What is Tess and Joan’s relationship like?
In Hardy’s novel ‘Tess of the D’Urbervilles’ Tess and Joan’s relationship is depicted as at
times resembling one of a mother and daughter and at others of forces: a dominant force –
Joan - dragging the other more submissive one, Tess.
At various points their relationship is seen as grounds for profit for Joan, so on Joan’s behalf
it is exploitative and one linked by convenience. Joan converts Tess into a pawn in her
scheme to acquire social ascension and financial advancement, her ticket to achieving this is
to get Tess married: “Have you come home to be married?” This hopeful question she
springs upon Tess the minute she returns from Trantridge; her motives here are poorly
disguised given this question is posed before any of motherly concern, conveying to the
reader Joan’s principle priorities with regards to her daughter. In Chapter XII, when Joan
discovers Tess has not succeeded in her ploy she was “ready to burst into tears if vexation”.
Usually, ‘tears’ are a physical manifestation of sorrow however, instead Joan feels anger and
frustration – ‘vexation’. This explosive - ‘burst’ – mixture of feelings can reflect those she has
for her daughter – they are not of pity nor of genuine love for Tess, but are instead of
‘vexation’, which symbolise her frustration at not achieving her desire of self-advancement.
Hence, like ‘tears’ her relationship with her daughter has lost its original meaning,
overpowered by the stronger feeling – ‘vexation’ – thus making their relationship Joan’s
personal mine for self-profit.
On the other hand, Tess and Joan’s relationship can be portrayed as misunderstood, where
both are victims of their ancestors. Given they are mother and daughter, they already span
a generation which can be seen to blatantly convey the ritual-like process of survival women
must go through; this is to say, the way Joan seemingly prostitutes her is what had to be
done for women to achieve power or even to survive. This point argues Joan is not
purposefully mean but simply unaware that what she does is wrong. This can in part be due
to the gap in education between them, evidently displayed in Joan’s vernacular – “perhaps it
would ha’ been better if Tess had not gone” – or it could also be because, as Tess’s father
describes, Tess is ‘queer’ and different to Joan. This supports their relationship is
misconstrued: each other’s love gets lost in translation. As regards to both being victims of
their ancestors, the new Historicist criticism argues Joan’s love and intentions are misplaced
as she herself performed this ritual like process and secured herself with a husband and
relative happiness – we observe this when she tells Jack Tess’s trump card is “her face – as
‘twas mine” revealing these actions run down generations. Henceforth their relationship can
be seen as already fated given it is subject not to their flaws but their ancestors’,
determined as much by their environment as much by their heredity.
Moreover, Tess and Joan’s relationship can be construed as weak given Joan’s side of their
bond can be perceived as flailing. Joan’s intentions, if discarding the influencing factor of
ancestry, are viewed by many as questionable: her attentions are focussed inwards even
with her daughter, even positioning Tess in a place that circles her own orbit. Tess’s love and
affection in turn is ever outward-reaching, and has adapted and conformed to playing a part
in her mother’s sphere of influence. This view of their relationship is perfectly reflected
here: “Her mother’s pride in the girl’s appearance led her to… like a painter from his easel…
Survey her work as a whole.” One can note Joan particular pride in Tess’s ‘appearance’,
In Hardy’s novel ‘Tess of the D’Urbervilles’ Tess and Joan’s relationship is depicted as at
times resembling one of a mother and daughter and at others of forces: a dominant force –
Joan - dragging the other more submissive one, Tess.
At various points their relationship is seen as grounds for profit for Joan, so on Joan’s behalf
it is exploitative and one linked by convenience. Joan converts Tess into a pawn in her
scheme to acquire social ascension and financial advancement, her ticket to achieving this is
to get Tess married: “Have you come home to be married?” This hopeful question she
springs upon Tess the minute she returns from Trantridge; her motives here are poorly
disguised given this question is posed before any of motherly concern, conveying to the
reader Joan’s principle priorities with regards to her daughter. In Chapter XII, when Joan
discovers Tess has not succeeded in her ploy she was “ready to burst into tears if vexation”.
Usually, ‘tears’ are a physical manifestation of sorrow however, instead Joan feels anger and
frustration – ‘vexation’. This explosive - ‘burst’ – mixture of feelings can reflect those she has
for her daughter – they are not of pity nor of genuine love for Tess, but are instead of
‘vexation’, which symbolise her frustration at not achieving her desire of self-advancement.
Hence, like ‘tears’ her relationship with her daughter has lost its original meaning,
overpowered by the stronger feeling – ‘vexation’ – thus making their relationship Joan’s
personal mine for self-profit.
On the other hand, Tess and Joan’s relationship can be portrayed as misunderstood, where
both are victims of their ancestors. Given they are mother and daughter, they already span
a generation which can be seen to blatantly convey the ritual-like process of survival women
must go through; this is to say, the way Joan seemingly prostitutes her is what had to be
done for women to achieve power or even to survive. This point argues Joan is not
purposefully mean but simply unaware that what she does is wrong. This can in part be due
to the gap in education between them, evidently displayed in Joan’s vernacular – “perhaps it
would ha’ been better if Tess had not gone” – or it could also be because, as Tess’s father
describes, Tess is ‘queer’ and different to Joan. This supports their relationship is
misconstrued: each other’s love gets lost in translation. As regards to both being victims of
their ancestors, the new Historicist criticism argues Joan’s love and intentions are misplaced
as she herself performed this ritual like process and secured herself with a husband and
relative happiness – we observe this when she tells Jack Tess’s trump card is “her face – as
‘twas mine” revealing these actions run down generations. Henceforth their relationship can
be seen as already fated given it is subject not to their flaws but their ancestors’,
determined as much by their environment as much by their heredity.
Moreover, Tess and Joan’s relationship can be construed as weak given Joan’s side of their
bond can be perceived as flailing. Joan’s intentions, if discarding the influencing factor of
ancestry, are viewed by many as questionable: her attentions are focussed inwards even
with her daughter, even positioning Tess in a place that circles her own orbit. Tess’s love and
affection in turn is ever outward-reaching, and has adapted and conformed to playing a part
in her mother’s sphere of influence. This view of their relationship is perfectly reflected
here: “Her mother’s pride in the girl’s appearance led her to… like a painter from his easel…
Survey her work as a whole.” One can note Joan particular pride in Tess’s ‘appearance’,
