Lottie Niemiec's response to Schaumberger

Lottie Niemiec, 'Partners in Pathology: David, Dora and Steerforth' - Nancy E Schaumberger

Schaumberger writes an intriguing psychoanalytic analysis of these three characters, the main points of which are, to paraphrase, that Steerforth is the way he is because he was loved by his mother only for his achievements and that she, essentially, lives through him. She claims that Dora grows up as a pseudo-wife to her father, while yet remaining a child, she therefore cannot overcome her ideas of being a child-wife, thus in her adult life she remains very immature. David is only able to become an adult and the ‘hero of [his] own life’ because both Dora and Steerforth die, leaving him with more mature companions such as Agnes and Traddles. She claims further that Dora and Steerforth are ‘prisoners of childhood’ - unable to move successfully into adult life. While her argument at its most basic is appealing - her analysis of Steerforth is primarily a sympathetic one - one can take her claims much further to suggest that David can connect (albeit inadequately) with Dora and Steerforth because they act as extensions of himself. If one is to take this view, then Mr Murdstone becomes almost a nurturing influence, rather than a tyrannical usurper. If Mr Murdstone had not married his mother, David could have remained a child, like Dora, under the loving protection of his immature mother, or he could have become as roguish as Steerforth, resulting from a childish hero-worship, if Mr Murdstone had not removed him from school and sent him to work. Only once this heroic figure from childhood is dead can David become his own hero. David’s marriage to Dora at such a young age is a way of entering adult life too soon, when neither party was ready for it, and they are punished for this by Dora’s inadequacy and early death. Yet by the time she dies, David has realised his mistakes, grown, and become a working, responsible adult. At the moment that Betsey Trotwood comes to London penniess and must rely on her nephew to take care of her, the roles are reversed. David has become the protector, she the protected, and David embraces this role whole-heartedly by writing to earn a living.

Schaumberger claims that Dora and Steerforth were David’s two mistaken friendships, yet I would have to disagree. David learns from Steerforth that one cannot always have what one wants, and if take what you want selfishly, the consequences are painful for others. From Dora he learns the importance of adult responsibility and the pain, yet almost welcome release, of death. Dora’s death allows him to finally realise his love for Agnes; it allows Dickens to use his great theme of rebirth - for David at least - as he is released from a disastrous marriage and allowed to love again. Here Schaumberger agrees, stating that only when Dora and Steerforth die is David free to ‘embark on the final growth spurt of self-realization that leads to his happy second marriage and increasingly successful writing career.’

Although not clearly stipulated, Schaumberger hints that Steerforth is David’s alter-ego, his doppelganger. If this is so, then Steerforth’s elopement with Emily can be seen as David’s repressed desire to do the same. Furthermore, both David and Steerforth grew up with females that love them: Agnes and Rosa Dartle. Rosa’s scar is significant: not only is there an underlying sexual suggestion (Steerforth throwing a hammer at her and splitting her lip, rendering her unattractive to other men for the rest of her life), it suggests the danger of turning your back on freely given love; that anger is destructive and leaves emotional - and physical - scars. When Steerforth dies, the events are set in motion for David to have the opportunity of seizing the love that was denied Steerforth. David does not turn his back on Agnes a second time.

Dora herself receives redemption through recognition that she should not have been the woman David married, that Agnes would be infinitely better for him. Therefore she can be seen also to be a part of David’s subconscious, as she understands what David cannot until he has reflected for many months abroad.
Dora and Steerforth are violently opposed in character. Dora is essentially warm-hearted, honest but weak, Steerforth cold-hearted, false, yet physically strong. Dora lost a mother, Steerforth a father; David both. Dora does not have a feminine influence in her life, a woman to encourage her to be self-sufficient and strong. Steerforth does not have a masculine influence, one to dissuade him from his roguish tendencies - indeed, he is violently overshadowed by females - his mother and Rosa Dartle. David himself has no mother or father, but he seems to acquire these figures during the course of his life. In Mr Murdstone he finds a violent, hard-hearted father; in Peggotty a gentle, caring mother. Later Mr Micawber stands as a father incapable of making the right financial choices, but a father nonetheless that stands by his family and teaches David how to sell and make deals.

Betsey Trotwood is the most nurturing of his pseudo-parents, she is quick, morally upright, extremely caring and guides David always in the right direction. But it is in the sister figure of Agnes (his ‘Angel’) that he finds enduring love.
Schaumberger’s analysis is therefore thought-provoking, but it does not touch deeply on her rather weak suggestions. Her theories may be correct, but her writing style suggests she is reticent about stating her conclusions too forcefully.