Dickens describes the horrid conditions of both countries to draw the reader’s attention to the fact that the two countries were not all that different, that the Revolution could have just as well have happened in England as it had in France. Dickens likely wanted to criticize the view the English must have had on the French Revolution that they were savages and barbarians and the English would never have done such a thing. He shows this criticism when he compares Tellson’s Bank to the state of England, which “[disinherited] its sons for suggesting improvements in laws and customs that had long been highly objectionable” as a stab at the monarchy that the English retained while the French had tried to object. With his combined use of hyperbole and irony, Dickens points out the absurdity that English is proud of being stuck in its ways as though that is respectable in comparison to the radical change that occurred in
Dickens describes the horrid conditions of both countries to draw the reader’s attention to the fact that the two countries were not all that different, that the Revolution could have just as well have happened in England as it had in France. Dickens likely wanted to criticize the view the English must have had on the French Revolution that they were savages and barbarians and the English would never have done such a thing. He shows this criticism when he compares Tellson’s Bank to the state of England, which “[disinherited] its sons for suggesting improvements in laws and customs that had long been highly objectionable” as a stab at the monarchy that the English retained while the French had tried to object. With his combined use of hyperbole and irony, Dickens points out the absurdity that English is proud of being stuck in its ways as though that is respectable in comparison to the radical change that occurred in