Oliver Twist is a novel that escapes easy categorization; what begins as a political satire on the Poor Law of 1834 turns into a crime novel that in turn becomes a melodramatic thriller with a surprisingly tidy ending. While Dickens juggles contrasting tones in many of his novels, one of his early works Oliver Twist was particularly noted for being made up of “a patchwork of genres” (Wood, 2014). Therefore, it is not surprising that for a novel that itself undergoes a series of identity crises, questions of identity become a recurring theme of the narrative. Indeed, our understanding of the novel's social message rests on how Dickens frames identity. Oddly, for a novel that seems interested in promoting the social message that the poor are not inherently morally inferior, Dickens presents an ambivalent picture of the nature of identity. This essay will address how Dickens presents elements of socially constructed and crowd identity, while also reconciling them with ideas of innate goodness and morality. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Perhaps the best-known cultural staple of Oliver Twist is the eponymous hero, who has become almost synonymous with our idea of ​​the orphan. Yet, ironically, it is this projection of an "orphan" identity that Dickens criticizes within the novel, as the characters constantly project their prejudices onto Oliver due to his low socioeconomic status and parentlessness. It is only in the first chapter, in which Oliver has not yet been clothed, that he is free from the constraints of social identity, as Dickens states “he may have been the son of a nobleman or a beggar”. This suggests that Dickens sees class identity as something fluid and socially learned rather than intrinsic. The abuse Oliver suffers in the workhouse and then on the streets of London is symptomatic of an unfair social stigma faced by those at the bottom rungs of Victorian society, and ultimately this stigma revolves around a false notion that poverty it is related to intrinsic immorality. This was particularly pertinent in the aftermath of the Poor Law of 1834, which sought to reduce the costs of caring for the ever-increasing number of poor people by establishing workhouses (May 1987). They also wielded enormous power over individuals like that of Mr. Bumble. In fact, even Oliver's name is chosen by Mr Bumble: his nominal identity is given to him by the system that abuses him. Furthermore, the superficiality of social identity is illustrated by how easy it is for a character to adopt another identity simply by changing their clothes. For example, Nancy's adoption of middle-class clothing completely alters how society views her, granting her the privilege of respect and trust among strangers who would otherwise demonize her for her identity as a prostitute. Of all the characters in the novel, Nancy is perhaps the most complex, as she is – at least by Victorian standards – an immoral woman, but she is also deeply sympathetic. While most of the characters in the novel fall under the label of good, bad, or comedian, Nancy defies these labels. The reader empathizes with her predicament, whereby her toxic upbringing has altered her identity to the point of no return. Contemporary reactions to Dickens's inclusion of a "fallen woman" confirm the prejudice that was rampant in 1840s Victorian society, as even his friend John Forster attempted to discourage it from publication due to its taboo nature (Bowen).By providing a sympathetic platform for the identities of marginalized characters and highlighting how these identities are, at least to some extent, socially constructed, Dickens opens a dialogue about how the poor and vulnerable should be treated. Although Dickens may view elements of class identity as learned, he too suggests that the environment can alter identity to the extent that it is irreversible or as Nancy states: “I am chained to my old life”. Dickens uses her as an obvious obstacle for Rose, but if her socioeconomic situations had been different it is possible that Nancy's personal identity and ultimate fate would have been different as well. Dickens not only describes how identity becomes restricted within a classist society, but also illustrates how individual identity can be lost to the crowd. A single accusation of theft causes Oliver to be chased by an angry mob, whose actions are depicted in an almost rhythmic lexicon: "helter-skelter, helter-skelter, slap-dash." The crowd depersonalizes, reducing the different aspects of society into a single antagonistic mass. The crowd's visceral reaction against Oliver highlights how illicit or transgressive identities threaten those who have conformed to their social roles. Furthermore, in exploring the mob mentality of Oliver Twist, the city of London cannot be ignored. The cityscape plays an important role in the collective identity of Dickens' characters. Oliver refers to the rancid urban environment of the slums he visits with Mr. Sowerberry as having reduced its inhabitants to animalistic qualities; they are part of the decaying landscape, even suggesting that they "looked so much like the rats he had seen outside". During the 19th century, rapid industrialization had pushed many migrants from rural areas to the cities, creating cramped and squalid conditions, as the historian Terry Trainor points out that in 1840 London "life in one room was the norm for families in the working class". (Trainor, 2011) Despite this harsh reality, the idea of ​​domestic happiness and the importance of the home were becoming increasingly popular during the 1840s, and thus domesticity became an intrinsic part of Victorian identity. Dickens contrasts the decay of city life and "men who have lived in crowded and repressed streets, through lives of hard work, and who have never longed for change", with the idealized pastoral setting in which Oliver finally joins a stable family unit. . Therefore, it becomes clear that Dickens sees identity and environment as closely interconnected entities, with Dickens making an implicit link between urban sprawl and the spike in crime and immorality. While at first glance it would appear that Dickens is arguing against the idea that people are intrinsically predisposed to crime, and that a mixture of prejudices and socio-economic positions leads them to crime, this message is undermined by the seemingly intrinsic identity of Oliver and from the resolution of the novel. Despite growing up in a workhouse, Oliver's vocabulary is remarkably middle class. Indeed, the infamous phrase “please, sir, I want more,” while a radical act of defiance, is almost painfully polite, especially when compared to the colloquialisms of the Artful Dodgers. Even if it did not turn out that Oliver was related to the Maylies, the dissonance between his social environment and his mannerisms would be reason enough to accuse Dickens of paternalism towards the working classes. Indeed, just like contemporary thinkers such as Carlyle who labeled the working classes “savage and inarticulate souls”, Dickens writes with a prejudice that isironic considering his reputation as a defender of the working class (Carlyle, 1839). Basically, the fact that Oliver comes from a bourgeois background only confirms that the novel is, at least to some extent, what the critic John Carey calls “a hymn to the purity of the bourgeois soul”. Oliver's identity remains bourgeois and static throughout, with Dickens contradicting his earlier suggestions that social identity was purely superficial. It could also be argued that Dickens is guilty of the unfair social labeling he attempts to criticize. The very names of his fictional characters are infamous for their "character-revealing" nature (Paroissien, 2000, p80), for example Mr Bumble's name is derived from the word arrogant, reflecting his arrogant personality (ibid). Thus, while within the diegesis of Oliver Twist the reader may be implored to look beyond the social confines of a name or label, Dickens himself thrives on this caricatural aesthetic. This is particularly evident in his portrayal of Fagin as the epitome of anti-Semitic stereotypes, in fact in the novel he is mainly referred to as “the Jew”. While Dickens himself stated that “I have no feeling towards the Jewish people except friendly” (Hartley, 2012). Fagin's entire personality is defined by his cultural identity and his seemingly immutable physiognomy. In fact, Dickens was a contemporary of Johann Kaspar Lavater who argued that physical traits were intrinsically linked to character traits. This not only contradicts the idea that identity is a social construct, but also calls into question whether a character like Fagin can be held morally responsible if he is inherently immoral. To further complicate matters, Oliver's angelic beauty is noted by middle-class characters, such as Rose and Mr Brownlowe in the novel who, with little inspection, are able to determine Oliver's true nature through observation of his face alone . For an author so interested in using art as a vehicle for social change, his prejudicial presentations of identity have the potential, according to his own artistic philosophy, to be socially harmful. As a contemporary magazine extolled at the time, "Mr Dickens's characters, as all the world knows, transmit their names into our language and become types" (Anon. 1971). It is important to note that Dickens's portrayal of identity in Oliver Twist is not consistently socially progressive, rather characters such as Fagin are both regressive and harmful. Ultimately, even if we must accept that Dickens's conception of hereditary identity does not detract from the social message of the novel, the problem of Oliver's actual characterization remains. Ironically, for a figure who has become so iconic within popular culture – so much so that the novel is the most adapted Dickens novel of all time (John, 2010) – Oliver has no personal growth or distinct identity that is separable from his moral goodness. Critic J Mullan states that “the orphan is above all a character out of place, forced to make his own home in the world”, but Oliver does not even meet this basic criterion. He remains a protagonist who lacks both agency in major plot machinations nor does he possess a distinct voice. His eventual comfortable position with the Maylies is due to the work of other characters, such as Mr. Brownlowe. Aside from his fight with Noah Claypole, Oliver demonstrates little active resistance, in contrast to secondary characters such as Nancy who push the plot forward and yet possess more morally complex identities. It can also be argued that Bill Sykes' dog displays a higher level of emotional complexity and tangible identity.