In “Signs of the Times,” Thomas Carlyle provides many examples of the way people have become too dependent on the machine. As we discussed in class, he uses these images to create a problem that he can then solve for his audience. By taking the environment that they know and recasting it to pose a question about the course of society, Carlyle sets himself up as an authority on the conditions of men at the time. Carlyle, who contrasts these “machine” images to the natural world, acts as both a bulwark against man�s modernization and a catalyst for it. Indeed, the word “nature” can help us to explore Carlyle�s machine-man dynamic and better illustrate his work in illustrating man�s power. Let us consider the following passages:
Nay, we have an artist that hatches chickens by steam; the very brood-hen is to be superseded! For all earthly, and for some unearthly purposes, we have machines and mechanic furtherances; for mincing our cabbages; for casting us into magnetic sleep. We remove mountains, and make seas our smooth highways; nothing can resist us. We war with rude Nature; and, by our resistless engines, come off always victorious, and loaded with spoils.
Consider the great elements of human enjoyment, the attainments and possessions that exalt man's life to its present height, and see what part of these he owes to institutions, to Mechanism of any kind; and what to the instinctive, unbounded force, which Nature herself lent him, and still continues to him. Shall we say, for example, that Science and Art are indebted principally to the founders of Schools and Universities?
No; Science and Art have, from first to last, been the free gift of Nature; an unsolicited, unexpected gift; often even a fatal one. These things rose up, as it were, by spontaneous growth, in the free soil and sunshine of Nature. They were not planted or grafted, nor even greatly multiplied or improved by the culture or manuring of institutions. Generally speaking, they have derived only partial help from these; often enough have suffered damage. They made constitutions for themselves. They originated in the Dynamical nature of man, not in his Mechanical nature. [“Signs of the Times,“ my emhasis]
Nature here seems to act as an enabler for man to achieve knowledge via science and art, but is also cast as “rude,” or elementary; nature serves as both opponent and proponent of man. Carlyle also uses capitalization to contrast man�s inherent tendencies (nature) with the force that often clashes with these propensities (Nature). Carlyle seems intent on forcing us to consider the intertwined nature (no pun intended) of the relationship between man and his world. They are inseparable - indeed, we use the same word for both conditions.
Questions
1. Carlyle's text distinguishes between “nature” and “Nature.” How would that have come across in the spoken word, if at all?
2. In the third passage, Carlyle discusses “art and science” as creating “constitutions for themselves.” To what is he referring? Doctrine? Scientific method? Or is he trying to illustrate nature as in some way self-governing?
3. How do these uses of “nature” and “Nature” help Carlyle to sell himself to his audience?
4. Carlyle groups together “Science” and “Art.” What effect does this grouping have on his larger discussion of mechanical man?
Last modified 21 February 2011