The rule about self-preservation

The rule about self-preservation is a philosophical axiom invoked by the narrator in Chapter X of Oliver Twist to explain the behavior of the Artful Dodger and Charley Bates after they frame Oliver for a pickpocketing. The narrator states that Oliver, having been brought up by philosophers, was not theoretically acquainted with this beautiful axiom, and thus was unprepared for the boys' self-serving betrayal. The rule is used to satirize the way self-interest can be dressed up as a natural law, and to highlight Oliver's innocence in a world governed by cynical pragmatism.

Definition and Context

The narrator introduces the rule about self-preservation as a "beautiful axiom" that Oliver, despite his upbringing by philosophers, was not theoretically acquainted with. The axiom is presented as a natural law that governs behavior, particularly in moments of danger. The narrator uses this concept to frame the actions of the Dodger and Charley Bates, who, after committing a theft, join the hue-and-cry against Oliver to protect themselves. The rule is thus a philosophical principle that the narrator ironically praises while using it to expose the hypocrisy of those who claim to follow it.

Application in the Plot

In Chapter X, the Dodger and Charley Bates pick the pocket of Mr. Brownlow at a bookstall in Clerkenwell. When Oliver is seen running away, the two boys, rather than coming to his aid, join the crowd shouting "Stop thief!" and pursue him. The narrator explains that this behavior is a natural consequence of the rule about self-preservation, which dictates that individuals will act to protect themselves first. The boys' actions are presented as a logical, if morally dubious, application of this principle. The narrator's ironic tone underscores the gap between the lofty language of philosophy and the base reality of the boys' self-interest.

Thematic Significance

The rule about self-preservation serves as a thematic counterpoint to Oliver's inherent goodness and innocence. Oliver, who has never been taught this axiom, is unprepared for the betrayal of his companions. The rule thus highlights the corrupting influence of the world Oliver inhabits, where even children are governed by cynical self-interest. The narrator's use of the axiom also satirizes the way philosophical principles can be twisted to justify selfish behavior. By framing the boys' actions as a natural law, the narrator exposes the hypocrisy of a society that claims to value morality while rewarding self-preservation at the expense of others. The rule ultimately reinforces the novel's critique of a world where the innocent are often the victims of those who claim to be acting according to nature.