美德的真實真實與美德的追求論威廉·戈德溫的《卡勒布·威廉斯》 (英文)

美德的真實真實與美德的追求論威廉·戈德溫的《卡勒布·威廉斯》(英文)

與社會發(fā)展和進(jìn)步的共同區(qū)域，sc吞咽和supply改革一樣，改革的輕率是社會，品質(zhì)和經(jīng)驗。風(fēng)險因素的“微聯(lián)系”和“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”和“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”和“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”和“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”和“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”和“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”和“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”和“微關(guān)系”的“微關(guān)系”（第23頁），“微關(guān)系”的“西化”是西化，“西化”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化，“微”的“微”是西化”是第22條?！拔ⅰ憋L(fēng)格構(gòu)建了“微”風(fēng)格，“微”風(fēng)格構(gòu)建了“微”風(fēng)格，“微”的“微”風(fēng)格是“微”風(fēng)格?！拔ⅰ憋L(fēng)格構(gòu)建了“微”風(fēng)格。這是第四種嘗試，“微”風(fēng)格是第三流。Inthispaper,IfocusonwhyeventhoughCalebwinsthefinallegalbattle,inwhichFalklandisprovenaguiltymurdererandCalebaninnocentvictim,theheroultimatelyacknowledgesaparadoxicalreversalofinnocenceandguiltbetweenFalklandandhimself.ThemomentCalebisrewardedwiththelegalverdictof“innocent”bythe“machineofsociety,”herealizes“thepenaltyof[his]crime”andproclaimshimself“acool,deliberate,unfeelingmurderer”whois“trulymiserable”(334-36).WitnessingFalkland’slegaldefeatandensuingdeath,Calebundergoesamoralawakening―anethicaldilemma―thatpusheshimtoseebeyondhisnewlyacquired“manifestmaterialandsocialempowerment”(McKeon273).FalklandundergoesamaturationprocessthatisthereversalofCaleb’smanifestmaterialandsocialempowerment,whenheconfessestoalltheallegedcrimesinthefinaltrialscenetherebyrelinquishinghisprivilegedposition,“spotlessname,”andhisinnocencewithinthemachineofsociety.Falkland’sethicaldilemmaresultsinhisnewlyacquiredabilitytofeelsympathy,remorse,andguiltinexchangeforcompletematerialandsocial“disempowerment”(McKeon378).Paradoxicallyunsettling,thenovel’sendingexposeswhatMcKeontermsas“manifestdiscursiveandimaginativeempowerment”―adiscoursethatdoesnotregisterinmaterialgainbutconcludeswithamoralawakeningthatentailsbothasympathetic“requitalofone’spersecutor”andaremorsefulconfessionofvariouscrimes(378-81).AfterescapingfromtheFalklandmansion,Calebhimselfspeaksofthe“machineofsociety”andhowits“handoffatalimpulseseemeddestinedtohurrymetomydestruction”(190,127).Drivenandderidedbysocialconvention,Falklandconfesses,“Iamasmuchthefooloffameasever”andgoesontodeclare,“Ihavesworntopreservemyreputation,whateverbetheexpense”(142,160).BothCalebandFalklandacknowledgethecontrollingforceofandevenidentifythemselvesasvictimstrappedwithinthemachineofsocietyanditslegalsystem.JonathanH.GrossmanexplainsthatalthoughGodwinostensiblyintendedCalebWilliamstobeanexposureofthesocialimpactofanadversariallegalsystem,almosteverymajorscene“eruptsintoatrial,completewithaccusationanddefense”(53).CalebWilliamstrapsbothauthorandcharacter,byultimatelyrestrainingthe“form[genre]anditsconceptionofsubjectivitymorefirmlythaneverbeforetothelawcourts”(Grossman49).Thehero,Caleb,issomewhatunusualinEnglishliteratureofthetimeinthatheiswronglyprosecutedandthendepictedasapersecutedvictimontherunformorethantwo-thirdsoftheentirenovel.Hedoesnotfoldhimselfbackintothesocialstrata.CalebWilliamsdiffersfromthemajorityofeighteenth-centuryEnglishnovelsinwhichprotagonistsstruggleand/orfighttoovercomesocietyratherthanchoosetosufferastrappedvictims-victimswhoarehunted,imprisoned,andevendestroyed.ThemachineofsocietyinCalebWilliamsnotonlyfailstoprotecttheinnocentbutalsoisabusedbyitsentitledlegalmembersservingwithinthejudicialsystem.Thenovelportrayshoweasilyacharacterisdoomedtofailregardlessofhiseffortstoescape.Calebpainfullylearnsthataccordingtothe“partialadministrationofourlaws,innocence,whenpowerwasarmedagainstit,hadnothingbettertohopeforthanguilt”(228).Calebalsolearnsthatthiswasonlyoneexampleofthe“tyrannyandperfidiousnessexercisedbythepowerfulmembersofthecommunityagainstthosewhowerelessprivilegedthanthemselves”(229).SquireFalkland,therefore,servesastheembodimentofsociety’soppressive,unjustpoweragainstwhichCalebstrugglestonarratethetruthandprovehisvirtueofinnocence.WhenCalebbringsFalklandtocourtforthefirsttime,heisshockedbythecorruptionofmoney,power,andthelegalsystem:“Sixthousandayearshallprotectamanfromaccusation:andthevalidityofanimpeachmentshallbesuperseded,becausetheauthorof[theimpeachment]isaservant!”(287)Caleb’sstrugglesnarratetheinsidiousartifice,theunfairnessandcorruptsystem,ofthemachineofsociety—asocietyofinstabilitiesandconflictinwhichsomehadaccesstogreatwealth,power,andlegalprivileges,whereasothersfromthelowerclasseshadnothingatall.JustafterCaleb’sfather,hislastsurvivingbloodrelative,dies,CalebisemployedasasecretaryforSquireFalkland.Caleb’snewmaster,aninternationallyacknowledgedandrespectedmanofhonorandvirtue,hidesadarksecretthatinvolvesthemurderofhisformerrival,SquireTyrrel.AssoonasCalebbeginshisserviceassecretary,his“ungovernedcuriosity”beginstounravelFalkland’scriminalpastwithcircumstantialthoughnotconclusiveevidence.DespitewarningsfromfellowservantsandevenFalklandhimself,CalebpersistentlysearchesforevidencethatwouldconvicthismasterasTyrrel’smurderer.FalklandsoondiscoversCaleb’smotivesandconsequentlyterrorizesCalebintosilence,ultimatelyfalselyaccusingCalebofthefttherebysendinghimtoprison.Convictedasacriminalandsocialoutcast,themachineofsocietyrefusestoacknowledgeCaleb’snarrativeoftruth,ashepossessesnoactualevidence,onlyreasoningandanintuitivefeeling.CalebescapesfromtheFalklandmansionandbeginshismiserablelifeasanoutlawontherun.Inutterfrustration,Caleblaments“WhyamIoverwhelmedwiththeloadofexistence?Whyarealltheseenginesatworktotormentme”(297).UnabletoescapeFalkland’srelentlessvigilance,CalebishunteddownbyFalklandandthemachineofsociety’slegalsystemuntilthelasttrialsceneattheendofthenovel.AlthoughCalebWilliamsisnotincludedinMcKeon’sanalysisofnumerouseighteenth-centurynovels,thetheoreticalparadigmcanbeappliedtoGodwin’snoveltoexplainhow“power”islargelydefinedasthe“abilitytomakeothersacceptone’sversionofeventsasauthoritative”(359).InCalebWilliams,theherostrugglestomaintainpowerthroughthecredibility(truth)ofhisstoryandthesincerity(virtue)ofhisactions;thus,Caleb’spowerreliesuponthe“truth”hepursuestonarrateandthe“virtue”ofinnocencethathestrugglestoprotectdespiteFalkland’sattempttodestroyhim.Caleb’snarrativesuppliesanswerstoquestionsoftruthandinnocence:forexample,answersthatcallforwhatMcKeontermsas“self-consistency”aswellassincereeffortto“representoneselfinfull”(358).Falkland’sobsessiontocontrolCaleb’snarrativeoftruthandtheattempttoblackenCaleb’svirtueofinnocenceonlyleadstoFalkland’sdefeatinthisstrugglefornarrativecontrol.Thereaderwitnesseshow—inthebattleforpower—FalklandisnomatchforCalebbecauseCalebnarratesFalkland’sstoryfarmorethanFalklandnarratesCaleb’s.Thenovel’sparadoxicaltwistoftruthandvirtue,innocenceandguilt,andjusticeandthemachineofsocietyeliminatestheneedtoweighandmeasurewhetherCaleborFalklandistheguiltier.Bothcharactershaveexperiencedhowthemachineofsocietyhaspropelledthemtothisend,andtheynowunderstandthatvirtueandinnocencearenotdefinedbysocietybutbytheindividual.Thus,Godwin’sultimateachievementinCalebWilliamsexposestheethicalproblemsinvolvedindefiningtruthandvirtue;inlegallydetermininginnocenceandguilt;and,finallyinbelievingthatthemachineofsocietycandetermineacharacter’sidentityandvalueasahumanbeing.Thequestion,then,ofhowthenovelexposestheseethicalproblemswithinthenovelanditsmachineofsocietyrequiresfurtherexamination.McKeonoffersatheoreticalanalysisofhowthenovelportraysaprogressiveideologyinwhich“thenovelattainsitsmodern,institutionalstabilityandcoherence...[intheeighteenthcentury]becauseofitsunrivaledpowerbothtoformulateandtoexplain”“problemsofcategorialinstability,whichthenovel,originatingtoresolve,alsoinevitablyreflects”(20).McKeon’sparadigmofcategorialinstabilitycanbeorganizedintwospecifictypes.Thefirstkindofinstabilitywithwhichthenovelisconcernedhastodowithgenericconditions,“QuestionsofTruth,”whichregisteran“epistemologicalcrisis”thatpointstoamajor“culturaltransitioninattitudes”about“howtotellthetruthinnarrative.”Thesecondinstability,“QuestionsofVirtue,”involvessocialconditionsthat“registeraculturalcrisisinattitudestowardhowtheexternalsocialorderisrelatedtotheinternal,moralstateofitsmembers”(20).McKeonexplainshowtheinstabilityofgenericandsocialcategoriesshowsachangeinattitudesabouthowtruthandvirtuearedefined.AccordingtoMcKeon,thenovelitselfcomesintoexistenceinordertospecificallymediatethischangeinattitudes.Thenovelgivesauthorsacrossawidesocialspectrum(middle-classRichardson,aristocraticFielding),an“explanatoryandproblem-solving”methodologyofexpression,anda“powerfuladaptability”tomediatequestionsoftruthandvirtuefrom“opposedpointsofviews”―differingviewsthatincludeissuesofclass,gender,andtheabilitytomakeothersacceptone’sversionofeventsasauthoritative(21).Godwin’sCalebWilliamsexpressestheinstabilityinthesocialspectrumbetweenCalebandFalklandwithinthelegalsystemofthemachineofsocietytherebyexposingandreplacingthecorruptsystemwithareneweddiscoveryofself-esteem.Themost“strikingdimensionoftheanalogy”betweenthesetwosetsofquestions,isthattheconflict/instability/struggle“l(fā)iesnotoutsidethenovel,betweenliteraryandsocialformations,butwithinit”(22).McKeonfurtherexplainsthattherealizationofthisinsight“istheenablingfoundationofthenovel;”thus,thenovelasagenre,then,canbe“understoodcomprehensivelyasanearlymodernculturalinstrumentdesignedtoconfront,onthelevelofnarrativeformandcontent,bothintellectualandsocialcrisessimultaneously”(22).InresponsetoMcKeon’sclaimofthenovel’sprogressiveideologyinwhichtheherogains“manifestdiscursiveandimaginativeempowerment,”IarguethatCalebWilliamsrepresentsthenecessaryconditionsforitshero’sempowermentprimarilyinlanguagethatforcefullysuggestshismanifestmaterialandsocialdisempowermentwithinthenovel’smachineofsociety(378).Calebchooses“self-esteemoverpublicesteem”twiceinthenovel;and,eachdeliberatechoicenecessarilyentailsmaterialandsocialdisempowerment.First,inthebeginningofthenovel,CalebisforcedtodependsolelyuponhimselfbecauseFalklandnotonlypursueshimasarunawayservantbutalsohasfalselyconvictedCalebofbeingathief.AlthoughCalebisseenasacriminalontherun,heneverthelessremainsfaithfultohisbeliefinhisinnocenceandself-esteem.UnlikeCaleb’sfirstexperienceofdisempowerment,hissecondexperience,intheverylastsceneofthenovel,differsinthatitisvoluntaryandleadstodiscoverynotonlyabouthimselfbutalsoaboutthetruenatureofhisadversary,Falkland.Inthefinaltrialscene,CalebrecognizeshowbothheandFalklandhavebeendrivenanddeludedbythemachineofsociety’slegalsystem,whichistheverysystemheattemptstoexposebutcontinuestocontrolhim.Caleb’sself-discoveryandmoralconversionfromvengefulmalevolencetosympatheticbenevolenceparadoxicallyrenderstheheromiserableandincapableofenjoyinganyrewardofmaterialandsocialempowerment.YetCalebfinallyattainsdiscursiveandimaginativeempowerment―anempowermentthatallowshimtoshakeoffthebindingchainsofthejudicialsystemandtrusthisownjudgmentandself-esteem.Caleb’smoralawakeningnecessarilyhingesuponFalkland’sconfessionandthefollowingmaterialandsocialdisempowermentthatiswillinglyaccepted.Thepowerstruggleoverdiscoursetomakeothersacceptone’sownversionofeventsasauthoritativeresidesinthelanguageofthenovel―bothinCaleb’sprivatememoirsandinFalkland’spubliclegalactions―whichindicatesthatFalklandisequally,ifnotmore,successfulasCalebindeterminingthemeaningofinnocenceandvirtuewithinthematerialandsocialdiscourseofsociety.MitziMyersfocusesonthetwo“conversionexperiences”whichbringaboutthenovel’sconclusion:Falkland’srealizationthatinpersecutingCalebhehaslostallmeansofpreservinghispublicvirtueofhonor,andCaleb’srealizationthatinpursuingthetruthofFalkland’smurderousdeed,intheformofalegaltrial,CalebhimselftransformsintoFalkland’smurderer(626).Falkland’sbehaviorbeforeandafterCalebescapesfromthemansionandlaterfromprison,Iargue,isnotrootedinmaterialgainorevenlegalrevenge.Rather,Falkland’sactionsstemfromadesiretowinaconflict,whichhasbeen“distilled”“intoterminologicaldisputes”overthemeaningandrelativemeritsoftheterms“virtue”and“honor”(McKeon366-68).Here,IapplyMcKeon’stheoreticalanalysisofClarissatotheparadigminCalebWilliams:“[Falkland]expresseshiswilltorepossesswhathisbehaviorannounceshehaslostto[Caleb],bothhishonorandhisexternalizedconceptionofhonor,whichisnowinternalizedin[Caleb’ssilentsuffering]virtue”(367).FalklandisnotonlydefeatedintheterminologicalbattleovervirtuewithCalebbutalsoforcedtoobsessoverCaleb’snarrativeoftruththroughthemeansofapervertedlegalsystem.Inthefinaltrialscene,onceFalklandbeginstopublicallyacknowledgehismoraldownfallandlegalwrong-doings,hethenundergoesapainfulconversionfrommalevolencetobenevolence,aconversionthatincludestheconfessionalexposureofhispastcrimes,remorsefulsympathy,andguiltforCaleb’sunjustsuffering.ThenovelfirstbeginswithandrecordsCaleb’sinabilitytoprovehisversionoftruthandvirtue,whichresultsinCaleb’slegalinabilitytoprosecuteFalklandinpublicforacrimeofmurder:aninitialpublicvictoryforFalklandwithintheboundsofthemachineofsociety.Calebexplainshowthe“evidence”ofhisvirtuewaspervertedinthelegalcourtusageoflanguage,whichdoesnotsignifythetruthofCaleb’svirtuebutratherpointstothematerialandsocialempowermentofFalkland’sprivilegeasmagistrateandsquire.InthefirsttrialscenewithFalkland,themagistrate,Mr.Forester,sentencesCalebtobesenttoprison:“Icannotbutbestruckwiththecontrastexhibitedbeforemeofthemagnanimityof[Falkland’s]virtue,andtheobstinateimpenetrableinjusticeof[Caleb’s]guilt”(182).FalklandviolatesCaleb’sdiscursivepowerthroughthemeansofsociety’ssystemofjustice;infact,FalklandmakeshisversionofeventsauthoritativebyreducingCalebtoacriminalandsilencingCaleb’s“illegal”narrativeoftruth.RatherthanliveunderthecontrolofFalkland’sversionofevents,Calebrelinquishesnotonlysecurityandmaterialisticcomfortbutalsotherighttoliveamongstthecompanyofmenandsociety.Forcedtohideindisguisesandendurethelowestmeansofliving,Caleblosesthematerialandsocialpowertomakeothersbelieveinhisversionofeventsbecause,asCalebexplains,“Mylifewasallalie”(265).ItisthennotsomuchthefalsecriminalaccusationthatruinsCalebbuttheperiodoftimespentunderFalkland’semploymentthathasunderminedhispowertopresenthisversionoftruthandprotecthisvirtue.BeforebeginningservicesunderFalkland,Calebcontrolshisownversionofevents;heisnotedforhaving“aninquisitivemind[that]neglectednomeansofinformationfromconversationorbooks;”and,“[his]improvementwasgreaterthan[his]conditioninlifeaffordedroomtoexpect”(5).However,afterhisemploymentinthesquire’shousehold,Caleblosestheabilitytomakeothersbelieveinhisversionsofevents.Caleb’s“ungovernedcuriosity”isseenasarebellionagainstthegenerosityofhismaster,whocatchesCalebinhisprivateroom.Falklandexclaims,“Yousetyourselfasaspyuponmyactions;butbitterlyshallyourepentyourinsolence.Doyouthinkyoushallwatchmyprivacieswithimpunity?”(10)CalebiscriticizedagainbyFalkland’ssteward,Collins,forbeinganungratefulfiendandunworthyservant,andheisleftwithnootheroptionbuttorelinquishhissocialidentityandallowtheworldtobelieveinFalkland’sversionofevents.Unabletoreachoutinpublic,Calebisreducedtothelifeofacriminalconstantlyontherunwithinthemachineofsociety.InordertofullyunderstandtheimplicationsofthelanguageinCaleb’sresponse,itisnecessarytoexamineanearlierexchangebetweenCalebandFalklandinwhichthetopicsofpunishmentanddeathentertheconversationmoredirectly:Falkland:PerhapsmynextmurdermaynotbesofortunateasthoseIhavealreadycommitted.Ihadnoalternativebuttomakeyoumyconfidantormyvictim.Ifeveranunguardedwordescapefromyourlips,expecttopayforitbyyourdeathorworse.(142)Caleb:Youmaydestroyme,butyoucannotmakemetremble.Yousaythatbenevolenceandhumanityrequirethissacrificeofme.No;itwouldonlybeasacrificetoyourmadandmisguidedloveoffame,—tothatpassionwhichhasbeenthesourceofallyourmiseries,ofthemosttragicalcalamitiestoothers,andofeverymisfortunethathashappenedtome.(293)Falkland:YoumightaswellthinkofescapingfromthepoweroftheomnipresentGod,asfrommine!IamGod,andyoucannotescapeme.(150)FalklandlaterphysicallyrestrainsCalebagainsthiswillandattemptstobullyCalebintoacceptinghisversionofeventsbyforcinghimtosignalegaldocument—anattempttocontrolCaleb’snarrativeoftruthandpersonalvirtue:Falkland:IinsistuponyoursigningapaperdeclaringinthemostsolemnmannerthatIaminnocentofmurder,andthatthechargeyouallegedattheofficeisfalse,maliciousandgroundless.(292)Caleb:Iwillneverdoanythingtocountenancethoseimputations.ThemoreIamdestituteoftheesteemofmankind,themorecarefulIwillbetopreservemyown.Iwillneverfromfear,oranyothermistakenmotive,doanythingofwhichIoughttobeashamed.(293)Thetwotypesofproceedingsdescribedinthesepassagesincludethreateningsomeonebyforcedinternmenttoacceptadifferentversionofeventsandforcingsomeonetosignadocumentagainstone’swill.Theactofthreateningsomeonetoacceptadifferentversionofeventscanbeseenasarequestforinformationtoverifyaversionofeventsasauthoritative:“IamGod,andyoucannotescapeme;”thus,thisactcanbedefinedasaquestionoftruth(150).Thesecondactofforcingsomeonetosignadocumentagainstone’swillcanbeseenasameansofextractingthroughforceacourseofactionwhichcanbemanipulatedasinnocentorguilty:“Iinsistuponyoursigningapaperdeclaring[…]thatIaminnocentofmurder;”thus,thisactcanbedescribedasaquestionofvirtue(292).AneasywayoutofthissufferingwouldbeforCalebtoagreetoliveinsilencewithmaterialrewardsunderFalkland’semployment;however,Calebrealizesthathewouldnolongerbeabletoasserthisversionofeventsconcerningthemurderand,asaresult,theveracityofhisself-esteemwouldbesacrificedunderthemachineofsociety’sbindingrolesofmasterandservantandevenmoresounderthe“l(fā)egaldespotism”ofmagistrateandcriminal(191).Howthendoestheunderstandingoftheseethicalproblemsembeddedwithinthenovel’slegalsysteminflectourunderstandingofCaleb’srefusaltoacceptFalkland’sproposalofmaterialrewardinexchangeforsilence?Obviously,themachineofsocietyhaseliminatedCaleb’slegalrighttoprosecuteFalklandbecauseCaleb’sversionofeventswouldbedisregardedasillegalandevencriminal.Caleb’spublicreputationandlegalidentityareexamplesofhismaterialandsocialdisempowerment;and,hefurtherdescribeshowhisdisempowermentbecomesarealitythroughpublicresponse,“Pursuedbyillfortune,Icouldnolongerconsidermyselfamemberofsociety.Iwasasolitarybeing,cutofffromtheexpectationofsympathy,kindness,andthegood-willofmankind”(256).Caleb’sinabilitytoprosecuteFalklandthensignifiesthedisempowermentofhispublicreputationyetalsoprovidesevidenceofhispersonalself-esteemandanunauthoritativepleaofinnocence,whichexistsoutsidethemachineofsociety.Strugglingtoanswerwhatheunderstandsasa“QuestionofVirtue,”Calebacceptspublicdisgrace,whichentitleshimtoanindependentvirtueofinnocence:“IknownotwhetherIwasdestinedforahero;butIthank[Falkland]forhavingtaughtmealessonofinsurmountablefortitude”(293).ForFalkland,however,thequestionofCaleb’sinnocence,atleastasfarashedefinesthesetermsisnotinteresting.FalklandisobsessivelyconcernedwithhisabilitytosuccessfullycontrolCaleb’snarrativeoftruth:thecontextsandwhereaboutsofhiswanderings.Inordertoprovehisversionofevents,Falklandthreatenswithtortureandpunishmentworsethandeath:“Youdefyme!Iwillexercise;apowerthatshallgrindyouintoatoms”(294).FalklandnotonlydemandsthatCalebsign“thecompositionIoffer”butalsoobsessivelyseekstoanswer,byallmethodsandatanyrisk,“QuestionsofTruth.”HowthenisthereadertointerpretthelanguageofCaleb’sresponsetoFalklandandmotivesforrefusingmaterialrewardsfromhispersecutor,whomCalebisunabletoescapeorprosecute?TounderstandCaleb’schoice,itisnecessarytoanalyzethebalanceofimplicitaccusationandexonerationofFalklandinCaleb’smemoirs.Calebwritesindesperationofhow“ahandoffatalimpulseseemeddestinedtohurrymetomydestruction”(127).Themetaphorof“ahandoffatalimpulse”emphasizes,incontrast,howFalkland’sversionofeventscontrolsthesecularworldofopinions,“thesinewsofinnocencecrumbledintodustbythegripeofalmightyguilt”(190).Furthermore,Falklandindicatesthatwhateverincidentsmayhavetakenplaceduringimprisonment,Calebisnotcompletelyfreefromguilt.FalklandevenclaimsthatheisindangerfromCalebandpresidesasanall-too-partialjudgeinhisexchangewithCalebjustafterCalebiscaughtandbroughtbacktotheFalklandmansion.FalklandevenattemptstofortifyhimselfagainstCaleb’sargument:“Whogaveyouarighttobemyconfidant?Base,artfulwretch!Begone,andfearlestyoubemadetopayofthetemerityyouhavealreadycommitted!”(123)However,Falklandlaterrecognizes,inaself-contradictoryremark,“OVirtue,Isoughttheeasasubstance,butIfindtheeanemptyname!Honour,justice,virtueareallthejuggleofknaves!”Inthefinaltrialscene,Falkland’sself-discoveryenableshimtoconfesstonotonlyhispastcrimesandmistakesbutalsoexpresshiswishto“crushthewholesystemintonothing”(122).Caleb’srefusalofFalkland’sproposaltoliveinsilence,then,explainswhyCalebdecidestolivethelifeofacriminalfugitivechasedbybountyhunters.IfCalebsignsFalkland’sproposaltogainmaterialandsocialpower,Calebmustsurrenderhisself-esteemandthecapacitytoasserthisinnocencebecausethatcapacitywouldresideinthelegalpowersofFalkland—eitherthroughaproposalofsilenceorprosecution.Caleb’spainfulmemoirsserveasproofthathehasmadeanescapefromFalklandonlybemoreaprisonerofpublicopinion.SuchareadingwouldindicatethatCaleb’sdiscursive,imaginativeempowermentisnotacknowledgedontheplaneofdiscourse,butrathersteadilycontradictedontheplaneofdiscourse.Calebbecomes,ashehimselfpointsout,“asolitarybeing,”whichontheonehand,isatriumphant,radicalrefusalofanyplacewithinthemachineofsociety—”symbolicorder”—but,ontheotherhand,aruthlessreductionofapersonwhoseversionofeventscannotexistwithinhissecularworld(256).Calebthusresolvestoliveinexileandcontinueto“preservehisownesteem”andbelieveinhisversionofvirtueandinnocence(293).Inconclusion,thisreadingprovidesaninevitablemotiveforCalebtoseekcomfortinmiserablesolitude,outsidethemachineofsociety,wherehisversionoftruthandvirtueremainsunacknowledgedyetunquestionable.Caleb’sdeliberatechoiceofmiserablesolitudeandhisinabilitytoprosecuteFalklanddoesnotputanendtoallofCaleb’strialsandpleadingsofinnocence;ratheritincreasesthem.FornowCaleb,stillignorantofthechargeswhichmaybebroughtagainsthimandoftheconditionswhichcoulddeterminehisinnocenceorguilt,musteithercontinuetopleadhisinnocencetobothFalklandandthemachineofsociety’sjuryorcompletelyrelinquishalltieswithhispreviouslife—thatis,surrenderhisversionofvirtueandanypossiblemanifestmaterialandsocialempowerment.CalebthereforechoosestomeetFalklandincourtandregainhismaterialandsocialpower.Inthelasttrialscene,Calebcanmakeothersaccepthisversionofeventsasauthoritative;and,hesucceedsinconvictingFalklandofmurderandofprovinghisinnocence.Yet,asCalebgainsaccesstothepowerembeddedwithinthemachineofsocietyanditssystemofjustice,heneverthelessloseshisvirtueofinnocencewhichstemsfromself-esteemandnotpublicopinion.TheCalebwhoindependentlyseeksto“preservemyownesteem”eventhoughheisdoomed“toliveinsolitary”isverydifferentfromtheCalebwhovengefullyavowsthat“thejusticeofthecountryshallhearme!”(293,256,325)Strikingly,however,inthisconversionfromsocialoutcasttolegalempowerment,CalebnotonlyexchangeslegalverdictsofinnocentandguiltywithFalklandbutalsofinallyunderstandsthatbothheandFalklandarevictimsofsociety’s“l(fā)egaldespotism”(191).CalebsuddenlyrealizesthathehasbecomeequallyobsessedwithhispublicreputationasFalkland.Calebrecallshispurposeofpursuinglegalaction,“Itwastimethattherealcrimin