In this story of tragicomedy, Waugh plots the circle of fortunes and misfortunes of the central character named Paul Pennyfeather. There are a few clever literary devices being used such as satire, parody, irony and absurdity to potray the classless protagonist's confrontation of an outdated traditional British society of the 1920s: education system and the establishment's snobbish view of it, the state church and religion, the class system, high society, the legal system and what was it to live, love and die during those times.
Although there are comic moments and almost relaxed relations between different classes of society, Waugh wanted to promote to good old cherished values of the elite upper class and showed his disapproval of the secular world and the future. He nevertheless rejected the idea that there would be any better political system or any at all, that could uplift man or his society from misery.
His beliefs in the goodness of traditional values and social relations put him in opposition to socialist ideals of Karl Marx, whom he is critical of. The fact that a friendly atmosphere existed between different classes of society as depicted in the book and Pennyfeather represents a socially mobile person even during those times,seems to create doubts whether Marx was right in suggesting that there needs to be a class warfare, class consciousness, struggle. Or even revolution. What Marx sees as opium of the masses in religion, Waugh saw beauty and spiritual benefits of it to redeem unfortunate souls and inspire those who struggle to improve themselves without causing upheaval in society.
With a rather an enlightened view of personal endeavour, Waugh depicted Pennyfeather 's triumphs after a going through trials and tribulations of expulsion, imprisonment and failed engagement. Evoking a very biblical allusion, he created the resurrection of Pennyfeather to imply a religious experience and in a sense personifying his idea of faith in divine grace. By using the idea of faith which comes from religion, Waugh tried to promote this well-cherished institution not as a problem but an entity representing order and establishment thus validating the high standards of morality the bourgeoisie (where he came from) should uphold.
Waugh is protective of traditional ideas of the past and its representations and promoted, through the writing, their preservation and reverence when the 'modern machinery' was blamed for causing the destruction of an old Tudor estate. Like Marxist ideals, the modern mode of progress would undermine traditional way of life which would mean an end to aristocracy and elitism. He is sceptical of the future represented by modern buildings that would destroy much cherished social relations of the past as symbolised by historical architecture like the tudor house.
What about secularism? Waugh did not seem to approve this as well: he put a non-denominational clergyman named Pendergast under capital punishment! This is a metaphor that Waugh used to show how the presence of secularism would remove the values of tradition and religion, not just present a philosophical threat that would rob the establishment the privilege to control and set the moral standards. Waugh also tried to associate socialism with inappropriate behaviour as displayed by the drunken behaviour of Silenus, the architect. In some ways it is an early parody of the modern architect. Very leftist,very avante guardian. I am quite certain that a profession such as this invites lots of aesthetic arguments between classicism and avant garde, tradition and modernity would create chaos and disorder,so not very welcomed.
In a nutshell, what Waugh has represented is the same dilemma that many writers and thinkers face at the present: must anyone rock the boat if the lives that we are living right now have been protecting our own interest, our communities, standard of living and the values that are promoted by the establishment as true and good? Perhaps these high-bred spinner of tales and other idealists should be reminded that a good system would be corrupted one day if it only ensures the prosperity and privilege to idea-making of the few remain so and increase further while the underclass and the middle class get stuck in an endless cycle of mediocrity. Then we would definitely deserve another better philosophy or political system to replace this rot.
No comments:
Post a Comment