Although many have argued that Dickens used the character of James Harthouse to criticize romanticism in his novel Hard Times, it is his utilitarianism that makes him such a danger. Harthouse himself notes early in the novel that there are many similarities between him and the utilitarian Tom Gradgrind: although Harthouse may in theory live his life by sensations, his disappointment with what he has discovered has led him to look at things with a blandly imperturbable eye. . “I saw a little, here and there,” says he, “up and down: I found it all very useless… and I hold to the opinions of your respected father, really because I have no choice of opinions, and I might as well support them as anything else.(100) However, unlike the utilitarians, Harthouse cannot be redeemed even by the illusion of purpose or social responsibility. Dickens is able to illustrate this scarcity of feeling by contrasting Harthouse, in his final scene, to the character of Sissy Jupe, whose sincere modesty and good will, together with a more elastic sense, bring into sharp relief her lack of character. It is Sissy, not Harthouse, who Dickens holds up as a model to follow - and it is Harthouse,. not Sissy, proving that falsehood matters much more than the label (romantic, utilitarian, or otherwise) given to plagiarism Get a custom essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? The void of feeling behind Harthouse's speech is a first clue in this passage regarding his sincerity. When Sissy informs him that he will never see Louisa again, his choice of words is romantically dramatic, yet his actual reaction is one of rather quick resignation. "Well! If unfortunately it should appear," he said, "after due efforts and duties on my part, who am brought into so desolate a position as this exile, I will not become the persecutor of the lady." (174)A life without Louisa is for him apparently comparable to an “exile” or, as he says shortly before, an “exile” (174), and insists on considering any such state as totally “desolate” (174). so vividly, he dismisses it almost in the same breath by returning to dull, dispassionate language. Any resistance on his part is considered nothing more than “due suffering and duty,” evidently routine enough to be satisfied with even the mere mention. His next thought – that he “will not become the lady's persecutor” – is another example of how vapid and powerful language becomes in his hands. The theatricality of the word “persecutor” might suggest that Harthouse feels the full weight of his punishment, and maybe even more. But like the theater, Harthouse's world is one of appearance only, “a conscious polishing of an ugly surface” (175). Because even though he shows real dismay, he promptly gives up on the girl he supposedly takes care of. It is important to note that although Harthouse is a superficial being, he, like the Utilitarians, is not actually evil. If it is going too far to say that his intentions are good, it can at least be argued that they are not consciously bad. “I beg to assure you,” he tells Sissy, “that I had no particularly evil intent, but I slipped from step to step” (175). His division of Louisa's seduction into several “steps” signals a cold perspective, almost as if to suggest that Harthouse moved from step to step in the seduction just as he would move from step to step in a mathematical problem. Although he is completely devoid of warm feelings, he is equally incapable of any true malevolence because he sees everything before him on the same placid.