer to solve the problems formulated in problem formulation. In this thesis, the writer wants to identify the experience of working class by using the theory of character and characterization.
It is important to understand the role of character in the story. The use of theory of setting is also important to understand the condition and social circumstances that influence the characters’ development and indicate the working class under the oppression.
Marxist theory is very important in this study, as the theory will help the writer to be open-minded about the social class and conflict among them. This theory is used to analyze the process of oppression of the working class and the process of struggle and its rising.
Meanwhile, the review of working class life in France nineteenth century is important to use to give better understanding to the writer about the historical 26
background of working class and to give factual event that relates to the working class condition in the novel. Because this analysis based on the sociocultural historical approach, then that information is needed and important.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
A. Object of the Study
The object of the study used by the writer in this analysis is a novel entitled Germinal. This novel was written between April 1884 and January 1885 by Émile Zola and printed as a book and published in French, March 1885, then continued published with English translation, in 1954. The novel had been translated in over one hundred countries as well as inspiring five film adaptations and two TV productions. This novel was translated by Leonard Tancock and published by Penguin Classics in 1954. Germinal consists of 499 pages. This novel is divided into 7 parts. Germinal was also made into a movie in 1993, directed by Claude Berri. At that time, Germinal was the most expensive feature film ever made in France.
The title, Germinal, is drawn from the springtime seventh month of the
French Revolutionary Calendar, and is meant to evoke imagery of germination, new growth and fertility. This novel was set in March 1866, and late March and early April together formed the Revolutionary month called "Germinal," the month of germination. Germinal is the month in which plants first begin to sprout from the ground, but the image of sprouting plant life is also used throughout the novel to symbolize the rising consciousness of the workers as they realize the sources of their suffering and organize to combat them.
(http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/hum_303/germinal.html).
27 28
The novel depicted a human exploitation in mining company in which the workers did not have prosperities for their life because of the wage cut system by the bourgeois. The sufferings made them aware to strike and revolt to the capitalist system and the bourgeois. Moreover, the condition became worse as the
French coal industry was struck by a crisis in which America had stopped importing massive quantities of steel to build its railroads, which had the effect of lessening the demand for coal to manufacture the steel. The condition discouraged the labors and made them to be pessimistic about the success of the struggle because it brought them to the starvation.
B. Approach of the Study
In this thesis, the writer uses sociocultural historical approach. The point of a sociocultural historical approach is seeing a literary work from its relation with the social history of a certain time and place. The social-cultural historical approach is an approach in examining a literary work using reference of the civilization of which the attitudes and actions of a specific group of people become the subject matter (Rohrberger & Woods, 1971: 9-11). The specific group in this thesis will be a group of miners as the subject matter because they experience social conflicts.
This approach cites the importance of knowing the sociocultural-historical facts behind the work. The sociocultural historical approach also enables us to understand the work of literature further. It provokes that without knowing the hidden evidence of certain social culture and history, the reader will find 29
difficulties in understanding the work, because literary work maybe based on certain cultures and history.
C. Method of the Study
The writer employed library research as a method of gathering sources in this study. There are two types of sources used in this study. The primary source is the novel Germinal by Émile Zola. While, the secondary sources for this study are some books about theory of literature, theory of critical approaches of literature, and other essays and references related on class struggle explored from library and the internet.
In this study, the analysis of the research, first of all, started with the reading of the novel, for many times in order to understand and to comprehend the story. Furthermore, by seeing the details of the story, the process of the analysis will be more profound.
The analysis would be conducted by applying the data, information, and the theories of character, characterization, and setting. This thesis used a sociocultural historical approach to identify the social and historical background in the society. Moreover, the approach was also appropriate to be combined with the class struggle and social conflicts as Marxism concerned on the social issues in a society.
The data of the analysis were the data related with the problem formulations been proposed. The researcher also found some books and papers about Marxism in order to understand everything about Marxism theories including theory of class struggle and oppression from the capitalist. These 30
theories would help the researcher comprehends the class differences that caused conflicts and the emergence of the class struggle in the society.
The same thing also applied in finding data for the main characters of the story and the social condition when, where and how the characters were taken place. The data of the main characters of the story would be found by using the theory of character and characterization and the condition when and where the characters being told would be found by using the theory of setting.
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS
In this chapter, the three questions that are proposed in the problem formulation in chapter one will be answered and discussed clearly. Firstly, it will discuss about the setting and characters in the novel. Secondly, this chapter will discuss about the oppressions towards working class seen through characters and setting description. The last, it will discuss about the reactions of the workers toward the oppressions that emerge class struggle as its impact.
A. The Description of Characters and Settings
1. Characters Description
The characters in the novel are divided into two types, they are minor and major character, as major character usually plays big role in the novel. The main character in this novel is Étienne Lantier as he gives influences to the plot and other characters of the novel. For the minor characters are the rest, which are
Maheu, La Maheude (Maheu’s wife), Bonnemort, Maigrat, Chaval, Monsieur
Gregoire, and others.
The description of characters is divided into two, which are working class characters and characters for the bourgeoisie. Those two different kinds of characters are needed to understand the significant contrast between the oppressed characters and the oppressors. However, most of the characters put by the author in this novel are the working class, as this novel focuses on the life of the working class.
31 32
a. The Working Class i. Étienne Lantier
Étienne is the central character in this novel. He is a young man with a desire of working. He comes from Marchienes and moves to Montsou to look for a new job in the Voreux mining company. He lost his job as an engine-man in the railway.
“My name is Étienne Lantier and I am a mechanic. Any work going here?” young man said. “Work for a mechanic? No. Two of them tried yesterday. No, nothing doing.” (Zola, 1954: 20-21).
At first, Étienne is refused to work in the mining camp, but finally the manager accepts him to work in the pit: “When Étienne arrived everything was fixed up: thirty sous a day, hard work but easy to pick up” (Zola, 1954: 43).
Étienne becomes a good hard worker in the mining camp and he is adored by other labors and his friends in the mining camp because of his thoughts and good works. Maheu, a miner who has worked for a long time in the pit, respects
Étienne and Maheu is proud of him. He is smart because he reads and writes a lot.
Maheu will think that he is better educated than himself.
After two weeks he passed for one of good haulage men. He never complained even when he was gasping with fatigue; he was probably too proud. He was accepted and looked upon as a real miner. Maheu in particular took to Étienne, for he respected good workmanship: he saw him read, write, sketch plans, and heard him discuss things which he did not even know existed (Zola, 1954: 139).
In the novel, Étienne is also described to have bad tempered and easily getting angry. Before he is accepted in the Voreux, mining company, he was dismissed from the railway because he had defied his chief. Even in the mining 33
camp, he cannot restrain his anger to one of labors, Chaval, as they have different arguments.
“So you are a mechanic, and your railway sacked you. Why?” “Because I hit my chief.” All her inherited ideas of subordination and passive obedience were turned upside down, and she remained speechless. “Mind you, I had been drinking,” he went on, “and when I drink I go mad, fit to do myself in and everybody else too.” (Zola, 1954: 56).
Even though Étienne has bad tempered, he reaches popularity as he has ambition and bravery that can bring his friends in the mining camp to get up and have revolutionary to change their condition. He spreads his thought and makes the workers think and act to change their life. In this case, he is very clever in influencing the miners.
ii. Maheu
Maheu is a protagonist character that supports character Étienne. Maheu is a labor in the mining company and he has worked for long time. He has a family.
Zola often describes Maheu’s family in the novel, as this family experiences the oppressions much. Maheu is a good worker and well reputable among his friends because he works hard in the pit. The owner also trusts him as best worker as he has worked in the mining camp for a long time and been loyal to the owner:
“Maheu was the best collier in the pit, the most popular, the most respected, the one everybody quoted as an example of good sense” (Zola, 1954: 210).
Maheu has a wife, named La Maheude. He has seven children; they are
Zacharie (21 years old), Chaterine (15 years old), Jeanline (11 years old), Lénore
(6 years old), Henri (4 years old), Alzire (9 years old), and Estelle (3 months). 34
Maheu has to work very hard to earn money to fulfill the needs of his family.
Therefore, it is very possible that his children also work to earn more money.
However, even though the children work, the money is still not enough to buy stocks for the whole persons in the family.
“Eh? You know I haven’t a penny and this is only Monday: still six days before the fortnight’s out. You, all of you, only bring in nine francs!” said La Maheude. “Oh! Nine francs!” exclaimed Maheu. “I and Zacharie three: that makes six, Chaterine and father two: that makes four: for and six, ten, and Jeanline one, that makes eleven.” “Yes, but there are Sundays and the off-days. Never more than nine, you know!” replied Maheude (Zola, 1885: 16).
In this case, the money they earn from the company is never enough to feed the whole members of the family.
Maheu is a timid man but he becomes a leader in the first meeting of a negotiation between the bourgeois and the miners. He actually does not want to go on, but because of the influence from Étienne, he agrees to become a representative to speak in the meeting.
“You know we are relying on you to speak,” Étienne suddenly said to Maheu. The miners’ demands would carry weight if voiced by him (Maheu). At first Étienne was to speak, but he had not been at Montsou long enough, and they would be more likely to listen to an old hand who had always lived there. “But I could never do it,” stammered Maheu. “I should say something silly.” Étienne patted him on the shoulder, glad to have made him accept. “Just say what you feel, it’ll be all right!” (Zola, 1954: 210).
It is seen clearly that although Maheu is not capable enough in speaking to the mine-owner, his friends and other miners trust Maheu and respect him as the best worker that can bring them to get their rights. The supports from his friends make
Maheu optimistic to be the spokesman in the negotiation with the bourgeoisie. 35
iii. La Maheude
La Maheude is Maheu’s wife. She is thirty years old. Zola describes La
Maheude as a rigid woman but patient. She is endurable, as she has to take care of her seven children. Maheude does not work in the mining camp anymore because she has to take care of the babies, Henri and Estelle, at home. Furthermore, there is also something wrong with her health.
“So you have been working in the mines a long time?” “Oh yes, oh yes! I was down there till I was twenty. When I had my second baby, the doctor warned me I would stay for good because something was misplaced in my innards, it seemed. I got married just then and I had enough to do at home.” (Zola, 1954: 99).
La Maheude is also a tough woman. It is seen when one day she has to let her children, Zacharie and Catherine, leave the house. This becomes a new burden for her and the family, because Catherine and Zacharie will not earn money for the family anymore but only for themselves as they decide to live with their lovers.
… it was a day lost, and now that she (Catherine) had a lover the girl did not want a change. Her eldest had left them and the old man had lost the use of his legs: it would soon mean death for them all (Zola, 1954: 182).
This makes Maheude that is unable to work anymore in the mining camp helping her husband, becoming a beggar to get some breads and money to buy food: “Her eyes filled with tears, and she felt confident of getting the five francs”
(Zola, 1954: 98-99). The quotation shows her incapability to get charities in bourgeois’ house. This will never end, before the voice of the workers comes out to take them out of the sufferings.
Zola characterizes La Maheude to be a dynamic character; Maheude undergoes changing in the novel through the influence of main character, Étienne. 36
In the early chapter of the novel, Maheude is described as a passive character which only can face her fate. However, in the last chapter she begins to change as an ambitious woman that wants to get her goal. This even makes Étienne thinks that Maheude has changed terribly.
He tried to explain, but she would not let him speak. “So we have starved for two months, and I have sold my home and my children are ill, all to no purpose! And the same old injustice would start all over again! Oh! The very thought if it is enough to give you a fit! No, no, now I would burn everything and kill everybody rather than give in.” (Zola, 1954: 376).
Étienne feels something burst in Maheude thinking. She is so different from the beginning when Étienne meets her. She had been so sensible and used to blame
Étienne for being violent, and now she is refusing to listen to reason and talking of killing people.
Instead Étienne, it is she who is talking politics, wanting to sweep the bourgeois away at one blow, demanding the republic guillotine to rid the earth of these wealthy robbers grows fat on the toil of the starving masses (Zola, 1954:
377).
iv. Bonnemort
Bonnemort is an old labor. He is Maheu’s father and lives in Maheu’s family house. Bonnemort is a short old man, with powerful neck, his legs turning outwards and his toes turning in, and his square hands hung at the end of long arms right down to his knees. He has big head, with its sparse white hair, and his flat features, livid, with bluish blotches. His age is fifty eight years old. 37
Bonnemort has worked for Voreux mining company for fifty years but his life never changes better.
“Have you been working in the pit for long?”, asked Étienne. “For long? I should say so. I was eight when I first went down – it was in Le Voreux, as a matter of fact – and now I am fifty eight.” (Zola, 1954: 25).
Bonnemort has done everything in his time. When he first went down to the pit, he became a pit-boy, then haulage man when he was strong enough to push, then when he was eighteen years old he became a collier. In his age, he is recommended by the mine-owner to retire, but it does not happen, as he cannot get any money but a few pension funds. Moreover, he has perished legs that the doctor recommends him to stay at home.
“And anyway I’m pretty tough, apart from my legs. You see, I’ve been soaked with water down in the workings that it has got under my skin. Some days I can’t move my foot without shooting out.” (Zola, 1954: 25).
Bonnemort is ill over a long period. There is a serious problem with his lungs as he coughs often. This does not turn him from keep working in the pit as haulage men.
He coughed, scraping hawk which seemed to tear out his inside and then sat by the side of the fire. It turned the ground black. “They say I’ve got to rest, but I’m not having any. What do they take me for? No, I shall stick it out another two years till I’m sixty,” he went on (Zola, 1954: 25).
His illness actually makes him more difficult to work in the pit, and even it may endanger him. However, he does not give in due to his physical incapability. It shows that Bonnemort is an energetic old man and a hardworker. In the end of the novel, he is not able to survive with his illness anymore, and then he finishes his life.
38
v. Rasseneur
Zola described Rasseneur as a heavily built man of thirty-age years old.
He had a round, clean-shaven face, good-natured and smiling. Rasseneur is a friend of Maheu. He used to be as a miner same with Maheu, but the Company had dismissed him because he had been following the strike three years before.
He is so smart and able to speak well that makes him become a leader when any complaints had been voiced.
“Yes, I am referring to Rasseneur, whom we had to get rid of to save our pits from socialist corruption. You are always at his place, and no doubt it is he who has urged you to start up this provident fund.” (Zola, 1954: 215).
In this case, the Company faulted at him to be the cause of the last revolt in the mining company. However, though he was dismissed from the pit, he still has a bar in Montsou and he earns money by keeping it with his wife: “he raised some money and planted his pub right opposite Le Voureux as a gesture of defiance to the Company” (Zola, 1954: 76). Therefore, now his house is prosperous and he becomes a rallying-point, thriving on the resentments he has slowly kindled in the hearts of his former mates.
Maheu brings Étienne to Rasseneur’s pub to find him a lodge to stay.
Rasseneur refuses him as Étienne is a foreigner that he had known before, but after finding out that Étienne knows Pluchart, a friend of Rasseneur who is also an activist in socialism, he welcomes Étienne in his house.
Rasseneur examined him afresh, and a rapid change came over his face, a sudden look of sympathy. Then he spoke to his wife: “Maheu has brought this gentleman, one of his haulage men, to see if there is a room upstairs and whether we can give him a fortnight’s credit.” (Zola, 1954: 78).
39
In the middle part of the novel, Rasseneur and Étienne are getting close each other. They talk much about the plan to revolt; however, Rasseneur is much more arguing because he disagrees with Étienne’s political thinking and idea. First, he supports Étienne, but finally he opposes Étienne because he thinks that what
Étienne does will not bring his friends, the labors, to a better life, but even worse.
vi. Chaval
Chaval is also a labor in Voreux mining company. He is a man of twenty- five, tall, thin, bony with strong features. Chaval is desirous of possessing
Catherine, Maheu’s daughter. However, he treats ladies disrespectfully, especially to Catherine. Most of the miners do not like Chaval because he is rude and easily getting angry.
Chaval had brought her into the Réquillart ruins. “Oh no! Oh no! Let me go, please!” She was seized by the terror of the male, that fear which makes a girl instinctively tense her muscles in self-protection. He said no more, but seized her in his strong arms and threw her into the shed. She fell back on the coils of rope and gave up the struggle (Zola, 1954: 133).
This quotation shows that Chaval wants to rape Catherine but she is too weak to defend. Chaval often treats Catherine badly. This makes Chaval has bad reputation among the other labors, especially in Maheu’s family.
Furthermore, when he discovers there is a new comer in the company, and almost everyone goes with Étienne, he becomes furious because after Étienne comes, the labors much more concerned with him. Étienne becomes his rival because he knows that Étienne also pays attention to Catherine. In this case,
Chaval is jealous at Étienne. 40
Chaval had kept her, threatening to beat her if she ran away. Chaval was now mad with jealousy, and wanted to prevent her from going back into Étienne’s bed where he knew her family put her (Zola, 1954: 183).
Because of his jealousy to Étienne, he asks Catherine to live with him and works in other mining company at Jéan Bart. Here, Chaval treats Catherine more harshly.
Chaval becomes a man who is not in one way of thinking with other labors. When the idea of going to struggle appears, he does not go with the miners. This happens because the idea emerges from Étienne, the man he dislikes, then he does not want to follow him. It can be seen from the middle to the last chapter of the novel, and will be discussed in the last subchapter of this thesis.
b. The Bourgeoisie i. Maigrat
Zola puts characters in this novel mostly for characters of working class.
However, he puts also some characters for the upper class, in this case, the bourgeois. Maigrat is actually included as a working class, because at first he is a have-not worker; he does not own the mining camp but working for the bourgeois in the mining company. Because he is loyal to the company and obedient to the company’s rule, then he quits the job in the mining camp when the company gives him supplies to open a big shop. Now, he becomes rich and also belongs to a group of bourgeois.
Maigrat has a big shop in Montsou, and he gives credits to the workers which burdens them. Maigrat lives next door to the manager of the mining company, from whose home his little house is separated only by a wall. He keeps 41
a store, a long building, opening on to the road, like a shop without windows. He stocks everything: grocery, provisions, greengrocery; he sells bread, beer, pots and pans (Zola, 1954: 95).
Before he begins to open the shop, he formerly became an inspector at Le
Voreux, he had set up in business with a small canteen, and then, thanks to official protection, his trade had grown and grown until it had killed the small shops in Montsou.
He combined everything under one roof, and his large number of customers from the industrial villages to undercut and give more credit. Incidentally, he was still in the Company’s power, for they have built his little house and shop for him (Zola, 1954: 96).
This quotation shows that Maigrat has close relationship with the bourgeois rather than the workers. It makes the workers hate him; moreover, he has brought them to a deeper suffering, for the high debts from the credit that Maigrat gives.
Zola described Maigrat as static character. He does not change during the story. He becomes an evil man that torments the workers with the debts and his stinginess. In the end of the story, Maigrat finishes his life. He dies in his shop for his greediness, being mutilated by the women workers in Montsou.
ii. Monsieur Grégoire
Monsieur Grégoire is one of the shareholders of the mining Company. He is sixty years old, but he looks younger than sixty. Monsieur Grégoire has married with a lady, Madame Grégoire, for forty years, and they have a daughter, named
Cécile. They love her only daughter, and they really spoil her in the house. It is seen when Cécile is going to marry, and the family spends much money for her: 42
They still satisfied her every whim: a second horse, two more carriages, dresses from Paris. As nothing was too good for their daughter, this outlay was an additional pleasure (Zola, 1954: 86).
However, Monsieur Grégoire is not worried with his wealth, as he earns much money in a year. His life and the family are fulfilled with luxuries and joy.
It begins when he was still very young, he was inherited a denier in the
Montsou mines and he married his wife. His wife was also inherited from an uncle the little concession of Vandame, in which there were only two pits working, Jean-Bart and Gaston-Marie, and these were disrepair. Monsieur
Grégoire dreams to repair it, modernize the plant and widen the shaft. Then blessings rain on his house: “The Grégoire’s fortune, worth some forty thousand francs a year, was all invested in shares in the Montsou mines” (Zola, 1954: 84).
Monsieur Grégoire is a little bit stingy. He does not want spend any penny only for the workers that begging in his house. He rather gives things than money.
It happens to Maheude, when she goes to Monsieur Grégoire’s house and begs for some francs to buy breads, she does not get it from him.
“We are very hard up,” stammered Maheude; “if only we had a five-franc piece….” Cécile glanced anxiously at her father, but he refused point-blank with the air of doing a painful duty. “No, it is not our custom. It can’t be done.” Cécile was touched by the mother’s tragic face and wished to do all she could for the children. They were starring at the brioche. She cut two pieces and gave them one each. “Look! This is for you.” (Zola, 1954: 101).
In this case, Monsieur Grégoire does not concern to his worker’s difficulty. In fact, Monsieur Grégoire does not work to earn money, but the workers’ sweat that gives him money: “Aren’t you a shareholder in Montsou? You do not work, you 43
live on the work of others – in fact, you are the accursed capitalist, and that is enough.” (Zola, 1954: 206).
iii. Monsieur Hennebeau
Monsieur Hennebeau is a manager of the Company. He directly deals with the workers in the pit. It means that he supervises and manages the working activity in the mining Company.
“So all this belongs to Monsieur Hennebeau?” “Oh no!” the old man explained. “Monsieur Hennebeau is only the manager. He is paid, same as we are.” (Zola, 1954: 27).
The quotation shows that Monsieur Hennebeau actually does not have the same position as Monsieur Grégoire as the shareholder, however, he belongs to the bourgeoisie because he also rules the working class.
During his days becoming a manager of the Company, he reaches everything especially in wealth. It can be seen trough the luxurious furniture in his house. His house is furnished with antique and fashionable styles: Henri II armchairs, Louis XV occasional chairs, a seventeenth-century Italian cabinet, an altar-front draping the mantelshelf, and old chasuble embroideries (Zola, 1954:
211). Hennebeau has everything that makes him comfortable.
Monsieur Hennebeau works hard in getting the luxuries, as at first he has nothing. In his early career, he had known the difficulties of a penniless young man thrown as an orphan on the streets of Paris. After a hard grind at the School of Mines, he had gone at twenty-four to the Grand’Combe as engineer in the
Sainte-Barbe pit. Three years later, he had become divisional engineer in the Pas- des-Calais at the Marles mines, and there by one of those strokes of luck, he had 44
married the daughter of a rich Arras spinner (Zola, 1954: 197). In his marriage, he was not given any birth of child. He passed the difficult times in getting the wealth and reaching the position as a manager in Montsou mines.
Monsieur Hennebeau is actually hospitable. He likes to be visited by everyone, even by the working class. He is patient in hearing the complaint of the workers, without temper.
“Ah! – here you are! This is a revolt, it seems.” He broke off to add with politeness: “Sit down. I am only too delighted to have a chat.” (Zola, 1954: 212).
From the quotation, it shows that even though he cannot accept the demands of the workers, he still wants to discuss the problems with the working class.
2. Setting Description
Robert Stanton stated that setting is the environment of the moment where the moment happens. It can be a period of time or history and also the place where the character lives (1965: 18-19). The setting can influence the character’s personality and also shape the character’s built in the novel.
In this section, the writer intends to discuss about the description of
French workers in the late nineteenth century and the social and living condition depicted in the novel. The characters in the novel set in 1866 to 1867 of France.
The characters in the novel are set to work in a coal mining company in France.
During this time, mining company grew fast in France and Great Britain. Firstly, the coal mining was introduced in England in the 14th century, then it aroused and followed in France in the early eighteen century, and this became the real interest in France (http://www.francemonthly.com/n/0408/index.php). 45
The coal industry expanded enormously in the 19th century, as railways and industry grew throughout Europe. Coal mining companies made fortunes, employed thousands more workers, and mined hundreds of thousands of tons of coal a year. The owners had their wealth, the law, and the state on their side - but slowly the miners organized themselves to improve their conditions.
Coal was worked beyond the freshly redrawn frontier along an axis running from Belgian border to Valencinnes, in France. In 1735, a pit was dug in
Anzin, near Valenciennes. The author, Zola, used this city to be the workplace in the novel as the setting. Moreover, in writing Germinal, he did researches in
Valenciennes:
Zola visited a strike at Anzin, a dreary black mining community on the outskirts of Valenciennes. He interviewed miners and their families, visited their homes, went down a mine, and listened to strike meetings. He soon got the feel of how the miners were permanently hungry, living brutish lives in overcrowded cottages, often diseased through dangerous working condition, haunted by debt, insecurity, and the risk of total ruin by a disabling accident (http://www.theotherside.co.uk/tm- heritage/background/zola.htm).
Usually, mines in the northern France have a deep pit. It is about five hundreds to one thousand two hundreds meters deep. The miners will need a lift like a cage to go down the shaft. The environment deep below ground is hot, dusty and wet.
The miners generally lived near from the mining company. The Company provided houses to their workers, they built them solid accommodations. By offering their workers low cost housing, they not only had settle down near their workplace, but also had them increase their dependence on the mine. Little by little, the inhabitants gave up their rural habits of living off their own produce and bought their consumer goods in the stores and cooperatives run by the mining 46
companies. As a result most miners went into debt feeding themselves
(http://www.francemonthly.com/n/0408/index.php).
To house thousands of workers in this previously rural area, the mining companies hastily put up rows of cheaply-built cottages which were rented to the miners. If they had an accident, or went on strike, they lost their house as well as their job (www.theotherside.co.uk/tm-heritage/.../coal- risefall.htm).
In the novel, the mine is placed in Montsou. In Montsou, there are four mining companies; they are Le Voureux, Crevecoeur, Mirou and Madeleine. Most of the labors in the novel are set to work in Le Voreux. The depth of the shaft in
Le Voreux is five hundred and fifty-four meters with four levels before the bottom. The workers use cage to go down to the bottom of pit. The cage is actually a primitive lift dropped on a long cable, wound up by a steam engine. At the beginning of the 19th century, cages were put in that functioned with cables to lower the miners down or pull them back up.
“When at last the cage stopped at the bottom, five hundred and fifty-four meters below ground, Etienne was amazed to learn that the descent had taken exactly one minute” (Zola, 1954: 46).
In the bottom pit, the workers dig the coal seams and then it is carried to the pit head. At the pit head, the coal is cleaned and sorted then dumped into railway trucks to be taken away by a never-ending stream of trains.
Le Voreux is owned by the bourgeoisies living in Montsou. They put their money and become the shareholders in the mining Company. Therefore, the company is not owned in private. To run the mining company, they hire a manager and foreman to watch out the workings in the mining camp. The fore man is actually the miners that are promoted by the company because of their loyalty and obedience to the company, not because of their competence. 47
The setting of place of the house is different between the working class and the bourgeois. In the novel, the bourgeois has provides lodgings for the workers to stay. The house is set near from the mining Company and it is called
Village Two Hundred and Forty.
Village Two Hundred and Forty, surrounded by its fields of corn and beet, was slumbering in blackest night. Its four great blocks of little back-to- back houses could just be made out: they were like hospital or barrack blocks, geometrical, parallel, separated by three wide strips of land divided into regular garden plots (Zola, 1954: 28).
The houses for the workers is actually not big, only small square of a room which can be divided into bedroom and dining room. There is also a coal fire in the house of working class to warm the house. The company gives limited accomodation and fuel to the workers.
When looking to the bourgeois’ house, it can be seen in contrast that the house of the bourgeois is much larger than the house of working class:
Just beyond was the house of the managing director, Monsieur Hennebeau, a large chalet-like building standing back behind iron gates and a garden containing some scraggy trees (Zola, 1954: 95).
The setting for home of the bourgeois is usually: large house, with a vast yard and it looks comfortable and luxurious.
B. The Oppressions Experienced by Working Class Reflected through
Characters and Settings
The working class in the novel experiences the oppressions in many aspects, such as their physically, societal and also psychologically. Becker added that the oppression happened when there are two different groups in which one group is dehumanized by another group which may be dominant. The oppression 48
includes discrimination, degradation, exclusion, exploitation and dehumanization
(Becker, 1992: 921).
In the novel, the oppressed group belongs to the working class and the oppressor is the bourgeoisie. The workers are dehumanized by the upper class, and being discriminated and also exploited. The forms of oppression can be analyzed by seeing the workers’ living condition and also their surroundings.
In this analysis, the oppressions are seen into two parts. First, we can see the oppressions reflected through the characters; in this case, the writer analyzes the life experience of characters in the novel, which is working class, that are oppressed by the bourgeoisie. The second, the oppressions are reflected through the setting of place in the novel.
1. Oppressions Reflected through Characters
In this section, the writer wants to analyze the form of oppressions that is experienced by the characters. The writer points to some characters described in the first subchapter that are oppressed by the bourgeois. Those characters experience human exploitation in the workplace, low wages and wage cut without shortage of working hours, poverty in each labor’s family, starvation, and also sickness that causes death.
a. Women and Child Labor
The bourgeois hired women and also children to work in the mining camp.
This includes the oppression toward the working class because working in the mining camp is dangerous, especially for women and children. To work in the 49
mining camp, there should be strong workers, or it can be said that only the man that are capable to work there.
Working in the mining camp is not easy. It deals with death because they will face many dangers in the pit. Many miners are employed in dangerous conditions that were detrimental to their health. That is why hiring women and child labor are included as human exploitation. The occupation is very hard and dangerous for man; moreover, it is done by the women and also children.
In many developed countries, it is considered inappropriate or exploitative if a child below a certain age works (excluding household chores or school-related work). An employer is usually not permitted to hire a child below a certain minimum age. This minimum age depends on the country and the type of work involved. In coal mines children began work at the age of five and generally died before the age of 25 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labor).
The bourgeois exploit all women and children to work hard in their company to get as much as profit from their production.
The human exploitation through hiring woman and children in the mining camp is seen through characters Catherine. Catherine is Maheu’s daughter. She is fifteen and she has to work in the mining company due to the need of the coal production. Besides, she also has to help her family to feed them. Moreover,
Catherine leaves the house to go with Chaval which means she has to earn money for herself as Chaval does not give any to her:
Seeing Catherine in her trousers and vest, with her hair tucked into her blue cap. As he never gave her any money and she had to keep both of them, what would become of her if she earned nothing? She was haunted by fear of the brothel at Marchiennes, which was where pit-girls ended up when they found themselves without food and lodging (Zola, 1954: 286).
50
Other children such as Jeanlin and Zacharie also go to the pit to work.
Jeanlin is eleven years old and Zacharie is twenty-one. For Jeanlin, he is too early to work in the mining company.
Children of hers, who had cost money ever since they were born, and ought now to be bringing some in! In this outburst lurked, the memory of her own hard childhood, hereditary poverty making of each child in the litter a future breadwinner (Zola, 1954: 184).
In this case, Maheude, the mother has told her children that they have to be used to work in the pit even it is difficult. The children should also earn money to help the economic condition of the family.
Another proof that woman is also employed in the mining company is seen through Mouquette, a minor character in the novel. She is eighteen years old and becomes a haulage girl in the pit. In the workplace, she is often mocked by the men in the pit.
But on that particular morning the mirth was more noisy than usual, for they were chaffing Mouquette, an eighteen-year-old haulage girl. She had nearly exploded with indignation, declaring that she had more self-respect (Zola, 1954:
41).
b. Long Working Hours
The oppression in the novel is seen through the working hours that are ruled by the mine-owner. The long working hours is included as exploitation toward the working class as this forces the worker to work in the pit whole day.
This happens because the Company does not want to suffer a financial lost when the coal production has to stop. Therefore, the pit is never left by the worker, in 51
every night and day they have to work in the pit: “The pit was never idle; night and day human insects picked away at the rock six hundred meters below” (Zola,
1954: 75). Though the machine of the mining camp should work, the workers also should have better system of working, in which there is a shift of working in the pit, and also a better payment.
In Traugott’s anthology, The French Worker: Autobiographies from the
Early Industrial Era, it is stated that in France 19th century, the workdays were very long. Most workers began their day at around 5 am and usually finished around 8 or 9 pm with an hour break for lunch (1993: 136). The workers have to work for 15 to 16 hours a day. This very long of working hours is not balanced to the money they earns from the job.
The system of long working hours happens to all characters of working class in the novel. The dangers at the workplace are seen in the novel. It is described that working in the pit is very difficult:
The work was difficult at Maheu’s new pitch. At this point, the Filonnière seam narrowed down so much that the colliers were wedged between wall and roof and grazed their elbows while working. They lived in fire-damp without even noticing the weight pressing on their eyelids and the cobwebby veil it left on the lashes (Zola, 1954: 184).
Through the long of working hours, the workers suffer much, because they cannot do their leisure activities but working in the mining camp. Even, they do not have enough time to take a rest. This really burden them as the company do not change their system to gain the as much profit as they can without concerning their workers.
52
c. Low wages/ Wage Cut
The oppression can be experienced also by the characters in the novel through the wages they earn from working in the mining company. The system of payment for the miners is not appropriate if it is compared to a very exhausting job they do in the mining camp. The company pays the labor very low because the company has a crisis that lessens the demand of coals from other countries. In this case, they have to cut the labors’ wage or their industry will go to the bankruptcy.
However, this is only the trick of the company to enrich their wealth. They do not want to loose anything they had owned but they sacrifice the rights of their miners.
The Company had been hit by the crisis and had to cut expenses or go under; and of course it was the workers who would have to tighten their belts. The Company would knock bits off their wages on some pretext or other (Zola, 1954: 174).
Maheu and also his friends experience this in the pay day. Maheu expects to go home with enough money in order to buy some stocks for the family after the pay day. During the pay day in Montsou, all miners from the village come in and expect the same as Maheu.
“Maheu and team, Filonnière seam, number seven face. A hundred and thirty-five francs.” The cashier paid it out. “Excuse me, sir,” stammered the collier, aghast, “are you sure there isn’t some mistake?” “No, no, there’s no mistake,” answered the cashier. “You have to deduct two Sundays and four rest days. That leaves you nine working days.” “And don’t forget the fines,” went on the clerk. “Twenty francs fine for defective timbering.” (Zola, 1954: 179-180).
53
Maheu takes up the money in his trembling hands. He truly cannot believe that he will get much lower pay than he expects. It will not be enough to feed the whole family, indeed.
Maheu gets angry and he tries to show his objection to the engineer of the mining company. However, it will change nothing. Maheu still gets less pay and cut with the fine:
Maheu was feeling more and more angry, but he managed to say calmly: “If we were properly paid we should do the propping better.” The engineer shrugged his shoulders and said nothing. He had completed his inspection of the face, and from the bottom threw back his final word: “You have got one hour left. You must all get down to it, and I give notice that the team is fined three francs.” (Zola, 1954: 63).
When he had gone it was Maheu’s turn to blow up: “God! What isn’t fair isn’t fair! I’m all for calmness, because it is the only way of getting along, but in the end they drive you mad. Did you hear? The rate per tub down and timbering separate! Another way of paying us less! Christ Almighty!” (Zola, 1954: 64).
It is seen clearly the injustice experienced by the working class. They are even getting worse with the fine given from the company due to the damage of timbering in the mining. The miners actually cannot be at fault due to the damage of the timbering. The quality of the timber in the workplace that the company provides is not good: “No! The timbering scale was unacceptable, it was only a disguised economy, they meant to rob each man of one hour of his working day”
(Zola, 1954: 274). So, that is what the Company is up to, a disguised wage-cut.
The bourgeois are economizing out of the miners’ pockets.
54
d. Insecurity of Working
The working class in the novel is also oppressed by the feeling of insecurity of their working in the mining camp. The company does not give good workplace condition for the workers. Because of that, the workers suffer some disease from the working, and even some of them are died.
It is seen that working in the mining camp is dangerous, and they get the disease from it. The sickness and death are also caused by the system of working that employing the miners in bad condition and also for long hours. The sicknesses are experienced by Maheu’s family. Whole family experiences these sufferings and woes which actually are caused by the capitalist or bourgeois.
… Grandpa coughing and spitting black, with his old rheumatic complaint turning to dropsy, Father asthmatical, his knees swollen up with water, Mother and the children scarred by scrofula and hereditary anemia. Of course all that was part of the job, and you didn’t complain except when lack of food finished you off (Zola, 1954: 252).
It is clearly shown that Grandpa (Bonnemort), Father (Maheu), and Mother
(Maheude) are oppressed by the sickness that is come from their job.
This also happens to other miners. When Etienne works in the pit, he discovers many things from the miners. He also finds and notices the disease contracted by the miners. Etienne admits that this is terrible to think of, when a whole of people dying down in the pits.
He had studied miners’ occupational diseases and now brought them all out with horrible details: anemia, scrofula, black bronchitis, choking asthma, paralyzing rheumatism (Zola, 1954: 279).
The oppression can also be seen through the health service or insurance from the company. The company actually does not give insurance to the workers.
They provide doctors, but the workers have to pay for the expense. Moreover, to 55
get the doctor immediately is very difficult. It actually happens to Maheude’s daughter, Alzire. Alzire is critically ill and her mother is waiting for the doctor comes to her house. Dr Vanderhaghen is promised to come round before nightfall, and it was night when the doctor has not come yet.
Alzire, drowsy with fever, had begun to mutter in her delirium, laughing away and thinking she was playing in the warm sunshine. “Good God!” exclaimed Maheude, feeling the child’s cheeks, “she’s burning hot now. I’ve given up waiting for that swine, I bet those beasts have told him not to come!” (Zola, 1954: 374).
In this case, Maheude is referring to the doctor and the Company. She is getting angry and calls them as swine and beasts as they treat her family cruelly.
Her only feelings of anger are on the children’s behalf, for she and the family are outraged by the pointless cruelty of Providence which had struck her little girl down with an illness when she had got to die anyway. When the doctor comes, there is a joy looked around Mahude’s face as she hopes a lot to the doctor that finally arrives. The doctor comes in hurry and with anger. However, as the result, Alzire is not saved because it is too late.
The door opened again, and this time it really was Dr Vanderhaghen. “Devil take it!” he said, “your eyesight won’t be ruined by candle-light…. Make haste, I’m in hurry.” As usual he grumbled all the time, for he was cruelly overworked. “Look, she’s gone! Your wretched brat has died of starvation. And she’s not the only one. I’ve just seen another down the street. You all call me in and there’s nothing I can do. Meat is the medicine you want.” (Zola, 1954: 378).
Here, we can see that the doctor does not help anyway. However, he just blames the family as if all of the disasters that happened are coming from themselves. As the minority group which has no power, they are oppressed by the treatment of the upper class and again, they just take it. 56
2. Oppressions Reflected through Settings
The settings described in the novel are setting of place where the characters pass their life, as the setting also includes the occupation and modes of day-to-day existence of the character (Kenney, 1986: 40). The setting of place that show the characters experience oppressions are seen through the condition of mining camp or the workplace which may endanger the workers and also the living condition of the workers, in this case, the lodging condition, where the workers live. Through the descriptions of both places, it can be seen that the workers as the oppressed group are not able to deserve comfort and convenience from their surroundings.
a. Mining Camp
Mining camp here is the place where the workers earn money. The name of the mining camp is called Voreux. The name Voreux comes from the word voracious. In this case, the mining camp describes the voracious animal (mining camp) which devours the labors who work in it. In the mining camp, the workers get exploited by the bourgeoisie, as they have to work for hours in the camp in which the condition endangers them.
…the pit gulped down men in mouthfuls of twenty or thirty and so easily that it did not seem to notice them to going down. The men came from the locker-room barefoot and lamp in hand. And so the shaft went on with its meal for half an hour, gulping men down more or less greedily according to the depth of the level they were bound for; but it never stopped for the hunger of this gigantic maw could swallow up a whole people… (Zola, 1954: 39-40).
The mining camp is also often called as “hell” because the workers feel as if they work in hell with thousands dangers catch their lives: “He (Étienne) might just as 57
well die at once as go down again into that hell where you could not even earn your keep” (Zola, 1954: 71).
To go down to the pit, the miners are handed with lamp. However, the lamp can either be a lifeline or a source of danger. Without light, they cannot move through the galleries or go about their work. But more importantly, the lamp helps detect the dangerous coal gas called firedamp that is the cause of so many accidents. The dangerous coal gas inside the pit can make the miners to have bad respiration. They have to stay inside the pit for hours to inhale the vapor that is poisoned. This makes the labors are difficult to take a breath.
…the air became more foul and heated with the smoke of lamps, the bad breath, the asphyxiating gas, which clung to their eyes like cobwebs and would only be cleared away by the night’s ventilation. Like moles burrowing under the weight of the earth, without a breath of air in their burning lungs, they went on picking… (Zola, 1954: 60).
With this condition, one of the labors in the novel, named Bonnemort, is described to have a bad cough from inhaling the toxic vapor from the pit. He has worked in the mining camp for fifty years, and gets lung disease. However, he still covers his disease from others:
He (Bonnemort) coughed a mighty, scraping hawk which seemed to tear out his inside, and then spat by the side of the fire. It turned the ground black. “And that’s what makes you cough as well?” said Étienne. “No, no. I caught cold last month. I never used to cough, and now I can’t shake it off.” He hawked again and spat black. “Blood?” by now Étienne felt he could make bold to ask. “No, coal. I’ve got enough in my carcass to keep me warm for the rest of my days. Oh, well, it keeps you fit.” (Zola, 1954: 24-25).
The atmosphere inside the pit is not certain. The temperature is always changing. At pit-bottom it was very cold, and along the main tram-road, which ventilated the whole mine, the confined space between the walls had turned the 58
icy wind into hurricane, in other roads the wind had dropped and the heat was increasing, a suffocating heat. This changing temperature really tortures the miner inside the pit. They cannot predict when they have a good time to dig the coal.
This happens to Maheu, when he works in the pit: “Maheu had the worst of it.
The temperature went up to thirty-five degrees Centigrade, air could not circulate, and he was stifled to death” (Zola, 1954: 50).
Working in the mining camp is difficult. It is shown when Maheu describes the condition inside the pit to Étienne in which he sees the worst of the pit that will endanger the miners.
… it was very wet, and every hour they were afraid of a rush of water, one of those sudden torrents that burst rocks asunder and sweep men away. Étienne hardly ever thought now about the possible accidents, oblivious of danger. When the lamps burned pale and blue, and then a miner would put his ear to the seam and listen to the little noise of the gas. But the constant threat was falls of rock, for apart from inadequate timbering, the earth itself was unstable, being saturated with water (Zola, 1954: 184).
The Voreux mining company is not well built and the pit will endanger the miners who work in it. The timber to hold the pit is not solid, and it may fall out one time. “when a distant roar of thunder shook the whole mine. ‘What’s up?’ he called, leaving his pick so as to listen. ‘A fall! Quick, quick!’, another said
(Zola, 1954: 185). The quotation describes an accident happened in the mining camp as the timber is not strong enough to hold the pit. When it happened, some of the labors were inside the pit and there was one died because of the collapse.
They all felt the icy touch of death pass by in the darkness, and silently looked at each other and shivered. A foot came into sight, and then they cleared the debris away with their hands, freeing the other limbs one by one. The light of the lamps fell on it and the name of Chicot was passed back. He was still warm. His spine had been broken by a rock (Zola, 1954: 188).
59
The company does not give better place for their labors to work, the owner even give fine to workers because of the damage. In this case, the workers are oppressed by the condition of the mining camp that endangers them. Many accidents would happen because of the condition of the workplace.
Moreover, the upper class who owns the mining company does not give good shelter for their miners. Therefore, the miners will not feel safe in doing their work in the mining camp but they are threatened by the dangers that may happen in the pit. The proof that the labors do not get good treatment from the bourgeois also can be seen by the living and housing condition where the workers stay.
b. Housing Condition
The housing condition for French worker in the nineteenth century was actually extremely unpleasant. The workers did not get better place to stay and take a rest after long day of work, in fact, they found the house worse. The housing conditions were often cramped, with poor lighting and poor sanitation
(http://www.uky.edu/~popkin/frenchworker/wells.htm). This housing condition of
French worker in the 19th century is almost the same with the description of lodging condition in the novel.
In the novel, the houses for the workers are small. They live in Montsou, in the Deux-Cent-Quarante (Village Two Hundred and Forty) settlement. The place distinguishes four immense blocks of small houses with the broken trellises of the enclosures, back-to-back, barracks or hospital blocks, geometric and 60
parallel, separated by three large avenues which are divided into garden of equal size.
Maheu’s family is one of labors living in the settlement. His house is small and has only one square room with poor lightening. They use candle to light the room and it is very dreary.
The candle lit up the square room with its two windows. It was almost filled by three beds, but there was a cupboard, a table and two old walnut chairs, which stood out dark against the cream-painted wall. That was all; clothes hanging on pegs, a jug on the floor beside earthenware basin to wash in (Zola, 1954: 29).
This description of Maheu’s house shows that the house is extremely unpleasant and looks gloomy. The house is very small for nine persons living there, as
Maheu has seven children and a wife. Kitchen, dining room, bedroom are combined into one small damp room. It is also the same as the housing condition of another labor, in Levaque family; the house is more or less as same as Maheu’s house and inappropriate to be dwelt.
The room was black with dirt, with greasy strains on the floor and walls, the dresser and table coated with grime. A stench of slatternly neglect caught your throat (Zola, 1954: 108).
On the contrary, in the bourgeois’ house, Monsieur Gregoire, one of the shareholders in the mining Company, they live with a high standard of living. The house is situated two kilometers to the east of Montsou, on the Joiselle road, and it is a large house. They live in prosperity.
It was a big square house, without any particular style, built at the beginning of last century. All that remained of the great estates originally belonging to it was some thirty hectares, walled in and easy of upkeep. The orchard and kitchen-garden, in particular, were much admired for some of the finest fruit and vegetables in the district (Zola, 1954: 81).
61
They have everything luxurious in the house; they also have man working to take care their house such as the guards, a gardener, and cooks. The kitchen is also set perfect in this house. It is totally different from the labors’ house that is dirt and full of filth and stink.
The kitchen was vast, and by its scrupulous cleanliness and the arsenal of saucepans, pots and utensils which filled it, you could tell that it was the most important room in the house. It had goodly smell of food. Racks and cupboards were overflowing with provisions (Zola, 1954: 82).
Moreover, the dining room also looks nice. In spite of the hot-air stove which warms the whole house, a coal fire enliven the dining this room. For the rest, happiness rains on this house.
Otherwise it was very simply furnished: just a dining-table and chairs and a sideboard, all of mahogany. But two capacious armchairs spoke of love comfort, of long, happy hours given to digestion (Zola, 1954: 82).
This description shows the ironical condition happens to the working class. They suffer living in bad conditions, on the other hand, the oppressors keep oppressing the workers and the upper class get everything that they actually do not deserve. The oppressions are seen clearly through the setting of place. They are oppressed physically and mentally as they suffer many things in the mining camp and also the house. Physically oppressed by all dangers and pains they get in the mining camp and mentally oppressed by the feeling of uncomfortable living in the unsuitable houses.
C. The Reaction of Working Class toward The Oppressions
In this subchapter, the writer intends to discuss about the impact of the oppressions. When analyzing the previous subchapter, the oppressions are clearly 62
seen happen to the workers, and those oppressions give impact to the working class. The reaction from the workers is actually an action to the class struggle. In this case, the workers wants to express their feeling as the oppressed group through class struggle, as stated in Introduction to Marxist Theory, class struggle means the expression of a human or social to the conflict of economic forces
(Mayo, 1960: 93).
Furthermore, the struggles that the workers conduct are divided into three forms, which are ideological struggle, political struggle, and economical struggle.
Through those struggles, they express their demands to the bourgeois to reach social welfare.
1. Ideological Struggle
The ideological struggle is the early reaction toward the oppressions.
Ideological struggle is needed before they conduct the strike. The purpose of this struggle is to make the workers conscious of the sufferings that they should not deserve, actually. Moreover, its significance is building the mindset of the workers that they cannot just accept the oppressions by the bourgeois, but they have to think how to fight against the bourgeois. In this case, an idea rises in their minds and brings them to the class struggle. The idea to struggle includes the class-consciousness of the workers. The class-consciousness is actually the feeling of awareness that the miners have been treated unfairly and been exploited.
The class-consciousness becomes the ideological struggle of the workers, because the idea burst out through the class-consciousness. The workers are 63
realized and aware of the exploitation they experienced, and they go to the spontaneous protest. As stated in Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism,
He is constantly encountering facts of injustices and economic and social inequality. This engenders among the workers a feeling of discontent, of spontaneous protest and indignation (Hall, 1963: 165).
Therefore, to have class struggle, there should be an ideological first. This ideological is needed to know their basic interests to struggle.
The class-consciousness happens in Étienne. He is the one who has the first idea to struggle. He feels that his heart overflowed with noble indignation against the oppressors, and leaps up in hope for the coming triumph of the oppressed.
Étienne began to understand the ideas that had been vaguely buzzing round in his head. Until then all he had was an instinct to rebel, in the midst of the inarticulate discontent of his comrades. His mind is full with sorts of questions that occurs to him: why poverty for some and wealth for others, why should the former be ground under the heel of the latter, without any hope of ever taking their place (Zola, 1954: 164).
He influences his friends and gives doctrines to the miners that all of the workers should come up. He tries to convince them by showing the cruelty of the bourgeois.
The worker could not carry on any longer; the revolution had only landed in him in a worse plight than ever – since 1789 the bourgeois had been living on the fat of the land, and so greedily that they didn’t leave the working man even the plates to lick. Now who could pretend that the worker had had his fair share of the extraordinary advance in wealth and living standards during the last hundred years? It was a mockery to call them free – yes, they were free to die, and they did that all right! (Zola, 1954: 145).
However, at first it does not go well as Étienne hopes. Étienne sees not all miners agree with his idea. Maheu and Maheude are pessimistic of what Étienne will do. They think that the rebellion just wastes the time. Moreover, it possibly 64
makes their condition even worse. Maheu is actually skeptical with Étienne.
Maheu thinks that the miners will always suffer, without even get the chance of the happiness. It also happens to Maheude:
No, no! It was too beautiful – such ideas should not be allowed to get a hold on you because they made real life look so abominable afterwards, and you felt like smashing everything up in order to find happiness. “Don’t you listen to him, man. You can see he’s only telling fairy-tales. As though the bourgeois will ever be willing to work like we do!” (Zola, 1954: 169).
The refusal from the miners does not make Étienne give in. He even tries hard to make his ideology to be done. His efforts harder to influence the miners are getting. Étienne’s influence is spread far and wide and gradually he revolutionizes the village with his propaganda.
Étienne begins to talk again to the miners, telling that the industrial crisis will attack the company and he is anxious that the panic at the growing industrial crisis will decrease the heavy stocks. The company may seize the slightest pretext for forcing its ten thousand employees into idleness. It means some workers will go to the deep sufferings. In order to influence his friends, Étienne also shows how the miners are exploited and are the only ones to suffer from these disastrous crises: “This time it had gone too far, and the time was coming for the downtrodden worms to turn and see the justices done” (Zola, 1954: 274).
The word justice shook the crowd, and a burst of applause passed over it like the rustle of dry leaves. Voices shouted: “Justice! It’s high time…. Justice!” “The wage system is a new form of slavery,” Étienne went on in a still more ringing voice. “The mine should belong to the miner, like the sea to the fisherman and the earth to the peasant…. Do you understand? The mine is yours – yours, for you have all paid for it with a hundred years of blood and misery!” “That’s right, by God! Our turn now! Death to the exploiters!” (Zola, 1954: 274). 65
This is what Étienne wants from the miners. That is exactly why things are going to change soon, because the workers begin to think now.
He wanted an immediate decision. “Comrades, what have you decided? Do you vote for going on with the strike?” “Yes, yes,” roared the voiced. “Very well, then, you have decided to hold them to their duty and sworn word. This is what we could do: go to the pits, our presence will stop the blacklegs, and we could show the Company that we are all in agreement and will die rather than surrender.” (Zola, 1954: 280).
In this case, Etienne succeeds to influence and set the workers’ minds to be conscious of the oppressions to fight against the bourgeoisie, and they now reach the ideological struggle.
The ideological struggle is needed to bring the workers to the next struggle, which is realizing their demands through revolt and strikes. When they have already had an ideological to understand their own interests in their minds, then it turns to the political way to have a realization by making an organization.
2. Political Struggle
The reaction from the workers toward the bourgeois’ oppressions can be seen through the political way. In political struggle, the workers build a union or organization in order to defeat the bourgeoisie. The workers actually strengthen their ideology by reuniting the workers to make an organization. Hall stated in
Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism, that:
The aims and methods of political struggle demand different, higher forms of working-class organization, above all the creation of a political party of the proletariat. Political struggle also demands not only nation-wide but international unity of effort on the part of the working class and all working people (1963: 169).
66
In political way, it can be seen that the workers has done such a revolt against capitalists.
The aim of the political struggle is not only reuniting the labors to make an organization by the ideology they already had, but also struggling for the political demands such as making a proletariat party that is legalized by the world so that they can campaign at the election and in parliament. This is important for the working class, because the party can strengthen them to fight for democratic rights and freedoms.
In the novel, the miners do a political struggle to fight against the bourgeois. Étienne suggests his friends to make an organization. He intends to strengthen the miners with a foundation: “So you are going to try to form a section at Montsou?” (Zola, 1954: 144), a miner asks Étienne about his plan to make a foundation. In this case, Étienne refers to the Workers’ International that has been founded in London. He wants to cooperate with this world organization.
… the Workers’ International, the famous International which had just been founded in London. Was it not a superb effort, a campaign in which justice must at length prevail? No more frontiers, the workers of the whole world rising up united to guarantee the working man the bread he earns. And what simple and impressive organization: at the bottom the section, representing the commune; then the federation, grouping together the sections of a province… (Zola, 1954: 144).
The Workers’ International is not yet a legal union, however, Étienne dreams of having involved in this organization.
Étienne discussed his ideas to Maheu and he gives explanation to Maheu on the importance of setting up a provident fund for the Montsou miners. This is meant to collect the money from miners, just in case, it is needed later when the strike happens. 67
“Well, then, it would be wise to start off a mutual aid society that would be independent of their good pleasure, and at least we could rely on that for cases of urgent need.” And he went into details, discussed organization, and promised to do all the work himself. “I’m willing,” said Maheu, now convinced. “Only there are the others…. Try to persuade them.” (Zola, 1954: 153).
Then Étienne conveys his idea about a provident fund to the miners and he gets supports from his fellows.
Étienne explains to the miners that each member can easily give twenty sous a month for the fund:
“With these twenty sous accumulated over four or five years we should have a nest-egg, and when you have money behind you, you are strong, aren’t you, whatever happens…. Well, what do you think?” “Well, I don’t say no,” answered Levaque (Zola, 1954: 154).
However, not all miners support Étienne. Still, there are other persons oppose him in doing this struggle.
Rasseneur is one of the miners who does not agree with Étienne.
Rasseneur and Étienne have arguments. He thinks that this fund in fact can burden the miners. Rasseneur does not trust Étienne that he can bring the workers come out of the misery. Rasseneur had experienced this before in the last strike, and he failed.
“I don’t give a damn for your ideas – politics, government and all that – not a damn! What I want is to see the miners better treated. I worked underground myself for twenty years, and I sweated so much with poverty and fatigue that I have sworn I’ll get some of the pleasures of life for the poor buggers who are down there still; and I am quite sure that you will never get anything with all your talk, you will only make the miner’s lot even worse.” (Zola, 1954: 231-232).
Étienne does not pay attention to these arguments as he gets more supports than
Rasseneur does. In fact, it makes Rasseneur lose his temper altogether. 68
“Very well, we shall see which one they mean to follow – me, whom they’ve known for thirty years, or you who have turned everything upside down in less than one.” (Zola, 1954: 235).
Another person who opposes Étienne is Chaval. At the first time Étienne comes to Montsou, Chaval dislikes him. He is jealous at Étienne as Étienne is more popular than he is. Then, Chaval becomes a traitor of the fellows. He does not follow the struggle, but he accepts an offering of promotion to be a deputyship, in condition, he can persuade other miners to avoid Étienne.
A deep calculation was going on his head: if he insisted on going on with the strike, he would be never be anything more than second-in-command to Étienne, but there was a new ambition opening out before him, to become one of the bosses. His face flushed with pride and he felt exultant (Zola, 1954: 290).
Though Étienne is having opposed by Chaval and Rasseneur, he reaches success in influencing his mates to have political struggle by reuniting them into an organization.
3. Economic Struggle
In economic struggle, they carry out strikes. They struggle to demand the economic interests for the better living condition of the workers. As stated in
Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism, the economic struggle is the struggle based on the economic interest for improving the condition of life and labour: increased wages, a shorter working day, etc (Hall, 1963: 164).
”To defend its economic interests the working class creates trade union, mutual assistance funds and other organizations.” (Hall, 1963: 164). It means that if the workers only have revolt on the economic struggle, it will be unsuccessful.
It should be strengthened by the political thinking to create and lead an 69
organization: “Every worker, even the least politically developed, realizes the need to protect his immediate economic interests” (Hall, 1963: 164).
The economic struggle in the novel begins with the negotiation between the working class and the bourgeois. After the workers are united, they go to the bourgeoisie to explain their demands. In this case, Étienne points toward Maheu to become the spokesman in the meeting. Étienne regards Maheu as a good employee that the bourgeois will listen to him. However at first, his wife, La
Maheude refuses letting her husband leads the strike:
“Oh no, that’s too much!” said his wife. “I don’t mind his going, but I won’t let him be the ringleader. Why him rather than anybody else?” At first Étienne was to speak, but he had not been at Montsou long enough, and they would be more likely to listen to an old hand who had always lived there (Zola, 1954: 210).
Finally, Maheude can let her husband go, becoming the spokesman, if it is best for the others: “All right, you go my man, and let yourself be done in for the sake of the others. I’m not stopping you!” (Zola, 1954: 211).
They go to the managing director, Monsieur Hennebeau. When they arrive, Monsieur Hennebeau is surprised and discontented to know that a leader of the strike is Maheu, the worker that has been loyal to the Company. He expects
Étienne to be the spokesman.
“What, you? One of thebest workmen, who have always been so reasonable, an old inhabitant of Montsou whose family has been working here ever since the first blow was struck! Oh, I am sorry, I really am sorry to see you at the head of this malcontents.”
However, Maheu keeps going on with his plan to state the demands of economic interests. He speaks hesitantly and in low voice. He starts to talk about the sufferings that the miners experienced. 70
“We only want justice: we are getting tired of dying of hunger, and it seems to us high time to come to some arrangement so that at any rate we get bread to eat everyday.” (Zola, 1954: 213).
Maheu feels more confident and courageous to speak up, because the other workers support him. He also explains his protest toward the new system of cut wage. He cannot afford to pay the fine of the timbering in the pit. He admits that he and also his friends do not put the timbering properly, because it takes long time and they do not put in the necessary time to work, whereas the overman forces them to increase the coal production in short. If they do the timbering, their day will be cut down still more, and as it does not give them enough to eat as it is, that will be the end of everything.
You cut down the price per tub and then pretend to make up for the cut by paying for timbering separately. We have come to say that, death for death, we prefer to die in idleness. At any rate it is not so tiring. We have left the pits, and we shall not go down again unless the Company accepts our conditions. You want to cut the price per tub and pay separately for timbering. We want things to stay as they were, and moreover we want five centimes more per tub. Now it’s up to you to show whether you are on the side of justice and the workers.” The miners’ voices rose in chorus: “That’s right…. He has said what we all feel…. We are only asking for what is right.” (Zola, 1954: 213-214).
Listening to the accusation from the workers, Monsieur Hennebeau tries to elude the problems and clarifies that all the sufferings happened are not only caused by the Company.
“Nearly half the mining companies in France are bankrupt. Besides it is foolish to accuse the succesful ones of cruelty. If their workmen suffer they suffer themselves. Do you think that the Company hasn’t as much to lose in the present crisis as you have? It cannot fix wages as it likes, it must be competitive or go under. Why don’t you blame the facts instead of the Company? But you won’t listen, you refuse to understand.” (Zola, 1954: 216).
71
From this quotation, it shows that the bourgeois do not want to admit their faults.
They even blame the conditions for the sufferings of the workers. In this case, the struggle is not yet successful as the bourgeoisie rejects the terms of the workers.
The strikes keep going on, after the workers know that their demands are rejected. They insist not to go down to the pit until the bourgeoisie approve their terms. When the workers do not go down to the pit, the coal production will stop for a while. It means that the Company will go to collapse, without any coal production. Both sides stay with their own stand and do not give in.
“Think it over, my friends, and you will realize that a strike would be a disaster for all concerned. You will be dying with hunger before a week is out, and then how will you manage? However, I rely on your good sense, and am convinced that you will go back into the pits by Monday at the latest.” (Zola, 1954: 218).
On the Monday of the third week, the manager finds that there is a new decrease in the number of men underground. At Le Voreux, the yard is wrapped in heavy silence. It is like a dead factory; the great workings are empty and abandoned and everything is at a standstill.
During the strikes, Etienne uses the funds from the organization and shares it to the families for their necessities. However, it cannot stand for long. All resources are drying up. The workers have no money left to carry on the strike, and hunger stares them in the face. In other side, Chaval is filled with glories, since he betrays their friend and gives his support to the bourgeois.
On both sides, obstinacy is aggravating the trouble: if labors are dying of hunger, capital was being eaten away. Each day’s stoppage cost hundreds of thousands francs. A machine stationary is a machine dead. The Company is worried with the damage of the workings without any workers repair it. This 72
accident becomes so serious that long months of repair work will be required before production can start again.
When the demands are not getting approved, the workers cannot stand for long. They go on strike again, in this time, they do it brutally, especially the women workers. They go to the Hennebeau’s and when they see Monsieur
Grégoire’s daughter, they immediately attack Cécile.
“Just you wait!” screamed Ma Brûlé. “We’ll stick that lace up your arse!” “Those bitches pinch all that stuff from us,” added la Levaque. “They stick fur on their skins while we die of cold. Strip her bloody well naked, just to show her what life is! Yes, yes, let’s whip her!” Surrounded by these furies Cécile was shaking with terror and on the point of collapse. Over and over again she stammered out the same words: “Ladies – please, ladies! Please don’t hurt me!” (Zola, 1954: 345-346).
In their march across country, the workers always shout aloud: “We want bread! We want bread! To the pits! Stop all work! We want bread!” (Zola, 1954:
315). The women workers also go to Maigrat’s shop. Maigrat finishes his life there, in his shop:
They had caught sight of Maigrat on the shed roof. All of sudden both hands lost their grip, he rolled down like a ball, fell across the party wall, his skull was split open on the point of a stone post, and his brains gushed out. He was killed instantly (Zola, 1954: 350).
Unsatisfied with the death of Maigrat, the ladies go after him and mutilate his body. This frightful mutilation has been performed in an atmosphere of icy horror.
… and Ma Brûlé, with her withered old hands, parted his naked thighs and grasped his dead virility. The soft skin resisted and she had to try again, but she managed in the end to pull away the lump of hairy, bleeding flesh which she waved aloft with a snarl of triumph. “I owed you sixty francs. Well, you’re paid now, you thief!” said Maheude, now as frenzied as anybody else. “You won’t refuse me any more credit.” (Zola, 1954: 351).
In this case, the workers feel satisfied by finishing the bourgeois. Whether their struggle will reach the goals or not, at least they have relieved their pain. The 73
point is they have made changing through their movement. The changing is not only seen whether the struggle is successful or not, but through their movement that can change their mindset through class-consciousness toward the capitalist system. In short, those three forms of struggle are important. The workers cannot only struggle for their economic interests, but they have also been imbued by the ideological thinking and been politically developed to overthrow the bourgeoisie.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION
In this chapter, the writer intends to draw the conclusion of the analysis in the previous chapter based on the three problem formulations that are proposed.
The writer can conclude that in studying the class struggle, there should be two class divisions that against each other. Those classes are described in two different types of characters, which are characters of working class and characters of bourgeois. Through those descriptions, the writer can shows the different life of both kinds of characters that the working class is always in poor condition and having bad standard of livings, whereas the bourgeoisie will have everything and enjoy their happiness through their wealth and power. When analyzing the setting of place in the history and the novel, the writer finds the historical background of the workplace, coal mining, that is set in the novel. The descriptions help the writer to understand the historical background that can be related to the setting in the novel.
It also can be concluded that characters and settings in the first problem formulation reflects the oppressions that happened in the coal mining in France nineteenth century. The oppressions that are seen through characters are varied.
The characters of working class in Germinal are oppressed physically by the long working hours that force the workers to work a whole day in the mining camp, and also the rule of the Company to hire woman and children to work in dangerous condition of the mines. This oppression includes as a human exploitation. The working class also experiences oppressions through the wage
74 75
cut that happens to Maheu. This brings him to other economic oppression which is poverty. Maheu and other workers have survived to come out of poverty, but it does not make it. The writer also finds the working class is oppressed because they are starved to die. The bourgeois shows their cruelty by not giving them food so that they are in starvation. Another oppression seen from the workers is the sickness that the working class gets from their workings that may cause death.
Through the setting of place, the writer also finds the act of oppressions reflected trough the condition of the workplace and the condition of the house.
The bourgeois oppresses the workers by not giving a proper and good safety for the workers in the mining camp. It is seen that working in the mining camp is dangerous, but the bourgeois do not give protections against the dangers that may happen, especially for giving better timbering in the pit. The bourgeoisie also provides the bad living condition of house for the working class. It can be concluded that the workers are mentally oppressed by the feeling of uncomfortable living in the unsuitable houses.
After the writer identifies the oppressions experienced by the working class, the reactions toward the oppressions appear. The class struggle is the reaction of the oppressions from the bourgeois. In this case, the writer can draw a conclusion that class struggle may be divided into some forms depending on the workers’ interests. In Germinal, the working class reacts toward the oppressions in three forms, which are ideological struggle, political struggle, and economic struggle. The workers are conscious by the feeling of discontented toward the oppressions and they have it in ideological struggle. After they have their ideology to hold, they feel it is important to have political thoughts by making a 76
union and organization to strengthen their struggle. Those struggles then bring them to a movement to reach their demands in the economic interests. They do economic struggle and have strikes against the bourgeoisie.
The class struggle considers to be strong and worth when it includes the ideological, political and economic struggle. At least, through them, the working class knows the basic interests to struggle. In most class struggle, the working class only has spontaneous protest through the economic struggle without realizing their ideology and political needs. Therefore, those forms of struggle might be completed each other. Finally, the writer can conclude that Zola’s
Germinal is actually a representation of the realistic condition of capitalists system toward the working class and may become a criticism against the capitalist to remove the system that oppresses the working class.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abrams, M. H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. New York: Holt, Rineheart & Winston, 1981.
Anderson, Gail. Gambits from Gail.
Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory. 2nd edition. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002.
Becker, Lawrence C. Encyclopedia of Ethics Vol II L- Index. NY & London: Garland Publishing Inc, 1992.
Brians, Paul. “Study Questions for Zola's Germinal”.
Bukharin, Nikolai. Historical of Materialism: A System of Sociology. Don Mills: Longmans Canada Limited, 1969.
Chilton, Ashley. Family Structure and Relations.
Duncan, David. Relations With Employers.
Gill, Richard. Mastering English Literature Second Edition. London: Macmillan Press, 1995.
Hall, Campion S. J. Kew. Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism. Foreign Language Publishing House: Moscow, 1963.
Holman, C. Hugh and William Harmon. A Handbook to literature, Fifth edition. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1986.
Kenney, William. How to Analyze Fiction. New York: Holt Rine & Winston, Zinc., 1986.
Langland, Elizabeth. Society in the Novel. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1984.
Marx, K. & F. Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party. F.L.P.H., 1959.
Mayo, Henry B. Introduction to Marxist Theory. New York: Oxford university Press, 1960.
77 78
Murphy, M.J. Understanding Unseen. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1972.
Rohrberger, Mary and Samuel H Woods. Reading and Writing about Literature. New York: Random House Inc., 1971.
Roth, John K. International Encyclopedia of Ethics. London and USA: Braun- Brumfield Inc, 1955.
Stanton, Robert. An Introduction to Fiction. New York: Holt, Rineheart and Winston, Inc., 1965.
Smith, Mark. “A review of Émile Zola's Germinal”.
The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford University Press, 2005.
Traugott, Mark. The French Worker: Autobiographies from the Early Industrial Era. Berkley: University of California Press, 1993.
Wells, Mary. Relations with the Government.
Wilczyinski, Jozef. An Encyclopedic of Marxism Socialism and Communism Macmillan: Macmillan Press, 1981.
Zola, Émile. Germinal. London: Penguin Books Ltd, 1954.
APPENDIX
Summary of the Émile Zola’s Germinal
Germinal is a novel by Émile Zola that was written in 1884. This novel is a portrayal of a life of working class in France in the nineteenth century that is exploited. The story begins by the arrival of Étienne Lantier, the main character of the novel, from the Northern France to Montsou.
Étienne was an engine man of the railway in his old job. He came to
Montsou to find a new employment in a mining company. He got his job in Le
Voreux mining company. He had many friends after he was accepted to work in the mining camp, because he worked well and the miners like him. He began to know Maheu and his family. Maheu’s family was big, because he had seven children and they live together in one roof. Maheu was a poor miner and his family was in deep sufferings of poverty and starvation.
Étienne lived together with Maheu’s family, and he saw a pathetic scene, that this family was unable to find enough bread to eat. La Maheude, a wife of
Maheu, asked Maigrat to give her some credits to buy some stocks for the family, but he refused her. Maigrat was a bourgeois who had a grocery near from the mining company. He often gave debts to the workers and burdened them with the high interests so that the workers could not pay their debts. La Maheude went to
Monsieur Grégoire, one of shareholders of the mining Company, and there she only got some bread.
Étienne observed the cruelty of the bourgeois when he first worked in the mining camp. He saw that the job was very difficult to do. The workplace was not
79 80
suitable for the workers, because there were many damages of the timbering that might cause accidents to the workers. The atmosphere inside the pit was also bad for the workers’ respirations. He noticed that some workers were in illness because of the bad condition of the workplace. He saw Bonnemort, the father of
Maheu, spit a black coal through his throat when he coughed.
In the pay day, Maheu and his friends were paid lower than usual. He was fined because of the damage of the timbering, and the wage was cut in order to repair the damage. Maheu was in deep of sorrow, because he could not imagine that he and his family could live with the rest of money he had. Étienne observed the situation happened to Maheu. He saw clearly the injustice given by the bourgeois through his friend and other miners.
Unable to accept the cruelty of the bourgeois, Étienne invites Maheu and other miners to have a section for labors in Montsou to overthrow the bourgeois.
He spread his thoughts to the miners. There are some workers who agreed with
Étienne and there are also some who opposed him. Chaval and Rasseneur were the people who opposed Étienne. Chaval opposed Étienne because he disliked
Étienne. He was jealous at him, because Étienne was spontaneously getting the popularity rather than Chaval who worked for long in the mining camp. Rasseneur opposed Étienne, because he thought that the struggle was in vain. The struggle would only bring the miners to a deeper misery.
Étienne continued the struggle to achieve the human rights. First, Étienne,
Maheu, and other miners went to Monsieur Hennebeau, the manager of the mining Company. They uttered their demands to Monsieur Hennebeau.
Unfortunately, the negotiation ended without bringing the victory to the workers.
81
Both sides decided not to give in and they restrained with their decisions. The workers would not go to the pit before their demands were approved, so did the bourgeois, they would not accept the workers’ demands. They even hired workers from Belgium to work in the mining Company. The strike lasted for more than two months. The terrible impacts of the strike were clearly seen in the side of the working class. The workers no longer had money to buy some food. The bourgeois was in bankruptcy for the dead coalmine that did not make production anymore, but they still can enjoy the luxury of the house and eat the delicious food.
When the workers could not stand for the sufferings anymore, they rebelled to the Maigrat’s shop. They attacked Maigrat, and he died. Maigrat body was mutilated by the women workers, and they plundered the provisions from
Maigrat’s shop. The daughter of Monsieur Grégoire, Cécile, also died, when she went to Maheu’s family. Bonnemort strangled Cecile to death, because he disliked the bourgeois.
Étienne was disappointed to the struggle that is brutish done by the miners. He also regretted that he could not bring the miners to the victory. In the end of the story, the activity of the miners was back to normal. The miners went down to the pit again. La Maheude lost her two children in the incident. One of his son was limped because of the accident happened in the pit. Bonnemort died because of his lungs disease. Étienne left Montsou and went to Paris. He began to join the international organization for labors that his friend had founded.