“THE COUNTRY OF THE PLAGUE”: ANTICULTURE AND AUTOETHNOGRAPHY IN DICKENS'S 1850S

Abstract

This short paper proposes toconsider the transition fromBleak House(1852–53) toLittle Dorrit(1856–57) as a phase of particular significance in Dickens's debate with himself over the claims, benefits, and pitfalls of national and wider forms of belonging. I elideHard Times(1854) because it seems to me that with the composition ofBleak HouseDickens had definitively arrived at the conviction that the twenty-number monthly novel was that one of his novelistic forms best suited to sustained exploration and testing of capacious social networks making claims upon individuals' identification and loyalty. InBleak House– as I have argued inDisorienting Fiction: The Autoethnographic Work of Nineteenth-Century British Novels(2005) – Dickens responds to the false universalism of the Great Exhibition of 1851 by producing his most restrictively “national” of novels, programmatically and demonstratively shutting out a wider world in order to produce an image of Britain that negatively foreshadows the kind of autarkic, autotelic fantasies of single cultures associated with the classic functionalist ethnography of the early twentieth century, as practiced by such luminaries as Bronislaw Malinowski and Franz Boas. “Negatively” is key here, since anticipations of ethnography in nineteenth-century British (autoethnographic) fiction typically involve representation of the nation as “a form ofanticulturewhose features define by opposition the ideals [later] attributed to genuine cultures” (Buzard,Disorienting21). Whereas the fast-disappearing genuine culture of ethnographic literature was credited with the integrated totality of “a sturdy plant growth, each remotest leaf and twig of which is organically fed by the sap at the core” (Sapir 90–93), Britain's culture vouchsafed inBleak Houseand exemplified in the tentacular Court of Chancery presents “a state of disastrous and inescapable interconnection,” “a culture-like vision of social totality that is simply marked with a minus sign” (Buzard,Disorienting21).