The Godmother

In chapter 16, I came to a realization about the small "organization" for the freedom of France. Basically, I realized who the real leader of the cause is, and that is Madame DeFarge. I had been trying to identify who truly ran the show in this organization and there has been a lot of evidence that supports that little old Madame DeFarge runs everything. I found this out mainly because of the typical protocol of the group. They believe in small assassinations of monarchs and aristocrats in order to bring down the French government. In order to decided and record who is next on the list, Madame DeFarge knits their name in a code that only she can read. She has literally all say in who dies and who lives. She clearly believes in the cause and is not deterred by murder. Not even in the mafia is one person given that much power. Maybe, the Godfather of the Mafia has a lot of say in how it goes, but the idea that the decision can ultimately only be made and recorded by one person is simply on heard of. One of my favorite movies is the Gangster movie Scarface. Madame DeFarge has always reminded me of the ruthless cocaine lord, Tony Montana. In the movie, Tony (aka Scarface) has literally all say in what happens next in his invasion on Miami. The movie is incredibly violent and shows that when a person who is dangerous, violent and unpredictable gets power, it takes an army to take him down. Madame has the entire organization in the palm of her hand and has the power to kill at any time. In chapter 16, Madame DeFarge is told by Monsieur that there is any enemy spy who is waiting to infiltrate their organization. She doesn't hesitate and says, "he should be registered". Monsieur says nothing accept for a quiet nod. In another great Gangster movie, The Untouchables, Al Capone is explaining his plan to take over the bootlegging of Chicago and a possible expansion. When one of his Generals politely objects to the idea, he bashes his head in with a baseball bat in front of everyone. I honestly think that Madame has more power over others around her than Dickens directly says. Monsieur doesn't even try to debate what she said, he doesn't question it. Perhaps because he completely agrees, or rather because he does not want to cause an impass with the real leader of the resistance.

How do they keep their cool?

In chapter 7 of book 2, we are introduced to Monsieur the Marquis. I find that through the little amount of information given about him already, I can deduce that he is a villain and massive A-Hole. I have come to this conclusion via his reaction to plowing a child with his carriage. His first reaction is: why are we stopped, I have things to do; instead of the first thought of a normal person being; What was that, is someone hurt?

"'What has gone wrong?' said M. the Marquis... 'Pardon M. the Marquis, it was a child'... 'What makes that abominable noise, a child' said M. the Marquis.

Later, we found out that the child has died and then the "empathetic" side of Marquis begins to show. He finds it appropriate to pay the family of the deceased child off with a shiny gold coin. It is my opinion that one coin doesn't equal the life of a human child, but that's just me.

This scene of death and coin throwing provoked a question in me, how did he not get torn apart by the crowd? I have thought about it a lot and I have still not come to a realistic answer. Nowadays, regardless of who hit a child, there would be some consequences. This entire scene paints a picture of the tendencies of the average everyday person. They are terrified of this man. Why they are is still unknown, and when, if ever they will stand up to him is still up in the air.

Setting of Tale of Two Cities

I found that while reading this book, the setting is more important than in other books. I mean not in whose home or place of business the chapter or passage is set in, rather when and where in the world it is being set. After a little bit of background information given, I found that it is set in both England, near Dover, and a few chapters later, in France. During this time in history one of the most complex and interesting events is transpiring, the French Revolution. I know little about the French Revolution from History class, so I did some research about it. Basically, it is my understanding that monarchy is dying in France and democracy is beginning to prevail. I know from World History last year that the main reason that monarchy was accepted and democracy was not adopted earlier in society, is because it worked. Contrary to popular belief, monarchy did work at some points in history in Africa and Asia; it has not always been so frowned upon. It has also worked in France up until this point. So, the reason the French Revolution happened is because things started to go bad in France.
I had read the book carefully and had not found a definitive event that proved that people were unhappy, until chapter five. In the chapter, a large case of wine was dropped in the streets of a town in France. To people who are doing fine, happy and healthy, I would expect nothing more than a quick glance and continuation of their day; this did not happen, in fact almost the opposite happened. Apparently, when wine is dropped in the street, it is a very big deal. People were licking the pavement to get the sweet taste of the wine. “Others, men and women, dipped in the puddles with little mugs of mutilated earthenware…” I was completely shocked when Dickens said this. Things were clearly not going well for these people. They would take sips of wine out of puddles of mud and “lick the shards of the bottles” just to get the taste of wine. This was a big eye opener to me of just how bad things must be going for these people. I would consider myself to be somewhat content and financially secure. I would never like the earth or shards of glass just to get a taste wine or another delicious beverage. I am sure that many people who are not as financially secure as I would do so either. I cannot honestly picture a homeless man licking a shard of glass just to get the taste of wine in his system. Clearly, this passage reveals much of the setting to the reader. It does not as much reveal when or where, rather it reveals how.