Skip to main content

What are two passages in Great Expectations that illustrate the lack of warmth and personality of Mr. Jaggers?

Two instances that illustrate the lack of warmth and personableness of Mr. Jagger occur in the First Stage of Great Expectations when Pip first encounters him, and with Pip's meeting with him in Mr. Jaggers's office in the Second Stage.


1. In Chapter XI, as Pip returns to Satis House after six days according to Miss Havisham's instructions, he again follows Estella, who holds a candle, up the dark stairs. This time, he encounters a gentleman, who is groping his way down in the darkness. This is Mr. Jaggers:



He took my chin in his large hand and turned up my face to have a look at me in the light of the candle.
"Boy of the neighborhood? Hey?" said he.
"Yes, sir..."
"How do you come here?"



When Pip explains that he has been sent for, Mr. Jaggers responds in a very negative manner, prejudging Pip as a miscreant.



"Well! Behave yourself. I have a pretty large experience of boys, and you're a bad set of fellows. Now mind!. . . You behave yourself!" 



2. In Chapter XX, after Pip arrives in London, he goes to Jaggers's office in Little Britain. There he meets Mr. Wemmick, who informs Pip that Mr. Jaggers has left word for Pip to wait "in his room." Pip is escorted to an inner chamber, where he is struck by its dismal quality. When Mr. Jaggers arrives, he eats his lunch without offering Pip anything, and he informs Pip coldly of his allowance—"a very liberal one"—while handing Pip the cards of various tradesmen with whom he should deal for clothes and other items that he might need. Mr. Jaggers then adds with no warmth,



You will find your credit good, Mr. Pip. . . but I shall by this means be able to check your bills, and to pull you up if I find you outrunning the constable. Of course, you'll go wrong somehow, but that no fault of mine.



Pip narrates with irony, "I pondered a little over this encouraging sentiment."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.