The death of Hadoula

[Theseus]

This, Hadoula’s end with its heavy religious overtones reminds me of Hardy’s Tess, who had been condemned to death by hanging at Winchester. Hardy ends Tess’s tale with the words “‘Justice’ was done, and the President of the Immortals, in Aeschylean phrase, had ended his sport with Tess.” Aeschylus seems to have concluded that all suffering in the world is a result of the deliberate will and malice of “The President of the Immortals,” as in the Prometheus Bound.
Papadiamantis is so much the more poignant in his description of the death of Hadoula:

— Ω! νά το προικιό μου! είπε.
Αυταί υπήρξαν αι τελευταίαι λέξεις της. Η γραία Χαδούλα εύρε τον θάνατο εις το πέραμα του Αγίου Σώστη, εις τον λαιμόν τον ενώνοντα τον βράχον του ερημητηρίου με την ξηράν, εις το ήμισυ του δρόμου, μεταξύ της θείας και της ανθρωπίνης δικαιοσύνης.

The dowry. Her Orthodoxy. Her courage and the realisation of her murders, done with the best of intentions but taking over her (am I anywhere near the truth?), are harrowing to read and heart-rending. Papadiamantis is a pious Orthodox Christian but one who understands the tragedy of human nature.
Why hadn’t I heard of this book before.
I am asking a literary question. Are these two accounts comparable? Thanks especially to SBE for sparking off in me all these musings.

 

[Earion]

Of course the two accounts are comparable, if by “comparable” you mean putting them side by side in order to observe how justice is exercised in two diametrically opposed systems of world order, without expecting judgment on which one of the two is the better. In the pagan sacred order the gods often act wilfully and arbitrarily, as a powerful potentate can do in real life. This doesn’t mean that there is no justice in the world, for even the higest god (Zeus) admits to being inferior to that. It simply means that the gods by their prerogative escape punishment for being every bit as selfish and malicious as the mortals can be; hence no mortal can “bring them to justice” for distributing suffering at will. The opposite is true in the Christian world order, for the Christian god is justice incarnate. The Christian interpretation for the presence of undeserved suffering in this world is that God merely permits the Devil to administer evil to mortals in order to test them. In addition though—and this is crucial—the Christian god is a loving god. He is love, an attribute absent under the previous dispensation. His love transcends justice, and he can pardon sin by extending his grace. Papadiamantis, for the faithful Christian that he is, refuses to put Christian divine justice to test. The Murderess is left unjudged by God and men alike. The reader is called to fill this gap in the moral order according to his personal literary taste, religious faith or aesthetic preference.

 

[Theseus]

Hardy was often accused of holding the Aeschylean view that all suffering in the world is a result of the deliberate will and malice of "The President of the Immortals," or the supreme deity. It is also true that Christ is divine justice incarnate & His justice says:- "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven." Roman Catholicism until recent times stressed this justice in terms of the simplistic 'do good & you go to heaven; do bad and you go to hell.' This may seem to be a parody but many Roman Catholic--& many fundamentalist evangelical--friends believe it. I found in Orthodoxy my final spiritual home. Your conclusion is brilliant: 'The Murderess is left unjudged by God and men alike. The reader is called to fill this gap in the moral order according to his personal literary taste, religious faith or aesthetic preference.'