The dramatic comedy of William Somerset Maugham 9783111391434, 9783111028927

Citation preview

STUDIES IN ENGLISH

LITERATURE

Volume XXXII

THE DRAMATIC COMEDY OF WILLIAM SOMERSET MAUGHAM by

R O N A L D E. B A R N E S

1968

MOUTON THE HAGUE · PARIS

© Copyright 1968 in The Netherlands. Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, The Hague. No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD NUMBER: 67-27211

Printed in The Netherlands by Mouton & Co., Printers, The Hague.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

In 1957, under the direction of Robert Loper, the Stanford Players revived W. Somerset Maugham's The Circle. During the three weeks of production I sat with the audience listening to their amusement, and I developed a great admiration for the ability and perception of the playwright. It was in the theatre that this study began. To my wife, who made graduate study for me possible, who created the role of Lady Kitty in that memorable production, and who is my most ardent critic, editor and supporter, this work is dedicated. Since this manuscript was completed the present tense has become the past, for William Somerset Maugham died on December 15, 1965. The fact of his death has not altered the anachronism of his 91 years of life, nor has it altered the ideas expressed in this manuscript.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgment

5

I. W. Somerset Maugham: an Enigma and a Plan . II. Introduction to Maugham's Comic Attitude .

.

9 .

27

III. Structure and Idea as Determinants of Maugham's Dramatic Comedy

42

IV. Maugham's Image of Society as Reflected in the Marriage Contract

64

V. The Illusion and Reality of a Classless Society and of a Class Conscious Society

91

VI. The Conflict of Austerity and Opulence and a Revised View of Privilege and Responsibility . . . .112 VII. Cynic and Reporter: Contradiction of Theory and Practice

130

VIII. The Human Image in Maugham's Dramatic Comedy

149

Appendices: A. Plot Outlines of the Subject Comedies . B. First Publication of Maugham's Original Plays . C. Production Record of the Eleven Comedies . . D. Chapter Heading Quotations Bibliography

.159 .180 .182 184 186

I

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

The power of attaching an interest to the most trifling or painful pursuits, in which our whole attention and faculties are engaged, is one of the greatest happinesses of our nature. The common soldier mounts the breach with joy; the miser deliberately starves himself to death; the mathematician sets about extracting the cube-root with a feeling of enthusiasm; and the lawyer sheds tears of admiration over Coke upon Littleton. It is the same through human life. He who is not in some measure a pedant, though he may be a wise, cannot be a very happy man.1 William Hazlitt, "On Pedantry"

William Somerset Maugham, who was considered an enigma in his twenties, continues to be an enigma in his eighties.2 It is the intent of this paper to discover the meaning of Maugham's dramatic comedy. In pursuit of this meaning some effort must be made to explain and to understand that enigma. This is not to imply that the enigma in itself is so important. It is altogether possible that the enigma of Maugham is in part a creation of the writer himself. In the recently published "Looking Back" Maugham tells us, "I had for some time an idea that I should like my complete production to have something in the nature of a pattern." 8 Such a comment is certain to send some critics scrambling to discover the "pattern" in Maugham's writing. But this is an idea conceived after the fact. Whatever pattern there is in Maugham's writing was the result of his progression as a writer. In order to study Maugham's dramatic comedy it is necessary to 1

William Hazlitt, The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed. P. P. Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1931), Vol. IV, p. 80. Malcolm Cowley, "Angry Author's Complaint", The Maugham Enigma, ed. Klaus W. Jonas (New York, The Citadel Press, 1954), pp. 200-204. s W. Somerset Maugham, "Looking Back", Show, June, 1962, p. 62. 1

10

W . SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

circumvent any deliberately conceived enigma, and instead concentrate on the actual writing of dramatic comedy by one of the relatively few men in the English speaking countries who chose to write comedy for the twentieth century stage. In a period when many are concerned about the absence of comedy, we would do well to take a fresh look at the writing of one who successfully wrote comedy for the stage. Another cause of the Maugham enigma is the divergence between public and critical acceptance. Maugham, as a writer of short stories and novels, of drama and criticism, and of autobiography, has more often than not proved a success with his public. Examination of the performance record of his dramatic comedy in Appendix C is an indication of the measure of that success.4 Jonas indicates this popular success when he says, "As a romantic who would believe but as a realist who must doubt, for more than fifty years Maugham has entertained and held his public." 5 But if Maugham has satisfied his public, he has not satisfied his critics. Evaluating his contemporary, St. John Ervine has termed Maugham "a great craftsman".« Ervine is quick to point out that this should not be taken in the deprecatory sense.7 This comment of Ervine's, written in 1959, follows the opinion shared by many of Maugham's critics. Mclver, James Agate, Dorothea Mann, to mention only a few, have all commented on Maugham's craftsmanship. This accolade has been rendered in a somewhat negative sense. The fact is, Mr. Maugham has contributed very little to the development of the drama. . . . He is perhaps a better craftsman, a better master of situation and dialogue than most others of his school. . . . But he seldom, if ever, indicates the originality of Synge, O'Neill or Granville-Barker. 8 4

Infra, pp. 258-259. Klaus W. Jonas, ed., The World of Somerset Maugham (New York, British Book Centre, 1959), p. 95. « Ibid., p. 143. 7 Ibid. 8 Claude Search Mclver, William Somerset Maugham: A Study of Technique and Literary Sources (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1936), p. 47. 5

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

11

"In general, while Maugham's novels are far bigger work [sic] than his plays, they are written with far less attention to technique." 9 "Mr. Maugham, though never a deep thinker, was always a witty one . . . and from Mr. Maugham we are entitled to expect the best wit, the best irony, and above all, the best playcraft." 10 Perhaps all such critical comments are best summed up by Sawyer when he says, "As we think of his plays in the aggregate, we are impressed with the man's knack for being entertaining, but there is the feeling that he has never deemed it worthwhile to expand himself to any high end." 11 There is inherent disappointment in all of these remarks, for they imply that Maugham has not written the drama which the critics would have him write. Criticism from this point of view is begging the question. Maugham's answer to such criticism is to be found in his Notebook when he says, "I don't know why critics expect writers to do as well as they should have done. The writer seldom does what he wants to; he does the best he can." 12 But even this apology by Maugham avoids the real issue for in a sense it disclaims the creative evidence which he has provided for critical evaluation. The critic's primary source should be the works that were created. It is Maugham's particular deftness in playwriting which attracted this writer's attention. Is there a lesson to be learned from Maugham's craftsmanship? Is it possible that by focusing on Maugham's craftsmanship critics have overlooked what it was he had to say? Furthermore, if Maugham's technique is excellent, is this excellence recognized by an audience sitting in its seats in the theatre enjoying the obvious intricacies of technique? Or, does the audience enjoy listening to Maugham's dialogue because of the • Dorothea Mann, "William Somerset Maugham: Novelist, Essayist, Dramatist", W. Somerset Maugham, A Collection of Essays, Charles Hanson Towne, et al. (New York, George H. Doran Company, 1925), p. 35. 10 James Agate, First Nights (London, Iver Nicholson and Watson, 1934), pp. 197-198. 11 Newell W. Sawyer, The Comedy of Manners (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1939), p. 224. 12 W. Somerset Maugham, A Writer's Notebook (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949), p. 43.

12

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

success of his technique? In order to answer this question it is necessary to re-examine the relation of technique to content. Also adding to the enigma of Maugham is his relation to his contemporaries. In view of Maugham's popularity and productivity, the writer was surprised to discover that Maugham's name rarely appears in the biographies or autobiographies of men of letters or arts who were influential in the period from 1900 to 1950. One can speculate as to the reason for this absence, but there is no purpose to be served in doing so. More important, the absence of Maugham's name from such works means only that the one view we have of Maugham's creative purpose and design is Maugham's own view. This is not likely to be too objective. The writer was privileged to meet one of Maugham's friends, the late Bertram Alanson, a long time resident of San Francisco and one time President of the San Francisco Stock Exchange. Mr. Alanson spoke warmly to me of his friendship with Maugham, but unfortunately his fondest memories were those of playing bridge with Maugham in his San Francisco home and on cruises to the South Seas and the Orient. From the biography of Edward Sheldon, the invalid American playwright and play "doctor" we learn only that "Whenever Maugham was in New York he made his headquarters in Ned's apartment on Gramercy Park",13 and that Sheldon "was best man at Maugham's wedding to Syrie Bernardo".14 Such comments from Alanson or Barnes do not contribute to our knowledge of Maugham, the playwright. The fact remains that the critic must look to Maugham's plays in order to understand the creative force that made them. Another factor in the Maugham enigma is Maugham's position as revealed by literary history. Research revealed that discussion of Maugham's works was frequently absent, or often only casually mentioned, in literary histories written during and about the period of 1900 to 1940. However, in the period since World War II, this situation has changed. Swinnerton, for example, in his revised survey of The Georgian Literary Scene found it necessary to in13

Eric Wollencott Barnes, The Man Who Lived Twice (New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1956), p. 74. 14 Ibid.

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

13

elude a discussion of Maugham which he had not felt important enough to include in the original.15 Explaining this omission elsewhere, Swinnerton concludes that whereas the generations of the twenties and thirties were interested in the inner-psychological school, or the metaphysical school, the generation of post-World War II had become fatalistic because of the horrors of war.16 It left whole populations shaken, and perhaps impatient of the abstract. Mr. Maugham, to the newer generation, represents nothing outside the daily; but he does not represent escape from the daily. He represents something lucid, something to be understood and enjoyed. . . . In his eighties Mr. Maugham for the first time enjoys a popular admiration so great that critical admiration cannot resist it. 17

What is the reason for this changed critical attitude and how can Maugham's plays be re-evaluated in view of changing perspectives? Does the need for re-evaluation mean that the modern observer can see something in Maugham's plays that Maugham did not originally intend, but which is nevertheless present if one chooses to put it there, or does this mean that Maugham's vision extended beyond his own time? Contemplation of these aspects of the Maugham enigma raised some very interesting questions. The answers to these questions are to be found in the analysis of the plays themselves. However, the plays also add to the enigma. As a playwright, Maugham has followed several paths. He has written quasi-serious drama, comic drama, mystery melodrama - twenty-nine plays in all - and he has made translations and adaptations of foreign plays. In addition, several of his short stories and novels have been adapted by others for the stage and for the motion picture screen as well as for television. Of Maugham's twenty-nine plays, two are written in one act and four are unpublished, although typed copies of three of these are on file in the Library of Congress. Fourteen are comedies, and these are the plays that held the greatest interest for this writer. All 15

Frank Swinnerton, The Georgian Literary Scene, 1910-1935 (London, Hutchinson & Co., 1935). 16 Jonas, The World of . . o p . cit., p. 19. » Ibid., pp. 19-20.

14

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

fourteen are published in Maugham's The Collected Plays.16 Only eighteen plays are included in that collection. The reason Maugham gives us for that selection is vague: "I have included only such of my plays as I have wished for one reason or another to reprint." 19 Without committing himself to an actual appraisal of his drama, Maugham has selected the eighteen plays which have the greatest intrinsic merit. They have merit not only because of their dramatic integrity and their attempt to cope with basic human motivations, but also because they illustrate Maugham's development as a playwright. Since this is a study of Maugham's comedy, the four serious plays were eliminated from this study except where they aid in elaborating the development of Maugham's attitude toward his society. Three comedies, Mrs. Dot, Grace and Caesar's Wife have been arbitrarily eliminated. The first two have been dispensed with because they are early comedies and their strengths and weaknesses can be equally well illustrated by others written at about the same time. Caesar's Wife, according to Maugham, was patterned after Madame de Lafayette's La Princesse de Cleves, considered by some to be historically the first psychological novel.29 The play has been eliminated from this study for although Maugham terms it "a comedy",21 it retains the serious tone of its French model. In the order of writing, the following plays will form the nucleus of this study: Lady Frederick (1903), Jack Straw (1905), Penelope (1908), Smith (1909), The Land of Promise (1913), Our Betters (1914), The Unattainable (1915), Home and Beauty (1919), The Circle (1919), The Constant Wife (1926), and The Breadwinner (1930). Plot outlines of these plays will be found in Appendix A.22 The writer realizes that certain of these plays may be unfamiliar to the reader and he has chosen to include summaries in the Appendix in order to be 18

W. Somerset Maugham, The Collected Plays, 3 vols., 3rd ed. (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1955). Reference to all of Maugham's plays, unless otherwise noted, will be in this edition. Reference to these entries will be by play, act and page only (e.g. The Circle, ΠΙ, p. 65). « Ibid., Vol. ΙΠ, p. xix. 20 Maugham, Plays, op. cit., Vol. UT, p. vii. 21 Caesar's Wife, title page. 22 Infra, Appendix A.

W . SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

15

able to discuss the plays in their developmental relationship to each other instead of discussing them as individual units in a chronological order. As an introduction to the discussion of Maugham's plays a word should be said about his beginnings as a writer. It is unnecessary to repeat the details of his life which have already been covered in books by Brophy 23 and Pfeiffer 24 and by Maugham's numerous autobiographical writings. Where such biographical material adds specific meaning to the plays, it will be referred to later. In 1891, at the age of seventeen (Maugham was born on January 25, 1874), he wrote his first book, a biography of Meyerbeer. The book was rejected by the first publisher he submitted it to and that, Maugham says, was enough to discourage him.25 Then I began to write plays, chiefly in one act, of a harrowing nature and unflinching realism. I had learned to know Ibsen in Germany and the plays that I wrote between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one ruthlessly delved into the secrets of the human soul; few of my characters but suffered from a fatal or a venereal disease, and since I was studying medicine I was able to go into some very elegant detail.24 None of these early plays is extant, but evidence of the pseudoIbsen iconoclasm which he describes is to be found in his first published one-act play, Marriages are Made in Heaven (1903). Maugham was to be a successful novelist with Liza of Lambeth (1897) before he was a successful dramatist. His first produced play was A Man of Honour in 1903 by the Stage Society. He was not a "successful" dramatist until the production of Lady Frederick in 1907. The success of Lady Frederick and the notoriety and fame which it brought to him has often been described by him.27 For example, a Punch cartoon depicted a nervous 2S

John Brophy, Somerset Maugham (London, Longman's Green, 1952). Karl G. Pfeiffer, W. Somerset Maugham: A Candid Portrait (New York, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1959). 85 W. Somerset Maugham, Liza of Lambeth (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1951), pp. v-vi. 28 Ibid. 17 Maugham, Plays, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. ix-xiii, and W. Somerset Maugham, The Summing Up (Garden City, International Collector's Library, 1938), passim. 24

16

W . SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

Shakespeare looking down on the youthful Maugham who had four plays being produced concurrently in the London theatres.28 He continued to write for the stage until 1933 when he determined that the play he had just finished, Sheppey, would be his last because he had lost contact with his audience.29 He has not violated his 1933 withdrawal from the drama. Thus, in order to place Maugham's plays in their time, our concern is with the thirty year period 1903 to 1933. Having limited our study in time and in number, our attention can now turn to the method or design to be used. In the physical sciences the method followed is first to pose a hypothesis and then to devise a system of experiments which will, ultimately, either prove or disprove the hypothesis. The method of literary criticism does not preclude the scientific method, but literary criticism is of necessity more than analytical because the critic must be creative. Cazamian describes the process of criticism in the following way: Our imaginative perception, following the author's mind all along the series of its instinctive acts of will, shares in the decisions, the preferences, the choice, which are translated into the characteristics of the work. The major motives and themes of a book, its leading purpose, and every detail of its construction, manner and style, thus appear to us in their organic unity.30 In other words, the critic must learn to know his writer well enough so that he can share in the creative experience. "Criticism", according to Malcolm Cowley, "is a literary art, and like other forms of literature it is impure by definition." 31 Furthermore, Cowley contends, "The study of any author's language carries us straight into history, institutions, moral questions, personal stratagems, and all the other aesthetic impurities or fallacies that many new critics are trying to expurge."32 In this article Cowley focuses our attention on the weakness of the "new critics" who concentrate their Maugham, The Summing Up, op. cit., pp. 116-117. Ibid., p. 156. 30 Louis Cazamian, Criticism in the Making (New York, Macmillan, 1929), p. 31. 31 Malcolm Cowley, "Criticism: A Many-Windowed House", Saturday Review, August 12, 1961, p. 11. Sî Ibid. 28 29

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

17

attention on the text itself without regard for external influences or even for the influence that one work may have on another work by the same author.33 Although the first and last consideration in this study will be the text, we agree with Cowley in recognizing the external influence on the text. There is still another consideration since the texts with which we are working were written to be performed on the stage. Thus the challenge to this critic, removed in time from the original productions of these plays, is to perceive the dramatic significance of the play projected back into its own time. The term "dramatic significance" implies that a producer, director and/or actor regarded Maugham's written manuscript with sufficient respect to see in it the possibility of being interpreted successfully on the contemporary stage. It will be assumed that Maugham's plays had dramatic significance. The success Maugham's plays had in original productions is sufficient to warrant this assumption.34 Once granted this assumption, it is possible to remove two variables found in any dramatic production, and they are actor and audience. The variable nature of the people who take part as actors and audience in the performance of a play is obvious. It is not our intent to examine these production variables, but rather our concern is with what Maugham brought to his playscript that could be regarded as dramatic in his time. The advantage of proposing the acceptance of the hypothesis of dramatic significance is that it will permit the writer to concentrate on the "facts" (the term is Holland's) of Maugham's playwrighting. As Holland says: Critics can provide facts, too - plot parallelisms, repeated metaphors, structure, imagery, all those things that modern criticism includes in the term "meaning" but these, for the most part, critics have neglected.»« To collect these facts of dramatic technique, Cazamian maintains, the critic must recreate for himself both the "conscious" and the "unconscious" process by which the dramatic artist creates.86 «

Ibid., p. 10. Infra, Appendix C. 85 Norman N. Holland, The First Modern Comedies (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1959), p. 209. »« Cazamian, op. cit., pp. 28-29. M

18

W . SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

To criticise a work, in the proper sense of the term, is to understand and interpret as fully as possible the use of energy that produced it; to live again the stages of its development, and partake of the impulses and intentions with which it is still pregnant. 37

Accordingly, the objective of this study will be to relate Maugham's ideas to those of his time and to determine the dramatic expression which he used to give his ideas comic meaning. In seeking this objective certain terms can be defined as they will be used in this study. First it is necessary to clarify the use of the terms "story line", "plot" and "action". For purposes of this study these terms will distinguish three aspects of dramatic writing: what the dramatist says (story line), the way he says it (plot), and the meaning or intent of what he says (action). In a well written play these three aspects are inter-dependent, but they are not necessarily interdependent in all plays. A more binding definition will help to clarify the meaning of those terms. "Story" will be defined as the account of some event. This definition relates our usage to the Latin historia from which the word "story" is derived. The purpose in using the term is to distinguish the act of re-telling an event from the creative process of organizing and selecting, necessary for the structuring of plot. In this sense the story Ene is the least complex of the terms. "Action" will be defined as the attempt of a character to achieve an objective. There are three phases of conflict as the character moves toward his objective: involvement or preparation for conflict, the actual meeting of opposing forces, and the adjustment (or readjustment) following the second phase. This definition relies heavily on the meaning given to the term by Stanislavski38 which Fergusson refers to as a suitable "non-definition".39 It is by action that the dramatist gives meaning to his play and it is ironic 37

Ibid. Constantin Stanislavski, An Actor Prepares, transi. Elizabeth Reynolds Hapgood (New York, Theatre Arts Books, 1948), Chaps. ΙΠ and IV. 39 Francis Fergusson, The Idea of a Theatre (Garden City, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949), p. 244. 88

W . SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

19

that such an important term in the vocabulary of criticism should be so difficult to define. "Plot" will be defined as the orderly arrangement of the incidents. This definition follows Aristotle.40 Plot in this sense implies both the selection and the purposeful ordering of the incidents. Three other concepts to be used in this study are "technique", "meaning" and "structure". These terms relate directly to the definitions of story, plot and action. Meaning and structure are mutually dependent facts. The word "facts" used in this sense is the same usage as that of Holland when he refers to the "facts" of playwrighting.41 Meaning comes out of structure. "The form of the drama is its idea and its idea is its form", as Lionel Trilling says.42 "Each time a work is written a proper form has to be found. Form is a fluid but not an arbitrary thing. It corresponds to the mind of the artist which in turn is molded by place and time." 43 The broad nature of this statement by Eric Bentley signifies the flexibility of the dramatic medium. Moreover, it reduces the general philosophical concept of the term "form" to the somewhat more practical aspect of "technique". George Pierce Baker says of technique essentially the same thing as Bentley says of form, although Baker is more direct. "The technique of any dramatist may be defined roughly as his ways, methods and devices for getting his desired ends." 44 Technique, or form, then, is the means by which the dramatist achieves his desired goals. It is not intended here to become involved with definitions for the various aspects of dramatic technique or for the dramatic tools available to the dramatist in constructing his story. The subject is amply treated in any one of a number of books ranging from the simplest, in books providing an introduction to the theatre, to the more 40 Aristotle, On the Art of Poetry, transi. S. H. Butcher (New York, The Liberal Arts Press, 1950), p. 9. 41 Supra, p. 14. 42 Lionel Trilling, The Liberal Imagination (New York, Doubleday Anchor, 1948), p. 270. 4 » Eric Bentley, The Playwright as Thinker (New York, Meridian Books, 1946), p. 2. 44 George Pierce Baker, Dramatic Technique (New York, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1919), p. 1.

20

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

complex, in playwrighting manuals. The techniques which Maugham employs will be discussed in later chapters. The common implication to be noted in definitions of these terms is the emphasis placed on the importance of the dramatist's intent in determining the meaning of the play. Two other terms remain to be defined. One of these, "comedy", will require a full chapter to discuss. The other is "society". As used here, "society" will have either a general or a specific connotation. The context should not confuse the meaning. "Society" will refer either to a specific segment of the social order, as for example the leisured class or "high" society, or it will be used in its more general sense, referring to the social order as a "state or system restricting the individual".45 Other terms used should be clear by their context. Those listed above are the most troublesome in criticism. As a final reference point in framing this study of Maugham's dramatic comedy it will be appropriate to survey Maugham's philosophy of writing, or more specifically, the aesthetic theory on which his work is founded. Maugham has not written extensively about aesthetics. Nevertheless, his views have been made relatively clear if his random remarks on the subject are collated. It is his stated belief that "art is for delight".46 His aesthetic concept of the drama does not differ: "The aim of the drama is not to instruct but to please. Its object is delight."47 Moreover, "the business of comedy" is "to amuse".48 He expands this view when he says, "[comedy] is not a work of edification though it should be a work of art, and if it castigates the follies of the moment that is by the way and only in so far as this no doubt laudable process occasions laughter. The object is the entertainment of the audience, not their improvement."49 In the controversy between those who contend that art is for instruction, and those who contend that art is for entertainment, 45

Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 5th ed. W. Somerset Maugham, Books and You (London, W. Heinemann Ltd., 1940), p. 52. 47 Maugham, Plays, op. cit., Vol. I, p. xvii. 48 Ibid., Vol. Π, p. ix. « Ibid. 48

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

21

Maugham's stated position seems specific. However, this critic must seriously doubt the validity of making such a clear cut distinction that art must be either/or. Molière in La Critique de l'École des femmes specified that "the great rule of all rules is . . . to please".60 Nevertheless Molière's comedy did more than simply delight. As this study progresses we will see that Maugham has a specific point of view toward the society which he represents. As this point of view is revealed it will become apparent that, in spite of any statement to the contrary, Maugham does more than just delight. Although Maugham is not an insistent instructor as was Shaw, he is nonetheless an instructor. It is unfortunate that in differentiating between those qualities which amuse and those which instruct, Maugham does not identify the characteristics of the opposing intents. If he had done so we might have a clearer definition of what he means by comedy. Still another aspect of aesthetics is the artist's search for truth. In what many consider to be Maugham's greatest work, the autobiographical novel, Of Human Bondage, Phillip, the hero, is seeking to find the meaning of life. Phillip's conclusion, according to Carl and Mark Van Doren is that life has no meaning which can be set forth in a formula; it is this for one person and that for another, but if one has lived thoroughly one's memories will shape themselves into a pattern as rich though as unsymmetrical as those patterns formed by the colors in an oriental rug. 51

Awareness of life as a variegated pattern has led Maugham to search and to observe and to question those patterns as well as the motivations which determine those patterns. Writing in 1958, Maugham reflected, "Art is an effect of design; life is so largely controlled by chance that its conduct can be but a perpetual improvisation." 52 In what way does the dramatist give meaning to M

Molière, La Critique de l'École des femmes, Vol. ΠΙ of Œuvres de Molière, ed. M. Eugène Despais (Paris, Librairie Hatchette et eie., 1876), scene vi, p. 358. 51 Carl Van Doren and Mark Van Doren, "W. Somerset Maugham", Maugham: A Collection of Essays, op. cit., p. 16. 5S W. Somerset Maugham, Points of View (London, W. Heinemann Ltd., 1958), p. 25.

22

W . SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

this design of life? "The aim of comedy", Maugham says, "is not to represent life, but amusingly to comment on it." 58 Maugham's comments on life are, as Swinnerton says, neither those of a moralist nor an apologist.54 He has coldness, wit and malice. He at once sees what he looks for in a man or an affair . . . and abstracts for his own purposes. And since he does not credit the perfectibility of the world or human-kind, but finds life continuously interesting..., he is the nearest thing to a true realist.. . 5S

That is to say, Maugham has the perception to see not only the object before him, but also to see around and through that object. Some writers have attributed this "clinical" vision to Maugham's medical training.56 Others attribute it to the influence on Maugham of Flaubert and Maupassant.57 Whatever the source, the perspicacity of this vision has caused some critics to term Maugham a cynic.58 Desmond MacCarthy says it is impossible to discuss Maugham without using the term "cynical", but Maugham is more than cynical; he has an artist's pity which makes the naive reader think that he is moved while the brute of an author remains stony hearted. H e does not understand that he is so deeply touched himself only because the story-teller shed no tears.59

Maugham explains his perception of life in The Summing Up when he says, "a sense of humor leads you to take pleasure in the discrepancies of human nature; it leads you to mistrust great professions and look for the unworthy motive that they conceal".®0 Maugham's admiration of another writer, Dorothy Parker, provides still another insight into his philosophy when he says, "Per53

Maugham, Plays, op. cit., Vol. HI, p. xxiii. Swinnerton, op. cit., p. 173. 55 Ibid. 5 " Brophy, op. cit., p. 11. « Ibid. 58 Klaus W. Jonas, The Gentleman from Cap Ferrai (New Haven, no publisher, 1956), p. 11. 59 Desmond MacCarthy, "An Appreciation of William Somerset Maugham", reprinted from Nash's Pall Mall Magazine, May, 1933 (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1934), p. 12. 60 Maugham, The Summing Up, op. cit., p. 67. 54

W . SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

23

haps what gives her writing its peculiar tang is her gift for seeking something to laugh at in the bitterest tragedies of the human animal." «1

In these remarks Maugham presents us with his most accurate analysis of his own writing. Chance may play an important part in our everyday lives, but Maugham points out that an audience will not accept chance in the theatre.·2 Hence, the dramatist must represent adequate motivations for his characters. In his search for truth Maugham has discovered, as have so many others, that obvious human motivations may not be, in fact, very often are not the true motivations. The fact of this concealment can be the source of comic as well as tragic contemplation. Everything, therefore, is potentially comical and, in the course of human history, few things can escape a laugh; some curious mind is sure, sooner or later, to bring them under a new idea against which they will be shown to be absurd.·3 Maugham goes beneath the surface of apparently worthy motives. He delves beneath appearance in his comedy by creating characters who do not really belong to the leisured society in which they are placed or to which they aspire. In this way Maugham is able to examine not only the motivations of the individual within society, but also to question the tenets on which the philosophy of the leisured society is based. This intent is not as clear in the early plays as it is in the later ones. Particularly in the later plays, Maugham represents both the society and the individual as being manifestly insecure. It is this attitude that has led Maugham to remark that critics "could not say that my comedies were gloomy; but they felt them vaguely unpleasant".·4 A writer's aesthetic philosophy provides the backbone of his creative work. In The Razor's Edge, which is written in the first person, the story teller says, "Art is triumphant when it can use 81 Dorothy Parker, Dorothy Parker (New York, The Viking Press, 1944), pp. 14-15. 62 Maugham, Plays, op. cit., Vol. ΙΠ, p. viii. 63 DeWitt H. Parker, The Principles of Aesthetics, 2nd ed. (New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1946), p. 95. M Maugham, The Summing Up, op. cit., p. 116.

24

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

convention as an instrument of its own purpose." 65 However, the convention of the moment is subject to rapid change and Maugham considers one of the limiting factors of dramatic art to be the ephemeral nature of drama.ββ The writer of dramatic comedy is even more limited, according to Maugham, because "wit, too, which is the most delicate flower of civilization, is ephemeral". 67 If the comic dramatist is so limited then it follows that Maugham, not unlike many other dramatists, wrote for the moment. That moment for which he wrote was the theatre of his time. As he says, "plays are written to be acted, not to be read; it is certainly well for them to have literary distinction, but it is not that which makes them good plays, it may (and often does) make them less actable".68 As with so much theory, this discussion of Maugham's view of aesthetics can come to have no meaning until one observes its application. Maugham's view of aesthetics provides only a framework of understanding. The chapters which follow will attempt to complete the picture. The emphasis of this study will be on the plays and through the plays will be seen both what Maugham has to say and the way in which he says it. Study of the plays will, it is hoped, establish an objective critical understanding of Maugham's comic drama by: (1) ascertaining from his work his method of dramatic portrayal and his expression of dramatic idea, and (2) explaining his comic vision of man in society. To achieve this purpose, the plan for this study has been divided into two phases. The first is to distinguish the general characteristics of Maugham's playwrighting with particular attention devoted to the use of comedy. Accomplishment of this phase will be realized in two steps. The first step will arrive at a method for the analysis of dramatic comedy, and the second will discuss the transition from independence to interdependence in the 65 W. Somerset Maugham, The Razor's Edge (New York, Doubleday, Doran & Co., Inc., 1944), p. 267. ββ Maugham, Plays, op. cit., Vol. I, p. xviii. 67 Ibid., p. XX. 88 W. Somerset Maugham, The Art of Fiction (New York, Doubleday, 1956), p. 36.

W . SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

25

relationship of dramatic structure and idea to comic structure and idea. On first consideration it may seem that in stage comedy the dramatic structure and idea could not be separated from comic structure and idea. There is, however, such a separation in the early comedy of Maugham. The second phase is designed to determine from the plays the vision that Maugham has of his society and to analyze that vision as it develops in Maugham's plays through the use of repeated dramatic symbols and metaphors. The first of these symbols to be discussed is the marriage contract. The attitude of the individual to the marriage contract is symbolic of the individual's attitude toward society. Through Maugham's plays this attitude changes, revealing a growing conflict between the individual and his society. This is the subject of Chapter IV. In the chapter which follows our focus will be placed on Maugham's symbolic use of man's universal desire to create class distinction. By creating characters who seek class distinction Maugham reveals the individual's confusion between illusion and reality. The next chapter will examine Maugham's creation of a colonial character. The colonial character recurs in Maugham's comedies in several forms. In each case the colonial serves as an intruder who finds himself in the midst of an established leisured class environment. The colonial's sense of values are contrasted with those of the established class and by this contrast Maugham emphasizes the need to re-examine the traditionalist's conception of privilege and responsibility. The seventh chapter analyzes the symbolic motivation of Maugham's characters. Motivated by thoughtless self-interest, those characters are confused because in a radically changing world the values of society are changing but as yet have not received adequate definition. In this way Maugham reveals the inadequacy of the unstated laws which govern the existing social order. The formulation of this plan reveals that Maugham's dramatic comedy is not inexplicable. Moreover, his comic vision is reasonably complex, so that the critic does not have to be deliberately obscure in order to rationalize what Maugham is not. The value of such a study can be determined only by what it achieves. But the need for such a study is present in spite of Sewell Stoke's admoni-

26

W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM: AN ENIGMA AND A PLAN

tion, "Would it not be kinder, therefore to respect his [Maugham's] wish that the plays be allowed to die a natural death, instead of reviving their memory by insisting on their shortcomings." 89 The writer has not encountered any such wish expressed by Maugham in his writings.

·» Sewell Stokes, "W. Somerset Maugham", Theatre Arts, X X I X (February, 1945), pp. 94-95.

II

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps; for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are, and what they ought to b e . . . . To explain the nature of laughter and tears, is to account for the condition of human life; for it is in a manner compounded of these two. 1 William Hazlitt, "On Wit and Humour"

The subject of this study has been limited to the dramatic comedy of Maugham. In the first chapter, when defining terms, a definition of comedy was postponed. "Comedy" is one of the most elusive words in the critic's vocabulary. The many definitions of the word attest to its elusiveness. It is, nevertheless, necessary to arrive at a working definition of comedy. Once this is done it will be possible to explore the meaning of comedy, and more specifically, to survey the meaning that Maugham gives to his comedy. It is not germane to our purpose to examine the traditional definitions of comedy or the theories of laughter of which the definitions are a part. There are many excellent works which do so. Central to any discussion of comedy are the theories of four men. Aristotle's statement that "comedy deals with inferior persons" 2 led others to derive the theory that comedy is derision from a sense of superiority. Thomas Hobbes declared that laughter is the result of an emotional release.3 Immanuel Kant claimed that 1

William Hazlitt, The Complete Works Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 2 Aristotle, On the Art of Poetry, transi. Liberal Arts Press, 1950), pp. 7-8. 3 Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. A. R. millan Company, 1904), Book I.

of William Hazlitt, ed. P. P. 1931), Vol. IV, p. 5. S. H. Butcher (New York, The Waller (New York, The Mac-

28

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

"Laughter is an affection arising from a strained expectation being suddenly reduced to nothing".4 Freud conceived the theory that the pleasure of the various comic forms is achieved by an "economy of expenditure" in inhibition, thought or feeling.5 These philosophical and psychological theories of comedy have been followed, expanded or amended by numerous writers. Almost any book which deals with comedy (there are many recent publications) 6 reviews the theories with compulsive regularity. In most cases, each review serves only as an introduction to a new theory of comedy. It is this writer's belief that it is important for the critic to be aware of the various theories of comedy, but that it is not necessary for the critic to resolve the divergencies between theories or to support one theory in opposition to another. As Weightman says in his excellent discussion of "Humor and the French", ". . . there is no need to choose between these various theories; they can all be accepted together as representing complementary approaches to the truth".7 Each of these theories explains the relation of comedy to laughter. In other words, they involve an exploration of the relationship of an auditor's reaction to an example of humor. In point of fact, it is rather dull reading an explanation of why a given example of humor is laughed at. As a criterion of this study, in the last chapter, it was specified that we were going to eliminate the variable of the audience.8 It is possible to eliminate the variable of the audience in discussing comedy as well, for it is our purpose to discover Maugham's use of comedy. This approach can be justified on the 4

Immanual Kant, Critique of Aesthetic Judgement (Oxford, University Press, 1911), p. 199. 5 Sigmund Freud, The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud, ed. A. A. Brill (New York, Random House, 1938), p. 803. 0 David I. Grossvogel, 20th Century French Drama (New York, Columbia University Press, 1961); Theodore W. Hatlen, Orientation to the Theatre (New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1962); Robert Hogan and Sven Eric Molin, Drama: The Major Genres (New York, Dodd, Mead & Company, 1962). These three titles are a representative sampling of these recent publications. 7 John Weightman, "Humor and the French", The Twentieth Century, Vol. 170 (July, 1961), p. 117. 8 Supra, p. 13.

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

29

grounds that comedy is not static, but rather has a new life each time it is viewed. Krishna Menon is only one of many critics who have concluded that not everyone laughs at the same thing, nor, if there is laughter, do people laugh to the same degree.9 Societies change; what is regarded as comic changes. The history of stage comedy attests to this change, and at the same time illustrates the difficulty of reducing comedy to a single definition. Moreover, the works of any one dramatist may reveal a markedly diverse conception of the object of comedy. Consider, for example, the personal and social dynamics which contributed to the increasing political sterility of Aristophanic comedy: the sharp political criticism of The Knights was altered to literary criticism in The Frogs, and was finally reduced to criticism of the slave-centered household in The Plutus. The dramatist adapts his attitude to those ideas which his society will permit, and he alters his attitude where it is appropriate for his dramatic action. Few dramatists have been committed to a specific definition of comedy; few have analyzed their own theory of comedy. It is not necessary for the dramatist to define comedy because comedy can have meaning without definition. It is possible to examine the intent of the dramatist without analyzing the reaction of the audience. Before pursuing the idea of comic intent through to its conclusion, another critical approach to comedy must be considered. This critical method is established on the idea that comedy can be divided into classes according to style and type. It is in this system that the critic encounters the vocabulary which includes such terms as "wit" and "satire", "high comedy" and "low comedy". This vocabulary is not absolute as the following selective definitions of "high comedy" will illustrate: [High comedy is] a comedy usually dealing with characteristics rather than character, with the surfaces of polite society rather than with serious problems and intrigue, depending more on sparkle and wit than on comic situation. Its characters are of the well-to-do class with leisure, culture, and money, more concerned with repartee than with middle-class morality. Its muse is the comic spirit of Meredith's classic • V. K. Krishna Menon, A Theory of Laughter (London, George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1931), p. 14.

30

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

essay, and it tries to steer the comedy safely b y the shoals of sentiment. 1 » H i g h comedy views man as a social animal in the midst of his fellows, with customs, conventions and traditions of his own devising, and prods h i m gently or mockingly, as he stands confounded b y w h a t h e made. It catches him red-handed in folly or stupidity, in inconsistency or errors of taste or of judgment, or in self-pity or sentimentality, and administers the lash on his b a r e back or thumps h i m playfully over the head with the blown bladder. According to the extent of his obliquity is the severity of the castigation, whereby the soul is cleansed by laughter as by a fresh, sweet wind. F u r t h e r m o r e , incongruity being at the heart of the comic, a n d m a n , as a bundle of disparities and contradictions, being the s u p r e m e incongruity, it follows that the higher types of comedy will concern themselves primarily with people rather than with incident, except as incidents grow out of what people are. 1 1 [High comedy can be defined as] a play that is not only well written, well characterized, and theatrically effective, but also built on a comic idea or theme which, considered abstractly, is seriously significant t o civilized and m a t u r e people. 12 In all high comedy - as distinguished f r o m drawing-room comedy o r the comedy of manners - we must cut across circumstances t o character, to something rooted and decisive, t o something akin t o the tragic. . . . H i g h comedy is something that reaches us t h r o u g h the mind. 1 3

These terms which identify one type of comedy are difficult to apply because they place meaning before form. They emphasize the playwright's intent, but they place externals before internals. The terminology of style is more useful to the critic than that of type, but here also there is difficulty in arriving at precise definition as the following examples will illustrate: By definition h u m o r is gentle. T h e w o r d " c o m e d y " covers all the non-tragic. T h e sharp, savage, cruel, harsh fall under the heading of 10 Richard A. Cordell, W. Somerset Maugham (New York, Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1937), pp. 162-163. 11 Newell W. Sawyer, The Comedy of Manners (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1931), pp. 1-2. 12 Alan Reynolds Thompson, The Anatomy of Drama, 2nd ed. (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1946), p. 89. 13 Louis Kronenberger, The Thread of Laughter (New York, Knopf, 1952), p. 196.

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

31

wit or satire. Now, my definitions are these: the wit makes fun of other persons, the satirist makes fun of the world, the humorist makes f u n of himself, but in so doing identifies himself with people. Not for the purpose of taking them apart, but simply revealing their true nature. 14 When the comic poet is amused by someone or something that he dislikes, the result is satire; when he is amused by someone or something that he likes, the result is humor. 1 5 The writer of comedy creates fools, the writer of satire "attacks fools." 16 If you detect the ridicule, and your kindliness is chilled by it, you are slipping into the grasp of S a t i r e . . . . . . . The satirist is a moral agent, often a social scavenger, working on a storage of bile. 17 Satire is a (commonly) formal or elaborate holding up of (esp. public) vice or folly, always as colored or pervaded by the satirist's feeling, to ridicule or reprobation; it is not necessarily ironical. 18 Irony is really a form of ridicule or satire. 1 · [If] you prefer to sting him [a ridiculous person] under a semi-caress, by which he shall in his anguish be rendered dubious whether indeed anything has hurt him, you are an engine of Irony. 20 Irony involves the contrast but not the playfulness [of comedy]; its effect is the emotional discord we feel when something is both funny and painful. 81

In the initial phase of this study an attempt was made to classify Maugham's comedy according to this system of type and style. However, it soon became apparent that not only was it difficult to 14 Heard on the television program "Small World", March 29, 1959. The statement was made by the late James Thurber. Verified by a report in the Oakland Tribune, Tuesday, March 31, 1959, E-13. 15 Henry Alonzo Meyers, Tragedy: A View Of Life (New York, Cornell University Press, 1956), p. 126. " J. L. Smeall, English Satire, Parody and Burlesque (Exeter, A. Wheaton & Company, Ltd., 1952), p. 16. 17 George Meredith, "An Essay on Comedy", in Comedy, ed. Wylie Sypher (New York, Doubleday Anchor, 1956), pp. 42-44. 18 Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 5th ed. ι · Krishna Menon, op. cit., p. 114. w Meredith, op. cit., pp. 42-44. 21 Alan Reynolds Thompson, The Dry Mock (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1948), p. 11.

32

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

find neat labels for Maugham's comedy, but also, once his comedy was squeezed into seemingly appropriate compartments, there was no possibility to expand the analysis. That is, the system imposed the critic's interpretation on the plays without ascertaining what Maugham himself had to say. Such a system overlooks the importance or the possibility of the dramatist deliberately mixing types and styles for a specific purpose. In short, there was no demonstrable need for this exercise in classification, for as Frye points out, unlike the Greeks, we have found the need to "develop a classification of prose forms", yet we have never succeeded in developing a satisfactory classification.22 Having stated our intention to provide a working definition of comedy at the outset of this discussion, we have thus far only succeeded in eliminating possible definitions. Nonetheless, we have delimited the task which we originally set out for ourselves by specifying our interest in the dramatist's attitude as expressed in his comedy. Having eliminated these traditional definitions of comedy, the possibility occurred that we could discuss dramatic comedy without defining "comedy". It was stated earlier that "it is not necessary for the dramatist to define comedy because comedy can have meaning without definition".23 The distinction to be made here is that "meaning" connotes intent and "definition" connotes explanation and formalization of meaning.24 If the dramatist can provide meaning to comedy without defining comedy, it follows that the critic should be able to ascertain the intent of comedy without explaining or formalizing comedy. Based on this distinction it is possible to define dramatic comedy as an attitude which is expressed by the dramatist toward his subject. At least two critics have suggested this non-restrictive definition of comedy. The word "attitude" is suggested by Burke's concept of "strategy".25 As he says, "strategies size up the situations, name their 22

Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1957), p. 13. 23 Supra, p. 30. 24 Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 5th ed. 25 Kenneth Burke, The Philosophy of Literary Form (New York, Vintage Books, 1957), pp. 3-4 et passim.

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

33

structure and outstanding ingredients, and name them in a way that contains an attitude towards them".26 Cazamian, on the other hand, contends that if literary analysis is to "explain its object, the right sort of elements are to be dissociated, and the synthetic force that not only brought them together, but fused them into a whole, is to be recaptured".27 Burke's concept of strategy is similar to Cazamian's synthetic force. When Burke says, "we think of poetry . . . as the adapting of various strategies for the encompassing of situations",28 he directs our attention to the role of creation in the development of the artistic work. The dramatist proceeds from the real or imagined event and gives new meaning to it by restructuring the event to have pertinence to his intent. By this process he synthesizes his ideas. From this organization develops the form of dramatic comedy. Let us examine this concept of comic strategy more closely. "It is humor which discerns the infinite diversity of human beings", Maugham says in his Notebook,29 The concern of comedy is "with human imperfection", according to Kronenberger.30 Holland maintains that comedy "is the creation of perspectives. We are asked to look at an event from at least two points of view, acceptance and rejection, and to recognize not that one is right but that both are." 31 Cazamian says, The instinct of relativity which is the soul of humor is reflected in its method; it will say one thing and mean another thing; or rather, it will bring out more forcibly what it does not actually say, adding point to suggestion by its very indirectness. 32

Stark Young has suggested a "measure" for humor in the drama 26

Ibid., p. 3. Louis Cazamian, Criticism in the Making (New York, The Macmillan Company, Inc., 1929), p. 17. 28 Burke, op. cit., p. 3. 2 * W. Somerset Maugham, A Writer's Notebook (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949), p. 162. 30 Kronenberger, op. cit., p. 4. 31 Norman N. Holland, The First Modern Comedies (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1959), p. 6. 32 Louis Cazamian, The Development of English Humor (Durham, Duke University Press, 1952), p. 66. 27

34

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

Humor in social comedies is measured in its importance by the extent to which it becomes revealing. The lowest form of comedy is the joke, the pun, the witticism stuck in for its own sake and put into the mouths of any character regardless. . . . Next comes the piece of humor that is comic in itself but much more so because of its comment on the character that says it. . . . The highest form of humor is that which finds expression in all the terms of the comedy, in the character, the action, and the place in the play's design at which it occurs. 38

Implicit in each of these statements is the belief that comedy has a dramatic function and that function depends upon the playwright's use of humor. Comedy as used by the dramatist is not mechanical in the sense that Bergson described it as an explanation of why we laugh,34 but rather it is mechanical as a synthesizing force which the dramatist imposes on his dramatic creation. This leads us to an important consideration of criticism which Frye describes as the "recovery of function, not of course the restoration of an original function . . . but the recreation of function in a new context".85 "Function" in this context refers to the effect that the historical work of art has when it is viewed in another time.86 The implication for us in this instance is that the critic must test the dramatist's strategy as it affects himself (the critic). The problem, therefore, in determining Maugham's use of humor is to perceive the conscious intent of the humor as used in his plays. To this end, the relation of comic structure and comic idea to dramatic structure and idea reveals the strategy of Maugham's comedy. In effect this relationship suggests a complex view of comic technique. Maugham, in his Notebook comments, They [the general public] talk about art as though they knew all about it and what they don't know weren't worth knowing. But art isn't as simple as all that. How can it be when so many diverse things enter into its origins: sex, imitation, play, habit, boredom and the wish for change, emotional desire for enhancement of pleasure or diminution of pain.87 33 34 35 38 37

Stark Young, The Theatre (New York, Hill & Wang, 1958), p. 42. Henri Bergson, "Laughter", in Comedy, ed. Sypher, op. cit. Frye, op. cit.,p. 345. Frye, op. cit., p. 345-346. Maugham, Notebook, op. cit., p. 327.

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

35

It is true that all of these things enter into the creation of a work of art, but a work of art is more complex than the diversity of its subject matter. Creative design is accomplished not only by content but also by structure. Dramatic unity is achieved by what the play says and by the way it says it. The most elementary thing to observe is that literature is of its nature involved with ideas because it deals with man in society, which is to say that it deals with formulations, valuations, decisions, some of them implicit, others explicit. 88

Dramatic structure has a primary function in determining what the play says. But dramatic structure has an even greater significance. In a discussion of fiction, Maugham describes the "chief" use of plot when he says a good story should have like Aristotle's tragedy a beginning, a middle and an end. The chief use of plot is one that many people do not seem to have noticed. It is a line to direct the reader's interest. That is possibly the most important thing in fiction, for it is by direction of interest that the author carries the reader along from page to page and it is by direction of interest that he induces in him the mood he desires. The author always loads his dice, but he must never let the reader see that he has done so, and by the manipulation of his plot he can engage the reader's attention so that he does not perceive what violence has been done him. 3 9

The purpose and need for clarity and directness of plot applies also to Maugham's dramatic theory. One wonders if "clarity" has the same significance for Maugham that "obvious" has, since Maugham's dramatic structure is obvious. Perhaps "telegraphic" (used in the colloquial sense of preparing the auditor for what is to come) would be a more correct term than "obvious", or perhaps both terms should be used to describe his dramatic structure. His structure is obvious because it is direct and unencumbered with subtleties. It is "telegraphic" because the audience almost always knows what to expect. The ω

Lionel Trilling, The Liberal Imagination (New York, Doubleday Anchor, 1954), p. 268. 39 W. Somerset Maugham, The Summing Up (Garden City, International Collector's Library, 1938), p. 222.

36

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

"obvious telegraphic" structure arouses in the audience an attitude of anxious anticipation. The audience almost always knows more than any one of the characters on stage knows. The necessity for such dramatic structure, Maugham indicates, comes from the requirements which the audience imposes on the dramatist.40 Moreover, Maugham says, the dramatist's "dialogue must be a sort of spoken shorthand. He must cut and cut until he has arrived at the maximum of concentration." 41 Elsewhere Maugham remarks that such "economy" is another word for "form". 42 From Maugham's emphasis on technique both in theory and in practice it will be seen that he is a playwright in the strictest sense of the denotative meaning of the word "wright". In a discussion of Henry James, Maugham defines the word "dramatize". Y o u will remember that Henry James insisted again and again that the novelist must dramatize. That is a telling, though not perhaps very lucid way of saying that he must arrange his facts in such a way as to capture and hold your attention. That means that if need be he will sacrifice verisimilitude and credibility to the effect that he wants to get. 43

One may well ask, "If Maugham's dramatic structure is so obvious, why make such a fuss about it?" This is a legitimate question and caused the writer a great deal of concern. First, because the structure was so obvious, how could one analyze Maugham's drama in the conventional sense of the thesis analysis? Secondly, if it was so obvious, why not eliminate all comments? Such questions led to new considerations. Although the structure was obvious, that does not mean that the structure is always the same. Where in Maugham's plays does the structure vary, and why does it vary? Maugham's comedy, although superficially direct in its method, is not direct in its suggestion of idea. Maugham's indirectness comes to have special importance in the more mature comedies. 40

Maugham, The Summing Up, op. cit., p. 126. Ibid. 42 Maugham, Notebook, op. cit., p. 327. 43 W. Somerset Maugham, The Writer's Point of View (London, Cambridge University Press, 1951), p. 13. 41

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

37

Only by carefully examining these plays and thoroughly studying Maugham's method and his ideas can the critic come to a full understanding of Maugham's comic strategy. As an aid to later discussion it will be useful to introduce at this time a general consideration of the central ideas that come to dominate Maugham's comic strategy. These ideas include (1) man's relation to society, and (2) man's concept of good and evil. Maugham's concern with these ideas is apparent for they are also a major consideration in the serious plays that he chose to include in The Collected Plays. The idea of man's relation to society which Maugham develops is the dual responsibility of man to society and society to man. Maugham is clearly disturbed about the absence of this dual responsibility, for in the world he depicts the individual and society do not complement each other. In The Unknown (1920) Maugham develops a conflict between those who have a blind faith in conventional religion and those who have put aside their former religious belief because God would permit the horrors of war they have experienced. Those characters who have lost their faith in God respect the right of the others to retain their faith, but there is no such flexibility in those who hold to the traditional belief. Traditional society is inflexible. This conclusion is repeated in The Sacred Flame (1928) which considers the problem of euthanasia. The mother in this play, who has poisoned her hopelessly invalided son when all hope for his happiness is gone says, "But I wonder why people don't see that morality isn't the same for everyone at the same time in the same country." 44 The doctor in Sheppey (1933) concludes that The normal man is selfish, grasping, destructive, vain and sensual. What is generally termed morality is forced upon him by the herd, and the obligation he is under to repress his natural instincts is undoubtedly the cause of many of the disorders of the mind.45 By this statement the doctor explains the decision of society to term Sheppey, the title character of the play, insane. Sheppey is a " «

The Sacred Flame, III, p. 298. Sheppey, ΠΙ, p. 285.

38

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

barber who wins a small fortune in the Irish sweepstakes. His social conscience becomes overactive and he decides to sacrifice his material wants by giving the money to the poor rather than using it for his own family's needs. A prostitute and a thief are his first benefactors; the Christian symbolism is obvious - Mary Magdalene and the crucifixion. Sheppey's "Christ-paranoia" is diagnosed as dangerous and he is consigned to a mental hospital, but before being committed, he is visited by Death in a form resembling the prostitute. Before Death takes Sheppey, the thief (who cannot see or hear Death) enters to warn Sheppey of the decision to commit him and to offer to hide Sheppey. Thus, in another way Maugham illustrates the confusion of responsibility between man and society. In each of these plays the individual is forced to exclude himself from his society. Each isolates himself because he refuses to conform to a belief or an action which is generally prescribed by the other characters in the play. As Maugham has created these characters, each is strong enough in his own way to stand alone in his imposed isolation. They neither feel the need to convince the other characters of their point of view, nor is it necessary to relinquish their point of view in order to find companionship. To use Frye's theory, these characters are exclusive.46 But in comedy, according to Frye, there is a tendency for the characters to be inclusive rather than exclusive.47 That is to say, the characters do not stand alone, but rather they seek identity with another group. When a comedy concludes, the characters who have pursued some extreme behavior are usually re-incorporated in the group which represents the norm. Thus, one action of comedy is "to belong". Maugham illustrates this action in his comedy by creating characters who demonstrate the need to belong to the leisured society. His characters create class distinction so that they may belong. They attempt to establish an ideal society. Comedy, Frye maintains, is the "vision" to "establish a desirable society".48 But in the mature plays Maugham's characters do not succeed in establishing 4e 47 48

Frye, op. cit., p. 39. Frye, op. cit., p. 166. Ibid., p. 286.

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

39

an ideal society. It is significant that whereas the early comedies conclude with a stable society, the later comedies disclose a society which is lacking in stability. This attitude Frye would term "irony" for irony is the "vision of . . . the character individualized against environment". 49 Elsewhere Frye explains that the movement of comedy is "fundamentally . . . a movement from illusion to reality". 50 He clarifies this statement by defining illusion as "whatever is fixed and definable", and reality "as its negation". 51 In other words, the individual who lives in a world of illusion is unable to admit the need for change, and he is unable to accept change when it comes, as it inevitably must. Frye's analysis of the structure of comedy is invaluable in helping to explain the idea that Maugham develops concerning man's relation to society. In later chapters we will see how the struggle of Maugham's characters to create class distinction reveals his attitude toward the unsteady foundation of the leisured society. A second idea pervading Maugham's comedy that requires an introduction in this chapter is man's concept of good and evil. To aid in this discussion we can turn to Burke's discussion of Christian symbolism, of "the sacrifice and the kill" as being representative of the dialectic of the definition of good and evil.52 It is necessary to explain first that it is not the writer's intention to expand Burke's theory of "the sacrifice and the kill". However, his discussion is useful to explain an ambiguity commonly found in literature - the ambivalence of good and evil. As a consequence of this ambivalence many writers (Maugham is no exception) do not hasten to commit themselves to precise definition of what is good or what is evil. One of the principle dates of the Christian calendar is Easter, which celebrates the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. In his discussion of this celebration Burke calls attention to the fact that as Christ was crucified, at the same time on either side of him a known criminal was crucified. This, Burke explains, is an expres« Ibid., p. 260. 50 Ibid., p. 169. « Ibid., pp. 169-170. 52 Burke, op. cit., pp. 40-43 et passim.

40

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

sion of the basic confusion between good and evil which exists in Christian symbolism.53 Burke reasons that if the ultimate symbol of good is sacrificed at the same time as evil, man cannot have an accurate conception of either good or evil. The result is what Burke terms an ambivalence of guilt. Confused by the ambivalence of guilt, the distinction between good and evil, man expiates the guilt caused by his confusion by "the most normal mode of expiation", and that is "socialization ('the socialization of losses')"·54 By this, the writer believes Burke to mean that society, which is responsible for the confusion caused by its own inability to define good and evil, atones for the confusion by continually formulating new definitions of good and evil. This process of seeking new definitions could be called a "social cycle". Society is in a constant state of change involving the examination of old social laws and maxims and the projection of new ones, always attempting to eliminate the dichotomy between good and evil. The stress on ambivalence is, according to Bentley, a Freudian approach to analysis.55 However, Frazer in The Golden Bough calls attention to the ambivalent practices of primitive tribes who sacrifice destructive animals and then nurture the young of the same species.56 There is apparent in Maugham's comic characters a confusion between good and evil. This is also true of the serious characters already mentioned. The traditional Christian and the nonChristian in The Unknown will not unite in marriage, but the play ends with two domestics discussing what to order for dinner; life, which the non-Christian defines as "the most precious thing man has", will go on.37 The mother in The Sacred Flame is not prosecuted because the other characters are willing to overlook their legal responsibilities, although at least one character was not willing to do so when another character was suspected of the 53

Burke, op. cit., p. 40. Ibid., pp. 42-43. Eric Bentley, The Playwright as Thinker (New York, Meridian Books, 1946), p. 163. 58 Sir James George Frazer, The New Golden Bough, ed. Theodore H. Gaster, (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1959), p. 274. 57 The Unknown, I, p. 28. 54

55

INTRODUCTION TO MAUGHAM'S COMIC ATTITUDE

41

"murder". Sheppey dies before he is committed to a mental institution. In each case Maugham sets up two opposing forces but he does not side with either one. Moreover, his conclusions are ambivalent for they make no determination of what is right and what is wrong. Instead, if anything, he suggests that the truth lies somewhere between the extremes, but he does not commit himself to a definition of that middle ground. Similarly, in the comedies Maugham suggests that the truth lies somewhere in the middle ground. He emphasized the need for new definitions of good and evil, but he himself provides no new definitions. The conflict between good and evil, unlike the conflict in the serious plays which concerns existing legal terms such as insanity or murder, is concerned with social maxims and mores. The social order creates maxims and mores to govern social behaviour, but they are only guides to behaviour and lack the precise definition and clarity of the law. Thus, they are more difficult to define in comedy and the ambivalence of guilt is more complicated. It is by the device of emphasizing the ambivalence of guilt that Maugham illustrates the confusion of the society which he represents. Thus, he demonstrates the failure of society to seek new definitions of good and evil to keep apace of the rapid changes that are instituted in the social structure at the time of his writing. The specific application of this attitude will be demonstrated in later chapters. In the chapter which follows we will explore Maugham's structure and idea as determinants of his comedy, and in the remaining chapters we will consider the strategies which give meaning to his comedy.

III STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS OF MAUGHAM'S DRAMATIC COMEDY

There is a certain stage of society in which people become conscious of their peculiarities and absurdities, affect to disguise what they are, and set up pretentions to what they are not. This gives rise to a corresponding style of comedy, the object of which is to detect the disguises of self-love, and to make reprisals on these preposterous assumptions of vanity, by marking the contrast between the real and the affected character as severely as possible, and denying to those, who would impose on us for what they are not, even the merit which they have. This is the comedy of artificial life, of wit and satire, such as we see in Congreve, Wycherley, Vanbrugh, etc. 1 William Hazlitt, "Characters of Shakespeare's Plays"

"The work of art", according to Brooks Atkinson, "is an expression of life by someone who has a point of view." 2 The problem of the critic is to ascertain the artist's point of view. We have set out to examine and to establish what can be regarded as Maugham's comic point of view, and as a first step in seeking this goal, our attention will be focused on Maugham's use of comedy. The relation of comic structure and idea reveals the strategy with which Maugham has created his dramatic comedy. Commenting on his early playwriting experience, Maugham mentions his disappointment with the production the Stage Society gave to A Man of Honour because production by this experimental theatre group labeled him as an "advanced" dramatist and 1

William Hazlitt, The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed. P. P. Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1931), Vol. IV, p. 313. 2 Brooks Atkinson, "Anatomy of Newspaper Criticism", Theatre Arts, VXLIV (April, 1960), p. 8.

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

43

therefore, one whose plays the regular theatre managers would not produce.3 In the writing of A Man of Honour Maugham says he discovered a flair for comic dialogue and he decided to write a comedy.4 The result was Lady Frederick. In the plays of his comic apprenticeship comedy is used in an obvious manner in both structure and idea. Some critics have emphasized the derivative nature of these plays, particularly their derivation from Oscar Wilde.5 This critic would suggest that it would be more significant to regard these plays as experimental. Maugham's experimentation was not with new forms or with old forms of the drama. He was merely experimenting with comic form. Most of these plays were written to attract the attention of theatre managers. But when they were finally produced, Maugham says he used them to see how his dialogue sounded when spoken on the stage,® and to train his mind to sense the audience reaction to his spoken word.7 This was the motivation with which Maugham approached the comic in the drama. It was through this experimentation that he was to develop his comic point of view. Maugham has been chary of making specific statements regarding his dramatic intent. In The Summing Up he divided his plays into four groups according to a stated intent: those written for popular appeal; those written for specific actors; comedies written in the Restoration tradition; and those written for his own satisfaction.8 Those in the first group would include Lady Frederick, Jack Straw, Penelope, Smith and The Land of Promise. The last three plays named also comprise the second group: Penelope for Marie Tempest; Smith for Marie Lohr and Robert Loraine, and The Land of Promise for Irene Vanbrugh. 9 The third group would include Our Betters, The Unattainable, Home and 3

W. Somerset Maugham, The Collected Plays (London, William Heinemann, Ltd., 1955), Vol. I, pp. viii-ix. * Ibid., p. viii. 5 Newell W. Sawyer, The Comedy of Manners (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1931), pp. 225-226. β W. Somerset Maugham, The Summing Up (Garden City, International Collector's Library, 1938), p. 107. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid., pp. 114-121; 155-156. • Maugham, Plays, op. cit., Vol. I, p. xiii.

44

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

Beauty, The Circle and The Constant Wife.10 The Breadwinner belongs in the final group as the second of four plays written in what Maugham regarded as their descending order of popularity.11 The critic can accept such a statement of intent, but the absence of more specific comment acts as a challenge to discover Maugham's intent within the plays themselves. Nevertheless, examination of the plays according to Maugham's suggested order reveals a progression in dramatic structure. Those plays written for "popular appeal" are obviously contrived and reveal little of the complexity of human motivation. Those plays written for specific actors are less obviously contrived and are more revealing of that complexity. Finally, those plays in the last two groups are increasingly complex because Maugham develops major characters who determine their own action and this reveals a broader human perspective in a less contrived manner. This changing relationship of contrivance to characterization leads to the evolution of Maugham's comic structure toward interdependence with dramatic structure. The evolution of Maugham's comic structure is to be seen in his use of comedy which can be divided into three stages. The first stage is that in which Maugham uses "specific comic instances". The second stage is that in which he uses "wild, delightful, unrestricted comedy". The final stage is his use of "integrated comedy". The plays which make use of specific comic instances include Lady Frederick, Penelope, Smith and The Land of Promise. The characteristics of the drama of specific comic instances are as follows: units of comedy are employed at random as elements of the dramatic structure; objects of humor are found outside the context of the play; the comic idea is not the unifying device; and comedy is an obvious means to an end. These characteristics can best be explained by specific reference to the plays. Humor as a part of the dramatic structure is very obvious in this first group of Maugham's plays. Consider, for example, the 10 11

Maugham, The Summing Ibid., p. 156.

Up, op. cit., pp. 120-121.

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

45

following illustration from the early part of the first act of Lady Frederick:12 LADY MERESTON: Don't be ridiculous, Paradine. Everyone knows she [Lady Frederick] hasn't a penny, and she's crippled with debts. [Introduces the major complication] FOULDES: One has to keep up appearances in this world [sic] Life nowadays for a woman of fashion is a dilemma of which one horn is the Bankruptcy Court and the other - the President of the Divorce Court. wish I knew how she manages to dress so beautifully. It's one of the injustices of fate that clothes only hang on a woman really well when she's lost every shred of reputation. [Foreshadow]

LADY MERESTON: I

FOULDES: My dear, you must console yourself with the thought that she'll probably frizzle for it hereafter. hope I'm not wicked, Paradine, but to wear draperies and wings in the next world offers me no compensation for looking dowdy in a Paquin gown in this.

LADY MERESTON: I

surmised she was on the verge of bankruptcy when I heard she'd bought a new brougham. And you seriously think Charlie [Mereston] wants to marry her? [Major dramatic question]

FOULDES: I

The quick repartee of this dialogue is achieved by epigrams which could be just as witty when spoken outside the context of the play. These speeches could have been given to almost any character in the play. Yet they belong at this point in the dramatic structure for they contain elements of the exposition which very quickly introduce us to the major conflict and the major dramatic question. But the structure is misleading and strained. Lady Mereston's clever "cattiness" as developed here is inconsistent with her later development as a character, for she becomes vituperative without being clever. Furthermore, notice the shift in tone of the last speech of Fouldes quoted here. Fouldes is given the witty comment on the brougham, which is followed by a factual statement introducing the major dramatic question. By this shift Maugham 11

Lady Frederick, I, p. 9.

46

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

separates the dramatic progression from the comic progression of the play. The dialogue is not consistently witty. Not only are comic and dramatic progression separated, but the progression is simple. He develops only one joke at a time instead of developing several concurrently. Compare the progression of this scene in Lady Frederick with a scene from The Constant Wife:18 It's true that Marie-Louise is very pretty. Marie-Louise is a darling. But she and John have known each other far too long. John likes her of course, but he says she has no brain.

BARBARA:

CONSTANCE:

MARTHA:

Men don't always say what they think.

Fortunately, or we shouldn't always know what they feel. MARTHA: Don't you think John has any secrets from you? CONSTANCE: I'm sure of it. But of course a good wife always pretends not to know the little things her husband wishes to keep hidden from her. That is an elementary rule in matrimonial etiquette. MARTHA: Don't forget that men were deceivers ever. CONSTANCE:

My dear, you talk like a confirmed spinster. What woman was ever deceived that didn't want to be? Do you really think that men are mysterious? They're children. Why, my dear, John at forty isn't nearly so grown up as Helen at fourteen.

CONSTANCE:

is your girl, Constance? CONSTANCE: Oh, she's very well. She loves boarding school, you know. They're like little boys, men. Sometimes of course they're rather naughty and you have to pretend to be angry with them. They attach so much importance to such entirely unimportant things that it's really touching. And they're so helpless. BARBARA: HOW

As can be observed, in the later play Maugham has managed to incorporate dramatic structure with comic structure, while at the same time his progression is developed by a number of ideas proceeding simultaneously. Another example of the experimental nature of Maugham's early plays can be found in Lady Frederick, where Maugham 13

The Constant

Wife, I, p . 108.

47

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

interrupts the progression of the play to develop a comic idea on the House of Lords. 14 FOULDES:

. . . Are you having a good time in Monte Carlo, Charles?

MERESTON: FOULDES:

Ai, thanks.

And what do you do with yourself?

Oh, hang about generally, you know - and there's always the tables.

MERESTON:

That's right, my boy; I'm glad to see that you prepare yourself properly for your duties as a hereditary legislator.

FOULDES:

MERESTON:

[Laughing] Oh, shut it, Uncle Paradine.

rejoice to find that you have already a certain command of the vernacular.

FOULDES: I

Well, if you can browbeat a London cabby and hold your own in repartee with a barmaid, it oughtn't to be difficult to get on all right in the House of Lords.

MERESTON:

But let me give you a solemn warning. You have a magnificent chance, dear boy, with all the advantages of wealth and station. I beseech you not to throw it away by any exhibition of talent. The field is clear and the British people are waiting for a leader. But remember that the British people like their leaders dull. Capacity they mistrust, versatility they cannot bear, and wit they utterly abhor. Look at the fate of poor Lord Parnaby. His urbanity gained him the premiership, but his brilliancy overthrew him. How could the fortunes of the nation be safe with a man whose mind was so quick, so agile, that it reminded you of a fencer's play? Every one is agreed that Lord Parnaby is flippant and unsubstantial; we doubt his principles and we have grave fears about his morality. Take warning, my dear boy, take warning. Let the sprightly epigram never lighten the long periods of your speech nor the Attic salt flavour the roast beef of your conversation. Be careful that your metaphors show no imagination and conceal your brains as you would a discreditable secret. Above all, if you have a sense of humor, crush it. Crush it.

FOULDES:

My dear uncle, you move me very much. stupid as an owl.

MERESTON: FOULDES:

There's a good, brave boy.

MERESTON: I 14

will be heavy and tedious.

Lady Frederick, I, pp. 13-14.

I

will be as

48

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

see already the riband of the Garter adorning your shirtfront. Remember, there's no damned merit about that.

FOULDES: I

None shall listen to my speeches without falling into a profound sleep.

MERESTON: FOULDES:

grasp.

[Seizing his hand.] The premiership itself is within your

When taken out of context there is much humor in this passage. Fouldes' ironic view of the House of Lords is amusing. Some of the humor is derived from the quick manner in which Mereston learns his lesson, but this character trait is not utilized in later scenes. Mereston's mental agility in responding to his Uncle's wit is missing from his later characterization. In context this scene contributes nothing to the progression of the play. It is delivered with all of the main characters on stage; immediately afterward, without further comment on the House of Lords, there is a mass exit of all but two characters; and no one refers to this exchange later in the play. The humor is not integrated because we can understand it without knowing the characters. One possible reason for including this dialogue in the play is its topicality, but this is highly conjectural. The original version of Lady Frederick was completed before 1905, although it did not reach the stage until 1907. The date of 1905 is important for it was the year the newly formed Liberal ministry came to power in the House of Commons, and that new ministry seriously questioned and threatened (to the point of extinction) the composition and the authority of the House of Lords. 15 Conjecture of this political topicality as the justification for this passage is highly speculative and impossible to prove. The fact remains that the dialogue does not fit into the continuity of the play, nor is the very long speech of Fouldes' typical of Maugham's rapid-fire dialogue. The opening scene of Penelope (which is just over ten pages of dialogue - slightly over one-fourth of the act) is another example of Maugham's rather awkward dramatic structure. Unlike the passage on the House of Lords in Lady Frederick, the opening of 15

Sir Sidney Lee, King Edward VII (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1927), pp. 441-455.

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

49

Penelope is belabored, rather than irrelevant. The curtain rises on the drawing room of Penelope's house. Four characters are escorted into this room by the maid, Peyton. As each character enters, he or she is provided with liquid refreshment and a newspaper. The nature of the refreshment and the newspaper provide the key to the type of character. Thus, Barlow, Penelope's uncle, is given the Morning Post (the society newspaper) and whiskey and soda; Penelope's mother, Mrs. Golightly, is given the Church Times and tea, her father is given a copy of the Athenaeum (an intellectual newspaper) and barley water (the quinine of the day); Beadsworth, the family solicitor, is provided with the Law-Times and port. In addition, as a means of identifying the type of character they represent, each brings with him an urgent but brief telegram from Penelope. Each telegram begins with "Come at once!" and concludes with the following message respectively: "Archduchess Anastasia"; "Grave scandal! Central Africa Mission"; "Decimal 7035"; and "six and eightpence". On the basis of these three pieces of information concerning each of the characters, Maugham weaves ten pages of dialogue which are climaxed by Penelope's entrance to explain the reason for her selection of the identifying traits of each character. There is opportunity for humor in the way Maugham introduces his characters, for the audience is given clues with which they can fill out the character type. But the clues, at least to the modern reader, are so explicit that Penelope's explanation of the Archduchess Anastasia is extremely awkward, for she contends that she invented the name when in fact, the four visitors are aware of the existence of the person. Penelope's explanation may have been intended to arouse laughter, but to the present reader there is no believability in the repetition of the obvious. Is there an object in Maugham's repetition of the obvious? To answer this question another question can be asked. What does this passage accomplish? One of the four characters introduced, Beadsworth, never appears again. It is quite clear that he is introduced only for the commentary that Maugham makes about solicitors. The only exposition provided in this lengthy passage is to establish the types of these four characters. However, all but

50

STRUCTURE A N D IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

Beadsworth are further developed with specific qualities that extend their characterizations beyond that of mere type. Information relevant to the plot or to the major characters is delayed until after this scene. In the little it achieves, the scene is merely an awkward piece of dramatic writing, although based on a clever comic idea which never realizes its potential. The opening scene of Penelope is similar to that of The Breadwinner, but in the later play Maugham realizes the full potential of the scene. The first third of the first act of The Breadwinner is dialogue between the four teenagers. In this scene Maugham achieves humor from the "radical" ideas expressed by the teenagers and he also develops the characters of the adults who will enter later. The characterization of the adults from the teen-age point of view adds to the progression of the comic idea when this view is contrasted with the adults' view of themselves. Another comic perspective is provided the audience in that they can further compare what the adults do with what they say they do. The humor derived from the three-sided perspective involves the mutual progression of dramatic and comic structure and idea. The example from Penelope is an extreme instance of what seems to be irrelevant humor and awkward dramatic structure. But there is another consideration. Return again to Lady Frederick and note the following dialogue: 18 You know, you're devilishly extravagant. I'm not. I'm content with the barest necessities of existence.

FOULDES:

LADY FREDERICK:

You've got a maid. Of course I've got a maid. dress myself.

FOULDES:

LADY FREDERICK:

I

was never taught to

And you've got a footman. I've always had a footman. And my mother had a footman. I couldn't live a day without him.

FOULDES:

LADY FREDERICK:

FOULDES:

What does he do for you? He inspires confidence in tradesmen.

LADY FREDERICK: 18

Lady Frederick,

Π, p . 41.

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

51

The humor in this section of dialogue is obvious. Dialogue such as this which seemingly goes no place, which adds no new details to the plot or to the character, but which nevertheless makes sense in the context of the play reminds one of the validity of Kronenberger's remark when he says, The ability to let characters rattle on, entertaining not so much by the quality as by the abundance of their remarks, less by single hits than by a continual barrage, is one of immense usefulness on the stage. . . . Good chatter . . . can afford to move fast, and has also a sort of ability to sketch in character as it dashes along. 17

There is a quality in such random dialogue of clever repartee that likens this dramatic structure to the operettas of the same period. The songs which the principal characters or the chorus come down to the footlights to sing have a random quality which adds to the texture of the production. However, the lyrics and music do not, as they do in more recent musical drama, stem from the dramatic action of the play, nor do they interpret musically the plot or the characterization. The purpose is to establish a tone, or as Kronenberger suggests, a "sketch" as it "dashes along". It is for this reason that, with the exception of The Land of Promise, the comic structure of these plays is deceptive. The Land, of Promise can be excepted because there is very little in the play that can be regarded as comedy. The comic structure of the remaining plays is deceptive because of its inconsistency. Often the humor is not related to the progression of the play. In some of these instances the audience can see the possibility for humor only by making an analogy of the idea expressed by the dialogue with some idea, event or knowledge in their experience, apart from the dramatic context of the play. In these plays Maugham is also inconsistent in his use of comic structure as related to dramatic structure. The dual development of comedy and drama is artificial. Thus, the comedy is forced. To the modern reader the forced comedy is superimposed on the dramatic idea, which results in the feeling of being forced to laugh at the contrivances of the drama17

Louis Kronenberger, The Thread of Laughter (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1952), p. 219.

52

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

tist. Certainly there is a facility in such structure, but one can only remark on the facility. In these earlier plays Maugham demonstrated the facility to "wright" clever dialogue which sometimes was combined with his dramatic structure. Nevertheless, one must admire the technique. In one's initial contact with the plays one is aware that these instances of humor occur frequently in the first act and become less frequent as the play progresses. However, the play does not become successively less "funny". In other words, Maugham creates an illusion of humor with his intentional instances of humor in the early part of the play and this illusion sustains itself in the remainder of the play because Maugham creates the further illusion that the repartee in and of itself is humorous. In short, Maugham uses comedy as a means to an end. Remarking in general on certain comic structure of the "Modern" drama, Thorndike, in 1929, said, The skillful unfolding of a story, such as we find in the best plays of Dumas fils, or Augier and Sardou, is perhaps of more importance in drama or melodrama than in comedy. I wish, however, to note two particular effects on comedy. First, it tended to change the species, making comedy merely the telling of a story with a happy ending, and of that we shall find aplenty in England. Second, it created a special form of comedy, wholly dependent on deft manipulation of plot and situation. Nothing quite like this had been known before. The clever audacities of plays of Spanish intrigue, or of Fletcher and Mrs. Centlivre, seem timid beside the ingenuities of Scribe and Sardou.18

There is good reason to believe that Maugham owed a certain allegiance to these masters of the "well-made play" for that was the type of play in demand by the theatre managers at the time he was writing his early plays. Consequently it is reasonable to hypothesize that, at least to a certain extent, Maugham's facility was dictated by the demands of theatre managers. Speaking again of the well-made play, Thorndike says the fun of the clever plotting of Scribe and Sardou "doesn't come necessarily in the situations themselves, still less in the persons or in their conversa18 Ashley H. Thorndike, English Comedy Company, 1929), p. 514.

(New York, The Macmillan

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

53

tions; it arises from the mental pleasure in following the dramatist in his intricate dodgings".19 The attention devoted to the detail of plotting in the well-made play is described from quite another view by Shaw when he says, I do wish "that Mr. Pinero, Mr. Grundy and Monsieur Sardou could be persuaded to learn . . . how to write a play without wasting the first hour of the performance in tediously explaining its 'construction' ".20 These remarks considered in the aggregate are interesting, for if one stops to consider it the basic plot idea of Lady Frederick does not really contain elements of humor. Yet Maugham uses his clever dialogue to give the impression that the play is a comedy. Something similar happens in Smith. The conflict between Freeman and Rose is, as in Lady Frederick, basically devoid of humor but Maugham imposes humor on it by the facetiousness of the repartee. Moreover, in Smith, the conflict between Freeman and Smith does have the element of humor as a basic ingredient. The comic idea of Lady Frederick is the third act make-up scene in which Lady Frederick reveals to Mereston that her beauty actually comes from make-up pots and from false hair. Proceeding from this comic idea, Maugham developed the various situations which led to this comic idea and those which concluded it. The comic structure of Lady Frederick which leads to this comic idea is not irrevocably committed to the comic idea, but instead the comic structure "wanders" outside of a focused unity. Furthermore, the dramatic conflict between Lady Frederick and Mereston which resolves itself in the make-up scene is not one of the principle conflicts of the play. The principle conflicts are those between Lady Frederick and Lady Mereston, between Lady Frederick and Montgomery, and, for the convenience of the conclusion, the conflict between Lady Frederick and Fouldes. Here also there is not unity. The only thing that unifies the play is the woman "with the heart of gold". The woman with the heart of gold is not real. She successfully manages to get her own way with men and with women, but she only succeeds in getting her own way by chance 19

Ibid. George Bernard Shaw, Shaw's Dramatic Criticism, ed. John F. Mathews (New York, Hill and Wang, 1959), p. 70. 20

54

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

and by the Irish brogue which she speaks when she wants to be particularly charming. Even this Irish brogue is superficial as far as Maugham's playwrighting is concerned for he does not write Irish dialect for his leading character; he merely indicates in a stage direction that she use brogue and places the responsibility for the execution of the idea on the actress who is interpreting the role. The unreality of the situation contributes to the unreality of the characters. They are automatons performing on the end of a stick, tied to the playwright by his controlling strings. Thus the strategy of the playwright in Lady Frederick is merely mechanical. The comic idea of Penelope is the conflict of the woman faced with the problem of regaining the affection of her straying husband. In this case Maugham has begun to unite the comic idea with the dramatic idea. The structure, too, is better unified than in Lady Frederick. Nevertheless, the structure remains mechanical because the conflict is all one-sided. Maugham places the emphasis on the maneuverings of the wife and consequently the audience can only observe the husband squirming. Maugham does not give the husband an opportunity to fight back. Maugham does not show the inner struggle of Penelope. She is a creature of impulse as she gives her own interpretation to the advice of her father. But her improvisation on impulse provides the play with a comedy that is more integral than that of Lady Frederick. The dramatic idea of Smith depends on the dual conflict of Freeman with his sister and with the maid. These conflicts lead superficially to the dual comic idea of the criticism of the hollowness of society's behavior, and of the maid holding to her position in society. The comic idea is the superficial result of the dramatic idea because Maugham involves his characters in a verbal conflict, which is interrupted by outside forces introduced to give the play its progression. The death of Mrs. Otto's child is an outstanding illustration of one of these outside forces. Moreover, the two conflicts and comic ideas are not really brought together in such a way that they supplement and complement each other. Instead, they develop almost independently of each other until Maugham is finally forced to bring them together to effect the resolution of his play. Nevertheless, it can be pointed out that the

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

55

contrast between the maid recognizing her place in the social order and the sister not recognizing hers, anticipates an idea that is to dominate Maugham's later plays. As for the final play in this group, The Land of Promise, it is possible to let Maugham speak for himself. Maugham contends that the second act is an almost perfect example of playwriting skill, for event follows event with a logical progression.21 Although this may be true, it is difficult to divorce the second act from the entire play, and even in the second act, as in the other plays in this group, there is an awkwardness in the obviousness of the succession of events. The external force guiding the course of the play is too apparent. Unity in this play, as in the others, stems from the dramatist rather than from collaboration of the dramatist with his creation. One might say that Maugham is working too hard at his dramatic writing. The comic structure and idea, like the dramatic structure and idea, continue to be isolated instances, rather than an integral whole. This was not always true of Maugham's playwriting technique. The second group of Maugham's plays is that of wild, delightful unrestricted comedy. The characteristics of this group of plays (which includes Home and Beauty, The Unattainable, and The Breadwinner) are: the comic idea is the unifying device; units of comedy develop in rapid progressive order; objects of humor are directed at the situation within the play; and comedy is an end in itself. The comic idea of Home and Beauty is "what does a woman do when she has two legal husbands?" It is interesting to observe the justification and embellishments that Maugham gives to this comic idea. First, Maugham justifies the situation in which Victoria finds herself with the recent war. Her first husband was reported missing in action and when it was safe to presume that he was dead, she took her second husband. The justification of the initial comic idea is believable. There were such instances in both the First World War and in the Second. The story line is founded on a credible base. Where it goes from there, however, is incredible, 11

W. Somerset Maugham, The Collected Plays, 6 vols. (London, William Heinemann, Ltd., 1931), Vol. Π, p. vii.

56

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

but it happens so fast that the dramatist gives the observer no time to question its credibility. The speed which makes the incredible credible is created by the rapid sequence of situations which develop from the initial contention and by the consistently clever dialogue. This technique is effective because the audience has built up an anticipation of what is going to occur. The entire first act builds up to the arrival of the supposedly dead first husband. The arrival is delayed while Victoria's second husband, Frederick, attempts to explain to Victoria that William is alive and will arrive momentarily. With this, Maugham arouses the double expectation of the reaction to that arrival and of William's reaction to the second marriage. The expectation is magnified by introducing Victoria's mother and the nurse. It is also complicated by having the nurse carry in the young child of the second marriage, a child too young to have been fathered by the first husband. Maugham exploits this complexity just enough to be teasing, but not enough to be annoying, and then he drops the subject with the first act curtain. Now the audience is exposed to the second extension of the problem; how do the husbands react to one another? The situation is obviously awkward for them, but Maugham introduces a new factor which turns the expected upside-down; each husband is willing to withdraw in favor of the other because each knows what Victoria is like to live with and each chooses not to live with her if he can possibly escape. Maugham places little emphasis on Victoria's decision to obtain her two divorces. Instead, he concentrates on the conflict between the husbands in their efforts to get out of their marriage. This emphasis culminates in the farcical action of the husbands drawing slips of paper out of a hat in order to determine who "wins" Victoria. Frederick has placed "x's" on two pieces of paper so that he cannot fail to "lose" Victoria. When William realizes the trick that has been played on him, he chases Frederick around the room to get the slips of paper and prove the fraud. Frederick tries to eat the evidence, but William chokes him until he spits out the proof he seeks. The third act has a new focus and that is how one goes about obtaining a divorce. Here Maugham introduces many new elements of complication, elements which concentrate on the inadequacy of divorce laws and

STRUCTURE A N D IDEA AS D E T E R M I N A N T S

57

the connivance of divorce lawyers. Maugham introduces two new characters to demonstrate his point. These two characters are the divorce lawyer and the ugly, elderly woman with whom the husbands are to be compromised in order to substantiate the divorce proceedings. The invention of Maugham in embellishing his original idea becomes somewhat constrained in the final act. With the introduction of new characters the audience is given time to think about the incongruity, so that in drawing the action to its conclusion, the logic of the dramatist imposes itself and the artificiality becomes more apparent than it was in the first two acts. In Home and Beauty Maugham does not give his characters time to create their own situations. He, as a dramatist, creates them for them. But there is a difference between this kind of plot manipulation and that in the first group of plays. In the first place, the characters in Home and Beauty are themselves the object of the humor. Society outside of the play is also the object of the humor, but this relationship is tangential. It is tangential in the sense that the dramatist achieves his comment on society by indirect means. These characters talk about things that matter to them - things that directly affect the situation for them at the moment. And if some of their comments incidentically refer to situations outside of their own circle that is all well and good, but it is left incumbent upon the audience to make this extrapolation; the character does not have to do it in the mechanical sense of Lady Frederick for instance. Moreover, it is very difficult to quote lines from Home and Beauty out of context. The lines have the same effect of brittle and witty chatter, but all of the connotative meaning cannot be perceived unless they are placed in context. One illustration of this is to be found in William's entrance near the end of the first act. He is unaware that Victoria has married Frederick. WILLIAM:

Are you surprised to see me?

FREDERICK: A VICTORIA:

little.

In fact, a good deal.

I'm jolly glad to see you here, Freddie, old man. On the way up in the train I cursed myself five times for not having

WILLIAM:

58

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

asked you to wait with Victoria till I rolled up. I was afraid you might have some damned feeling of delicacy. FREDERICK: I ?

see, it struck me you might think Victoria and I would want to be alone just the first moment, but I should have been as sick as a dog if I hadn't seen your ugly old face here to welcome me. By the way, you've neither of you said you were glad to see me. VICTORIA: Of course we're glad, Bill darling. FREDERICK: Rather. WILLIAM: Tactful of me to get old Freddie to come round and break the news to you, I think, Victoria. VICTORIA: Yes, darling, and exactly like you. WILLIAM: It's just like old times to hear you call me darling every other minute. FREDERICK: It's one of Victoria's favourite words. WILLIAM: YOU know, I nearly didn't warn you. I thought it would be rather a lark to break in on you in the middle of the night [Frederick and Victoria give a little start] VICTORIA: I'm just as glad you didn't do that, Bill. WILLIAM: What a scene, my word. The sleeping beauty on her virtuous couch. Enter a man in a shocking old suit. Shrieks of the sleeping beauty. It is I, your husband. Tableau.22 WILLIAM: YOU

In Home and Beauty there is a continuity of comic idea and dramatic idea. Every action in the play is relevant to the problem of the two legal husbands (the comic idea), and to the desire of both husbands and the wife to get rid of a previously confining commitment (the dramatic idea). The Unattainable does not have this continuity. The dramatist in his own sagacious evaluation of the play points to the difficulty when he says, If I were a critic I should perhaps feel it my duty to make the observation that the play really is finished by the end of the first act. What follows might have very well been left to the imagination of the audience.23 22

Home and Beauty, I, pp. 250-251. W. Somerset Maugham, The Collected Plays, 3 vols., 3rd ed. (London, William Heinemann, Ltd., 1955), Vol. Π, p. viii. 23

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

59

This is a most interesting remark and points to Maugham's technique of letting the audience evolve its own personal conclusions.24 In spite of this criticism of the play, the play does fall into the classification of wild, delightful unrestricted comedy. Maugham's invention of conflicts based on the central idea manages to keep the focus on the central problem without straying into irrelevant bypaths. The comic idea, the freedom resulting from a marriage to an absent husband, is interwoven with the dramatic idea. The characters themselves are the object of their own humor and enjoy making jokes at each other's expense. The person observing these characters is left with the impression that their goals and desires are insignificant. There is no universality in the problems they face, but there is universality in the inter-relationships of characters who misunderstand each other in their efforts to reach a goal. The characteristics of The Breadwinner are the same with the exception that here the comic idea, the escape from convention, is a more universal problem. The success or failure of the plays in this second group depends primarily on the ability of the dramatist to clear a trail and then move on before the audience gets bored. Maugham manages to do just this although, as he has suggested, The Unattainable is the least successful of the three in accomplishing this mobility. This raises an interesting comparison between the plays in this group and those of the preceding group. Maugham suggests the basis for this comparison in the words of the title character of his novel Ashenden. Ashenden reflected that this was the mistake the amateur humorist, as opposed to the professional, so often made; when he made a joke he harped on it. The relations of the joker to his joke should be as quick and desultory as those of a bee to its flower. He should make his joke and pass on. There is of course no harm if, like the bee approaching the flower, he buzzes a little; for it is just as well to announce to a thick-headed world that a joke is intended.26

In the plays in this second group, Maugham prepares his audience Infra, Chapter VII. W. Somerset Maugham, Ashenden (New York, Doubleday, Doran and Company, 1928), p. 105. 24

a

60

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

for the coming joke. The audience knows what the course of action will be and they are not being misled. The same cannot be said for the earlier group of plays. With the humor leading in all directions and often leading in no direction at all because of its total irrelevancy or because it is so belabored, Maugham does not achieve the same degree of concentration, nor does he achieve the same unity of dramatic intent. In this first group of plays Maugham makes the mistake of the amateur humorist. The amateur quality is gone from the second group. The humor in these plays serves as an end in itself. There is delight in the rapid movement brought about by the clever invention of conflicts which embellish the comic idea. Because the characters do not create their own condition there is a limited application to the problem of society. Maugham does not go beyond that humor. This is what differentiates the plays in the second group from those in the final group, the plays of integrated comedy. The characteristics of integrated comedy follow the same pattern as the two groups already discussed. In integrated comedy, character is the unifying device; units of comedy cannot be easily isolated; objects of humor are directed at character reactions within the play; and dramatic idea and comic idea are integrated. The plays which fit into this category would include Jack Straw, Our Betters, The Circle and The Constant Wife. Jack Straw, being the earliest of Maugham's plays in this group, is the logical point at which to begin discussion for it is the least integrated of the plays. Nevertheless, this integrated comedy was written before Penelope. The comic idea of Jack Straw is the double identity of Straw. Straw is the most believable of all the characters. We in the audience see the reasoning behind his decisions and we see the ultimate effect these decisions have in determining Straw's course of action leading to new decisions. Not everyone's action is as well motivated as Straw's. Count Adrian Von Bremer, for example, tends to be mechanically contrived by the dramatist. But even with the Count, Maugham integrates the structure and idea of the drama and the comedy. The Count, when first introduced, wanders over to Lady Wanley's table and Holland says,

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS HOLLAND: I

61

suppose nothing has been heard of the Archduke Se-

bastion? VON BREMER: Nothing. We've given up the search. HOLLAND: You remember that affair, don't you? There was some quarrel in the domestic circle, and the Archduke Sebastion suddenly disappeared - four years ago, now, isn't it? - and hasn't been heard of since. He simply vanished into thin air. LADY WANLEY:

But how do you know he's alive?

VON BREMER: Every Christmas the Emperor receives a letter from him, sent from different parts of the world, saying he's well and happy. LADY WANLEY:

It's really very romantic.

I

wonder what on earth

he's doing. VON BREMER: Heaven only knows. Tell me, how is that nice young attaché of yours that I met at luncheon the other day. [sic]

LADY WANLEY:

VON BREMER: The nice young attaché has come to a bad end. I've had to send him back to Pomerania. LADY WANLEY:

Really?

VON BREMER: The story is rather entertaining. There's an American woman here who has a passion for titles, and it occurred to my attaché one day to introduce his valet to her as Count So-and-So. Of course she was full of attentions and immediately asked the valet to dinner. Presently the story came to my ears. I really couldn't have my attachés playing practical jokes of that sort, and so I sent him home. LADY WANLEY:

Poor boy, he was so nice.

VON BREMER: Good-bye. 2 6

In this short appearance the Count not only provides the audience with the clue to Straw's identity, but he also suggest the means by which Lady Wanley will seek her revenge. The Count thereafter appears only briefly in the second and third acts. On the first occasion he goes off with Straw, ostensibly to discuss the situation in Pomerania. The remaining characters, not knowing Straw's true identity, think that Straw is only executing his disguise with a 28

Jack Straw, I, p. 200.

62

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

daring aplomb and this leads to additional complications. In the final act it is the Count who reveals Straw's true identity. By his creation of the Count, Maugham has given a rather mechanical "patness" to the progression of his play, but in so doing he has also integrated the projection of the action. Another example of this integration is to be observed in Maugham's creation of Rosie Abbott, the vicar's young wife. In discussing Ethel, the Parker-Jennings' daughter, this dialogue takes place: 27 I see Maria Jennings has got a lord with her. HOLLAND: Serlo, isn't it? I thought I saw him. WITHERS: I suppose you know they're trying to hook him for Ethel? LADY WANLEY: Good Heavens! M R S . WITHERS:

long as he's a Marquess, and he's that all right, Maria Jennings don't mind the rest. LADY WANLEY: I hope Ethel will refuse to have anything to do with him. ROSIE: She's a dear, isn't she? I'm so fond of her, and she's simply devoted to Lewis. LADY WANLEY: My dear, do you never say anything against any one? M R S . WITHERS: A S

[sic] Seldom. Everybody's so nice. It must make conversation very difficult. But Ethel is a charming girl, and I shouldn't like her to fall into the hands of that disgraceful young rip.

ROSE:

LADY WANLEY:

Rosie appears only briefly in the first act. With simple exchanges of dialogue such as this Maugham succeeds in providing a precise characterization of Rosie. The characterization lacks depth, but it does create a distinctive character sufficient for her function, which is to provide the modus vivendi for Lady Wanley's revenge on the Parker-Jennings. There can be no comparison between the delineation of Rosie as a character and that of Beadsworth in Penelope. Rosie is much more clearly defined and, moreover, she is necessary for the progression of the play. "

lack Straw, I, p. 198.

STRUCTURE AND IDEA AS DETERMINANTS

63

This discussion of Rosie and the Count reveals the characteristics specified for integrated comedy. Because the plays that remain are so well integrated, it would serve no purpose to discuss them here. Instead, discussion of Our Betters, The Circle and The Constant Wife will be reserved for the second phase of this study, the vision that Maugham has of his society, and that subject will occupy our attention in the following chapters.

IV MAUGHAM'S IMAGE OF SOCIETY AS REFLECTED IN THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT

Before we can laugh at a thing, its absurdity must be at least open and palpable to common apprehension. Ridicule is necessarily built on certain supposed facts, whether true or false, and on their inconsistency with certain acknowledged maxims, whether right or wrong.1 William Hazlitt, "On Wit and Humour"

The institution of marriage is an accepted fact in the social order of Western civilization. Because of the universality of marriage, or in spite of it, there is probably no other element of the social order which is fraught with so many different interpretations of the facts of behavior, and with so many different interpretations of the maxims designed to govern that behavior. Perhaps this is why marriage and all that marriage implies, from courtship to children, has been a subject for comedy since before the time of Aristophanes. In view of the recurrence of marriage in dramatic comedy it is not surprising to find marriage in all the Maugham comedies which form the basis for this study. On this fact alone it would be possible to examine Maugham's attitude toward marriage. As the study progressed it became apparent that the frequency with which he used marriage revealed more than just Maugham's attitude toward marriage. Why? In the first place, Maugham's use of marriage varied from play to play. In the second place, the attitude of the characters toward marriage changed from play to play and this seemed to be indicative of something other than a changing attitude toward marriage per se. Maugham's concern with marriage, it became clear, was with the contractual aspect. 1

William Hazlitt, The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed. P. P. Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1931), Vol. VI, p. 20.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

65

The parties to a marriage contract are partners in a miniature society. The maxims of the miniature society of marriage evolved from the maxims of society. By expressing an attitude toward marriage, Maugham, in a larger sense, was expressing an attitude toward the social order, that is, toward society. By comparing and contrasting the relation of the individual to the marriage contract, Maugham has explored, within the limited scope of the marriage contract, the relation of the individual to society. The "inconsistency" between the alleged "facts" and "maxims" (the terms are Hazlitt's) of the marriage contract enables Maugham to represent symbolically the "inconsistency" of the social order. Man in conflict with the marriage contract is symbolic of man in conflict with his society. It will be the purpose of this chapter to examine more fully the relationship of the marriage contract to society, to examine specifically this relationship in Maugham's comedy, and to determine Maugham's use of the marriage contract within the dramatic structure. The marrriage contract is society's law imposed upon a fundamental relationship. In the case of the marriage contract the fundamental relationship is a natural, indeed necessary, relationship. Four parallels are to be observed between the miniature society of the marriage contract and the larger social order. They are: confinement, conformity, companionship and procreation. Both the marriage contract and the social order are confining in the sense that to belong one must surrender, to some extent, one's individual habits and one's freedom. Both require conformity in varying degrees to some formal Biblical, judicial or social code, or to some combination of these codes. Both provide companionship in the nature of reciprocal benefits and obligations. Finally, for both, procreation is necessary in order to regenerate the line of the family or the social order. By comparing the parallels between marriage and the social order with the reasons given for marriage in the English Renaissance, the reader will recognize the one with which it was most difficult to comply. To the Elizabethan there were four reasons for marriage: avoid fornication (conformity), mutual society (companionship), procreation, and the continuance of the life of the church (another

66

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

aspect of procreation).8 The similarity is at once apparent as is the omission of confinement. To both the Elizabethan man and woman marriage was an "interruption of freedom".3 This attitude toward the "interruption of freedom" is not peculiar to the Elizabethan for it is the confining nature of the marriage contract that has often caused initial resistance to it. Similarly, it is resistance to confinement that often causes one who has already agreed to that contract to break it. One does not usually choose marriage in order to achieve confinement, but one does accept confinement as a condition of marriage, or for that matter, as a condition of belonging to a social group. There can be no question that confinement is a necessary condition of belonging. Nevertheless, the individual desire to resist confinement has often inspired the incongruity of dramatic comedy. Alceste (The Misanthrope) resists the confinement of the "deceitful" pleasantries practiced by his social order. Millamant resists the confinement of marriage, "I may by degrees dwindle into a wife".4 Mrs. Pinchwife (The Country Wife) resists the confinement imposed by an over-jealous husband. Hjalmar Ekdal (The Wild Duck) resists the confinement imposed by the regularity of a photographic studio and the pressures of a loving wife and a doting child. The examples of comedy inspired by this resistance to confinement are numerous. At the same time, resistance to, or interpretation of, the other maxims have been significant inspirations to writers of dramatic comedy. The marriage contract as an element of confinement is viewed by Maugham from the obvious extremes, surrender and revolt. Consider first surrender. Maugham's characters surrender, or have surrendered, to marriage because of either a romantic notion, or for a practical consideration. It is romantic love which leads to the conclusion of Smith and Jack Straw. In the later plays exposition often reveals that the characters have surrendered to romantic love. But according to Maugham, marriage for romantic love 2

Carroll Camden, The Elizabethan Woman (Houston, The Elsevier Press, 1952), p. 80. Camden, op. cit., p. 82. 4 William Congreve, The Way of the World (New York, Hill and Wang, Inc., 1956), p. 346. 3

IMAGE O F SOCIETY

67

alone is hardly sufficient reason for surrendering one's freedom, because love is ephemeral. In the novel Ashenden, which grew out of Maugham's experience as a secret agent during World War I, the title character (an abstraction of Maugham himself) says, "with advancing years, mercifully, you can snap your fingers at the terror and servitude of love. . . . Time can assuage the pangs of love." 5 Conflict and action in the later plays often develop from the discovery that romantic love does not last. think that's the only real tragedy in life [love does not last forever]. Death? Well, one expects death. But when one's in love, one never expects love to die. It makes life look such a sell.«

BATTLE: I

It is this discovery that often motivates Maugham's characters to revolt from the strictures of the marriage contract. The other reason for surrendering to the marriage contract is practical. Practical as used here indicates that the underlying motivation for marriage is for some personal benefit. Maugham indicates that there are several possible benefits to be had in marriage. One is indicated by the colonial characters Frank Taylor in The Land of Promise and Freeman in Smith. Each of these men expresses the need for a wife to share his isolated farm because he needs someone to perform his household chores and he needs companionship in the evenings after a hard day in the fields. Their basis for selecting this working-companion is strictly utilitarian, as the following speeches indicate: FREEMAN: But if you put a strong healthy man and a strong healthy woman together, love will come.7 TAYLOR: What's love got to do with it [marriage]? It's a business proposition.8 FREEMAN: There's little love in the world. A man ought to be grateful if a woman cares for him.*

Another practical benefit is the marriage of convenience for 5

W. Somerset Maugham, Ashenden (New York, Doubleday, 1928). pp. 230-231. • The Breadwinner, ΙΠ, p. 286. 7 Smith, I, p. 138. 8 The Land of Promise, Π, p. 247. • Smith, Π, p. 164.

68

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

money or for title. This was the reason for Lady Frederick's first marriage as it was for the marriages of the American expatriates in Our Betters. Practical reasons also determine surrender in The Unattainable, but in this instance Maugham has his tongue in his cheek. When Caroline decides to keep her dead husband "alive", she is contradicting the concept of surrender for she does so in order to retain the freedom she has found in the absence of a husband in fact, but with the presence of a husband in name. In practical terms, because Caroline is separated from her husband and because she refuses divorce, she need make no concessions to the confinement of marriage. This freedom from confinement is important not only to Caroline, but also to her suitors, Rex and Robert, neither of whom wishes to submit to the confinement of marriage. Caroline's decision that a husband from whom she has been separated for ten years is better "alive" than "dead" is a surprise reversal which Maugham uses conveniently to end the play. In so doing he is turning conventional morality topsy-turvy. Caroline uses conventional morality to make possible her unconventional relations with Rex and Robert. By this means Maugham reveals the ambiguity of a recognized maxim. At the opposite extreme of confinement as an aspect of marriage is revolt from the marriage contract. In the later plays, revolt is a reaction to surrender. In revolting from the confines of marriage Maugham's characters seek sex, romantic love, justification of a principle, or some practical objective. There is a certain irony in the fact that with the exception of justification of principle, his characters seek in their revolt from marriage what they failed to find in their submission to marriage. The husbands of Penelope (Penelope) and Constance (The Constant Wife) revolt for sex, that is, an extra-marital affair. Each husband finds the affair less than satisfactory after the initial excitement because a mistress proves to be more demanding, more confining, than a wife. The husbands in these two plays are similar. Both husbands are physicians; each has an affair with a married woman; each makes contrite excuses and apologies when he discovers that his wife is aware of his affair; each is more

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

69

chagrined that he has been discovered in an affair than that he has broken his marriage contract; and each is quick to give up his mistress because the demands of his mistress have become unbearable. Dickie decides that "philandering with a married woman is the most exaggerated form of amusement that's ever been invented".10 John observes that free love "has all the inconveniences of marriage and none of its advantages".11 The possibilities for complication are increased by the fact that the mistresses of both husbands are married women. Maugham adds another dimension to The Constant Wife by introducing Bernard Kersal, one of Constance's former suitors. Bernard, who has not married, retains his affection for Constance. She, in turn, enjoys his inspired expression of affection. His declarations of love are not dulled by repetition. Because Maugham has compared the wife and mistress as well as the two husbands, why does he not increase the complexity by providing Constance with a married lover? Dramatic economy is one reason that Bernard is a bachelor. More important to the idea of the play is that Constance's revolt, in contrast to her husband's or to Marie-Louise's, is motivated by principle. Constance encroaches on her own marriage but not on someone else's. Her principle, that the modern wife is nothing but a parasite and prostitute, carries with it more apparent justification than the sexual excitement that Marie-Louise and John seek. But Constance's reasoning is confused, for it is not only to substantiate the validity of her principle that she vacations with Bernard; she is also looking for her lost romantic love, "a perfection of something that is beautiful and transitory".12 The principle which motivates Charles Battle to revolt is not so confused. To Battle, the formalities and restrictions of marriage and of conventional society are restraining. They restrain his desire to satisfy his own personal needs. To Battle, the role of the husband in the post-war society is to provide the necessary environment to permit his family the luxury of boredom. As his wife maintains, "The ordinary man gets his pleasure by providing 10 11 12

Penelope, Π, p. 67. The Constant Wife, ΙΠ, p. 188. ibid., p. 189.

70

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

the family with the things they want. I mean, that's his normal existence." 18 Battle is bored with this role. He chooses to relieve his boredom by leaving his family and migrating to the colonies where he can work for his own benefit. He feels this action will have the corollary benefit of forcing the members of his family to discover what it means to work for themselves. Family allegiance and intra-family responsibility (companionship) have disappeared from the maxims of this well-to-do middle class family. Although she will not admit it, his wife will really be happier without him, although she will miss the security which he has provided. The reasons for Battle's quarrel with this conventional society are partly explained by his experience in the war: I have only one life. When I look back and think of all the fellows who were killed in the war, I think I'd like to make more use of it than just buy and sell shares and make or lose a fortune.1·» But Maugham does not develop this line of motivation. The aftermath of war is just one manifestation of the problem of society as Battle sees it. Battle sees society as having lost its perspective. Here is the ultimate confusion of the ambivalence of guilt, for definitions of right and wrong are lagging far behind the needs of the time. Unlike father Ardsley in For Services Rendered, who is content to sit back and wait for this "old England of ours . . . and all it stands for" 15 to establish itself in the post-war world, Battle insists on the need for positive action, now. The Breadwinner is Maugham's last comedy. It is one of the last four plays he felt compelled to write. Battle is the only one of Maugham's characters in his dramatic comedy to cut all ties with the strictures of society. Battle's ultimate fate is unknown. He is a non-conformist in a society whose maxims of conformity are confused. In creating this character Maugham has unified his image of a man in revolt with his society, who at the same time is seeking a more useful life in a productive society. In earlier plays the colonial represents this useful life.16 14 14 15

18

The Breadwinner, III, p. 294. Ibid., p. 263. For Services Rendered, III, p. 181.

Infra, Chapter VI.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

71

In The Circle Maugham deals with the revolt of romantic love from the confines of marriage. It was with the spirit of romance that Lady Kitty bolted from Champion-Cheney, and that Elizabeth bolted from Arnold. Romance for Lady Kitty was shortlived. Her spirit of romance could not thrive in the society in which she was forced to move. What will become of Elizabeth's spirit of romance is left for the audience to decide. In both cases, revolt was from a marriage which was confining. The original marriage relationship of Lady Kitty and Champion-Cheney was correct in terms of class relationship and was comfortable in that no material advantages were wanting, but in each case the relationship was cold. The wife of a Champion-Cheney performs the duties of the wife of a rising member of Parliament. For all of Lady Kitty's new difficulties in the unobtainable "ideal" romance with Lord Porteous, she has at least found a warmth to be occasionally kindled. This is revealed in the album scene of the third act. The motivations for the revolt in Our Betters are practical. Pearl's affair with Tony is for the satisfaction of a malicious ego: "It just happens that I feel no man so desirable as one that a friend of mine is in love with." 17 The pleasure that Pearl gains from her affair with the elderly Fenwick is motivated by another practical reason, for Fenwick supplements her husband's income. This enables Pearl to buy social recognition not otherwise available to one of her origin or means. Certain characteristics of Pearl and Battle are to be found in the characters Maugham created for Home and Beauty. However, in this play those qualities are treated more facetiously. Victoria (it would have to be Victoria) revolts for the pleasure of a RollsRoyce and a title. Victoria has made her sacrifice for the war effort - she has been married to two D.S.O.'s - but now that the war is over she no longer has to make sacrifices. Confronted with two legal husbands, neither of whom is wealthy, there is no alternative but to divorce them both and marry a millionaire. Thus, Victoria reveals a practicality similar to Pearl's. Victoria's two 17

Our Betters, m , p. 97.

72

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

husbands do not dispute her action, for they have discovered freedom from marriage in the military service. In this respect they are like Battle. Now that the war is over, neither husband is prepared to resign himself to a fate of marital servitude, particularly not under the conditions that Victoria has demanded in the past. Considered in the aggregate, Maugham's characters discover the strictures of the marriage contract to be increasingly more confining. Coincidentally, they become more resistant to the confinement of society. It can be noted that the reasons Maugham's characters give for submitting to or resisting the confinement of marriage are, with the possible exception of Battle, personally sound but generally petty and insignificant. Thus far only the maxim of confinement has been discussed. Now, knowing why Maugham's characters surrender to or revolt from the marriage contract, his arguments for conformity will have more significance. By definition the reason for conformity has been related to some form of Biblical, social and/or judicial code.18 In Maugham's comedy Biblical law is not a consideration for conformity. There is no particular significance indicated by the absence of Biblical law. Maugham's characters are not religious, nor are they antireligious; they are a-religious. John Wharton in the serious play The Unknown expresses Maugham's attitude toward conventional Christianity. "If you ask me why I don't believe in the existence of God", Wharton says, "I suppose I can give you a certain number of reasons, but the real one, the one that gives all the others their force, is that I feel it in my heart." 19 In his Notebook Maugham explains his position more completely.20 Then came the war, and grief, fear and perplexity brought many to religion. Many consoled themselves for the loss of persons they did not care very much about by their faith in an all-powerful, allmerciful and all-knowing Creator. Once, at sea, I thought I was in imminent danger of death, and words of appeal rose quite involun18

19

Supra, p. 82.

The Unknown, Π, pp. 57-58. W. Somerset Maugham, A Writer's Notebook (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949), pp. 156-157.

20

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

73

tarily to my lips, remains of the forgotten faith of my childhood, and it required a certain effort of will to suppress them and look forward to what might come with an equal mind. I was at that moment within an ace of believing in God, and it required an outraged sense of the ridiculous to save me from surrender to my fear. I tried in Of Human Bondage to set down why I had lost the very ardent faith of my childhood, but it is difficult to describe such things accurately and I have never been satisfied with the result. Though the turn of my mind is concrete and my intelligence moves inactively amongst abstractions, I have a passion for metaphysics and I find a keen delight in the acrobatics of philosophers on the tight-rope of the incomprehensible. I have read much philosophy, and though I do not see how it is possible to refuse intellectual assent to certain theories of the Absolute, I can find nothing in them to induce me to depart from my instinctive disbelief in what is usually meant by the word religion. I have little patience with the writers who try to reconcile in one conception the Absolute of the metaphysician with the God of the Christian. But if I had had any doubts, the war would have effectually silenced them. Judicial law is not a factor, either, in leading Maugham's characters to conform. For Maugham it is social law that imposes the greatest pressure to conformity. This is not surprising. In fact, it enforces the writer's idea that the marriage contract is to Maugham a symbol of society. What, then, is Maugham's vision of the social law? The least complicated of the social laws is to be found in Penelope. This is the animalistic law. To Golightly, marriage is a game which needs to be played continually and with as many variations as possible, for "a wise woman never lets her husband be quite, quite sure of her. The moment he is - Cupid puts on a top-hat and becomes a church warden." 21 In other words, marriage is an event which can only be sustained by a variety of sensual experiences. Penelope loses Dickie because she does not provide him with this variety, but the reason she chooses to maintain her marriage, the reason for conforming to the marriage contract, is because she also needs this variety to satisfy her sexual needs. Marriage is society's solution for satisfying this animalistic sex drive. But Penelope's solution is not the conventional solution 21

Penelope, ΠΙ, p. 82.

74

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

of society. To society, marriage may be an answer to the satisfaction of the sex drive, but it is morality which determines conformity to marriage. To Maugham the sex drive is not a moral issue. In his Notebook he says, That which is universal in mankind cannot be evil: it is a fault with many ethical systems that, more or less arbitrarily, they fix upon certain tendencies of man and call them good; and upon others and call them evil. How much greater would human happiness have been if the gratification of the sexual instinct had never been looked upon as wicked. A true system of ethics must find out those qualities which are in all men and call them good.22 Penelope conforms to her marriage contract but not for the reasons of conventional society. She does the "right" thing for the "wrong" reason. By this negative example, Maugham clearly reveals his attitude toward sexual gratification. Sexual gratification is to Maugham a natural drive, not to be governed by an ethical judgment. This attitude is revealed in other plays. Pearl's affair with Tony is not judged morally wrong. In describing the affair Maugham's stage direction reads, "a hot flame of passion leaps up suddenly between them".28 Even though Maugham does not consider that the animalistic sex drive should be governed by an ethical judgment, the fact remains that society does. Maugham does not overlook this fact. Complications are created for Maugham's characters, particularly in Our Betters and The Constant Wife, not from the instinctive sex drive, but from the attitude with which society must regard it once it becomes known. The Pearl-Tony affair will illustrate this phenomenon. Following the discovery of her affair with Tony, Pearl makes no effort to conceal the truth from her intimate friends, but she does try to hide it from the society into which she has bought her way. The means by which she does this is not one of denial. Instead, she craftily manages to convince her week-end guests to stay at her country estate until the week-end is over. She knows that the façade of a successful and complete outing would make the story of her affair with Tony seem improbable to the 22 28

Maugham, Notebook, op. cit., p. 75. Our Betters, Π, p. 68.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

75

rest of society. The Duchesse who forced Pearl's friends to become aware of the affair is incongruous later when she tells Tony, "If you wanted to be unfaithful to me, why didn't you prevent me from finding out?" 24 The actual behavior of society is inconsistent with its professed rules of behavior and therefore, in Maugham's opinion, this social pressure for conformity is incongruous. "To dramatists more than novelists Victorian prudery had been an obstacle." 25 Kronenberger says that in the England of the Nineties the only way Oscar Wilde "could write about sex was to call it sin".2e By the time Maugham was writing he did not have to conceal the "sin" of sex. But, at the same time, Maugham does not become a spokesman for freedom to discuss sex as do some of his contemporaries. Lady Frederick expresses Maugham's rational opinion: 27 Well, I don't suppose they're any the worse for having an elementary knowledge of natural history [reproduction]. Personally I doubt whether ignorance is quite the same thing as virtue, and I'm not quite sure that a girl makes a better wife because she's been brought up like a perfect fool.

In these plays Maugham accepts sex as a fact and he prefers to ignore any argument either for or against his position. His characters are not subject to ridicule because they respond to this natural desire, but society is subject to ridicule because of the way in which it responds to knowledge of this desire. Writing in the Preface to the first volume of his collected plays, Maugham claims that in his time to deal "in a sincere spirit with life", one had to deal with prostitution.28 But the prostitute is significantly absent from his comedies. Only the deceased Lord Mereston, pinnacle of Victorian virtue, sought the services of a prostitute. In Mrs. Warren's Profession Shaw unmasked prostitution as an efficient, profitable business. Such was not Maugham's concern. He was M

Our Betters, ΙΠ, p. 88. André Maurois, The Edwardian Era, Hamish Miles, transi. (New York, D. Appleton-Century Co., Inc., 1933), p. 293. »· Louis Kronenberger, The Thread of Laughter (New York, Knopf, 1952), p. 212. " Lady Frederick, Π, p. 36. 28 W. Somerset Maugham, The Collected Plays, Vol. I (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1955), p. vi. î5

76

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

concerned with the inconsistency of individual behavior. However, according to Maugham, individual behavior was inconsistent because of the incongruity of social pressure for conformity. This attitude is also revealed by Maugham's treatment of divorce. Shaw, in an 1895 letter, wrote that he could not understand "the stupidity of the conclusion that there is no solution of the difficulty of unhappy marriages, whereas there is a perfectly simple solution in reform of divorce laws".29 Maugham did not seek to reform the divorce law, he merely kept apace of divorce law reform. Consider, for example, Lady Frederick, who could not divorce her first husband on the grounds of his cruelty to her; yet, according to the laws of the time he could have divorced her because of her part in the Bellingham affair. When Lady Frederick had an opportunity to separate from her husband she chose rather to keep the marriage contract because of her ailing son. By such action Lady Frederick became an object of sympathy for the audience of her time. Rose and Dallas-Baker never consider divorce even though they are bored with each other. When Norah talks of leaving Taylor she speaks only of separation, not of divorce. It is only in the later plays that characters seek divorce. The reason for this is not because divorce was not a possible solution to marital problems, but rather because divorce was regarded as an extreme and undesirable solution to marital problems. Sixteen years after Lady Frederick, however, Lady Kitty leaves her husband and her son. Eighteen years after Penelope, Constance chooses to have her own affair instead of troubling to restore her husband's spirit of romance. It is only in the period following the First World War that Maugham's characters do not finally conform to the marriage contract. According to Cazamian, in England "The years from 1880 to 1914 have their unity in the more or less open defiance of the intellectual and social discipline which the preceding age had so triumphantly enforced." 80 But the defiance of social disci2

» George Bernard Shaw, Advice to a Young Critic (New York, Crown Publishers, Inc., 1955), p. 31. 30 Louis Cazamian, Criticism in the Making (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1929), p. 106.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

77

pline in this period was altogether different from the open conflict with social discipline in the disillusioned society of the post-war world. In the Edwardian period certain elements of society felt that "moral standards were deteriorating".31 Whereas the Victorian writers believe in the permanence of the building, even while criticising some of its subsidiary arrangements or inhabitants, the Edwardian writers attack the very foundations of the social structure - religion, capitalism, and class hierarchy.82 In Edward's time "every few years some lurid divorce case was printed in the Times and the participants always seemed to be members of the Prince's inner circle".33 Divorce may have been more common, but it remained sensational. By 1921 the divorce rate, following a steady rise, was higher than ever.34 By 1923 women were allowed to sue for divorce on the same terms as men.35 Divorce, as it appears in Maugham's plays, follows rather than leads popular opinion. Even after society's attitude was altered by the law courts, a stigma continued to remain with the divorced person. In other words, society continued to impose a pressure on the individual to conform to the marriage contract. It will be noted that the reasons cited for conforming to the marriage contract are negative. Social pressure, as Maugham depicts it, is a negative force. Why conform? Because society exerts pressure on those who do not conform. Ironically, the reasons which society gives for conforming are often petty. But it is painful to remain in society and be a non-conformist. Bessie recognizes this when she decides not to marry Lord Bleane. Maugham emphasizes the force of this negative pressure when he chooses to let Bessie ignore Lord Bleane's argument that there is another segment of society quite different from Pearl's. Social pressure is negative because it likes to protect its illusions. The first concern of Battle's wife is how she is going to explain her abandonment to 31

Virginia Cowles, The Gay Monarch (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1956), p. 154. Maurois, op. cit., p. 292. 33 Cowles, op. cit., p. 154. 34 John Montgomery, The Twenties (London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1957), p. 164. 35 Ibid., p. 160. 32

78

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

society. When Constance leaves John to go on her "vacation" she does so knowing that he will find excuses for her vacation to prevent the facts from becoming public knowledge. The negative characteristic of society is also to be found in the reciprocal benefits and obligations which Maugham's characters find in the marriage contract. Of the final two groups of plays only in The Land of Promise does Maugham depict the positive side of the reciprocal nature of marriage. Lionel Trilling has said that "a culture is not a flow, nor even a confluence; the form of its existence is struggle, or at least debate - it is nothing if not a dialectic".36 Maugham's characters of the marriage society are engaged in a struggle which is symptomatic of the struggle of society. But this struggle can hardly be called a debate because, with the exception of Constance and Battle, his characters do not clearly verbalize what it, is they seek. With few exceptions, Maugham's characters have not formulated anything but a vague notion of what they expect from marriage, nor do they know what to expect from society. Nevertheless, they are aware of an undercurrent of uncertainty, of revolt. They feel the need to go somewhere else, but where they do not know. This uncertainty is reflected in the changing attitude of Maugham's characters toward procreation. In Smith and Our Betters there is opposition to child bearing. In the final three comedies there is indifference to child bearing. When Battle deserts his family he knows that there is something wrong with society; he does not know if his solution is workable. His uncertainty is reflected in the ideas and uncertainty of his children. The good years of Victoria and the gay years of Edward have left only a vacuum partially filled with disillusion. Without knowing why he does so and without knowing what it is that he seeks, Battle recognizes that his children, like himself, have got to discover a new meaning for society. The maxims of the pre-war world have lost their validity. Maugham depicts his characters struggling with outworn maxims, but he does not provide new ones. se

Lionel Trilling, The Liberal Imagination (New York, Doubleday Anchor, 1954), p. 20.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

79

On the basis of this discussion it is possible to provide a general characterization of the marriage contract as Maugham envisions it. Surrender of one's freedom to the marriage contract becomes increasingly difficult because the foundation of the marriage contract becomes increasingly less secure. The foundation crumbles because there is confusion in the terms of the contract. The terms are no longer clearly understood and there is no basis for expectation. Although the terms of the marriage contract have been changed from what they were in the past, no specific terms have replaced them. Maugham's dramatic structure incorporates the marriage contract as a part of the story line in all of his plays, but it is only in the later ones that the marriage contract is incorporated in the action. As an element of the story line, Maugham arrives at one of three conclusions to the marriage agreement. Each play concludes with either the making, or the preserving, or the breaking of a marriage contract. Based on the plays' conclusions, Maugham's comedies follow a definite pattern that is nearly chronological (only Penelope and Our Betters are out of chronological order). This pattern suggests a basis for classification. The "early" plays, Lady Fredeñck, 1903; Jack Straw, 1905; and Smith, 1909, all conclude with the making of a marriage contract. The remaining plays prior to the First World War conclude with the preserving of the marriage contract. The plays which comprise the "middle" period are Penelope, 1908; The Land of Promise, 1913; and The Unattainable, 1915. The "final" group, the plays which were produced following that war, conclude with the breaking of the marriage contract. Is there significance in this classification of Maugham's plays by their conclusions? The chronological ordering of these plays by conclusion is similar to the historical divisions which characterize significant changes of the English social pattern: Edwardian, pre-war Georgian and post-war Georgian. The first group of plays, making the marriage contract, reflects Edwardian adherence to a social order. The causal factors of Edwardian society are too numerous to discuss, and moreover do not belong in this study. It is sufficient to conclude that there was

80

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

a stability, an acceptance, an adherence to "society" in the form that was "practically invented" by the last English monarch to reign before the disillusionment which resulted from world conflict.37 The innovations and changes the Prince introduced sprang entirely from his own fads and fancies. He liked to be comfortable and he hated being bored. He insisted on pretty women and entertaining men.38

"The pleasures in which he frankly indulged were those which appealed to the greater number of his subjects." 39 Although problems of international conflict were evident, they did not detract from the ebullience of what Lee has called the "sociable brightness and vivacity of the Edwardian era".40 To the outsiders [American and English plutocracy] Society became a grim and exciting business; to the aristocracy it became an opportunity for profitable matrimonial alliances which resulted in a general refurbishing of the family coffers. 41

In his Notebook Maugham could recall the Edwardian era as one of those exceptional "short periods of peace and plenty".42 The writer would not dwell on the characteristics of this period except that it is so hard for a younger generation to imagine such a time. In contrast to the security of the first decade of the twentieth century, Maugham's plays of the middle period, restoring the marriage contract, reflect a growing uncertainty or social insecurity as England approached The Great War. If it is not easy for us to understand the Edwardian Age, it cannot be any easier for us to understand the undefined frustrations of the period which followed it. Writing in 1952, Nicolson comments, "It is not easy for the modern generation . . . to understand the perplexity and alarm with which the statesman and citizen of the 1910-1914 period 37

Sir Sidney Lee, King Edward VU, Vol. Π (New York, Macmillan, 1927), p. 405. 38 Cowles, op. cit., p. 13 3. 39 Lee, op. cit., p. 405. 40 Ibid., p. 71. 41 Cowles, op. cit., p. 268. 42 Maugham, Notebook, op. cit., p. 321.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

81

regarded these successive upheavals."43 Although Maugham sensed this unrest and reflected it in his plays, he did not regard the situation as serious enough to reflect the disruption of the stability of the social order. Conditions were significantly altered by the time the final group of plays were written. In these plays the marriage contract is broken. All were produced after the First World War when the social structure was severely disrupted. Evidence of this disruption was shown in many ways. One example which Nicolson describes is symbolic of all: at the conclusion of the war, King George again began to appear in state; however, this "surface resumption of pre-war pagaentry and customs did not conceal the fact that fundamentally the structure and spirit of society had changed".44 In this final division of plays the breaking of the marriage contract reflects Maugham's perception of the increasing disillusion which accompanied the post-war social, political and philosophical upheaval. It is not the purpose of this analogy between the general pattern of the English society and the marriage contract in Maugham's plays to suggest that these plays are social documents. Holland has pointed out the error in regarding the drama as a social document in his excellent discussion of Restoration drama.45 Nevertheless, the fact cannot be denied that the drama is a reflection of contemporary history although it does not document that history. The analogy will serve only as a starting reference from which we can proceed to examine the parallels between society and Maugham's attitude toward the marriage contract. The similarity of the changed character of the marriage contract to the changing character of the social order is at once apparent. The importance of this likeness and the change is to be discovered in the role the marriage contract plays in the drama. As the marriage contract becomes less secure, Maugham's characters become more actively involved in conflict with it. As Maugham's charac49

Harold Nicolson, King George V (London, Constable & Co., Ltd., 1952), p. 159. Nicolson, op. cit., p. 338. 45 Norman N. Holland, The First Modern Comedies (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1959), p. 199. 44

82

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

ters come into conflict with the marriage contract it becomes incorporated in the action of the play. In effect, the marriage contract plays two distinct roles in Maugham's dramatic structure. The first is the role it plays in developing the story line; the second is in developing the action. In the early plays the marriage contract is less well integrated, providing only the story line. Jack Straw is a prime example. The story of Jack Straw is a romantic fairy tale. A Prince, disguised as a commoner, concludes a marriage contract with a nouveau riche commoner. In actual playing time this love story receives little attention. There are only two short scenes between the Prince and the girl. In Act II she intimates her love for him by asking him to leave the estate. Early in Act III she demonstrates her independence by defying the Prince and accepting an offer of marriage from someone for whom she does not care. There is no question of the affinity between the Prince and the girl, or of the suitability of a marriage between the two classes. The idea of love at first sight is established from the beginning by Straw's interest in her. Straw says to Holland and Lady Wanley, "To tell you the truth, I'm perfectly indifferent to the rudeness and vulgarity of your friends, but I think I should like to know that young lady." 48 Again, in the final scene, when Straw tells the girl that "you're just as much in love with me as I am with you",47 she replies, after a short protest, "you were quite right in what you said just now".48 Their marriage is inevitable in the romantic context of the story. This love-at-first-sight romance requires little dramatic development. The obstacles which delay the completion of their marriage contract, except for those noted above, derive from two other sources. These two sources which motivate the major complications of the plot are, first, the revenge which Lady Wanley takes on the Parker-Jennings for their insult to the innocent clergyman's wife and second, the double unmasking of the disguised Prince disguising as a "Prince". The story line of the marriage contract is 46 47 48

Jack Straw, I, p. 210. Ibid., m , p. 264. Ibid., p. 270.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

83

a dramatic technique which provides the motivation for Straw's initial involvement in the first complication, and which sustains the conflicts of the second complication by motivating Straw to continue with his disguise. There is only a superficial relationship between the marriage contract and the major complications. The action of the major complications is separated from, but sustained by, the story line of the marriage contract. Ervine has said that Maugham tells a story in a terse and quick and vivid manner. H e has views, but he subordinates them to his tale. . . . H e seldom diverges from the main avenue, nor is he distracted by side issues, however amusing they may be. 49

In Jack Straw we see ample evidence of how Maugham uses the story line of the marriage contract to give to the play a surface continuity. Maugham's obvious emphasis on story line is to be observed also in Smith. There are two story lines in Smith, one involving the making of a marriage contract between Freeman and Smith, and the other involving the ideological conflict between Freeman and his sister, Rose. It is the first of these stories that requires our attention in this chapter.50 Although approximately one-third of the playing time is devoted to the development of the SmithFreeman story, it is a love story with little conflict or action. Moreover, the love story is only remotely inter-related to the Freeman-Rose story. Freeman's search for a wife is lackadaisical. Maugham provides only two candidates for marriage. One is Emily, to whom Freeman proposes, but who eventually rejects the proposal. The other is Smith. It is not Freeman's own motivation that leads to his selection of Smith as a wife. The romantic conception of this story makes the choice obvious. Attention is called to Smith as the obvious choice by her twenty-one entrances and exits, many more than are necessary for the menial duties of a servant in a play. In Smith, as in the case of Jack Straw, the marriage 41

Klaus W. Jonas, ed., The World of Somerset Maugham (New York, British Book Centre, 1959), p. 149. so The other story is discussed in Chapter VI.

84

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

contract is used by Maugham to provide a surface continuity. The major complications in Smith arise from the conflict between Freeman and Rose. A tangential relation between the romantic story and the major conflict is to be noted also in Lady Frederick. The story of Lady Frederick is that of a woman with a heart-of-gold who attempts to restrain the infatuation of a younger gentleman who wants to propose marriage to her. This, also, is a conventional love story which requires little elaboration. The incidents of the plot are selected to reveal the many facets of Lady Frederick's golden heart rather than the progression of the marriage contract. This revelation is made as a result of Lady Frederick's conflict with Lady Mereston, the young gentleman's mother, and with Captain Montgomerie. As in the previous two plays, there is only a superficial conflict between the characters considering the marriage contract. But, as before, the contract provides the impetus for the major conflict and complications. Another use for the marriage contract as a dramatic device in Lady Frederick is the surprise ending of the play: Lady Frederick concludes a contract for marriage with Fouldes. The significance of the lack of coordination of the marriage story line with plot and action in these plays is to be found in the subject matter of the major complications. These complications are designed to expose flaws or inequalities in society. Maugham has used the marriage story line as a means of imposing a façade of continuity to comments of social criticism which are often unrelated. The marriage story contributes an easy flow to these three plays, but this flow is only tangentially related to the progressive development of plot and action. Marriage itself is not criticised. The exception is Lady Frederick's previous experience with marriage, but this only exemplifies the title character's heart-of-gold. The flaws which Maugham exposes involve, among others, the conventional social climber and the nouveau riche. Thrusts are made at a number of general social weaknesses: social inequality, deceit, vanity, intrigue, and so on; but, there is no concerted or sustained thrust at one weakness or at any one segment of society. In contrast, the remaining plays contain a concerted criticism of

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

85

society, and a part of this criticism is of the marriage contract. Moreover, there is in the later plays a cohesion of plot, story and action. It is in the development of these plays that one perceives the ultimate significance of Maugham's extensive use of the marriage contract. The plots of these plays in the middle group are unified. All incidents relate to the character's goal of maintaining the marriage contract. The plays differ in the goals which the character seeks, but in each case the goals sought coincide with and define the action of the play. Using the infinitive form to describe the action, the action of Penelope is to satisfy the animalistic sex drives; the action of The Land of Promise is to discover one's identity in the benefits and obligations of society; the action of The Unattainable is to maintain one's individual habits and freedom. The action of each play relates to one of the four maxims of the social order. Another characteristic of the plays of the middle group is that their structure provides situation continuity. The major complications and the marriage contract are integrated; however, there is a contrived development in the progression from act to act. This can best be illustrated by the four acts of The Land of Promise. Act one establishes Norah in her English environment as a lady's companion and leads to the situation which finds her without her expected inheritance and without available employment. Act two establishes Norah in the environment of her brother's Canadian farm and leads to her quarrel with her sister-in-law and acceptance of Taylor's proposal of marriage. Act three establishes the environment of Taylor's farm and leads to her being forced to submit, as his wife, to his desires. The final act establishes the fact that Norah has accepted, with reservations, the obligations of her new life and leads to her acceptance of the benefits which that life offers. In each act Maugham creates a new situation for Norah which follows logically from what has preceded it, but she does not create the progression of her circumstances. This is what is meant by situation continuity. Returning to the action of the plays, it was observed that the action is related to the maxims of the social order. A more thorough examination of the plays reveals the inter-relationship

86

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

of the individual's attitude toward the marriage contract with the individual's relationship to society. The incongruity of Penelope's interpretation of the maxim of conformity has already been discussed.51 This incongruity in Penelope's reasoning is reflected in the incongruity of conformity in other characters. The first example for consideration is the delightful character sketch which Maugham makes of Mrs. Watson, a physician's widow. She appears briefly in the second act. Dickie has been spending so much time and money on his mistress, Ada Ferguson, that his practice is suffering and his bank account is dwindling. Dickie has just learned that Penelope has made extravagant expenditures and he is happy to have a new patient, especially one who seemingly has so many simple ailments. Gradually the audience learns, at the same time Dickie does, that Mrs. Watson is a physician's widow. Appreciation of the sketch depends on the knowledge that the medical profession provides free service for the immediate families of the members of that profession. Mrs. Watson has made an avocation - it could almost be called a profession - of taking advantage of that free service. Like Penelope, Mrs. Watson does the right thing for the wrong reason. Her interpretation of the maxim of conformity is incongruous. The relation of Mrs. Ferguson to her absent husband reveals a similar incongruity. The excuse she gives to society for not being with her husband is that he is in the Navy. This is ostensibly logical for a Navy wife cannot accompany her husband at sea, but Ferguson is not at sea, he is stationed at a land base. Similar incongruities in this play could be mentioned but only one more, the case of Davenport Barlow, Penelope's uncle, will be dealt with here. Barlow is a comment on leisured society. He is excessively conscious of traveling in the "best" society and knowing only the "right" people. He admonishes Penelope for having married a physician because "one doesn't marry a doctor. . . . We suppose they do marry, but they don't marry any one we know." 52 In spite 51 52

Supra, pp. 94-95. Penelope, I, p. 17.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

87

of his social awareness, he is intrigued by the appearance of Ada Ferguson. By this interest he serves the dramatic function of providing the means to rid Dickie of his mistress. When Dickie breaks off his affair with Ada, she must travel to Paris alone. Barlow gallantly offers to travel with her. But there is incongruity in his offer for, as he assures Penelope, "my dear, I'm not only the soul of honour, but fifty-two".53 By interweaving the relation of the individual to the marriage contract and to society in Penelope, Maugham reveals incongruity in the motivations of those who seemingly conform. Maugham achieves a unity in the play by presenting several facets of the single maxim. The maxim of companionship is the central feature of The Land of Promise. The action of the play, to discover one's identity in the benefits and obligations of society, envelops the characters in different ways. The heirs to the estate of Norah's deceased employer, Miss Wickham, are all too anxious to leave with their inheritance, but they are quick to forget the obligation which they have to Norah for her faithful service. Miss Wickham had promised Norah an inheritance, but she neglected to change her will. The heirs who had paid no attention to their aged aunt expected to receive only a token inheritance. Later, in the fourth act, Norah receives a large check from them. Coming as it does at the end of the play, the change is melodramatic. The heirs have not appeared since the first act and the check provides the means to compensate for Taylor's crop loss. The heirs' changed attitude parallels the change of the other characters. When Norah cannot find work she migrates to her brother's farm in Canada. Norah's sister-in-law, Gertrude Marsh, like Norah is struggling for identity. Gertrude loves her husband and she has made great sacrifices for him, but when he met her she was a waitress and she finds it difficult to reconcile her social crudeness with Norah's ladylike ways. Gertrude's adjustment is particularly difficult because the hired hands show respect for Norah's cultivated manners, and moreover, they admire the adjustment which she is making, while ignoring any adjustment that Gertrude has had to make. It is this conflict 53

Penelope, ΠΙ, p. 103.

88

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

within Gertrude that leads to her conflict with Norah causing, in turn, Norah to many Taylor, one of the hired hands. Gertrude's reaction to Norah together with that of the heirs, forces Norah into greater isolation. She is isolated from any benefits which society might offer and consequently she wonders at her efforts to meet the obligations of her society. In the third act, her wedding night, when Taylor makes it clear that she is to follow his orders and that he expects her to be a wife in fact as well as in name, she is further isolated. The change which takes place in Norah between the third and the fourth act is not altogether unprepared for. In the face of adversity Norah has at first tried to meet the obligations of her new life. Nevertheless, the audience is led to assume this change in her. We are not shown the change. Like the letter from the heirs, the goal of the characters is reached rather hastily in a melodramatic fashion. Gertrude and her husband are happy together with Norah gone, and moreover, Gertrude is pregnant. This information is reported to the audience when Eddie conveniently visits his sister while on a trip to examine a new piece of farm machinery. Along with Eddie comes Reggie, the proper Englishman, who realizes that he will never find a suitable identity in Canada and who is about to return to his gaming ways in England. Norah's convincing speech to Mrs. Sharp, her neighbor, who first appears in the final act, restores Mrs. Sharp's confidence in the benefits to be had in the struggle with the virgin soil. This speech also reveals to the audience that Norah has finally found the companionship she has been seeking. This is confirmed in the final scene when Norah discovers she has begun to love Taylor as well as to enjoy working for him. Maugham involves his characters in conflict with the companionship of society and in conflict with the companionship of the marriage contract. In the final act he shows the parallel rise of companionship in both. The action of The Unattainable grows out of the conflict within and between the characters to retain their individual freedom. Caroline finds it difficult from the beginning to maintain her freedom because of the meddling of her women friends. The friends continue to meddle with Caroline's freedom throughout the play.

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

89

The audience is left with the impression that they would continue to meddle with her married life as well. Caroline's only escape is in "reviving" her husband. It is this meddling which initially threatens the freedom of Caroline's male friends also. Left alone, Robert Oldham especially would never have questioned sacrificing his freedom to the confinement of marriage. The magnificent gesture for freedom, however, is invented by Dr. Cornish. He is very fond of Caroline but he values his freedom too highly to marry her. When she announces that she will marry Cornish, it is he who sidesteps the issue and brings her husband back to "life". To everyone's surprise, Cornish fabricates a story which indicates that the report of the death of Caroline's husband was erroneous. Caroline is quick to recognize the value of this turnabout and she accepts the resurrection with delight. In each of these three middle plays the inter-relation of the action with the marriage contract has been shown. Nevertheless, the over-all progression of the plays is disturbed by the mechanical effect of the situation continuity. It is not our intention to examine at this time in detail the dramatic structure and the marriage contract in the final plays. The reason for this is that the plays, in contrast to those of the two earlier groups are so well integrated that they cannot be easily segmented. A few general remarks will conclude the discussion. In the final group of plays, the marriage contract cannot be regarded as a separate entity of society. There was evidence of this in The Unattainable, but then, although it was the first to be produced, it was written after Our Betters. In these final plays the relation of the marriage contract becomes secondary to the social order, but unlike the early group of plays, the two are so closely interrelated that the problems progress concurrently rather than separately. Unlike the plays of the middle period, the action of the final group of plays follows a continuous progression. The action of the characters leads directly to the involving complications from act to act. The one exception to these general remarks is Home and Beauty which, like the plays of the middle period, is segmented. This structure is, however, very appropriate for the farcical conception of the play. The action must necessarily move

90

IMAGE OF SOCIETY

rapidly, otherwise the events would strain the credibility of the audience. In summarizing, as we view the marriage contract in Maugham's comedy, we see its use as a common image of society. Maugham questions man's attitude toward marriage and he questions what man can obtain from marriage, and by so doing, he raises the same questions concerning the individual's relation to society. Conflict in Maugham's plays becomes more real and more significant. As Maugham incorporates plot and action with his story line, the interdependence of the marriage contract and society emerges more clearly. What was used in his early plays as a technique for imposing continuity becomes in the later plays a unifying element. As a unifying element the marriage contract is used by Maugham to ridicule social ills, not to correct them. But it is clear in the progressive development of man's relation to marriage that there is less stability in marriage and there is less reason to retain stability. Coincidentally, society becomes more confused. To Maugham there is no new stabilizing factor, no revision of old maxims, to resolve that confusion. The social pressure which acts to enforce those maxims is negative, petty, superficial. We would do well to ask ourselves whether this changing perspective of man in his relation to his society is only a manifestation of historical change. We cannot overlook the obvious: the progressive integration of plot, story line and action indicates that Maugham is becoming a more proficient dramatist. As Maugham continued to write he became more aware of the complexity of man and he became better able to depict that complexity. "The world has always been a place of turmoil", he says in his Notebook·, "Man is born into trouble as the sparks fly upward: that is normal, and we may just as well accept the fact. If we do, we can regard it with that mingling of resignation and humour which is probably our best defence." 54

M

Maugham, Notebook, op. cit., p. 321.

ν THE ILLUSION AND REALITY OF A CLASSLESS SOCIETY AND OF A CLASS CONSCIOUS SOCIETY

The height of comic elegance and refinement is not to be found in the general diffusion of knowledge and civilization, which tends to level and neutralize, but in the pride of individual distinction, and the contrast between the conflicting pretentions of different ranks in society. 1 William Hazlitt, "The Comic Writers of the Last Century"

Hazlitt, the nineteenth-century critic, in his lecture on "The Comic Writers of the Last Century" claimed that "the proper object of ridicule is egotism: and man cannot be a very great egotist, who every day sees himself represented on the stage".2 Hazlitt was attempting to explain the dearth of comedy in his time. He observed the tendency of his contemporaries to de-emphasize class consciousness. In a classless society man is indistinguishable from other men. Maugham, in his dramatic comedy, does not present man with an everyday picture of himself. Unlike certain of his contemporaries, Maugham breaks with the realistic tradition of comedy which began to be formulated in the moralistic and classequalizing comedy of the Eighteenth Century. Maugham's characters strive for individual distinction. Instead of neutralizing the importance of class distinction, Maugham imposes on his characters man's universal desire to create class distinction. Man has an ambivalent attitude toward class in this century; he thinks of himself as living in a classless society, but he takes pride in being "just 1 William Hazlitt, The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed. P. P. Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1931), Vol. VI, p. 153. * Ibid., p. 151.

92

ILLUSION AND REALITY

a little bit better" than his neighbor, and he looks up to the wealthy class with a mixed feeling of disdain and desire. The opulence of society as depicted in Maugham's comedies is a figment of the imagination of the characters. They recognize and try to adopt the appearance of opulent society; they do not have its natural qualities. The burden of belief in this opulence depends upon the preconceived notions the audience has of that society. One can only presume the existence of the audience's pre-conceived notions, but one can discover tangible facts by observing the characters. Maugham's characters do not belong in the society in which they are placed, but they do attempt to establish for themselves a position in that society. The real image is obscured by the social image. It is in this way that Maugham symbolizes the confusion of his own society in recognizing what it represents. As a writer of comedy for the English theatre, Maugham inherited a number of traditions. Part of this tradition is to be found in the comedy of the English Restoration. Indeed, it is Maugham's contention that his plays as well as those of Noel Coward merely carried out that tradition.8 There is no need to accept or reject at this time the accuracy of that contention. Why does Maugham overlook the excellent examples of English comedy prior to the Restoration? There is a definite distinction between the comedy of the two eras which are divided by the Interregnum of Cromwell. There is a sharper cleavage between these two eras than there is between Restoration comedy and English comedy of the first third of the Twentieth Century. One of the major differences is to be found in the changed view of man's image of himself and of his relation to society. Restoration men "came increasingly to feel that what shows not only was not but often ought not to be a true reflection of what is".4 Prior to the Restoration, man "had felt that what shows either was or should be a true reflection of what is".5 This "crucial change",6 as Holland terms it, indicates the new 3

W. Somerset Maugham, A Writer's Notebook (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949), p. 355. 4 Norman N . Holland, The First Modern Comedies (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1959), p. 50. 5 Ibid. 0 Ibid.

ILLUSION AND REALITY

93

conception of dissimulation. To the Restoration man, man's image became a façade concealing the real self. To quote again from Holland, "the separation of appearances from nature was a central concept in Restoration maimers, morals, pranks, politics, science and literary and linguistic theory".7 Two examples from Restoration comedy will illustrate this dissimulation. Congreve's Petulant in The Way of the World (I, 2) hires bawds to call for him in a public house and then he dissembles to his friends that they are women of fashion seeking him out. The second example, also from Congreve, is Mrs. Frail who when talking with her sister concerning their lost virtue says, "[our losses] are but slight flesh wounds, and if we keep 'em from air [i.e. from society's knowledge], not at all dangerous".8 The Restoration practice of concealing the real image, illustrated here, was inherited by the Twentieth Century and is found in Maugham's comedies. A source of conflict in Maugham's plays is the character's attempt to conceal the real image with the social image. For example, although Lady Frederick's real image is the melodramatic "woman with a heart-of-gold", it is where this image meets her social image, the hard woman, that Maugham creates his conflict. In later plays the melodramatic real image of Lady Frederick changes first into the romantic image of Jack Straw, and then into an image more easily identified in life. By this is meant that the emotion which determines the real image is more clearly identified with real emotions. Similarly, the emotions which determine the social image of Maugham's characters become more life-like. The life-like images reflect Maugham's belief that the drama should possess verisimilitude.9 In this he follows Hazlitt's admonition that the "comic writer . . . ought to open the volume of nature and the world for his living materials, and not take them out of his ethical common-place book".10 However, on a more elementary level, there is the additional factor that as Maugham's plays become 7

Holland, op. cit., p. 57. William Congreve, Love for Love in Congreve (New York, Hill and Wang, Inc., 1956), p. 226. 9 W. Somerset Maugham, The Collected Plays, 3 vols., 3rd ed. (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1955), Vol. I, pp. xviii-xix. 10 Hazlitt, op. cit., p. 157. 8

94

ILLUSION AND REALITY

more real, they also reveal Maugham to be a more competent playwright. There are degrees of accuracy and of submission for the artistic creation of reality or verisimilitude. What is Maugham's degree of accuracy and submission? To answer this question it is necessary to consider first what environment Maugham creates, and secondly, how his characters fit into that environment. The physical environment Maugham creates for his characters in his stage directions is usually a fashionable drawing room, tastefully furnished, in a manner generally distinctive of the resident. Arnold's drawing room is "stately", authentic Georgian, "not a house, but a place".11 Pearl's drawing room reflects the chinoiserie of the period of George II, accentuated, however, by a touch of color in the "coverings of the chairs, the sofas, and cushions, [which] show the influence of Bakst and the Russian ballet".12 Maugham further suggests the nature of the environment by specifying the locale, as for example, Regent's Park,13 or Creditor's Court, Kensington.14 By such reference to specific locale, or to remarks as "Aston-Adey has been described, with many illustrations, in Country Life",15 Maugham suggests to the reader or to the scenic designer a setting of understood elegance for his leisured society. Study of photographs of the original productions and of significant revivals collected by Mander and Mitchensen 16 reveals that the setting Maugham suggested for the original designers was realistic. It is understood that these photographs, all black and white, have limited value. Nevertheless, they are sufficient to indicate general characteristics. In these photographs, settings and costumes of the original productions appear to be realistically fashionable with much attention paid to detail. The detail is tasteful, highly decorative and in an expensive style. When compared 11

The Circle, I, p. 5. Our Betters, I, p. 5. 15 The Unattainable, I, p. 123. " Smith, I, p. 115. 15 The Circle, I, p. 5. 18 Raymond Mander and Joe Mitchensen, Theatrical Companion to the Plays of Maugham (London, Rockliff, 1955). 12

ILLUSION AND REALITY

95

with photographs of interiors of the period, it would appear that the designers depicted a restrained but accurate elegance. In the photographs of the revivals the designers have captured a stylized suggestion of elegance, an elegance that goes beyond that of the original production. This extension of elegance is also true of costume, where in the revivals the males are almost always attired in formal wear, which was not so in the original productions, and the females are decorated with furbelows. In some plays Maugham emphasizes the couturiers Callot or Worth,17 but high fashion does not have to, in fact generally does not, go to an extreme. Sir Sidney Lee calls attention to the fact that Edward VII, who set the fashion, "was always soigné and well groomed, but never foppish".18 Extreme dress is not a subject of ridicule in Maugham's plays as it is, for example, in those of Molière or of the Restoration. Why, then, are the designs of the original productions and the revivals different? Many reasons suggest themselves; many could be valid. One that has a high degree of probability is that the designers of the revivals felt the need to emphasize, in the environments they created, the superficiality which they felt was a part of Maugham's character. What is this superficiality? Maugham's characters do, or at least they say they do, what is currently fashionable in the social world. They follow "the season" or they go to the fashionable spas. They speak in elegant and precise language intentionally clever and witty while, for the most part, their interests do not extend beyond their own personal needs and desires. Although Maugham's characters manifest the external traits of an elegant leisured class, with few exceptions, they are out of place; they do not belong to that society. The impression of a leisured society is in part made by Maugham's selection of characters. In all the plays except The Breadwinner there is a servant included in the cast. Even in it, Battle's wife asks if he wants the chauffeur to drive him to the station. The servant type, butler, maid or governess, immediately established for an audience the "

The Circle, I, p. 26. Sir Sidney Lee, King Edward VII, Vol. Π (New York, Macmillan, 1927), p. 408.

18

96

ILLUSION A N D REALITY

idea of a leisured class. With the exception of Smith, these servants are all minor characters. Their dramatic function in the plays does not go beyond the particular services which he (or she) provides. There are other minor characters belonging to the working class that Maugham develops characterizations for: the dressmaker in Lady Frederick, the janitor in Smith and the manicurist in Home and Beauty. The services which these characters provide further add to the image of the leisured society. Madame Claude, the dressmaker, is particularly well observed. Madame Claude appears only in the second act. Her short scene with Lady Frederick and Fouldes has no function in the progression of the play except to delay the obligatory scene, the final clash between Lady Frederick and Lady Mereston. Madame Claude enters with the intended purpose of collecting the bill which Lady Frederick owes her. Knowing this, Lady Frederick makes a wager with Fouldes that she will offer the money to Madame Claude and Madame Claude will refuse it. Maugham first provides insight into the character of the dressmaker by his selection of the name Claude (clod). The following dialogue illustrates how, in a brief sketch, Maugham develops this minor character. I wanted to have a little talk with your ladyship. LADY FREDERICK: Oh, but I hope we shall have many little talks. We must go out some drives [sic] together. I hope you're going to stay some time. MADAME CLAUDE: That depends on circumstances, Lady Frederick. I 'ave a little business to do here. LADY FREDERICK: Then let me give you one warning - don't gamble. MADAME CLAUDE: Oh, no, my lady. I gamble quite enough in my business as it is. I never know when my customers will pay their bills - if ever. MADAME CLAUDE:

LADY FREDERICK: . . . H a , h a , h a . FOULDES: . . . H o , h o , h o .

Isn't she clever? I must tell that to the Archduchess. She'll be so amused. Ha, ha, ha, ha. The dear Archduchess, you know she loves a little joke. You must really meet her. Will you come and lunch? I know you'd hit it off together.

LADY FREDERICK:

ILLUSION AND REALITY

97

MADAME CLAUDE: . . . That's very kind of your ladyship. LADY FREDERICK: Y e s . A n d Mr. Fouldes, his uncle.

MADAME CLAUDE: Excuse me, are you the Mr. Paradine Fouldes? FOULDES: . . . At your service, madam. MADAME CLAUDE: I'm so glad to make your acquaintance, MR. Fouldes. . . . I've always heard you're such a bad man. FOULDES: Madam, you overwhelm me with confusion. MADAME CLAUDE: Believe me, Mr. Fouldes, it's not the ladies that are married to saints who take the trouble to dress well. 1 »

Although Madame Claude finally succumbs to the persuasive flattery of Lady Frederick, this dialogue reveals Madame Claude to be a woman of some perception. Her ability to perceive, in fact the necessity for her perception, has been determined from practical experience with the titled gentry. Because Madame Claude is on the outside looking in, her observations of this society are the most critical in the play. Her attitude is prejudiced by her position, but it does reflect the conventional stereotyped attitude that one is likely to have of this social group. Madame Claude does not conceal her real image with a social image, although she does serve to expose some aspects of Lady Frederick's social image. The dressmaker scene adds to the comedy although it does not develop the progression of the play. It is significant as an early attempt to reveal the superficiality of society by introducing an intruder into that society. The colonial is the refinement of this intruder. Important also is the way in which Maugham develops the scene to illustrate the desire of the tradeswoman to exist on the same level as the leisured class. Lady Frederick suggests to Madame Claude that she plan a luncheon to introduce her dressmaker to several of her titled friends. Madame Claude at first refuses the suggestion, but later she accepts the idea. Finally, the scene has special interest because it is an early indication of Maugham's ability to derive the progression of scene from characterization. Maugham's major characters all have, at least in terms of basic 19

Lady Frederick, Π, pp. 44-45.

98

ILLUSION AND REALITY

conception, their origin in a type: social climber, colonial, titled, wealthy, pretentious, gossip, parasite, "absent". The "absent" type was developed by Maugham although the type is derived from the cuckold. This character is the husband whose influence is felt (usually his influence is negative) but who does not appear on stage. He is to be found in Our Betters and The Unattainable, although the first such character is Lady Frederick's deceased husband, and Battle's absence in the first act of The Breadwinner makes him a descendant. To a certain extent the idea is used also in Home and Beauty, although in this case the "war casualty" first husband returns at the end of the first act. Maugham's absent husband has little influence with his wife, but it is not because he is ineffectual. Lord Grayston, for example, deliberately and conspicuously absents himself from his wife's society. He withdraws because he does not wish to have anything to do with Lady Grayston's "newspaper" society. One could construe this as a sign of strength, or as an indication of Maugham's moral attitude toward Lady Grayston's society. But Maugham is not moralistic unless it is in a negative sense. Lord Grayston, the man who cannot even control his own wife, must be an object of comedy. Indeed, as M. C. Kuner points out, for Maugham "very rarely does a man dominate a woman".20 Does Maugham have so little regard for the male sex? Probably not. Rather, the practice of showing the male's inferiority to the female, as Sully indicates, has always been a source of comedy.21 The "absent" male provides Maugham with a source of ridicule. But is there another reason for the presence of this character? The answer has already been suggested. The derivation of the absent male from the cuckold has been noted. With the exception of John in The Constant Wife and Lord Grayston, none of Maugham's males are cuckolded. Even with these two, Maugham does not make advantage to the humor of the cuckold. The absence of the cuckold and the substitution of the absent male are vestiges of Victorian morality. 20

Klaus Jonas, ed., The World of Somerset Maugham (New York, British Book Centre, 1959), p. 41. 21 James Sully, An Essay on Laughter (London, Longman's, Green and Co., 1902), p. 246.

ILLUSION AND REALITY

99

Environment is also established by language. Maugham's language is simple and his dialogue tends toward the stychomithic. Maugham himself has commented on the trend to simple language,22 and at least one critic 83 has found fault with Maugham for his oversimplification of language. In the early plays Maugham's language tends to be deliberately contrived clever repartee and is freely adorned with epigrams. This repartee dominates the first act of these plays, but is reduced in subsequent acts to make way for the development of the story. The repartee establishes the environment of the leisured class, but often exists apart from the progression of the play and often is not indigenous to the character speaking. In Maugham's later plays this clever repartee becomes a part of the character and the action and is consistent throughout the play. As the epigram fades from fashion, its use is reduced in Maugham's plays although it is replaced by the new fashion in language. Most clearly identified as the new fashion is the teen-age jargon of The Breadwinner. A parallel can be drawn between the trend toward unified dialogue and the progressive incorporation of the marriage contract into the plot and action. Although the development of uniformity in Maugham's dialogue can be observed in stages, Our Betters is the first play in which he created a continuity of clever dialogue. Continuity is achieved because the dialogue does not stand apart from the progression of the play, but instead becomes a part of it. Having observed the means by which Maugham establishes environment, our attention can return to the concept of the character who is out of place in that environment. This concept leads to an ethical consideration. Who is victorious in Maugham's comedy? Is there victory for the ethically good, or for the ethically moral, or is there no victory at all? The setting for Jack Straw is a fashionable spa, the Grand Babylon Hotel. This is in itself a cliche which immediately suggests the leisured class. But what characters does Maugham place 22

W. Somerset Maugham, "To A Young Novelist", W. Somerset Maugham, Charles Hanson Towne et al. (New York, George H. Doran Company, 1925), p. 52. 23 John Brophy, Somerset Maugham (London, Longman's, Green and Co., 1952), pp. 22-23.

100

ILLUSION AND REALITY

in this environment? Lady Wanley, by virtue of her title and manners belongs here but she cannot afford it, and therefore she is out of place. The Parker-Jennings do not belong for the opposite reason. The Withers and the Abbotts are only tourists, curious onlookers; they do not belong. Perhaps only Jack Straw belongs, but even he is out of his element for he belongs as a resident, not as a waiter. Nevertheless, Lady Wanley describes Straw's adaptability to be "thoroughly at home in whatever society he finds himself" as "not a bad definition of a gentleman".24 This is more than just an epigram; it represents Maugham's basic philosophy. He comments repeatedly in his plays on the inability of his characters to move between social groups. Conflict results as the individual attempts to create class distinctions which will separate him from others. Man's desire to create class distinctions is a universal element in the comedies of Maugham. It pervaded Maugham's works. Class consciousness in the lower classes, as Maugham had observed it while interning in obstetrics at St. Thomas' Hospital, led to the tragic conclusion in his first published work, the novel, Liza of Lambeth. The individual in conflict with class stigma was the subject of his first produced one act play, Marriages are Made in Heaven,25 and of his first full length play, A Man of Honour.2" The conflict in A Man of Honour evolves from the complexities, idiosyncracies and crassness of society and of those who are in conflict with society. John Halliwell, the raisoneur, indicates the power of society when he says, Y o u know, m e n and w o m e n without end have snapped their fingers at society and laughed at it, a n d f o r a while they t h o u g h t they h a d the better of it. But all the time society was quietly smiling u p its sleeve, and suddenly it put out a n iron h a n d - and scrunched t h e m up. 2 7 24

Jack Straw, I, p. 193. Adapted into German by Maugham as Schiffbruchig (Shipwreck) and staged in Berlin in 1902 by Max Reinhardt possibly. (Mander and Mitchensen, op. cit., p. 17.) Published in England in a literary annual, The Venture, 1903, edited by Maugham and Laurence Housman. 26 First presented at two performances by the Stage Society in London by Harley Granville-Barker who also played the lead. 27 W. Somerset Maugham, A Man of Honour (Chicago, The Dramatic Publishing Co., no date), I, p. 27. 25

ILLUSION AND REALITY

101

The story of A Man of Honour is that of a young gentleman who marries a bar maid when he discovers that she is to bear his child. The marriage is not a success and the wife commits suicide. The husband, who had already decided to leave his wife, expressed mixed feelings of guilt and pleasure that he is now free. John's moral sense is disturbed by the friend's attitude and they discuss whether the friend was more "noble" by defying convention and marrying, or whether John was more "noble" by conforming to the conventions of society. Although John is the raisoneur, he does not answer the argument. Maugham left the solution to the audience. The answer was clear to J. T. Grein, who, writing in the Sunday Special, March 1, 1903, proclaimed the play "The second Mr. Tanqueray". 28 [A Man of Honour] is the drama of thousands of middle class homes. It is the drama of thousands of thoughtless young people who marry beneath their intellectual and educational status and repent when it is too late.28 Whether it is possible to agree with Grein's interpretation, or not, is immaterial. Maugham left the decision to the audience and he has refused to commit himself to an answer. However, when evaluating and recounting his experiences in Europe during and immediately after the fall of France in 1941, he makes the following statement: "I conceived the notion that the crisis was destroying the class consciousness which had been one of the evils of English life." 30 And who was responsible for class consciousness and for its elimination? In Maugham's opinion, it is a mistake to think that it is the well-to-do (in England at least) who are standoffish to their social inferiors; on the contrary it is the poor who have the strongest feeling of class distinction, it is they who look upon members of the better-educated or more opulent class with a suspicion; and it is this suspicion that these young men of gentle birth had managed by their good humour and good sense to dispel.®1 88

Mander and Mitchensen, op. cit., p. 24. Mander and Mitchensen, op. cit., p. 24. so W. Somerset Maugham, Strictly Personal (Garden City, Doubleday, 1942), p. 261. " Ibid., pp. 262-263. *·

102

ILLUSION AND REALITY

Would this have been Maugham's attitude in 1903? It is impossible to know. But we do know that in his dramatic comedy it was usually the well-to-do who were conscious of class distinction. Maugham's continued concern with the problem of class consciousness and his opinion expressed in the above 1941 quote, suggest the reason why Maugham's characters do not belong in their stereotyped environment. In Maugham's comedies, there are numerous examples of characters who attempt to create class consciousness although the majority belong to the leisured society. From the upper-class there are the obvious examples of Lady Wanley, the Parker-Jennings, Captain Montgomerie and Davenport Barlow. The American expatriates in Our Betters also represent this group, as do the characters in The Circle. Class conscious characters in the opulent middle class are found in The Breadwinner, Home and Beauty, The Constant Wife, Penelope and Smith. There are fewer examples from the lower class; however, the characteristic is demonstrated by Fletcher in Smith, Madame Claude and the manicurist in Home and Beauty. In his discussion of the comedy of manners, Newell Sawyer questions After a rereading of Maugham one queries what there is of the wit or wisdom of high comedy. As a comedian of manners has he done more than give back to his audience their own traditional conceptions of high life? Does he carve out of the living granite or has he deftly pieced together quarry-chips?82 There is an element of truth in Sawyer's first question. The second question, implicit criticism of Maugham, can be ignored because Sawyer overlooks the fact that it may have been part of Maugham's design to stimulate the audience's imagination with their own pre-conceived impressions of the leisured class. If Maugham does not represent a complete picture of the manners of the leisured class, what does he do? The solution is to bei found in another question. Why do the characters not belong in this 32

Newell W. Sawyer, The Comedy of Manners (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1931), p. 228.

ILLUSION AND REALITY

103

class? Sawyer makes the mistake of "manners" criticism which Holland explains as follows: Behind "manners" criticism one senses always the tacit assumption that the business of literature is to portray the mores of a particular period. While that may be so, I think it is even more the function of literature to fuse the details of which it is made with some kind of human universal. To neglect the universal is to turn the writer into a social historian and that has been the principle of Palmer's book and of the consequent "manners" criticism of Restoration comedy. The plays are commonly regarded as meaningless representatives of an outmoded frivolity.33

According to Ervine, the plays from Our Betters up to the last plays are "entirely concerned with marital relations", and suffer "from the confusion of thought which is evident when a problem is too narrowly examined".34 Mr. Maugham appears to be distressed by the fact that marriages are sometimes unhappy, and in his distress ignores the fact that happy marriages are commoner.35

Ervine need not have confined his remarks to the early plays. Maugham did not choose the marriage contract because he was "distressed" by unhappy marriages. Instead, he chose the marriage contract because it was a universal symbol of society. Another universal in Maugham's plays, one dependent on the marriage contract, follows from his concern with the structure of society, with the morality of class distinction. Maugham's concern with this morality provides another universal element in his plays. Consider, for the moment, a comparison of the relationship of the character to the environment in the comedies of Shaw, Barrie and Maugham. The characters in Barrie's comedies belong to their environment and it is almost always that of the leisured class. A perfect example of the "belonging" is found in The Admirable Crichton. Turning on the clever comic idea that the servant becomes the master, Barrie set the second act of this play on a deserted island which is temporarily occupied by the shipwrecked family of Lord Loam and their servants. Crichton, who is the 33 34

»

Holland, op. cit., pp. 205-206. Jonas, op. cit., p. 151. Ibid.

104

ILLUSION AND REALITY

perfect butler in act one and who readily assumes the same role in the final act, becomes the master on the island where his particular ability qualifies him for this position. The inversion of servant and master emphasizes Barrie's conception of the stability of the conventions of society. Shaw, on the other hand, questioned society's conventions by presenting diverse arguments of an abstract idea from the point of view of a "Hegelian or Marxist dialectic".36 Shaw not only questioned the stability of the conventions of society, he vociferously recommended specific alterations of those conventions. Maugham, from still another perspective, questions the morality of society. "Can the perfect adaptation of man to society ever take place?" he asks in his Notebook.91 In answer, he says, Wherever there is love, there cannot fail to be hatred, malice, jealousy, rage. However willing people may be to surrender their own gratification to the common good, it is hard to believe that they will ever surrender their children's. Men do not change: passions are always likely to be awakened and the brutal instincts of the savage to reassert their domination. 88

For Maugham there is "another and a better world" outside the circle of his "castigating".3» This other world is masked by the unworthy motives which characterize the present world. By such an attitude Maugham's philosophy suggests the "general existentialism" of Nietzsche which concerns itself with "immorality that struts around masked as morality".40 It is not our intention to conclude that Maugham is an existentialist. In fact, the tone of his plays suggests rather that he was always an Edwardian looking for the period of ease characteristic of that Age which disappeared forever with the death of Edward VII. This is part of the Maugham enigma for although he belongs to the past, there is some suggestion of the present. 311 37

Holland, op. cit., p. 62. Maugham, Notebook, op. cit., p. 31.

m Ibid. 39

James Agate, The Contemporary Theatre, 1924 (London, Chapman & Hall, Ltd., 1925), p. 214. 40 Walter Kaufmann, ed., Existentialism (New York, Meridian Books, Inc., 1956), p. 21.

ILLUSION AND REALITY

105

Maugham has been identified with the past because as Sawyer said, "he told nothing new". What is unique in Maugham, what identifies him with those who follow him (not in style, but in time), is his attitude toward the confusion of society. It is only by associating Maugham with certain dramatists since 1940 that the true depth of his irony can be recognized. Ward, in his work on Maugham, recognized this depth of irony when he concluded, But he is not a humorist in the sense of being a comedian. He is an ironist and a satirist, but are these actually humorists, or are they something more than is usually meant by the word humorist. . . . Mr. Maugham is an ironic humorist. He is often funny, but what he writes that is funny is not pure wit, is not wit in itself, nor is it funny simply because it is absurd or ridiculous. His humor does not produce a chuckle or a giggle but a laughter that is pained and qualified. It is never free laughter or joyous laughter, but laughter held in bondage to grief. Often it is a kind of defense against life, against the 'callousness of the universe'.41

Here there is a clue to that enigma of Maugham's comedy which makes it "vaguely unpleasant". Maugham's humor possesses serious overtones. Certainly it is not necessary to trace the history of the argument concerning the dual existence of the serious and non-serious. As early as Plato, disagreement on this dual existence was registered when in the Symposiom Plato contended that "he who is through art a tragic poet is a comic poet also".42 In the Republic, to the contrary, Plato has Socrates say, "the same men cannot do well in the two domains of imitation which appear to be so near together, the composition that is, of comedy and tragedy".43 The long history of dramatic literature reveals alternately the insistence that comedy should be separated from tragedy, or that the two should not be separated. Since the last world war the world's drama has tended to follow the latter phase. As Wylie Sypher contends, "the comic and the tragic views of life no longer exclude each other".44 41

Richard Heron Ward, William Somerset Maugham (London, Geoffrey Bless, 1937), pp. 148-149. 42 Plato, Cooper transi. (London, Oxford, 1938), p. 276. 43

44

Ibid., p. 315.

Wylie Sypher, ed., Comedy (New York, Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1956), p. 193.

106

ILLUSION AND REALITY

The philosophy of Maugham can be traced to the German and to Nietzsche as well as to the Restoration, but it can also be traced to the French; to Flaubert and Maupassant. Today, particularly, it is the French who view the duality of life with the greatest clarity in the drama. From France comes the modern theatre's most challenging comedy, and what is the quality of that comedy? I only wish to point out that the dominant tone in modern French humour is of the "black" variety, l'humour noir, and is a compound of anti-religious seriousness, anti-bourgeois vehemence and anti-rationalism. It can be traced, with many variations on the rationalist/ anti-rationalist pattern from Baudelaire and Flaubert, through Mallarmé, Rimbaud, Jarry, Breton and Artaud, to Gide, Sartre and Camus, Beckett, Ionesco.. . ·45 As a writer of "black" comedy and as one who questions the stability of his society, Maugham anticipates not in structure but in idea the comedy of subsequent dramatists. His comedy has an ironic bite because it involves the audience in the same confusion between the reality and illusion of class distinction that his characters face. But is this questioning of society a new concept? Holland points to another difference between Restoration and Elizabethan comedy when he says, "Restoration comedy questions; earlier English comedy affirms". 46 Elizabethan comedy affirms because the characters arrive at decisions through analogy. That is, the character adjusts his position to the accepted social order. The individual adjusts because he accepts the status quo as the representative condition of "the great chain of being", and, he reasons, there can be no variance from "the great chain of being". 47 By contrast, in the comedy of the Restoration, Holland contends, the individual arrives at decisions by the reasoning process of causality. Facts are obscured by illusions and hence, the process of reasoning depends upon perception rather than on analogy. For the Restoration individual, science has destroyed the inevitability of "the great chain of being" and has substituted the idea that there can be no in45

John Weightman, "Humour and the French", The Twentieth Century (London, July, 1961), Vol. 170, p. 125. Holland, op. cit., p. 224. 47 Ibid. 48

ILLUSION AND REALITY

107

evitability. As a result Holland concludes, the Restoration individual adjusts to the individual and to science but not to society.48 As the individual adjusts to the individual the configuration of the social pattern changes. As the social pattern changes, the maxims of society are made to seem less definitive and the need for conforming is less imposing. The evolution of the questioning of the social structure was a gradual one until after the First World War. Following that war this gradual evolution began to increase with "ever-increasing velocity", as Nicolson has said.49 "As class distinctions began to lose their former inevitability, class enmities arose. . . . No longer would any adolescent be taught, or inclined, to take his status for granted." 50 In spite of the continual realignment of class structure, the existence of a class structure was exceedingly important to the English as has been demonstrated by events following World War II. As a layman on the subject, Tyrone Guthrie reflects, comparing his observation of society in England, Australia, Canada and the United States, "You suddenly realize how tremendously important, how all-pervading in every aspect of British life is the class structure of society." 51 Maugham's view of the instability of the English social structure is most clearly marked when one views his plays as a whole. In the early plays, through Penelope (1908), the resolution of the play reveals that the social order present in the beginning of the play has been restored. In Lady Frederick, for example, the social order of the gentry is established from the start, and, although this social order is disrupted by the status-seeking Montgomerie, it is restored in the resolution of the play by laughing Montgomerie off the stage. Montgomerie's exclusion from society is rather harsh (though not undeserved in the melodramatic context of the play) when compared to the nouveau riche characters in Jack Straw. Jack Straw provides a comparison of three levels of society: the gentry, the nouveau riche and minor royalty. In the development 48

Holland, op. cit., pp. 222-225. Harold Nicolson, King George V (London, Constable Co., Ltd., 1952), p. 517. 50 Ibid. 51 Tyrone Guthrie, A Life in the Theatre (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1959), p. 277. 48

108

ILLUSION AND REALITY

of this play Maugham's attitude is that no single group is out of order, but rather that they all are. The resolution does not reject one level of society as in Lady Frederick. Instead each level moves from an extreme form of behavior to a more equitable form of behavior and that becomes a common form for each level. Thus, Maugham uses the concept of the golden mean. Society is restored. The social order in Penelope differs from the earlier plays because the characters come from the middle class rather than from the gentry. This social order is also restored in the resolution of the play, but it is the last of Maugham's plays which concludes in this way. By the following year, 1909, when Smith was written, the social order is formed by an amalgam of gentry and plutocracy. This social order is disrupted by Freeman (obviously a symbolic name) but it is not restored, although Rose does seek new and similar companions in order to escape from boredom, and Freeman and Smith set off for the colonies as man and wife. But by 1914 the social order so carefully established by Lady Grayston in Our Betters is permanently disrupted by the intrusion of her American sister. The Circle follows a similar pattern with one significant distinction: the social order is disrupted more clearly from within the group. The colonial, Teddie Luton, is a catalyst rather than the instigator of the dissolution of society. The remaining plays, Home and Beauty, The Breadwinner and The Constant Wife, follow the pattern of The Circle, although they differ in the respect that the social order represented is the middle class. In all of these plays the existence of a structured society is taken for granted. At the same time it can be noted that the social structure is realigning from play to play, and moreover, there is increased emphasis on the middle class. The Breadwinner is the only one of the plays that does not have a heterogeneous class structure, but even here the direction is clearly the same since Battle (again the symbolism of the name is obvious) chooses to dissociate himself from the segment of middle class society which is grasping for recognition in the leisured class. What is the importance of class structure in these plays of Maugham's? Swinnerton maintains that Maugham

ILLUSION AND REALITY

109

was not an innovator, moral or technical. Where Shaw, Galsworthy, and Wells concerned themselves with society, and directed attention to faults in its structure, Mr. Maugham's exceptionally keen eye was upon the follies of individuals. Since these others were 'serious', he could only be regarded as flippant. He was regarded as flippant, trivial, cynical and non-constructive. His name was known; the earnest greatly enjoyed his plays in the theatre; but the British were in the mood for politics and sociology, and he was not. 52

Swinnerton's conclusion is ambivalent. In effect he is saying that the audience enjoyed Maugham's plays, but the critics did not. Swinnerton overlooks the fact that the individual follies of Maugham's characters illuminated the faults in the social structure. It is true, Maugham's criticism is not corrective as is Shaw's. Nor does Maugham find fault with any one aspect of society as does Galsworthy. Instead, Maugham creates his characters to grope within a framework that is unstable. Beginning with Smith his characters attempt to falsify their social image when they do not even know the basis of the reality of their society. The characteristic is best seen in Our Betters. Maugham's plays were not treatises on politics or sociology. They were amusing because the audience could laugh at itself without knowing why it was doing so. Maugham's attitude, which stresses the ambiguity of a classless society and fails to identify right and wrong, is ironic. Frye describes this irony when he says, "whenever a reader is not sure what the author's attitude is or what his own is supposed to be, we have irony with relatively little satire".5® Meredith, the Victorian novelist, who held a high regard for Molière, but discounted the greater part of Restoration comedy as being false, explains in his "Essay on Comedy" that the deplorable condition of English comedy (circa 1877) dates back to the Restoration in general and to Wycherley in particular for Wycherley "stuffed lumps of realism in a vulgarized theme to hit the mark of the English appetite".54 Elaborating on this belief, Meredith says, 52

Jonas, op. cit., p. 13. Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1957), p. 223. 54 George Meredith, "An Essay on Comedy", in Sypher, op. cit., p. 16. 53

110

ILLUSION AND REALITY

These bad traditions for comedy affect us, not only on the stage, but in our literature, and may be tracked into our social life. They are the ground of the heavy moralizings by which we are outwearied, about life as a comedy, and comedy as a jade, when popular writers, conscious of fatigue in creativeness, desire to be cogent in a modish cynicism; perversions of the idea of life, and of the proper esteem for the society we have wrested from brutishness, and would carry higher. Stock images of this description are accepted by the timid and the sensitive, as well as by the saturnine, quite seriously; for not many look abroad with their own eyes - fewer still have the habit of thinking for themselves. Life, we know too well, is not a comedy, but something strangely mixed; nor is comedy a vile mask.55

There can be no doubt that Maugham has fed the appetite of his audience, but has he done more than merely reinforce their already stereotyped notion of the leisured class? The society which Maugham depicts in his comedy is the society one reads about in the newspapers. This is true of all of his comedy even though only Our Betters calls attention to the fact. People who belong to the upper echelons of society do not have to, nor do they want to, call attention to that fact in the newspapers. There is a superficial quality in "newspaper" society for it needs to seek recognition. The observer watching the manipulations of this society develops a stereotyped image of all high society. Maugham takes advantage of this. His stereotyped leisured class characters are searching for an identity. The question, "who is victorious in Maugham's plays?" was asked but was not answered.56 It can be answered now. There is no victory. Maugham defines neither the ethically good nor the ethically moral. Beginning with Smith, when society is not restored to a middle ground or to a golden mean, what is good and what is moral to Maugham lies somewhere in the vacuum between the extreme positions which his characters take. In other words, Maugham does not create a character to represent the real social image. Society is disrupted but there is nothing to restore its order. To Maugham there is no defined right and there is no defined wrong, and therefore, there is no victory. Lady Grayston is not right for deserting responsibility to sustain her social image, 55 ω

Meredith, op. cit., p. 16. Supra, p. 135.

ILLUSION AND REALITY

111

but neither is Bessie for turning from the challenge of responsibility. Constance makes her point for recognition of the changed role of the wife in the society of the post-war world, but is she right in flaunting her new-found freedom in the face of her husband, and is he not somewhat of a fool for docilely standing by and accepting the horned fate which she imposes on him? Here is the "new" woman and the "new" man but they are lost in a vacuum because there is no precedent to determine their behavior. Not even Battle leaves the field in glory for, although he has gained the day, he has no conception of tomorrow's struggle. How can society present its real image if it does not know what that image is? Can there be victory in deserting responsibility? Maugham's answer would be, "No", and this is the problem of the next chapter.

VI THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE AND A REVISED VIEW OF PRIVILEGE AND RESPONSIBILITY

The truth is, John [Bull] was always a surly, meddlesome, obstinate fellow, and of late years his head has not been quite right! In short, John is a great blockhead and a great bully, and requires (what he has been long labouring for) a hundred years of slavery to bring him to his senses.1 William Hazlitt, "The Round Table"

At the close of the preceding chapter the question was asked, "Can there be victory in deserting responsibility?" This question is significant because it is a question which many of Maugham's characters must face or avoid. The tradition of responsibility accompanying privilege is well known. This meant in ages past that the landed aristocrat must provide for the well-being of those who lived in his domain. It was in this tradition that King George V from the outset of his reign sought to identify the monarchy with the needs and the pleasures of ordinary people, paying repeated visits to industrial centres, attending football matches, driving through the poorer districts of London, and visiting miners and workers in their homes. 2

Edward VII had been of the same tradition although he did not manifest it in the same way as his son. Moreover, Edward had been the leader of an auspicious and flamboyant society. While Edward's opposing activities might seem to be contradictions, they were attuned to the time. As Laver says, "the Edwardian age was 1 William Hazlitt, The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed. P. P. Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1931), Vol. IV, p. 99. 2 Harold Nicolson, King George V (London, Constable & Co., Ltd., 1952), pp. 141-142.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

113

probably the last period in history when the fortunate thought they could give pleasure to others by displaying their good fortune before them". 3 The social and economic reaction to the Edwardian age was a reaction of austerity. With this austerity arose the need to discover a new meaning, to formulate new maxims, for the responsibility of the privileged classes. Beginning with the writing of Smith Maugham explores the conflict that arises between the opulent society and the austere society. In this and subsequent plays the opulent society is identified with the privilege of the leisured class, and the austere society is identified with the colonial character who comes to represent a new concept of responsibility. In 1941 Maugham wrote a novelette, Up at the Villa,4 in which he reveals his conception of the new responsibility. The story of Up at the Villa contrasts three men: an idealist, a traditionalist, and a playboy. The idealist realizes that he will never achieve his ideal, and recognizing the futility of struggling for the unobtainable, commits suicide. The traditionalist refuses to modify the tenets of his tradition. Unswerving in his adherence to the old customs, he continues to exist; but he is childless. Symbolically the traditionalist represents a disappearing society for he does not propagate. Finally, the playboy, recognizing the folly of his mode of behavior, chooses to follow a new way of life. And what is this new way of life? The playboy does not turn to the stability of tradition as would the Restoration man who, having sown his wild oats, was ready to assume a responsible role in his aristocratic society. Instead, the playboy becomes a worker who hopes to achieve status in the middle class. To Maugham the symbol of England's survival was the traditional English gentleman who could retain the qualities of the gentleman, but who could give up the traditional gentleman's privilege and in its stead accept the new middle class responsibility. Maugham identifies this as the desire to work for a living and contribute to society as an individual and not as a class. It is true that this novelette was written in * James Laver, Edwardian Promenade (Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958), p. 4. 4 W. Somerset Maugham, Up at the Villa (New York, Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc., 1941).

114

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

the early years of the Second World War when the need for austerity was dramatically apparent. But the playboy was not new to Maugham's writing. In various shadings, the colonial character in Maugham's dramatic comedy represents the rejuvenation and modification of the playboy as the progenitor of England's survival. In only one play, The Land of Promise, does Maugham portray the colonial in his own environment. Analysis of this play will provide the basis for the study of Maugham's dramatic colonial. The Land of Promise is the story of the adjustment of a woman's companion, Norah Marsh, to the hard agrarian Canadian life. To Norah, her life as a woman's companion, "almost a lady", was "ineffectual and useless". Norah comes to realize that the boredom of her former life has been replaced by a new boredom. The prairie in the winter is "dreary and monotonous". But there is a difference in the new boredom for "there's beauty and romance in it".5 Norah's new boredom is more than adequately compensated for by the self-realization of contributing to the building of a new nation. In England the excitement of building an Empire has been replaced by complacency. The "courage and strength and hope" necessary in the colonial life appear to Maugham to be gone from the life in England. Virile English life has been supplanted by a life of ease and unsatisfied boredom. England must regain the vigor she once had, a vigor which has already been discovered by her colonials. Opulent society versus industrious society is the argument of The Land of Promise. The opposing arguments, the return to indolence and opulence, are represented by Reginald Hornsby. Hornsby, a perpetual mother's boy, was sent to Canada by his father when his father found it impractical to pay the gambling debts of his parasitic son. Norah, whose migration to the colonies parallels and contrasts with Hornsby's, and who makes the adjustment to colonial life, is more completely developed as a character than Hornsby, who chooses to return to the easy social life of England when his mother sends the necessary funds. 5

The Land of Promise, IV, p. 308.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

115

HORNSBY: All I want is to get through life comfortably. I don't mean to do a stroke more work than I'm obliged to, and I'm going to have the very best time I can get.*

Hornsby returns to the past tradition where he will retain the privilege of leisure but will assume no responsibility. In contrast, hard work and the spirit of the romance of the future characterize Norah's confrontation of life. Norah married in a fit of spite. Acting on an impulse she agreed to marry Taylor, and her pride kept her from withdrawing from her agreement. It was not a marriage of love. She found her husband to be demanding, for the prairie required long hours of labor, and he demanded her body, as they were man and wife, "and if you don't submit willingly, by God I'll take you as the trappers in the old days used to take the squaws".7 She learned satisfaction from her work, but she found no satisfaction in love until she realized that she was working for the same thing her husband was; the romance which was to be found in the potentiality of the prairie. The Land of Promise by its contrasting of Hornsby and Norah suggests that England should re-evaluate her principles in terms of the industry of the colonies. In recognizing that England could learn from her colonies Maugham shares rather than leads public opinion. As early as 1901, the apogee of the Edwardian era, the lesson which the colonies held for England began to be apparent. In that year the Duke of York (King George V) was sent on a tour of the colonies by his father. The changing colonial picture was to change the Duke of York's perspective. [He] was not slow to comprehend these changed perspectives, this wider horizon. He had seen governments functioning, cabinets in office, which were composed of men of humble origins and simple education. In New Zealand he had witnessed a Welfare State in being, . . . in which women had been accorded the franchise. 8

Cabinet members from the Labor party, the women's franchise and the Welfare State would come to England. It is ironic that the colonial pupil would become the teacher. There is irony in the « The Land of Promise, IV, p. 295. 7 Ibid., m , p. 284. 8 Nicolson, op. cit., pp. 72-73.

116

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

colonial character Maugham creates for his dramatic comedy. In Maugham's short stories and novels and in his serious plays his colonial characters are more conventional. As Malcolm Cowley says, "For the most part Maugham writes about Englishmen of the upper middle class, particularly those who carry the burden of empire in Borneo and the Malay States." 9 The conventional colonial, the patriot who carries with him the wisdom and the justice of England to the outposts of the Empire, appears in the plays Caesar's Wife and The Sacred Flame. Maugham has labeled Caesar's Wife "a comedy",10 although it would more correctly be termed a serious play. The play is concerned with the sacrifice a British Consular Agent, Sir Arthur Little, must make in carrying the "burden of empire" in Egypt, and with the lessons his young wife must learn so that she, too, can make sacrifices to aid her husband in carrying that burden. Sir Arthur and Lady Little are patriots. Discussing the play in his Notebook, Maugham says, There is one queer thing about patriotism: it is a sentiment that doesn't travel. Many years ago I wrote a play called Caesar's Wife which was a success in England, but a failure elsewhere. It wasn't a bad play. To the inhabitants of other countries it seemed improbable and faintly absurd that English people should sacrifice themselves to what they considered was their duty to their country. 11

Whether or not Maugham is accurate in appraising the reason for his play's failure in other countries, his comment here illustrates the conventional English image of the patriotic colonial. What, then, is the image of the colonial that Maugham creates in the comedies which are the concern of this study? Maugham's colonial characters in these comedies are, like Norah Marsh, abstractions of the new working middle class gentleman as characterized by the playboy in Up at the Villa. These colonials are not employed by the government to help in ruling the Empire. They are engaged in their own private enterprise, usually • Malcolm Cowley, "An Angry Author's Complaint", in Klaus W. Jonas, ed., The Maugham Enigma (New York, The Citadel Press, 1954), p. 182. 10 Caesar's Wife, title page. 11 W. Somerset Maugham, A Writer's Notebook (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949), pp. 325-326.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

117

commerce or farming, and they have all achieved at least a modicum of success. They have attained affluence by hard work, by faith (not religious faith, but faith in one's self and in the Commonwealth), by a strong motivation and ceaseless desire, and by a sensitivity to natural beauty. Because he is endowed with vigor and tenacity, the colonial achieves his goal. But, with the exception of The Land of Promise, the colonial only talks about his vigor and tenacity, for being out of his environment he is given little opportunity to demonstrate it. Following this general introduction to the colonial, the type can now be examined for particular qualities in specific plays. First consideration shall be given to the colonial element in Our Betters. Strictly speaking, of course the American is not a colonial. Nevertheless, the history of America as a colony and the derivation of American society and government from the British is sufficient for purposes of this discussion to classify him as such. Three elements of society are represented in Our Betters, accordingly: the American expatriate, the English gentry, and the American colonial. Harvey and Bessie are intruders on a society which is itself an intruder. Thus, it could be said that Harvey and Lord Bleane occupy opposite ends of a continuum. Lord Bleane, born into the gentry, belongs to the traditional English society. As an intruding colonial, Harvey is more blatantly outspoken than Bessie for he has no desire to join the expatriates in seeking status in that society. Although Harvey does not know why, he believes that he belongs in America. "Go back to America, and fall in love with some nice fellow, and marry him", he tells Bessie.12 "Perhaps your life won't be so brilliant or so exciting, but it will be simpler and wholesomer, and more becoming." 13 This is a vague argument; Bessie ignores it. As a character Fleming is not fully developed. When it is convenient to the story Fleming is there. (He was available to discover Lady Grayston and Tony in bed together when the censor decided it would be immoral if Bessie were to do so, as Maugham originally intended.) Fleming functions primarily as an interrogator. He asks questions about the expatriate society 12 13

Our Betters, II, p. 58. Ibid.

118

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

and thus provides the other characters with the motivation to explain their society. But Harvey never does understand that society; he does not want to. Nor does he understand the motivations of the legitimate English gentry. Regarding Lord Bleane, he tells Bessie, Well, I don't think much of these English lords who run after American girls for their money. I expected him to be a brainless loafer, with just enough cunning to know his market value, but he's a modest, unassuming fellow. To tell you the truth, I'm puzzled.14

Harvey is puzzled, and yet this scene immediately follows his scene with the Princess in which she explains, "No one has ever hinted to us [Americans] that we have any duty towards our own country." 15 Harvey is not meant to understand; Maugham has created Bessie to understand. The major conflict in Our Betters is between the two sisters, Bessie and Lady (Pearl) Grayston. Although reluctant at first, Bessie agrees to marry Lord Bleane because she admires the life her sister leads as a member of the English gentry. However, when she discovers the moral deceit on which her sister's life is based, she chooses first to leave her sister's jurisdiction and then to reverse her decision to marry. Upon the outcome of their conflict depends the stability of Lady Grayston's social position. Their conflict illuminates the difference between those born into the gentry and those who are not. That difference is primarily one of understanding the responsibility that accompanies privilege. The life of the gentry, Bessie tells Lord Bleane, is "a life of dignity, of responsibilities, and of public duty".16 It comes naturally to the English girls of your class. They've known it all their lives, and they've been brought up to lead it. Don't you see that we're not strong enough for the life over here? It goes to our head; we lose our bearings; we put away our own code, and we can't adopt the code of the country we come to.17 14 15 16 17

Our Betters, Π, p. 56. Ibid., p. 54. Ibid., ΙΠ, pp. 112-113. Our Betters, ΙΠ, pp. 112-113.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

119

This is an important discovery to Bessie, for upon it is based her decision to withdraw from her marriage contract with Lord Bleane. Yet it must be noted that Bessie arrives at this understanding without having a representative character of the English gentry to compare with the expatriates. Lord Bleane is not well enough developed as a character to provide her with an example. What this means is that Bessie must make her discovery outside the bounds of the play. In other words, Maugham imposes Bessie's conclusion on her, rather than showing it develop. It is by exterior motivation, that is, by the playwright's manipulation, that Bessie and Harvey, the outsiders, find a flaw in English society. This flaw is the discrepancy between privilege and responsibility. The American expatriates are more than simply representative of those leisured Americans who are looking for recognition in the European aristocracy. They symbolize as well the English gentry who have forgotten their responsibility. Even Lord Bleane is befuddled when Bessie reveals to him her discovery. In fact, he never does understand her position. Yet he can utter almost mechanically (the playwright speaking again):18 The set you've been living in here isn't the only set in England. It makes a stir because it's in the public eye. Its doings are announced in the papers. But it isn't a very good set, and there are plenty of people who don't very much admire it.

Although Lady Grayston can control her guests to prevent the scandal of her intimacy with Tony from being rumored about her social set, she cannot prevent Bessie from leaving. When Bessie announces at the curtain of the play that she is returning to America tomorrow, the curtain descends on an uneasy security. The audience has every reason to believe that Lady Grayston is fully capable of inventing some acceptable excuse. Her position of superiority in her social group will not be deleteriously affected. Nevertheless, it will weaken her position, for one suspects she will not always be able to cover up her manipulations. Thus, we see revealed the dramatic function of the colonial character in Our Betters. We have seen the colonial as an intruder 18

Our Betters, III, p. 112.

120

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

who disrupts an insecure leisured class and leaves it less secure than when he entered. Of the two colonials Bessie is more completely developed as a character. Except for her major discovery regarding the role of responsibility, her development is an integral part of the action. On this basis interesting similarities between Our Betters and Smith become immediately apparent. As a dramatist Maugham was less successful in portraying the underlying insecurity of society in Smith. Moreover, the attack and exposure of society by the colonial in Smith is less subtle and more contrived. To see what these differences are, attention can now be turned to the earlier of the two plays. In the chapter on marriage it was pointed out that Smith is developed with a double story line: the Smith-Freeman marriage contract and the Freeman-Rose ideological conflict.19 The progression of the latter story line is developed in four steps which correspond to the four acts of the play. Those four steps are: society interrupted, society debated, society in practice and society disrupted. What is the society of Rose Dallas-Baker? Rose does not belong to the gentry, nor do her friends, but she is pretentiously a member of the leisured class. Her life is a constant battle against boredom, she says. She has only two visible ways of meeting this boredom and they are bridge and the diversion supplied by a professional social parasite, Algernon Peppercorn, a modern version of the court jester. The name is symbolic of the spice he provides for a bored society. I am a benefactor of my species. What d'you suppose Rose and Herbert would do without me? And there are thousands of couples like them who are bored to death with their own company and want a man like me to amuse them. I find by experience that these jobs last about two years. They get sick of me. I can't keep them on good terms with one another any more, and they turn to rend me. I know all the signs a month or two beforehand, and I start looking for somebody else.20 19 20

Supra, p. 109. Smith, II, p. 154.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

121

Rose does not want children because the responsibility and expense they require would make it impossible for her and her husband to follow "the season". Rose does not belong to the leisured class; she cannot afford it; she understands its ways only superficially. Rose exemplifies quite a different kind of social climber than Lady Grayston. Rose is not a "joiner"; she is a follower, clutching at the lowest rung of the social ladder. Unlike Lady Grayston, Rose is an amorphous hanger-on. Rose has none of Lady Grayston's redeeming qualities. She is not clever; she is not aggressive; she is not perceptive; she is not witty. Freeman, Rose's colonial brother, interrupts the security of her bridge table society. Freeman was a playboy who retreated to the colonies when he was hammered on the stock exchange. He learned to work with his hands for a living, at first carrying luggage as a bellboy and eventually rising to become owner and operator of a vast acreage of farm land. Freeman tells of his struggles and of the wisdom he has learned in the colonies, but he behaves in the Dallas-Baker household as an unrelieved boor. From his first entrance Freeman comprehends and criticises the artificiality and decadence of his sister's society. Throughout the play his criticism is only an elaboration of his initial reaction. Freeman's most outspoken criticism of Rose's coterie is made in the third act when he discovers that Rose has deliberately concealed information from Mrs. Otto and from Mrs. Otto's husband in order not to lose a fourth for bridge. By concealing this information, Mrs. Otto is prevented from discovering that her baby is fatally ill. Her baby dies while she is seated at Rose's bridge table. The death of Mrs. Otto's child is an obvious plot device to change the direction of the play. That change leads, in the final act, to Freeman's proposal to Smith and to the dissolution of Rose's coterie. This dissolution is affected first by a melodramatic gesture by Emily, who gives up her artificial social life and departs for the colonies (not the same one as Freeman) where she hopes to find a useful life for herself. Secondly, Mrs. Otto announces that she is withdrawing from the artificiality of bridge because her husband has offered her the choice of marriage and no bridge, or divorce and bridge. She chooses marriage. Even Algernon leaves (he senses that his useful-

122

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

ness has ceased). He has found an American heiress to marry. Finally, Smith is dismissed by Rose because Freeman has had the temerity to propose marriage to her. Except for Freeman, this leaves only Rose and Dallas-Baker on stage, and they depart to seek in artificial gaiety a new solution to their boredom. Rose must have "the crowd and the band, and the gaiety".21 Rose departs with only one regret - that she had not dropped her "friends" before they dropped her. The difference in the dramatic structure of Smith and Our Betters is clearly shown by comparing the colonial's discovery of the immorality of society. Freeman discovers what he has known all along, what he has already condemned. To Bessie, the revelation of Lady Grayston's intimacy with Tony brings into perspective an undercurrent of immorality which she has sensed but which she could not quite explain. With this revelation Bessie begins to see more clearly other relationships which she has not been able to place in their proper perspective. Bessie's discovery follows from the motivations and consequent inter-action of the other characters; but having made the discovery, she does not condemn her sister's society. By Bessie's standards, Pearl's society is false and she does not want to be a part of it, but even her withdrawal is in stages. She first asks the Princess to assist in the wedding arrangements instead of Lady Grayston, and then she withdraws altogether from the marriage contract. Freeman is as inflexible as his sister. Harvey retains to some extent that inflexibility. The social criticism of Our Betters is much less didactic than that of Smith. The seed of discontent in Our Betters is all the more difficult to pinpoint because it is not a matter of right and wrong, of black and white, but of degrees of right and wrong. When talking with the Princess, Harvey says, People don't seem to be good or bad as the squares on a chessboard are black and white. Even the worthless ones have got good traits, and it makes it so hard to know how to deal with them. 22

The idea is not original. But by virtue of this statement, Maugham 21 2î

Smith, IV, p. 208. Our Betters, Π, p. 50.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

123

points to an improvement he has made in his technique of presenting dramatically an aspect of social weakness. As there is a difference between Smith and Our Betters, so there is a difference between Our Betters and the two plays which follow, The Circle and The Constant Wife. The fundamental difference is that society discovers its own weakness rather than having it discovered by an intruding colonial. The colonial character is still there, but his function in the plot has changed. What is the role of the colonial in these later plays? Teddie Luton, the colonial character in The Circle, is first mentioned in a conversation between Arnold and Mrs. Anna Shenstone. ARNOLD: And I think it was a good idea to have Teddie Luton down. ANNA: H e is breezy, isn't he?

ARNOLD: Yes, that's his great asset. I don't know that he's very intelligent, but, you know, there are occasions when you want a bull in a china shop.23

The image of Luton, the bull in a china shop, is very accurate indeed, when one considers the possible connotations of the simile. To Luton, England is rather like a china shop, filled with people who must move with artificial delicacy for fear of breaking. "England seems to me full of people doing things they don't want to because other people expect it of them." 24 Elizabeth explains that this behavior is "what you call a high degree of civilisation".25 Following this interpretation, the colonies, the F.M.S. (Federated Malay States), would be considered the "bull" for there "one works like blazes".26 Moreover, the "pasture" of the "bull" has a natural beauty, "it's lovely, with palm trees", the ocean and the blue sky. "You get used to a blue sky and you miss it in England." 27 Luton's view of England, "I don't think anything's wrong with England. I expect something's wrong with me", 28 is quite restrain23 24

"

28

»

18

The Circle, I, p. 6. Ibid., p. 21. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., p. 20.

124

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

ed when compared with that of Freeman or Harvey. Moreover, Luton's commentary stops early in the second act as he is caught up in the action of the play. The second connotation of the bull in the china shop is the sexual one. Luton's virility is contrasted with Arnold's primness. That primness is exemplified by Arnold's concern for the authenticity of the furnishings in his Georgian estate as indicated in Maugham's stage direction on Arnold's entrance as the first act opens: "He slightly alters the position of one of the chairs. He takes an ornament from the chimney-piece and blows the dust from it." 29 In his primness Arnold is an indifferent lover: ARNOLD: I happen to be in love with you. ELIZABETH: You might have said that before. ARNOLD: I thought you'd take it for granted. You can't expect a man

to go on making love to his wife after three years. I'm very busy. . . . After all, a man marries to have a home, but also because he doesn't want to be bothered with sex and all that sort of thing.»0

Luton may not be a polished lover, but he is certainly an ardent one. As Lady Kitty says, "Of course, the moment he said he'd give her a black eye I knew it was finished."31 Both connotative meanings are significant to Elizabeth's decision to leave with Luton. It is by Elizabeth's decision that Maugham returns to the conflict between privilege and responsibility, opulent society and industrious society. In order to understand this it is necessary to explore the other relationships in the play. Thirty years ago Lord Porteous was the leader of his party, destined to become Prime Minister, and Champion-Cheney was his parliamentary secretary. Both were respected wealthy gentlemen contributing to society as members of Parliament. Their life was as Arnold describes his now, thirty years later, "we lead a very distinguished, useful life. We know a lot of extremely nice peo29

30 31

The Circle, I, p. 28.

Ibid., Π, pp. 56-57. Ibid., i n , p. 88.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

125

pie." 32 Their usefulness to society was destroyed when Lady Kitty eloped with Lord Porteous. Social pressure was so strong that both Lord Porteous and Champion-Cheney withdrew from the House of Commons. Since then Lord Porteous has become a grumpy, gouty old man, and Champion-Cheney has found his pleasure in the worthless pursuit of a parade of chorus girls. Lady Kitty is a disillusioned old woman who attempts to hide behind a façade of youth created with paint and dye. "Oh, of course in the beginning it was heavenly", Lady Kitty tells Elizabeth.33 People cut me, you know, but I didn't mind. I thought love was everything. Perhaps they're [her friends] not very sure of themselves. Perhaps they're honestly shocked. It's a test one had better not put one's friends to if one can help it. It's rather bitter to find out how few one has.34 As Lady Kitty, Lord Porteous and Champion-Cheney reveal themselves to the audience, the audience also begins to understand that Champion-Cheney may see what has become of Lord Porteous and Lady Kitty, but he has only a superficial understanding of what has happened. He cannot understand why they did what they did, nor has he learned what they have learned. It is this vacuousness that establishes the irony of the curtain scene when he sits there praising himself as a "downy old bird" while Luton and Elizabeth drive off into the night. Lady Kitty and Lord Porteous, on the other hand, have some understanding: Will they suffer as we have suffered? And have we suffered all in vain?

LADY KITTY:

My dear, I don't know that in life it matters so much what you do as what you are. . . . If we made rather a hash of things perhaps it was because we were rather trivial people. You can do anything in this world if you're prepared to take the consequences, and consequences depend on character.86

LORD PORTEOUS:

A2 The Circle, II, p. 56. >' Ibid., ΙΠ, P. 75. M Ibid. » The Circle, ΙΠ, p. 89.

126

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

Luton's and Elizabeth's love for each other acts as a catalytic agent to set the parties of the thirty-year old love triangle reminiscing. As the parties of the old love triangle view their lives in retrospect, the audience is made aware of the emptiness that has been created when responsibility was deserted. Without responsibility the three have lost a purpose for their lives. One senses that Arnold, too, will lose purpose for when he loses his wife and his seat in Parliament, he will withdraw into his one love - interior decorating. What motivates Elizabeth to elope when she has such a vivid example of failure before her? Although Elizabeth and Luton confess their love in the first act, Luton does not propose until the second act. Does Elizabeth submit to the ethereal romantic love which she envisions Lady Kitty had for Lord Porteous? When Luton proposes he offers Elizabeth this romantic love. When Lady Kitty attempts to persuade Elizabeth not to elope, Lady Kitty uses as a basis for her argument the disillusion of romantic love. But to Lady Kitty romantic love requires wealth to make a life of ease possible. Quite to the contrary, Luton's love does not emanate from a bank account. But I wasn't offering you happiness. I don't think my sort of love tends to happiness. I'm jealous. I'm not a very easy man to get on with. . . . I daresay we'd fight like cat and dog, and sometimes we'd hate each other. Often you'd be wretched and bored stiff and lonely, and often you'd be frightened and homesick, and then you'd regret all you'd lost. Stupid women would be rude to you because we'd run away together. And some of them would cut you. I don't offer you peace and quietness. I offer you unrest and anxiety. I don't offer you happiness. I offer you love.36

Elizabeth chooses to go with Luton because their life will be a practical, creative life viewed realistically with ups and downs, in a world of natural beauty. In other words, their life will be that which Luton described in the first act before Elizabeth knew that she loved him. But it was that early argument that convinced Elizabeth, not the final argument. She knows what her "love" will be. »« The Circle, m , p. 87.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

127

Plot, action and idea are all inter-dependent in The Circle. Maugham does not express new ideas of conflict in this play. Many have been seen in the plays which preceded this one. The difference is the manner in which Maugham expresses himself, and this new manner of expression is a highly integrated dramatic form. In The Circle as Luton became involved in the action, he became unimportant as a spokesman for the qualities that we have ascribed to the colonial. It is true he represented those qualities, but Maugham did not find it necessary to create this colonial to stand on a soapbox and preach. The idea of the colonial which had been presented didactically in earlier plays and to a lesser extent in Our Betters, was in The Circle represented by the action of Luton and Elizabeth. In fact, the major burden for the argument was given to Elizabeth and this she presented by the decisions she made. In The Constant Wife the form by which Maugham presents this same, or at least similar idea, undergoes another change. Bernard Kersal is the colonial in The Constant Wife. Like the Americans he, too, cannot properly be regarded as a colonial as his business is in Japan. However, because he has been away from England he is in a position to comment on changes that he has observed. Unlike his predecessors, Kersal does not comment on a changed England, nor does he make an argument for the virtues of industry as opposed to opulence. Instead, the argument is carried by Constance but even her argument is changed, or at least somewhat altered. Constance is concerned with the role of the leisure class woman. She has servants to perform the household chores; she has a governess to bring up the children. She has no responsibilities to her husband; not even the responsibility, if it can be termed that, of satisfying him in bed. Let us face it, she [the modern wife] is no more than the mistress of a man of whose desire she has taken advantage to insist on a legal ceremony that will prevent him from discarding her when his desire has ceased.87 37

The Constant

Wife, Π, p . 160.

128

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

And what should the woman do to break away from this role of "parasite", of "prostitute"? "Now that women have broken down the walls of the harem", she tells John, "they must take the roughand-tumble of the street".38 Constance resolves what she considers to be her unenviable position by obtaining employment as an interior decorator. Having worked for a year she is able to pay John what she has cost him to support in that year. I owe you nothing. I am able to keep myself. For the last year I have paid my way. There is only one freedom that is really important and that is economic freedom, for in the long run the man who pays the piper calls the tune. Well, I have that freedom, and upon my soul it's the most enjoyable sensation I can remember since I ate my first strawberry ice.39 Now that she has earned her freedom, whenever she chooses she can tell John "with calm and courtesy to go to hell".40 The manner in which she chooses to do this, her six-week affair with Kersal, has been commented on earlier.41 What deserves our attention here is the idea which she presents and the form in which Maugham presents it to us. As an outspoken member of her sex arguing a case for the freedom of women the only opposition she meets, outside of a rather mild flutter of frustration from John, is the opposition of her mother. Mrs. Culver represents the argument of the traditionalist: there is a double standard and it is the role of the woman to accept graciously her fate within that double standard. The woman's place is in the home. We all know that unchastity has no moral effect on men. They can be perfectly promiscuous and remain upright, industrious and reliable. It's quite different with women. It ruins their character. They become untruthful and dissipated, lazy, shiftless and dishonest. That is why the experience of ten thousand years has demanded chastity in women. Because it has learnt that this virtue is the key to all others.42 The opposing arguments of Mrs. Culver and Constance develop 38 39 40 41 42

Ibid., IU, p. 180. Ibid., p. 181. Ibid., p. 180. Supra, p. 88. The Constant Wife, III, p. 188.

THE CONFLICT OF AUSTERITY AND OPULENCE

129

as they do in Our Betters within the framework of the action of the play. They are integrated and not awkwardly appended as they were in the earlier group of plays. But are they really arguments? More accurately they represent an irrefutable position based on false premises. The arguments, on either side, are unbending, didactic, even though they are integrated. It is in this seeming contradiction that it is perhaps possible to perceive Maugham's true intent. The writer realizes that this is subject to question, for it may be that he is imposing his own ideas on Maugham. Before hazarding an opinion, however, it must be remembered that A Doll's House had been written almost forty years earlier; the initial fight for women's rights had already become an old fight and legally, women had been granted many of the rights they desired. Taking all these facts into consideration, it is the writer's opinion that Maugham is once more presenting arguments from two extreme points of view and furthermore is suggesting that the truth lies somewhere in between. Maugham had used this technique before. Even in The Circle Maugham avoids a definite position, for the audience must draw its own conclusion as to the happiness or success that Elizabeth and Luton find for themselves. Maugham's technique of providing extreme positions without defining the moderate position has been observed in all but one of the colonial plays. By this technique Maugham offers social criticism but he offers no positive alternative. It is this trait which has caused critics to term Maugham a cynic. It is this writer's belief that by taking an undefinable position Maugham has developed a technique of creating comedy, and that will be the subject of the next chapter.

νπ CYNIC AND REPORTER: CONTRADICTION OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

This sour, nonjuring critic [Jeremy Collier] has a great horror and repugnance at poor human nature, in nearly all its shapes; of the existence of which he appears only to be aware through the stage: and this he considers as the only exception to the practice of piety, and the performance of the whole duty of man; and seems fully convinced, that if this nuisance were abated, the whole world would be regulated according to the creed and the catechism. - This is a strange blindness and infatuation! He forgets, in his overheated zeal, two things: First, That the stage must be copied from real life, that the manners copied there must exist elsewhere, . . . Secondly, That the stage cannot shock common decency, according to the notions that prevail of it in any age or country, because the exhibition is public.1 William Hazlitt, "On Wycherley, Congreve, Vanbrugh, and Farquhar"

As we study Maugham's characters, we note a quality about them that is not quite real. We look for the reason but the reason does not present itself to us. We are interested in what happens to the characters and we cannot but learn from them in the way that Maugham has juxtaposed one against another. What disappoints us is that the problems they face, the decisions they make, are so insignificant. But there are lingering doubts as to whether or not this is an accurate appraisal of the disappointment. In the Preface to The Human Image in Dramatic Literature, Francis Fergusson tells us that "the poet's vision is ultimately derived from his human efforts to find his way in the puzzling world we all know, 1

William Hazlitt, The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed. P. P. Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1931), Vol. VI, p. 90.

CYNIC AND REPORTER

131

2

i.e., from experience". What is the human experience to be found in the plays of Maugham? What can be the significance to us today of his characters seeking social prestige? Fergusson goes on to say that the experience to which he refers "is not a matter of literal observation and report; it accumulates slowly within us at some deep level at the very edge of awareness".3 It is this "edge of awareness" that extends beyond mere observation and report where we can discover what is perhaps the greatest enigma of Maugham, the enigma that distinguishes his literary practice from his literary theory. In English literature in the period following World War I, Cazamian maintains that "the fever of an anxious thought still burns under the affected cynicism of indifference".4 This is an apt phrase which suggests two important questions regarding the "cynic" label which was placed on Maugham by his critics. These questions are (1) was Maugham's "cynicism" an "affected cynicism of indifference", and (2) is there a "fever of anxious thought" concealed by that supposed cynicism? In order to answer these questions, we must first understand the meaning of "cynic". The word "cynic" was derived from a Greek school of philosophy and connotes in modern usage "one who believes that human conduct is motivated wholly by self-interest".5 As we contemplate Maugham's characters we observe that none of the characters in the plays is motivated toward any goal beyond his own persona) happiness. None of these characters sacrifices himself to a broad principle. In this respect Maugham's characters are more like those of Congreve than those of Molière; more like those of Anouilh than Shaw. Like Congreve's characters, Maugham's characters are most concerned with their position in society, and like Anouilh's they are living according to an earlier tradition, the tradition of the first decade of the Twentieth Century. Does this mean that Maugham is indifferent to the society of the present, or that he is 2

Francis Fergusson, The Human Image in Dramatic Literature (Garden City, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1957), p. x. » Ibid. 4 Louis Cazamian, Criticism in the Making (New York, The Macmillan Co., Inc., 1929), p. 156. 5 Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 5th ed.

132

CYNIC AND REPORTER

concerned only with the motivation of self-interest? If so, what possible justification can Alec Waugh have for referring to Maugham as the "mouthpiece of the decade" of the 1920's? 6 To answer these questions is to understand Maugham's vision of humanity. The greatest cynic of all of Maugham's characters is Captain Montgomerie. He is such a cynic that he is a travesty not only of himself, but also of the whole family of melodramatic stage villains. Maugham's other characters are not so singly or so simply motivated by self-interest. If we look at these characters, Rose Dallas-Baker, Lady Pearl Grayston, Lady Kitty, Constance, to mention only a few, we notice that Maugham may motivate his characters toward selfish goals, but he also explains or justifies that motivation. How is one to reconcile Maugham's concern with motivation with his contention that he was an observer, not an interpreter of human action; or, as he says in The Summing ϋρ,Ί . . . I have always found that I was assailed by so many impressions, I saw so many strange things and met so many people who excited my fancy, that I had not time to reflect. The experience of the moment was so vivid that I could not attune my mind to introspection. It is the contention of this writer that Maugham's statements of dissociation are not altogether accurate; that they are, in fact, misleading; and that they have misled certain of Maugham's critics. Lady Pearl Grayston is a delightful rogue who has sacrificed all to attain social position. "I've made myself the fashion. I've got power, I've got influence. But everything I've got - my success, my reputation, my notoriety - I've bought it, bought it, bought it." 8 Certainly Pearl is motivated toward self-interest, and ironically, we cannot help admiring her for it. Maugham is not content to stop with this observation of character. The Princess was created, in part, to explain Pearl's motivation. The Princess 6

John Montgomery, The Twenties (London, George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1957), p. 210, quoting Alec Waugh. 7 W. Somerset Maugham, The Summing Up (New York, International Collector's Library, 1938), p. 7. 8 Our Betters, ΠΙ, p. 111.

CYNIC AND REPORTER

133

tells Pearl that she is "so much more English than the English". 9 Later she says to Pearl, You've brought all the determination, insight, vigour, strength, which have made our countrymen turn America into what it is, to get what you wanted. . . . And what makes it more complete is that what you've arrived at is trivial, transitory and worthless.10 Pearl has "arrived". She has attained the pinnacle of success; she has been accepted by the social class with which she sought to be identified. The Princess questions the value of this attainment. Can Pearl be criticized for seeking values that are established by society? Pearl is motivated by self-interest but behind her motivation are goals which society itself established. Maugham's characterization of Pearl does more than just report the behavior of the individual in society, it reveals the conflict of the individual with society. The major conflict in Our Betters grows from the clash of ideas which holds the importance of social position on the one hand, and its unimportance on the other. But the individual motivations for that conflict stem from the emotional desires of the characters. Their motivation by emotional desires rather than by idea is deceptive, for the resultant impression is that the problems they face are insignificant. Holland points to the theory of Professor Guy Montgomery, stated in 1929, that "the motives behind a society's conduct are often more meaningful than the conduct itself would suggest".11 Maugham does more than just present his observations; behind his seeming indifference, he is concerned with the motives for that conduct. In The Circle the separation of Lord Porteous and Lady Kitty from their respective spouses was motivated by self-interest. But in The Circle Maugham is not concerned with that act. Instead he is concerned with what has become of them thirty years later. The toll that society has extracted from them for their impulsive action leaves them as mere shells hiding behind make-up and alcohol. » Ibid., I, p. 23. 10 Ibid., p. 28. 11 Norman N. Holland, The First Modern Comedies (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1959), p. 207, quoting Guy Montgomery.

134

CYNIC AND REPORTER

Explaining what had become of them, Lady Kitty tells Elizabeth, "because we couldn't get the society we'd been used to, we became used to the society we could get".12 Maugham was not unfamiliar with the society of which Lady Kitty speaks, as he tells us in his most recently published articles, for it was the society in which his future wife travelled.13 If Maugham wished to concern himself with the outcast society, why does he place the action of The Circle back at the "scene of the crime" and why does he surround Lady Kitty and Lord Porteous with Kitty's former husband and her son; and why does he develop the dual story line juxtaposing the old lovers against the new? In his compact writing of The Circle Maugham shows two generations which repeat the same action. Many critics are impressed with the irony of the title. One recent college production of the play even went so far as to place the play in a circular setting (on a proscenium stage, not in the round). The circular design was inappropriate to the action. Why? Because the characters themselves are not engaged in a circular conflict. The conflict is linear, not circular. The characters do not choose to avoid conflict by following a circuitous path. Lady Kitty is forthright in her arguments with Champion-Cheney, with Elizabeth and with Lord Porteous. And so it is with the other characters. Their struggle extends beyond a struggle with other individuals, however. They are also struggling with an undefined society which surrounds them. The characters, caught within the amorphous and, ironically, confining mass, attempt to break out of the confines of that society and are bounced back into conflict with another character caught within the same circle. Why can't the characters break out of the circle? Maugham's answer is simple. No matter how poorly defined society is, the individual cannot escape. Such an attitude can hardly be regarded as that of a cynic. But do not Elizabeth and Teddie escape from this circle? Maugham makes it clear that they will not, for earlier in the play he has taken pains to have Teddie describe the society which will confine their new 12 13

96.

The Circle, III, p. 76. W. Somerset Maugham, "Looking Back", Show, July, 1962, pp. 44 and

CYNIC AND REPORTER

135

life.14 Why, then, does Lord Porteous say that they might survive? 15 This is Maugham's vision of hope. He hopes for a new definition of the old, conventional morality. Maugham's vision, however, does not extend beyond recognizing the possibility for such a new definition. He does not attempt to define it. Perhaps such an attitude is not so short-sighted after all, for Maugham realizes that it will have to be re-defined by youth and not by him or by his contemporaries. Still, Maugham does not discount the potential contribution of his generation, for it is the men of his generation, like Lord Porteous or Battle who must recognize the need for a change before it can be accomplished by youth. The "experience" which Maugham reflects in The Circle is his vision of the inadequacy of society. What Maugham sees behind the individual's motivation to seek an object of self-interest is a picture of society which not only encourages such motivation, but which supplies no alternative. A central idea to all of Maugham's plays is that society imposes itself upon the individual and says, in effect, "conform or get out". This conformity is even imposed by Maugham on his colonial characters, Norah and Freeman. Maugham's point is that the motivation of self-interest is inadequate in his experience, and he continually expresses that inadequacy. Maugham's cynicism is a façade which conceals his belief that society is inadequate. It is not surprising to discover that Maugham may not be the cynic that his critics would have him be when one considers Mark Sullivan's belief that the "disillusionment, frustration and cynicism" of the writers of the 1920's reflect more on the large group they influenced rather than on the tone common to the artists of the period.16 To separate Maugham from contemporary criticism is important for, as Stark Young says, The history of any art is a history of man's states of mind and spirit, not of the objective world around him. To be ignorant of that is to be ignorant of the theatre as an art, and leads to a mere muddle of resemblances and recognitions, a confusion between life and the 14 15 16

The Circle, I, pp. 20-23. Ibid., ΠΙ, p. 89. Sullivan, The Twenties, op. cit., pp. 379-380.

136

CYNIC AND REPORTER

theatre, contradictions about naturalness and artifice, and - what is profoundly important - blindness to such ideas as may require a new method or form to express them.17 By separating Maugham from his contemporaries it is possible to explore further into Maugham's "mind and spirit". Writing in 1935 Swinnerton said concerning Maugham: As to what he says, . . . I think it would be true to suggest that he is at his best with the personal and the concrete. For the dissemination or even the discussion of general ideas he has little inclination; in a play or a novel he would believe it literary and laboriously clumsy. Nor does he as a rule wish to impress, as do those who parade learning and familiarity with current metaphysics. It is the object of the realist to decipher and record; never to display his own ingenuity.18 Maugham's concern is with the personal and concrete, as Swinnerton claims, but to understand Maugham, we must extend our minds beyond, to what lies behind the personal and concrete. We cannot agree with Ervine's statement that, It is, nevertheless, a pity for an author to restrict himself to charitable contemplation of insignificant people, as Mr. Maugham, in spite of his reputation for bitterness and cynicism, may be said to do.19 Why, in the first place, should "bitterness and cynicism" commend the writer to serious contemplation of mankind? If Maugham's characters seem to be insignificant, their conflict with society is no less important than the conflict of seemingly significant people. Maugham comments on man's conflict with society by understating the significance of that conflict. If he chooses not to discuss "general ideas" as Swinnerton suggests, it is because he does not feel the province of literature is didactic. Instead, he comments in the guise of a reporter who ostensibly neither selects nor orders his facts. Further insight may be gained by listening to Maugham close 17

Stark Young, The Theatre (New York, Hill and Wang, 1958), p. 19. Frank Swinnerton, The Georgian Literary Scene (London, Hutchinson & Co., 1935), p. 173. 19 Klaus W. Jonas, The World of Somerset Maugham (New York, British Book Centre, 1959), p. 151. 18

CYNIC AND REPORTER

137

his novel, The Razor's Edge. The irony in these remarks seems to be in part an answer to his critics. And however superciliously the highbrows carp, w e the public in our heart of hearts all like a success story; so perhaps my ending is not so unsatisfactory after all. 20

Yet, one may well ask if The Razor's Edge is a success story. Superficially, it might be considered as one, but to the contemplative it is less than that, or more. Each of Maugham's characters achieves his desired goals - social eminence, fortune, security, death, happiness. However, in the course of his novel, as the narrator, Maugham does not permit the reader to sympathize with any one character. Instead his attitude is that there is value in the goals of each character, but that there is an inherent deficiency in the interaction which each character seeks with his society. To understand the vision of Maugham as he views the human image, "the motives that lie behind society's conduct", (the term is Montgomery's), consider a comparison of the movie script and the original of one of Maugham's short stories. Compare R. C. Sheriff's script of "The Alien Corn" 21 with Maugham's original short story.22 Sheriff's script was written for the motion picture version of the first presentation in films of some of Maugham's collected short stories. The movie was entitled "Quartette". Others in the series were called "Trio" and "Encore". The story of "The Alien Corn" is centered on the close family ties of a Jewish family. Maugham develops three lines of conflict. The first is between Ferdy Rabenstein and his nephew, Lord Bland. Ferdy, a wealthy man of the world, retains his Jewish identity. Lord Bland had inherited his title from Ferdy's brother, the first to bear the title of this Barony. Lord and Lady Bland have changed their names to sound more "gentile". Neither of them m

W. Somerset Maugham, The Razor's Edge (New York, Doubleday Doran & Co., Inc., 1944), p. 343. 21 "Quartette" an adaptation by R. C. Sheriff of four short stories by Maugham was filmed in England by Gainsborough in 1948 and the script was published as W. Somerset Maugham, Quartette, adapt. R. C. Sheriff (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1948). 22 W. Somerset Maugham, East and West: The Collected Short Stories (Garden City, Garden City Publishing Company, Inc., 1921), pp. 740-777.

138

CYNIC AND REPORTER

looks particularly "Jewish". Their struggle to become identified as non-Jews is the second conflict of the story. Interestingly enough, each of these conflicts is, for want of a better word, "passive". That is, in telling the story in the first person, Maugham indicates that these conflicts exist, but they do not manifest themselves until they are juxtaposed with the third conflict. That conflict centers on George, Ferdy's great-nephew and Lord Bland's son. George has been trained from childhood by his father to ascend to the traditional rights of the aristocratic English country gentleman. George will not have to contend with the religious conflict which his parents and grandparents faced. To make this easier, Lord Bland has severed relations with Ferdy. The Bland's greatest hope for their son is that he will marry a gentile. George upsets his father's plans when he announces that he wishes to become a concert pianist and he is not interested in inheriting the title. George's announcement does more, however, than arouse the wrath of his family. More important, it unites the family, including George, into the tight bond of the traditional Jewish family group. Even Ferdy is brought into the group. George is adamant in his ambition and finally the matriarch of the family, Ferdy's elder sister and Lord Bland's mother, persuades the family to give George a trial. The conditions are that George shall study music for two years in Munich and at the end of that time, play for an impartial pianist who will judge whether or not he has the talent to become a concert pianist. Depending on the verdict, George will either continue to study music with the blessings of his family, or he will follow the path his father has chosen for him. George fails the test and his family is even more strongly united in a common bond of family spirit, because as Jews they know the feeling of rejection. George leaves the room and while he is examining a rifle which was a gift for his twenty-first birthday, it fires and he is killed instantly. "One reads of such accidents in the paper often", are the words which Maugham chooses to end the story.23 The script which Sheriff wrote for the motion picture version concentrates on the story of George and eliminates the problem of 25

Maugham, East and West ..., op. cit., p. 777.

CYNIC AND REPORTER

139

religion. Sheriff introduces another character, that of a young woman who is in love with George. The young woman assumes the role of mediator in place of the matriarch and she replaces the story teller as the one who visits George in Munich (in the movie it is Paris) just before the test. In Sheriff's script there is no emphasis on family unity when under duress. Instead, it is the girl who remains to comfort George after he has failed the test. And in the motion picture version, the story is brought to an end by an inquest in which it was decided that George's death was accidental. A comparison of these two versions of the same story provides a great insight into Maugham's technique of reporting. In making this comparison, it will be assumed that the motion picture script in 1948 could have dealt with the Jewish problem in the same way that Maugham did in his short story. In the motion picture the focus is placed on the young man's desire to become a concert pianist and his ultimate failure to achieve his goal. By contrast, in the short story the young man's desire and subsequent failure are only a means of developing the societal conflict involved in the adjustment of the Jewish family to its inherited tradition and to a purchased (and very much desired) tradition. Maugham's story has more to say about man in conflict with his society. The addition of the young girl and the deletion of the matriarch in the motion picture version alter the action to a bathetic love story. The inquest which concludes the motion picture gives to the story more of an air of finality than do the simple lines which end Maugham's short story. Sheriff's script overlooks the subtle understanding and interpretation of humanity which characterizes Maugham's story. It is an irony of this short story that the total meaning is not made clear until that final line, "One reads of such accidents in the paper often." In his story Maugham prepares the reader for the family loyalty and he prepares the reader for George's failure. He even prepares the reader for George's suicide. When the story teller asks George in Munich what he will do if his test is a failure, George replies, " 'Shoot myself', he said gaily." 24 But Maugham does not M

Maugham, East and West...,

op. cit., p. 768.

140

CYNIC AND REPORTER

prepare the reader for that final line, the line which brings to light the total meaning of the story and places society in its proper perspective. Such a line earned for Maugham the title of "cynic". Either George committed suicide, or he did not. If he did, it was because he could not live in the society his father has chosen for him and he did not feel strong enough to hold to his belief as his great uncle has done. George claims no pretention to the established English aristocracy when he tells his parents, "We're all Jews, the whole gang of us, and everyone knows it and what the hell's the good of pretending we're not?" 25 If he did not commit suicide, it was an accident. In either case Maugham's conclusion is ironic, for it follows that if it was an accident then George was thwarted a second time in achieving his goal. If it was not an accident, Lord Bland was thwarted again. "The Alien Corn" is the story of men seeking a goal that is never reached. It cannot be reached because either George or Lord Bland fears compromise, and as a consequence one of them suffers the loss of human dignity. Maugham leaves it to the reader to decide whether it was the father's loss because he was not strong enough to face the truth of his religion, or whether it was the son's because he could not face the truth of life. Maugham's vision of the human comedy is expressed by this final irony, the loss of human dignity, and he adds to the irony by not committing himself to an opinion. This was a technique which he developed over a period of years. In the discussion which follows, we shall try to show how this technique developed in his dramatic comedy and to show Maugham's perspective of humanity when this principle of the final irony is applied to his plays. The first comedy in which the final irony has a significant application to society is Smith. Prior to that, in Lady Frederick, Jack Straw and Penelope, Maugham ends his plays with a surprise twist, but the surprise twist has no larger social ramifications. Lady Frederick will marry Fouldes. Straw's in-laws cannot follow the newly married couple to Pomerania because as Straw says (an arbitrary invention on the part of the dramatist), ". . . it grieves 25

Maugham, East and West ...,

op. cit., p. 761.

CYNIC AND REPORTER

141

me infinitely to say it, but no sooner had you crossed our frontier than you would be instantly beheaded".28 Penelope slips out of the door, leaving her sexually aroused husband waiting for her to return from an imaginary automobile ride in the country. But in Smith, when Rose escapes from her house to seek the "crowd, the band and the gaiety",27 her words ring with a hollow reverberation past the gallery of lost souls who have sought from society the gift of belonging without offering anything in return. By this final action, Rose loses her human dignity. The loss of human dignity can be a serious consequence, but it does not have to be serious if the loser does not discern his personal loss, and Rose does not recognize her loss. This final irony, the loss of human dignity, is Maugham's perception of the "human comedy", and the serious overtones, the potentiality of the serious consequences, give to Maugham's comedy the dark, uneasy humor. This pattern is repeated in Our Betters when Pearl mends her already unstable social position. But notice Maugham's restraint in presenting the alternative case for Pearl's sister, Bessie. Bessie is as insecure as her sister. The romantic conclusion of young love is not resorted to, for Bessie will not marry Harvey. Bessie returns to the United States to put together the pieces of a disillusioned morality, but Maugham has not provided her with a template to replace those pieces. The problem is Bessie's to solve. Champion-Cheney's false estimate of his own ability to understand human motivation is the final irony of The Circle. The final irony is seen again in The Constant Wife when Constance leaves with the assurance of her new-found freedom without understanding the significance of that freedom, while her husband, seemingly calm, settles back to wait for her to return from her continental affair. The final irony is also implicit in The Breadwinner for, as has already been discussed, Battle leaves for a new life without knowing what that life will hold for him. "I had an acute power of observation", Maugham says, "and it seemed to me that I could see a great many things that other 25

"

Jack Straw, III, p. 271. Smith, TV, p. 208.

142

CYNIC AND REPORTER

people missed." 28 What was it Maugham saw that other people missed? In addition to the unawareness the individual has of his loss of dignity as expressed by the final irony, the question can be answered by examining more carefully the characterization of Maugham's women. Kuner has compared those women to the predatory Strindbergian women. On the whole, Maugham has cast his search-light more frequently on women; the more respectable they appear to be, the less comfortably can they face the glare. . . . Irrespective of their social standing or their accomplisments, these women share certain traits: they are cold, grasping, petty, vindictive and hypocritical; they have no attachment to their husbands save as breadwinners; they have no patience with or sympathy for ideals; and, like so many of the author's "good" women, they combine a sedate manner with a Strindbergian frenzy to dominate, for only by breaking the spirit of the opposite sex can they confirm their superiority.29 Such a comparison is not valid for Maugham's dramatic intent is very different from Strindberg's. To Strindberg the female is predatory because she must prove her superiority over the male. Laura, in Strindberg's The Father30 asserts her predatory nature by forcing her husband, the Captain, to withdraw symbolically back into the womb. Laura's principle weapon is to threaten the Captain with the painful thought that "their" daughter was not fathered by him. Ironically, Strindberg uses sex to emasculate his males. This pattern is repeated in Miss Julie 81 when Jean's submission to Julie's seductive advances takes from him his masculinity and he re-submits to his role of obedient valet. Maugham's females are not predatory in the Strindbergian sense. Maugham's females do not attempt to assert their superiority, but rather, they seek recognition. They would be happy with equality, but they do not seek dominance. To understand Maugham's attitude it is 28

Maugham, The Summing Up, op. cit., p. 30. Jonas, The World of ..., op. cit., p. 39. 30 Six Plays of Strindberg, transi. Elizabeth Sprigge (Garden City, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1955). 81 Ibid. 29

CYNIC AND REPORTER

143

necessary to look back at the historical development of women's rights. As we think of the role of the leisured class woman in Edwardian England it is altogether possible that we form an erroneous image. The costume plates of the ladies' magazines which have been captured in the costume design for My Fair Lady, the elegant artificial wit and repartee of Gwendolyn and Cecily in The Importance of Being Earnest, are only two of many literary sources that contribute to our impression of the age. We know that early in Edward's reign the Englishwoman began to campaign for the franchise.32 It would seem that women also had an active political role. Countering such an impression, Virginia Cowles says, "for the highly placed ladies of Society the Edwardian era has often been cited as the apex of feminine influence and enjoyment. Yet a curious melancholy runs through the memoirs of the day." 33 Edward "felt strongly that women should remain what he believed they were intended to be. Nothing was more repellent than an intellectual female." 34 Unlike her stage counterpart, "the lady of birth was supposed to content herself with feminine talk".35 Neither witty conversation nor intellectual discussion of contemporary problems was permissible.36 The woman's role was that of a "drone". Moreover, this conception was not quick to be replaced. As late as the Twenties, John Montgomery quotes one of the distinguished ladies of the time, In December 1924, Violet Bonham-Carter described upperclass married women as "drones, exclusive parasites who consume more money than they could possibly earn in the labour market by the services they render to their homes".37 In the period which followed the Edwardian, we know that women were given the franchise and they were given the right to sue for 32

Maurois, op. cit., pp. 302-305. ® Virginia Cowles, The Gay Monarch 1956), p. 331. 84 Ibid., p. 333. 35 Ibid., p. 332. 8 · Ibid., p. 331. 37 Montgomery, op. cit., p. 166. 3

(New York, Harper & Bros.,

144

CYNIC AND REPORTER

divorce on the same terms as the men. But they were being granted women's rights and they did not know how to use them, nor did the male know how to acknowledge them. This is the historical background from which Maugham's attitude reflects the incongruity of the social structure, the inadequacy of the social law to meet the new requirements which it had set out for itself. Constance is the most outspoken, the most positive to act of all of Maugham's characters in these plays. But can we regard her assertive efforts as being successful? The fact that John, her husband, is so spineless in submitting to her dogma of the "new" woman indicates that Constance may succeed in her action, but she accomplishes nothing by it because John accepts without recognizing what it is he has accepted. In view of this, one would well wonder whether the object of Maugham's comedy is Constance or John. Such a problem could be a question of either/or if it were not for the traditional Edwardian view which Maugham represents by the character of Constance's mother. Mrs. Culver removes the question from one of personal deviation to one of social conflict. Maugham's emphasis on society's failure to define the "proper" morality is intensified further by the characters of Bernard and Barbara. Bernard has been away from England while women were being granted their rights, so he can assume that having been granted rights, the women have assumed them and society has accepted the change. Thus, although as a Victorian he is awkward in his intrigue, he is forthright in following Constance's order that he take his leave of John before departing for the continent. Barbara provides an entirely different perspective. Barbara has proved herself a capable businesswoman and everyone accepts her role as such. In other words, she does not have to prove herself. A degree of acceptance has been granted to the single woman's rights, but ironically, the married woman does not have the same rights as her unmarried companion has. This contradiction adds to Maugham's portrayal of a confused society. Further examination of Maugham's women reveals that they are not as assertive as Constance in securing their rights, although they are equally confused about their role in the new society. In

CYNIC AND REPORTER

145

Our Betters, for example, Maugham establishes a comparison and contrast of his women more carefully than he does of the men. The differences between Pearl and Bessie have already been noted,88 but between these extremes are the Princess and the Duchesse. All four are wealthy American heiresses. The degree of their wealth determines the level of European aristocracy which they can achieve in a marriage contract. The Princess, being the wealthiest, can afford an Italian Prince; the Duchesse, next in line, can purchase a French Duke; Pearl and Bessie can afford only an English Lord. Maugham does not emphasize the national differences, however. Instead, his focus is on why these women sought European marriages and on their behavior as people of nobility. With the exception of Bessie, the other three women were motivated to marry Europeans because their new wealth was not accepted by the American social elite. "People weren't very nice to us in Chicago", the Duchesse says, until she could flaunt the title in their faces.39 But the Princess points out that there are motivations other than snobbishness: "Has it ever occurred to you that snobbishness is the spirit of romance in a reach-me-down?"40 The Princess saw romance in being the successor to a "long line of statesmen and warriors";41 but she did not understand the European way of life and she separated from her husband. The fact that she remained with her husband until their child died is incidental, a residual idea left over from Lady Frederick. After the separation she discovered she was no longer at home in America and so she settled in England. The Duchesse divorced her husband and when America bored her, she also settled in England. Thus, both the Princess and the Duchesse are not at home in the United States, in Europe or in England. Certainly the reason for their failure to adjust in any of the societies is partly their own. But society, too, is at fault, for society does not provide responsibility. The Princess tries to accept some responsibility by her charitable deeds, but she began to make this effort only after she 88 Si 40 41

Supra, pp. 162-164. Our Betters, Π, p. 44. Ibid., p. 54. Our Betters, Π, pp. 54-55.

146

CYNIC AND REPORTER

had been a failure. The only responsibility that Pearl and the Duchesse have is to satisfy their men in bed. Interestingly enough, the wives in The Breadwinner have served useful lives in the conventional sense of the middle class, but only recently have they begun to experiment with sexual freedom. The freedom which women have been given creates confusion in the old double standard of morality. Both wives believe that other men are quick to fall in love with them. "I've never been unfaithful to Alfred", Dorothy says, "But I've had scores of beaux. That's what's kept me fresh and alert and up to date." 42 Nineteen years of married life is a bore without some compensation, for as Margery says, "You can't really develop your personality when you're married." 48 But both women realize the practical motive for marriage is money, for Margery is most appalled by the loss of Battle's money, and Dorothy would run off with Battle, but "love can't live on five pounds a week".44 Like Constance, the women that Maugham creates following the First World War are seeking a new meaning for their lives. The key to this new meaning lies in finding equality with the men, but society has as yet created no new morality for this condition and thus, Maugham's women seek, but do not find. Only Norah in The Land of Promise discovers her role. Significantly, as has already been discussed,45 she discovers her role not in the purely social, but rather in the positive contribution which she makes toward the growth of a new land. The work which she must learn to do in this new land has nothing to do with her past life as an Edwardian "drone". In attempting to understand the workings of the dramatist, the critic must constantly sort out, evaluate and re-evaluate conclusions that have been reached by previous critics. This process of sorting out involves more than separating the wheat from the chaff. The greatest problem is that of maintaining a perspective.

42 43 44 45

The Breadwinner, I, p. 220. Ibid., p. 222. Ibid., ΠΙ, p. 276. Supra, pp. 156-158.

CYNIC AND REPORTER

147

Reading the critical commentary on Maugham's writings one is continually impressed by the many references to the realism of Maugham's works. Viewing the English people at the end of the nineteenth century, Andre Maurois concludes that "the dishonesty of human relationships denounced by Ibsen was precisely the malady which afflicted this society."46 Critics have suggested that Maugham's concern was with the dishonesty of human relationships. Maugham himself has said that he writes about the unworthy motives of mankind.47 In the discussion which has preceded this, we have attempted to point out that Maugham's concern extended beyond the dishonesty of human relationships and looked for the societal factors which created this need for dishonesty. The distinction between the two is the distinction between moral and social experience. It has been our suggestion that Maugham was concerned with the moral experience. What is the distinction? In discussing the French novel, Turnell makes the following interesting comment on the works of Marivaux: Marivaux's study of society possesses greater width than Mme de La Fayette's; but though he regards it as fundamentally sound, the society which he describes is altogether less impressive. The focus shifts from moral to social experience. The ideals of martial glory and public service have vanished. The great aim of his characters is to "arrive", to integrate themselves in the social organism without offering anything in return. They can think of nothing better to do than indulge in gallantry which has lost all its fire and none of its charm, or make a successful marriage.48

Turnell suggests that the distinction between moral and social experience depends on whether society is regarded as a right or as an obligation. We have attempted to explain Maugham's concern for the character who is out of place in society, the one who assumes a social position without earning that position by his contribution to society. Maugham does more than merely repre4i

André Maurois, The Edwardian Era, transi. Hamish Miles (New York, D. Appleton-Century Co., Inc., 1933), pp. 293-294. 47 Supra, p. 21. 48 Martin Turnell, The Novel in France (New York, New Directions, 1951), p. 410.

148

CYNIC AND REPORTER

sent social weakness, for he explains what, in his opinion, are the reasons for that weakness. Maugham's strategy in creating characters who seek social prestige is to demonstrate the ambivalence of a society which is created by man and which, in turn, imposes itself on man.

Vili

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN MAUGHAM'S DRAMATIC COMEDY

Players are "the abstracts and brief chronicles of the time"; the motley representatives of human nature. . . . They are, as it were, train-bearers in the pageant of life, and hold a glass up to humanity, frailer than itself. We see ourselves at second hand in them: they show us all that we are, all that we wish to be, and all that we dread to be. The stage is an epitome, a bettered likeness of the world, with the dull part left out: and, indeed, with this omission, it is nearly big enough to hold all the rest. What brings the resemblance nearer is, that, as they imitate us, we, in our turn, imitate them.1 William Hazlitt, "On Actors and Acting"

This research was conceived in order to come to a better understanding of Maugham's dramatic comedy. In the process of isolating the facts of structure and content, of dramatic symbols and metaphors, it is possible that the analytical process has obscured this more general purpose. It is now time to restore what might seem to be the minutiae of analysis to the general perspective of the completed play. J. B. Priestly, in his colorful book The Wonderful World of the Theatre, says, "Theatre, where man meets his image, lives on." 2 The double meaning of this perceptive idea is obvious although its significance may often be overlooked. The present theatre will continue to exist if man is permitted to meet his image in it; similarly, the theatre of the past will continue to have meaning in 1 William Hazlitt, The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed. P. P. Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1931), Vol. IV, p. 153. 1 J. B. Priestley, The Wonderful World of the Theatre (New York, Rathbone Books Limited, 1959), p. 69.

150

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY

the present if man continues to meet his image. In this study it has been the writer's purpose to recreate the image Maugham created of his society in his dramatic comedy. The problem now is how to reconcile Maugham's image with the image that man has of himself. In other words, does the pattern of Maugham's image coincide with man's own image; is Maugham's dramatic comedy living theatre? To answer these questions, to solve this problem, poses no small difficulty for the critic, since, as an octogenarian Maugham continues to add to his works even though for almost thirty years he has not expressed himself from the stage. Each new statement from Maugham has the potential of suggesting a new interpretation. Nevertheless, although "Looking Back" 3 has been referred to several times in this study, the ideas which it supports only reinforce ideas which had already been formulated by this critic. This is not the first time that the "final" word has been delivered on Maugham's career, nor will it be the last. Although it is not the writer's purpose to evaluate the "literary" worth of Maugham and to provide a niche for his final resting place in the annals of the theatre, it would be impossible not to arrive at some conclusions concerning his creative effort in the theatre. In the process of arriving at conclusions, this critic has attempted to put aside the obscuring screen surrounding Maugham's plays, a screen which has grown from the joint efforts of Maugham and his critics. By removing this screen, it might be said that our interest has been to discover what Maugham does, not what he does not do. It is the writer's opinion that such a positive approach has been absent from many previous studies, for no matter what the attitude of previous critics, there is always an implied apology for Maugham's shortcomings. It has been our contention that Maugham's ability to tell a story in an interesting manner has resulted in his revealing, intentionally or unintentionally, a great deal about humanity. Rather than dwelling on the former (story-telling), the approach of this work has been to concentrate on the latter. This critical approach has '

W. Somerset Maugham, "Looking Back", Show, June, July and August,

1962.

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY

151

produced a new perspective of Maugham's attitude as expressed in his dramatic works. The conclusions that have been reached must be regarded as inconclusive for the critic is a secondary creator. Maugham's works corroborate the ideas expressed in this study, but it is doubtful whether the conscious mind of the artist (in this case Maugham) could ever corroborate what is in part an unconscious process of creation (see Maugham's letter in Appendix D). Holland concludes that there is "no such thing as an archetypal 'comedy of manners' ",4 This is a sound conclusion and Maugham's comedy provides one illustration of this. Not only are Maugham's plays dissimilar in many respects to other comedies of "manners" but there is also a dissimilarity between his own plays. One reason for this is that Maugham matured as a playwright. Another reason is his flexible attitude. Maugham's strategy with the marriage contract has been demonstrated to encompass the failure of society to adjust to change. Yet, within this single strategy Maugham invented many variations. Ironically, Maugham adjusted his strategy to the changing position of society so that the marriage contract became a symbol for society, and man in conflict with the marriage contract became symbolic of man in conflict with his society. But the attitude toward marriage and toward society did not remain static in this period of Maugham's writing. Always, one has the impression that Maugham is barely keeping pace with those changes. Certainly he does not attack and lead the way with new proposals or corrective measures. The ambiguity of Maugham's position, leaving the final evaluation to be determined by the audience, expresses his concern with the inadequacy of the maxims that govern the individual's behavior in society. Because Maugham's view of the failure of society to meet its obligations is oblique, he has been set apart from his English contemporaries such as Shaw and Granville-Barker and Ervine. Instead, critics have found another identity for Maugham. Kronenberger is only one of many to contend that "Maugham brings us back to the 4

Norman N. Holland, The First Modern Comedies (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1959), p. 7.

152

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY

truest kind of comedy of manners - the Restoration kind".5 Furthermore, Maugham himself finds his identity with the Restoration. This critic would disagree and conclude rather that Maugham developed a "comedy of morals". What is the distinction between comedy of manners and comedy of morals? Quite simply, it is the difference between a world that has experienced two devastating world wars and the development of nuclear destruction, and a world that has not. The phenomenon of the mass destruction of innocents, first experienced in 1914-1918, placed the world in a turmoil. "The war had shaken the foundation of the old order." 6 War was no longer a battle between gentlemen, it was a battle between masses of people. Morality was a decision for governments, not for the individual soldier in the field. Whereas morality had been a gentleman's agreement, there was now a vacuum where morality had stood, for that agreement had been broken. As of this writing, morality still lacks definition, but certain contemporary writers express the need to fill the vacuum created by the loss. These writers of the so-called "Absurd Theatre" and others of their time as well as earlier, deal with the "senselessness of life, . . . the inevitable devaluation of ideals, purity and purpose".7 It is this writer's belief that too often critics have identified Maugham with the past when he should have been identified with the future (future in the sense that Maugham stopped writing for the stage in 1933). No definitive proof can be offered to substantiate this position. But it is a credible position and one that provides the clearest appraisal of this particular phase of Maugham's writing. Certainly the suggestion can have only limited application and it is not our intention to conclude that Maugham was a conscious leader in the evolution toward the attitude expressed by the Absurd. Instead, Maugham should be regarded as a victim of fate who was caught in a radical ideological transition, 5

Louis Kronenberger, The Thread of Laughter (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1952), p. 290. • Eugene Weber, Paths to the Present (New York, Dodd, Mead & Company, Inc., I960), p. 293. 7 Martin Esslin, The Theatre of the Absurd (Garden City, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1961), p. xix.

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY

153

a man who sensed to a limited extent the significance of that transition, but who did not encompass the complete significance of it. Certainly his style suggests the past, but certain of his ideas suggest the future. Because his early contemporary critics had no idea of the future (Maugham cannot be regarded as truly clairvoyant in this regard), they believed his plays expressed no ideas. Nor did Maugham regard himself as a writer of ideas: I do not suppose anyone who writes plays knows exactly why his lines get over the footlights or what it is in his scenes that holds an audience. But plainly it is only because it is an instinct that it can touch the emotions, for reason can only speak with reason; and the appeal of the drama is to the emotions rather than the intellect.8

By his appraisal of the emotions which motivate men, Maugham anticipated the uncertain ideas of morality in the "future". He may not have intended to write drama of idea which appealed to the intellect but he could not help embodying ideas in his appeal to the emotions. One of the issues of the post-World War I writers was, according to Weber, "to deny the accepted values of respectable society while remaining within it and benefiting from its economy".9 The theatre that Weber describes was the theatre of the social conscience. This is not an issue in Maugham's comedy. Maugham does not concern himself with the social conscience. He did not deny the accepted values of respectable society, but he did question them. In The Maugham Enigma Malcolm Cowley ponders the question of why Maugham never wrote again as he had written in Of Human Bondage.10 Cowley's personal answer is that Maugham has always written about the upper middle class, that class to which he was born and in which he will die, but, he hypothesizes, Maugham was estranged from that class as a boy and came to find warmth in the lower class which he discovered in Liza of Lambeth 8

W. Somerset Maugham, The Collected Plays, 3rd ed. (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1955), Vol. I, p. xvi. • Weber, op. cit., p. 293. 10 Malcolm Cowley, "Angry Author's Complaint", The Maugham Enigma, ed. Klaus W. Jonas (New York, The Citadel Press, 1954), pp. 200-204.

154

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY

and at the slum hospital (which he also wrote about in Of Human Bondage).11 Cowley says, "He has been writing stories - accurate and workmanlike stories - about a class from which he has been spiritually alienated, and about people with whom he doesn't care to live." 12 In his most recent article, Maugham expressed the wish that someone would write a "treatise" on the "rise, decline and fall" of the upper middle class.13 He suggests that the upper middle class began its rise in the middle of the Eighteenth Century and "lasted to about the middle of the nineteenth".14 It does not take too much imagination to see a parallel between Maugham's proposed treatise and his own attitude expressed by the colonial-type character he created in his comedies. Maugham continually used the colonial character to call attention to the failure of the system of values in England to ally itself with the social change which was much more clearly recognized by the colonies. One wonders if Maugham's expression of desire for such a treatise is not an afterthought, for he had in fact, instituted at least an introduction to such a document. The writer is in no position to judge the validity of Maugham's contention regarding the upper middle class. However, the facts seem to suggest that Maugham did not consider himself estranged from the class to which he belonged as Cowley suggests, but rather, he considered himself a part of a declining class and he chose to write about that decline. André Maurois defines the quintessence of conservatism in the following manner: "There are advantages in doing a stupid thing that has been done before, rather than a wise thing which had never been done before." 15 In his comedy Maugham takes advantage of the conservative tradition to provide a base for his characters' actions. This base serves to provide almost cruel irony. The idea has been emphasized that Maugham's characters do not belong to their environment; their perception of the illusion and 11

Ibid. Ibid., p. 204. 13 Maugham, "Looking Back", op. cit., August, 1962, p. 70. 14 Ibid. 15 André Maurois, The Edwardian Era, transi. Hamish Miles (New York, D. Appleton-Century Co., Inc., 1933), p. 115. 12

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY

155

the reality of their real image and their social image is confused; this confusion results in conflict. In The Circle Elizabeth tells Luton, "I don't think you want too much sincerity in society. It would be like an iron girder in a house of cards." 18 The image is most interesting in suggesting the inadequacy of the established traditional social values which an altered society continues to impose upon itself. In his Notebook Maugham refers to The Revisor, "an insignificant little farce", by Gogol.17 He makes the point that in spite of the weaknesses in the play, Gogol does not create type caricatures with opposing standards of morality.18 There is a certain artistic completeness in his collection of rogues and fools which would have been ruined by the introduction of an honest man or a man of parts. Congreve had the same wisdom and took care not to bring a virtuous person into the company of his rips.

Maugham is also careful not to introduce "virtuous persons" but the practice results in characters who are cold and not quite real. They lack human warmth.19 But is there artistic purpose in this design? Maugham insists that reality should not be a basic consideration of comedy: "The audience should not be allowed to ask, do such things happen? They should be content to laugh." 20 Elsewhere Maugham has said, The foundation of living drama is actuality. It must be natural above all things and it achieves the illusion of truth by reproducing as exactly as the exigencies of the theatre permit the manners and customs of the day. 21

There is a seeming dichotomy between these two statements. In the first chapter it was stated that Maugham's philosophy of truth is revealed by the individual's conflict with the superficialities of 18

The Circle, I, p. 21. W. Somerset Maugham, A Writer's Notebook (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949), p. 153. 18 Ibid. 19 Cowley, op. cit., p. 202. M W. Somerset Maugham, The Summing Up (Garden City, International Collector's Library, 1938), p. 144. 21 Maugham, Plays, op. cit., Vol. I, p. xviii. 17

156

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY 22

society. In the course of this discussion it has been demonstrated that, for Maugham, truth lacks definition. Here is the heart of Maugham's comic vision. In his search for truth Maugham has discovered that man is not what he seems. Pfeiffer has already called attention to this fact.28 But to ascertain the inevitable truth, the statement must be carried to a final conclusion. Truth for Maugham is that man is not what he seems because he does not know what he should be. That is, man is uncertain of the moral code which should determine his behavior. Thus, truth for Maugham assumes an intensity and irony much greater than Pfeiffer would imply by his abbreviated definition. An interesting illustration from "Looking Back" will help to clarify this concept. Maugham states clearly that he continues to believe in his old age as he had in his youth that Christianity will disappear.24 He claims that he is a "rationalist" believing that the existence of God can be neither proved nor disproved.25 Finally, he states that Jesus was "doubtless a faith healer" about whom his disciples embellished stories which became the source of the Synoptic gospels.29 Later, when Maugham has come to the end of his remarks he adds a "Postscript" in which he describes an incident that occurred to him while viewing the Veronese painting of "The Feast of the House of Levi". He describes sitting and contemplating the Veronese profile of Christ. "Then to my amazement, I saw Jesus turn his head so that I saw him full face and it was as though he was looking at me." 27 After commenting on the ways he tested his senses to check the validity of his observation of the turning head, he concludes that he did see the head turn, but that he could not believe it. "I suppose it was an optical illusion." 28 There are psychological implications of this experience which the writer is not qualified to understand or explain. The 22

Supra, pp. 20-22. Karl G. Pfeiffer, W. Somerset Maugham: A Candid Portrait York, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1959), p. 211. 24 Maugham, "Looking Back", op. cit., August, 1962, p. 72. 25 Ibid. " Ibid., pp. 72-73. 27 Ibid., p. 100. 28 Ibid. 23

(New

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY

157

experience is a contradiction to Maugham's stated belief. Maugham is aware of the contradiction, but he makes no attempt to resolve it. Just as he is aware of this contradiction in himself and reports it without comment, so he reports contradiction as the truth of the behavior of the characters in his comedies. Turnell, in his discussion of the novels of Laclos says, Laclos himself remains something of an enigma. A good deal of his criticism of society remains valid, but his claims to be regarded as a moralist are unproven. He is so dispassionate that the effect of his book depends almost entirely on the dispositions of the reader to whom it may be either a warning or a temptation; and his failure to realize his positive values suggests that at bottom they were no more than a sentimentalized variation of the convention he was attacking.29 As has already been seen similar criticism has been directed toward Maugham. But there is one very important difference between the enigma of Maugham and that of Laclos, and it is that Maugham did not claim to be a moralist. In Maugham's comedy of morals, he only pointed to the inadequacy of society's moral structure, he did not suggest positive alternatives. Maugham did not express an ethical philosophy. He refused to take sides in an argument of moral values. If this is a weakness, then this is Maugham's greatest weakness. However, this critic would suggest that Maugham has turned what may be regarded by some as a weakness into a strength for, by leaving the interpretation to the audience, Maugham has placed the burden of responsibility where it belongs. Such an attitude emphasizes the need for each man to take his own action, and explains Maugham's sense of irony. The logic can be stated in this way: if man chooses to laugh and not correct the weakness in his structure of morality, then man is blind to his own faults; but if man chooses to laugh and cannot correct that weakness, then he lacks the ability to take positive action. The suggested alternatives are not very pleasant, but neither is the dilemma of an inadequate morality pleasant. If Maugham did not resolve the dilemma at least he called attention to its presence, and here is the strength of Maugham's comic vision. 28

Martin Turnell, The Novel in France (New York, New Directions, 1951), p. 411.

158

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN DRAMATIC COMEDY

By whatever theory, Maugham created comedy which made the audience of his time laugh. Although we have not defined laughter, we have illustrated how the attitude of the dramatist is capable of producing laughter. Laughter may be inexplicable. The fact remains, Maugham has created dramatic comedy capable of producing laughter today. Maugham's vision of society, his image of man, as it finally developed in his later plays, is significant in a society which seeks to revise its moral precepts and to discover its responsibilities. Maugham captures the essential motivations that determine the individual's effort to meet the demands of society. Criticizing a journalistic critic, Edward Caroway, Maugham has said, "Of life as it is lived he knew nothing and, it must be admitted, cared less".®0 This can never be said of the dramatic comedy of William Somerset Maugham.

»· Maugham, "Looking Back", op. cit., August, 1962, p. 71.

Appendix

A

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES *

LADY FREDERICK, A COMEDY IN THREE ACTS

Characters: Lady Frederick Berolles Sir Gerald O'Mara, her brother Paradine Fouldes Marchioness of Mereston, his sister Marquess of Mereston, her son Admiral Carlisle Rose, his daughter

Captain Montgomerie Madame Claude Lady Frederick's footman Angelique, Lady Frederick's maid Thompson, Fouldes' man Waiter

Time: 1890 Act I: Lady Mereston explains to her brother, Fouldes, that she insisted he come to Monte Carlo to prevent the marriage of her son to Lady Frederick, a woman of questionable reputation. The remaining principal characters enter, are introduced to each other, and exit, leaving Lady Frederick to persuade the Admiral to permit Rose to marry Gerald. Lady Frederick is left alone with Gerald and they discuss their promissory notes which are soon due. When he suggests that she marry Mereston, she lightly dismisses the thought as Mereston is much younger than she is. Fouldes returns after Gerald's exit and reminisces with Lady Frederick about their past affection for each other. When he explains that he has been called to prevent her marriage to Mereston, they quarrel. She is left alone and Montgomerie enters to propose marriage; according to him it is her only alternative * The cast of characters listed for each play does not follow the organization used in The Collected Plays. The order has been altered in order to make the relationship between characters visually apparent.

160

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

to bankruptcy. Following his exit, Gerald returns to explain that his gambling debt is to Montgomerie, the ambitious son of a money lender. Act

II:

Gerald and Rose, in a tête-à-tête about the education of their yetunborn children, are interrupted by Lady Frederick and the Admiral, who has come to take his daughter for a drive. Left alone, Lady Frederick explains to her brother that someone has purchased her promissory notes. Gerald exits and Fouldes returns to continue the argument about her marrying his nephew. Their conversation is interrupted by Lady Frederick's dressmaker, Madame Claude. While Fouldes escorts Madame Claude to her carriage, Montgomerie enters to explain that now he holds both Lady Frederick's and her brother's promissory notes and he will force both into bankruptcy unless she consents to marriage. Fouldes returns with Mereston and Lady Mereston, who confronts Lady Frederick with the compromising letter Lady Frederick wrote in the Bellingham affair. Lady Frederick explains that she wrote that letter in spite of possible damage to her own reputation (she was very unhappily married) in order to protect the reputation of her sister-in-law. As a reaction to Lady Mereston's offensive attitude, Lady Frederick calls for the love letters she had obtained from the former mistress of the moralistic, hypocritical Lord Mereston, now deceased. Before disclosing their content to Lady Mereston (Fouldes already knows), she burns them one by one in the fireplace. Lady Mereston is pleased by Lady Frederick's raging insistence that she will never see Mereston again, but Mereston reacts by proposing marriage to Lady Frederick. Lady Frederick has tried to prevent this proposal; she postpones her answer until the following morning. Act

III:

Lady Frederick is dressing and Mereston is invited in to watch her public beauty grow with the aid of the deft application of false hair and make-up. This, she explains, is a moral lesson for him to show why he should not marry an older woman. When the slightly dejected, but somewhat relieved Mereston exits, Fouldes enters and recalls his affection for Lady Frederick. They are interrupted by the Admiral, Rose and Gerald. The Admiral has paid Gerald's gambling debt, and now, when left alone with Lady Frederick, proposes marriage to her. She refuses, Montgomerie enters as the others return. Fouldes pays Lady Frederick's debt to Montgomerie and unceremoniously orders him out of the room. Fouldes is left alone with Lady Frederick, and they agree to marry.

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

161

JACK STRAW, A FARCE IN THREE ACTS Characters: Jack Straw Mr. Parker-Jennings Mrs. Parker-Jennings Vincent, their son Ethel, their daughter Ambrose Holland Lady Wanley

Lord Serlo Count Adrian von Bremer Horton Withers Mrs. Withers The Rev. Lewis Abbott Rose Abbott, his wife Waiters and Footmen Time: 1905

Act I: Lady Wanley and Holland discuss the background of the snobbish, nouveau riche Parker-Jennings and the adventurous resourcefulness of their waiter, an old friend of Holland's, Jack Straw. The Withers with their guests, the Abbotts, join them. The Count stops at their table and informs them that his government in Pomerania has given up looking for the Emperor's grandson, the Archduke Sebastion, who left the kingdom as the result of a minor family quarrel. The Count explains also that he had to return his attaché to Pomerania because the attaché played the practical joke of disguising his valet as a Count to deceive an American heiress. Rose moves to speak to the ParkerJennings (who are ignoring those at Lady Wanley's table) and Mrs. Parker-Jennings cruelly snubs her. The Withers and Abbotts leave and Lady Wanley decides to revenge the snub by asking Straw to disguise as a foreign nobleman (the Parker-Jennings are seeking a titled husband for their daughter). Straw at first refuses, but he finally agrees because he is interested in knowing Ethel better. Straw insists on taking the title of the Archduke Sebastion and as such, he is succesfully introduced to the Parker-Jennings. Act II: The Parker-Jennings are entertaining Straw at the country estate they have rented from Lady Wanley. Mrs. Parker-Jennings has arranged an ostentatious garden party. Straw confesses his love to Ethel, but she asks him to leave as she does not feel comfortable with a man above her station and she is embarrassed by her mother's throwing her at his title. Lady Wanley and Holland attempt to convince Straw that he should give up the disguise, but he refuses. Holland tells the Parker-Jennings of the disguise. Their common origin reveals itself in their reaction to the trick played on them. Straw explains that unless they continue with the masquerade, they

162

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

will be the laughing stock of all society, for the aristocracy has only deigned to accept the invitation because he was the guest of honor. The Count arrives before any decision can be made and Straw takes him for a stroll in the garden. Act III: It is the morning after the party and Straw continues to play the role of the Archduke. The Parker-Jennings, Holland and Lady Wanley try to persuade him to leave but he will not, and reinforces his position by the embarrassment which will result if his disguise is made known. His hosts are forced to alter their insulting attitude to one of respectful demeanor whenever a servant or guest enters. Straw proposes marriage to Ethel, but she refuses by agreeing to marry Serlo. All but Straw are flustered when they learn that the Count is returning to pay another visit. Straw refuses to leave. The Count reveals the true identity of Straw as the Archduke and Ethel agrees to marry him.

PENELOPE, A COMEDY IN THREE ACTS Characters: Dr. O'Farrell Penelope, his wife Professor Golightly, her father Mrs. Golightly Mr. Davenport Barlow

Mrs. Ferguson Mr. Beadsworth, a solicitor Mrs. Watson A Patient Peyton, a maid

Time: 1908 Act I: Penelope has asked her parents, her Uncle Barlow and her solicitor to gather so that she can make one big scene announcing her divorce. She has discovered that her husband is having an affair with Mrs. Ferguson. Golightly convinces her that if she has lost her husband's affection, it is only because she has let herself become less alluring. If she really loves him she must win him back by being less effusive and more mysterious. She agrees to try. O'Farrell returns and is at once disturbed by Penelope's change. He invents a patient, "Mrs. Mac", to explain his absences with Mrs. Ferguson. Mrs. Ferguson arrives. Penelope suggests that since she is suffering with a headache her husband take Mrs. Ferguson to the music hall that evening.

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

163

Act II: O'Farrell is interviewing a patient. From the patient's embarrassment in asking the fee, we discover that the Doctor's income is negligible for he is devoting so much time and money to his mistress. Moreover, Penelope has taken to buying an expensive frock each day her husband attends the races with Mrs. Ferguson. When Golightly learns that his son-in-law is planning to take Mrs. Mac to Paris, he encourages Penelope to let them go. Penelope agrees, but she must have some new hats in consolation. O'Farrell is not pleased by her extravagance and begins to wonder if she knows. He must see another patient, Mrs. Watson. His temper is further strained when he discovers that Mrs. Watson is a Doctor's widow and he will not be able to charge her a fee. He expresses further concern about the change in Penelope and then is interrupted by Mrs. Ferguson who is making a "professional" visit. In private consultation with her he becomes aggravated by her demand for attention. She borrows money to invest in a questionable stock market "killing", and then borrows the fee from his first patient so that she may pay her fee. Penelope enters with Barlow who is impressed by Mrs. Ferguson's beauty. Penelope insists that Mrs. Ferguson not pay a fee and returns the money to her. Mrs. Ferguson announces that Mrs. Mac has asked her to go on the trip to Paris. When O'Farrell is left alone with his wife she informs him that she has known all along that Mrs. Ferguson was going to Paris with him. He is surprised that his secret has not been disguised and is disappointed that she does not make a scene. His confusion is increased when he learns that the Golightlys also know about his affair and accept it as calmly as Penelope. He telephones and leaves a message for Mrs. Ferguson that Mrs. Mac has had a relapse and will not be going to Paris. Act III: Golightly warns his daughter not to repeat her old pattern of demanding and showing excessive attention. Mrs. Ferguson has been trying to reach the Doctor by telephone and Penelope tells her that he is with Mrs. Mac. When he arrives he learns that Penelope is leaving for a week-end motoring tour. He is disturbed about her leaving now that Mrs. Mac is dead, for he has become physically attracted to her again. They are interrupted by Mrs. Ferguson and he sneaks out before she enters. Penelope gets Mrs. Ferguson to share crocodile tears at the death of Mrs. Mac. O'Farrell returns to add some details of the death and Penelope leaves them alone. Mrs. Ferguson makes a scene and threatens to send his love letters to Penelope. He is forced to explain that Penelope has known about their affair all along and Mrs. Ferguson is mortified. Barlow and Penelope enter

164

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

and Barlow decides to accompany Mrs. Ferguson to Paris. When left alone Penelope continues to taunt her husband's sexual desire and she exits on a week-end motoring trip. SMITH, A COMEDY IN FOUR ACTS Characters: Herbert Dallas-Baker, K. C. Mrs. Rose Dallas-Baker Thomas Freeman, her brother Algernon Peppercorn

Emily Chapman Mrs. Otto Rosenberg Fletcher, a janitor Smith, a maid

Time: 1909 Act I: Rose, Algernon, Emily and Mrs. Otto are playing bridge and discussing the impending arrival of Rose's brother, Freeman. Rose is reticent about the return of her brother, who left England when he was hammered on the stock exchange and went to start a new life in the colony of Rhodesia. Emily leaves the room to retouch her make-up and we learn that she was once engaged to Freeman. DallasBaker joins the game. Freeman enters exuding enthusiasm for his sister. He is not the same man that left; he no longer has the polish of cultivated society. In fact, he is disturbed by the falsity of this polish. He cannot understand why Mrs. Otto is not nursing her infant. When she and Emily leave, the others remain to discuss the present values of society. Freeman compares those values to the more functional values he has found in the colonies. He has returned to find a wife. Throughout the act Smith enters and exits performing varied services. Act II: Smith and Fletcher, while performing their respective chores, reveal that they are "walking out" together. Following Fletcher's exit. Freeman enters for lunch. Eating alone, he talks to Smith about life in the colonies. Dallas-Baker enters and Freeman questions the relationship between Rose and Algy. This upsets Dallas-Baker and he exits just as Rose and Algy arrive. Rose follows him. Freeman inquires about Algy's parasitic existence. Rose returns, asks Algy to leave, and then challenges her brother's right to deprecate and disrupt her home and social life. Emily enters. When she is left alone with Freeman she succeeds in finessing another proposal of marriage.

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

165

Act III: Algy and Emily and Rose and her husband are playing bridge. Freeman kibitzes. Mrs. Otto arrives to join the game. Smith announces that Mrs. Otto has an urgent telephone call. Instead of answering the phone, she asks Smith to take the message, and the disturbed Smith returns to announce that Mrs. Otto's baby is dead. Algy takes Mrs. Otto home and Dallas-Baker exits on business. Rose quarrels with Freeman and orders him to leave her house. Emily and Freeman discuss the values of society; she will intercede on his behalf with his sister; she must break their engagement again for she realizes she can never love him. Smith and Freeman discuss her childhood on the farm and his manual labor. The idea of his performing manual labor is incongruous to her, for he is a gentleman. He proposes marriage to her and she refuses because of their difference in station. Algy returns as Emily and Rose enter. Smith announces that neither she nor Fletcher is able to open the bottle of claret. Freeman asks her to bring him the bottle. Reluctantly she does so after Fletcher has tried again to open it, and Freeman opens it easily. Act IV: Smith thanks Freeman for not taking advantage of the delicacy of her position, having refused to marry him. Emily drops in to say goodbye as she is departing for the colonies. Dallas-Baker and Rose enter. She is upset with Algy who enters shortly. Before she can vent her anger with Algy, Mrs. Otto arrives to explain her absence. Mr. Otto has forbidden her to keep company with Rose and her bridge-playing friends. She leaves and is followed quickly by Emily. While finding fault with her two departed former friends, Rose discovers that Freeman has proposed marriage to Smith. She immediately dismisses Smith. Rose discovers that Algy is planning to desert her by marrying an American heiress and she orders Algy out of the house. Then she exits with her husband to find new gaiety and new friends. Freeman rings for Smith and persuades her to marry him. ΓΗΕ LAND OF PROMISE, A COMEDY IN FOUR ACTS Characters: Norah Marsh Edward Marsh, her brother Gertrude Marsh, his wife Frank Taylor Reginald Hornsby

Emma Sharp, his wife James Wickham Dorothy Wickham, his wife Agnes Pringle Clement Wynne, a solicitor

166

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

Benjamin Trotter Sidney Sharp

Kate, a maid

Time: 1912 Act I: Scene: Miss Wickham's house in Tunbridge Wells. The funeral service for Miss Wickham is just over. Norah, the deceased woman's companion, discusses her future plans with another companion, Miss Pringle. The job of lady's companion is one of the few open to the gentlewoman and there are not many positions available. Norah could go to live with her brother in Canada, but Miss Wickham had promised her a respectable inheritance. Miss Wickham's nephew, James, and his wife, Dorothy, enter and are left alone. They had never been particularly attentive to their aunt, but now they hope to be included in the will. Wynne, the solicitor, arrives to read the will and much to everyone's surprise, Norah is not included. The heirs do not choose to honor their aunt's promise to Norah. Norah is left alone and Miss Pringle rejoins her to discuss new plans. Hornsby enters to ask Norah for a letter of introduction to her brother in Canada. Hornsby, a gentleman-about-town, has exhausted his father's patience and pocketbook and has been ordered to go to the colonies and work for a living. Following his departure, Norah explains that she could not go to her brother for he has recently married a waitress, a woman beneath his station. Act II: Scene: Marsh's farm in Canada. Unable to secure another position, Norah has had to come to her brother's where Hornsby is now working as a hired hand. Trotter and Taylor also work for Marsh, but Taylor is working only to get enough money to return to his own farm. His crop had been hailed out. Friction soon develops between Norah and Gertrude, for Norah is not used to the rough frontier life and Gertrude has no patience with her sister-in-law's cultivated manners. Norah questions Taylor's values when she learns that he is thinking of stopping at an employment agency to look for a wife before returning to his own farm. Norah insults Gertrude and she demands an apology before the men. Norah tries to apologize but this only leads to further antagonism between the two women. In violent reaction Norah offers to marry Taylor and he accepts.

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

167

Act 111: Scene: Taylor's farm. Taylor returns to his farm with his new bride. Mr. Sharp, their only neighbor, has picked them up at the station. When left alone Norah and Taylor begin to dicker. Both are very proud. He wants obedience and she wants respect. He insists that they have tea in honor of their first night together. After tea he orders her to wash the dishes. She refuses and brushes the tea crockery onto the floor, breaking it. Their quarrel erupts. She slaps and bites him. He forces her to sweep up the broken pieces. She is made to realize that she must spend the night as his wife. She takes his gun and, much to his surprise, pulls the trigger. The gun is not loaded. Shrinking and ashamed, she enters the bedroom and he follows. Act IV: Scene: Taylor's farm. Norah has begun to brighten up the cottage. She is arranging mustard flowers on the table when Taylor enters. Her relations with him are better, but there is still the memory of the first night. She senses he is disturbed, but he insists there is nothing wrong. Her brother is coming to visit on a business trip. Hornsby accompanies him. Hornsby is giving up the vigorous life and returning to the leisure and comfort of England. Marsh discloses that his trip was instigated at Taylor's request. He has brought two letters for her, one from Miss Pringle telling her of an available job as a lady's companion, and one from Wynne with a check from Wickham for 500 pounds. Norah's reaction to the letters betrays to her brother the fact that her marriage has been difficult. Mrs. Sharp enters, distraught. The mustard flowers are weeds that threaten the destruction of their crops. Norah gives an impassioned plea for the beauty and the rewards of the struggle on the frontier. Taylor returns with the news that Sharp's crop is all right. However, Taylor's will have to be destroyed. Hornsby drives the relieved Mrs. Sharp to her farm. Taylor insists that Norah leave him and return to England. Marsh supports him, but Norah chooses to remain. Her check will keep them going in spite of the crop failure. She has discovered love and happiness with her husband. OUR BETTERS, A COMEDY IN THREE ACTS Characters: Lady Pearl Grayston

Thornton Clay

168

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

Elizabeth "Bessie" Saunders, her sister Duchesse de Surennes Principessa della Cercóla Arthur Fenwick

Fleming Harvey Anthony "Tony" Paxton Lord Bleane Ernest, a dancing master Pole, a butler

Act I:

Bessie, an American heiress, is visiting her sister, Pearl, who is married to an English lord. Bessie's former fiance, Harvey, who is also visiting in England, comes to say hello and Pearl decides that she must introduce him into the proper social circles. Pearl has already planned to engineer the marriage of her sister to Lord Bleane. Except for Bleane, all of Pearl's friends are also expatriated Americans. Clay spends his inheritance by traveling in the best circles. Fenwick, a sensual businessman, keeps Pearl as his mistress. This makes it possible for her to achieve a social position that she could not attain with only her husband's income. The Princess, who is separated from her husband, does penance for her wealth by supporting charitable institutions. The Duchesse is a divorcee who is currently keeping the parasitic Tony. One senses the uneasy relationship between these people, and Harvey brings out the insecurity of their social position. Bleane, a considerate youth with the traditional values of the landed gentry, proposes to Bessie, but she avoids an immediate answer. When Pearl is left alone, Tony telephones and hints that he is attracted by her; she does not discourage him. Act II:

Everyone is gathered at Pearl's country estate for the week-end. Pearl, the Princess and the Duchesse discuss their reasons for marrying European aristocracy. They go on to question Bessie about her progress with Bleane. The men, except for Bleane and Tony, enter. Harvey resists the attempts of his hosts to acclimatize him to their society. He is surprised that Pearl's friends ridicule him for being so gauche as to visit the National Gallery, insofar as he had seen Pearl enter it as he was leaving. The two missing men arrive, having walked through the garden admiring Pearl's new teahouse. While the others go in to dance, the Princess and Harvey remain to discuss the values of the aristocracy, particularly the weakness of the American system because it does not provide its wealthy class with the responsibility that goes with wealth in the English system. Harvey is left alone with Bessie and he urges her not to marry Bleane. Harvey cannot understand aristocracy. When Bleane enters, Harvey exits, and Bleane repeats his proposal of marriage. Bessie accepts. When they leave, the Duchesse and Tony enter to quarrel over the insecurity of their

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

169

relationship. He has been to the National Gallery. She is aware that his visit coincided with Pearl's. Tony is left alone with Pearl. Rising passion between them leads to the arrangement of an assignation in the teahouse. Pearl and Fenwick are left alone and we see the way she appeals to his vanity to get what she wants. All but Pearl and Tony gather to play poker. As the game begins, the Duchesse pretends to have left her handbag in the teahouse and she asks Bessie to fetch it. After some delay Bessie returns. She is sorry that she does not have the bag, but the door was locked. The Duchesse says she cannot understand this as she just saw Tony and Pearl go in there. The reaction of Bessie and Fenwick is severe. Clay attempts to keep the game going. Pearl and Tony nonchalantly wander in and she realizes that they have been discovered. Act

III:

It is the following morning. Nerves are strained. The eruption of tempers the previous evening was great. Pearl did not come down for breakfast, but she has ordered one car torn down for repairs and one to go to London. Scathing remarks are made about Pearl's character, particularly by the Duchesse, who plans to leave immediately, even though the only mode of transportation is a luggage cart. She plays a pathetic scene with Tony, whom she regrets losing. When Tony declares that he is going to the colonies, she becomes contrite, begs him to stay, and even agrees to marry him. Pearl is coming downstairs. Bessie asks the Princess to help her make her wedding arrangements. Pearl enters, deliberately calm and relaxed. She ignores the icy reception she is given. Bessie leaves the room. Pearl has taken pains to prevent anyone from leaving the estate, for she knows that if her guests leave before the weekend is over, society will believe the story about her and Tony. She insists on seeing the Duchesse to tell her that she has secured an easy and respectable job for Tony. She cleverly plays a scene of the ruined penitent with Fenwick and he forgives her. Bessie tells Pearl that she will arrange her marriage without Pearl's help. She will stay with the Princess until she is married. Pearl is not prepared for this and her reaction is violent. In the course of the ensuing argument, Bessie realizes the arrangement that exists between Fenwick and her sister. Pearl retorts that it was the Fenwick money that made it possible for her to buy Bessie's marriage to Bleane. Pearl leaves. Bleane enters and Bessie tells him that she must withdraw her promise to marry him. She has not had the proper training to live the traditional life of the gentry. After Bleane's exit everyone gathers. While the Duchesse is taking her leave, the car arrives from London with Ernest, the dancing master. The Duchesse cannot leave with him there. Pearl has seemingly re-

170

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

stored order to the troubled affair of the previous evening. As Pearl is being reunited with the Duchesse, Bessie quietly tells Fleming that she is returning to the United States within the week. THE UNATTAINABLE, A FARCE IN THREE ACTS Characters: Caroline Ashley Isabella Trench Maude Fulton Cooper, a maid

Robert Oldham Rex Cunningham Dr. Cornish

Act I: Caroline's friends, Maude, a spinster, and Isabella, whose husband is in India, rush to Caroline's side when they read in the Times obituary that Caroline's husband, from whom she has been separated for ten years, is dead. Now Caroline is free to marry the conservative solicitor, Robert Oldham, with whom she has had a platonic friendship for nearly ten years. Maude and Isabella usher Caroline's young friend, Rex, out of her house when they learn that he is in love with Caroline. They want nothing to upset their plan to have Caroline marry Robert. They telephone Robert to tell him to come immediately and when he arrives, they leave Robert and Caroline alone. Once the prying friends are gone, they can discuss the situation more easily. Robert, out of consideration for Caroline's wedded state, has never proposed marriage, although they have assumed that they would marry. Both, however, hesitate at the idea of marriage, for it would mean surrendering the comfort of their freedom in platonic love to the stringent demands of marriage. Nevertheless, facing the inevitable, Robert, aided by the support of several drinks, proposes marriage. Caroline declines. Each of them is so relieved and agreeable that they feel they could almost marry. Act II: Caroline is in a temper and not at home to guests, but Maude forces her way in. She has to hear all of the details of Robert's proposal. Maude is surprised to discover that there is no engagement. She is forced to leave when Cornish calls professionally. Cornish quickly diagnoses Caroline's complaint as middle age. The reality of the diagnosis is too much for Caroline and she chooses to escape by asking Rex to come over. Maude has called Isabella and as soon as Cornish leaves, the two of them return to press Caroline to recon-

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

171

sider Robert's proposal. When Rex arrives, they go off to an adjoining room. Caroline soon discovers that Rex does not have the youth and passion she had hoped to find. He enjoys suffering. When Caroline suggests that he might have a chance to marry her, he is unhappy. She quickly dismisses him. Maude and Isabella press back into the room. They have again called Robert, asking him to come at once. When he arrives, Caroline flings herself out of the room. Maude and Isabella impress on Robert by devious means the tragic blow he has dealt to Caroline by not marrying her. When he is left alone with Caroline they realize that there is no escape from their well-meaning friends other than marriage. They agree to marry, but cannot decide which house they will live in. Their quarrel is resolved when they remember the pressure of their friends. To relieve the strain of the day, they decide to entertain Isabella and Rex for dinner and bridge. Act III:

Cornish returns, curious to know whether Caroline has decided to marry Rex or Robert. She decides there is only one alternative; she must marry Cornish. Surprised at first, Cornish objects, but then agrees. She waits for all her friends to gather to hear Cornish's announcement. He surprises everyone by announcing that Caroline's first husband is still alive. He exits, leaving Caroline to invent the relevant details. She invents admirably. Rex is then happy because he can suffer. Robert is also pleased, for he can once more look forward with pleasure to the day when her widowhood will make it possible for them to marry. Caroline has made everyone happy because she is once more truly unattainable.

HOME AND BEAUTY, A FARCE IN THREE ACTS Characters:

William, a hero Frederick, another Victoria, a dear little thing Mr. Leicester Patón, a wangler Mr. A. B. Raham, a solicitor Miss Montmorency, a maiden lady

Mrs. Shuttleworth, a motherin-law Miss Dennis, a manicurist Mrs. Pogson, a respectable woman Taylor, a parlourmaid Nannie, a nurse Clarence, a boy

Time: The end of November,

1918

172

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

Act I:

Victoria discusses with her manicurist her marriage to two war heroes. When the first was reported missing in action, she married the second, her husband's best friend. She has bora a child to each. Her mother, Mrs. Shuttleworth, suggests that her daughter might have been wiser to marry Paton, a man grown wealthy from the manufacture of war goods. Paton arrives and agrees to obtain extra rations for Victoria. A somewhat distraught Frederick enters. When he is left alone with Victoria, he explains rather awkwardly that her first husband is alive and is arriving momentarily. William enters and they begin a hesitating, lengthy explanation of what has happened since he left. Finally, Frederick blurts out that he has married Victoria. Act 11:

Mrs. Shuttleworth is fluttering around making arrangements to take the grandchildren to her home, to a "normal" house. Victoria has asked Paton to comfort her in her hour of distress. He is so "strong". In her moment of confusion, there is only one thing to do - have lunch with him. Neither William nor Frederick is pleasantly disposed. They quarrel because each chooses to leave Victoria to the other. Victoria joins them, but she does not understand why they are fighting. They are interrupted by Mrs. Pogson, a cook, who has come to interview Victoria. As cooks are scarce, they can afford to be demanding. Mrs. Pogson's sense of morality is offended when she learns that Victoria is married to two men; she does not take the job. Frederick conceives the idea that he and William should hold a lottery to see who wins Victoria. Whoever draws the paper with the cross on it wins Victoria. William is the first to draw and he gets the Victoria cross. Frederick surreptitiously places the paper he drew in his pocket. It does not take William long to realize that Frederick has placed a cross on both pieces of paper. When he insists on seeing the other slip of paper, Frederick runs from him. When caught, Frederick tries to eat the paper, but William chokes him until he gets the paper and exposes the trick. Victoria leaves while they argue and returns in a "snit" because all the servants have quit. She decides that she will not choose between them, but instead will marry Paton. She leaves to lunch with him and to wangle a proposal of marriage from him. Act 111:

William and Frederick, left alone in their house, are sharing the household chores. The arrangements are not altogether satisfactory. Victoria arrives with her solicitor to make plans for the divorce. Divorce proceedings, Raham explains, must be delicately handled

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

173

to protect the reputations of the respective parties. He will make the arrangements for a divorce based on cruelty. He has in his employ an elderly old maid, Miss Montmorency, who he uses in his divorce cases to prove incontinency. The husbands must agree to protect Miss Montmorency's virtue because she does not wish to ruin her reputation. This will not be difficult. Once the arrangements are made, the husbands are left alone to try to cook. They are saved from starvation by a basket of food which Paton has sent to Victoria. They settle down to enjoy the delicacies and to drink to Victoria's third husband and to their liberty. THE CIRCLE, A COMEDY IN THREE ACTS Characters: Clive Champion-Cheney Arnold Champion-Cheney, M. P., his son Elizabeth, Arnold's wife Lord Porteous Lady Catherine "Kitty" Champion-Cheney

Edward "Teddie" Luton Mrs. Shenstone A Footman A Butler

Act I: Lady Kitty, who thirty years ago ran away from Clive to live with Porteous, has been invited by Elizabeth to visit the family country estate. Arnold, with many reservations, has permitted his wife to issue the invitation to his mother and Porteous. Luton and Mrs. Shenstone have been invited to ease the situation. Clive unexpectedly arrives, but he agrees to stay out of sight. Elizabeth expects her mother-in-law to be a delicate, elderly lady with white hair, dressed in black lace. Luton tells Elizabeth about the beauty of his life in the Federated Malay States (F. M. S.). He tells her he loves her, but before she can reply, the other guests arrive. Kitty is not what Elizabeth expected. She clings to the semblance of youth with dyed red hair, heavy make-up and the current fashion in dress. Porteous is a crochety, portly old man. There is friction between Porteous and Kitty which is intensified by the sudden appearance of Clive for lunch. Act II: Porteous and Kitty, Mrs. Shenstone and Luton are partners at bridge. Elizabeth and Clive kibitz. Clive continually needles Porteous by taking sides with Kitty. The game is soon lost and the irate

174

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

Porteous plays patience, but he cannot escape from the kibitzing of Clive and Kitty. Tempers are strained; Kitty and Porteous argue and Kitty leaves the room in tears with Porteous close behind. Clive is left alone with Luton and Elizabeth. Clive pointedly calls attention to the unpleasantness of such a relationship. When he leaves, Luton wonders if his remarks were directed to them. In a rather bumbling manner, Luton proposes marriage to Elizabeth and she accepts. She is not going to run off and leave a note on the pin cushion as Kitty had done. She will speak to her husband. They exit and Kitty joins Arnold for tea. Clive joins them. Arnold leaves when Porteous enters. Kitty argues with Porteous about what she would have become had she remained married to Clive and had Porteous become Prime Minister. In the middle of their disagreement, Porteous bursts out of the room when his false teeth become loose. Kitty tells Clive that she should not have left him, but he is rather pleased that she did. The scandal of the divorce meant that he had to give up his many responsibilities and could instead devote himself to the pleasures of a series of affairs with chorus girls. As they exit, Elizabeth returns and Arnold joins her. She asks for a divorce to marry Luton. He reacts by calling Luton into the room, refusing her request, and ordering Luton out of his house. Act

III:

Clive tells his son that he can secure his marriage if he will only follow his father's advice. Arnold exits, although there is no such indication in the script. Kitty and Elizabeth enter together and Porteous enters from another direction. Kitty and Porteous are not speaking to each other. Clive has brought an old photo album. While Kitty and Porteous sneer at each other from opposite sides of the room, Clive and Elizabeth look at the pictures of the women from another day. Elizabeth admires the beauty of a china-doll-like young woman. It is the youthful Kitty. Kitty begins to cry and Elizabeth takes Clive out of the room. In a delicate scene, Porteous makes up to Kitty. They reminisce about their past and he tells her that she is more beautiful now, in a mature sort of way. Clive returns to tell them about Luton and Elizabeth. He asks Kitty to convince Elizabeth not to go. The footman brings Elizabeth a note from Luton as she enters. Clive and Porteous leave. Kitty explains to Elizabeth the vicissitudes of trying to keep unmarried love alive. Elizabeth is touched with the horror of such a life. When Arnold enters, Kitty leaves. Arnold plays his father's scene: he will sacrifice himself and make her divorce possible. Elizabeth is left alone. Kitty and Porteous join her. Luton returns and Elizabeth tells him she cannot leave Arnold. Elizabeth does not love Arnold, but she cannot leave him when he

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

175

could make such a sacrifice. Luton will not accept the refusal. In an impassioned speech, Luton offers her love, not happiness; he threatens to black her eye. Her mind is changed. Kitty and Porteous aid their escape and then are left alone to wonder if the life of these young people will be any different from theirs. Clive joins them and boasts of his own cleverness in preventing the divorce, as we hear the car start up and drive off into the night. Kitty and Porteous join Clive in laughter.

THE CONSTANT WIFE, A COMEDY IN THREE ACTS Characters:

John Middleton, F. R. C. S. Constance, his wife Mrs. Culver, her mother Martha, her sister Barbara, her friend

Marie-Louise Mortimer Durham, her husband Bernard Kersal Bentley, a butler

Act I: Mrs. Culver, Martha and Barbara are discussing Constance's ignorance of the affair her husband is having with Marie-Louise. Martha wants to inform her sister, but their mother insists that they do not. Constance, Marie-Louise and John enter, one after the other. There are suggestions from Constance that she is more aware of her husband's affair than is expected. Mortimer is going out of town on business that evening, Marie-Louise explains. She is going to bed early. John, a physician, remembers that he has a case of acute appendicitis at the hospital. Marie-Louise asks John to attend to her trick knee and they go into the consulting room. Constance avoids inferences to her husband's affair. Martha leaves with Marie-Louise. Barbara offers Constance a partnership in her interior decorating firm, which Constance refuses. Constance is left alone with her mother. Mrs. Culver takes a strong line with her daughter: if men are unfaithful, it is usually because the wife is at fault; a wife should ignore an occasional indiscretion, but a wife must remain faithful. Bernard, an old beau who is working in Japan, visits and is left alone with Constance. Bernard is still in love with her, but has no intention of expressing his love or of breaking up her marriage. John joins them. As he has a case that evening, he asks Bernard if he would like to dine with Constance. Bernard accepts and Constance agrees.

176 Act

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES II:

Two weeks have passed. Bernard is talking with Martha while waiting for Constance. Martha cannot keep her secret. She leaves when Constance enters. Bernard awkwardly tells her that he will stand by her through any difficulty. She avoids the implication by questioning her sister's integrity. When they exit, Marie-Louise rushes in to tell John that Mortimer is suspicious. John assures her that she only imagines it. Martha and Bernard, Constance and Mrs. Culver enter. Bentley presents Constance a visitor's card and she requests that the visitor be admitted. John mentions that he has lost his cigarette case. Mortimer is announced. He is furious; he has discovered John's cigarette case under his wife's pillow. They are lovers. Constance is quick to explain that the case is hers and that she must have left it there last evening. She assures him that he is mistaken. Mortimer is chagrined and leaves. Constance explains to the others that she has known of the affair all the time. Marie-Louise is confused and Constance sends her home with Bernard. Martha, John and Mrs. Culver are quick to tell Constance what action she should take. When the others are through, Constance explains that Marie-Louise provided John with the sexual excitement that had long since disappeared from their marriage. She senses the futility of marriage in the upper class, for servants have taken over the duties of wife and mother. She decides to accept Barbara's offer of work. The others are puzzled by her attitude. After Bernard returns, he is left alone with Constance and she must explain her action again. She places a telephone call to Barbara. Act

III:

It is a year later. Constance, now a successful business woman, is about to leave on a vacation. Martha and Barbara come to see her off. Marie-Louise has just returned from a round-the-world voyage with her husband. John joins them and when Martha and Barbara leave, he asks Constance to speak to Marie-Louise and assure her that he is not interested in resuming their affair. When Marie-Louise arrives, John sneaks out the back. Marie-Louise also asks Constance to assure John that their affair is over. As a matter of fact, she is now having an affair with a nice young passenger she met on the boat. As soon as she leaves John returns. Constance assures him that all is finished with Marie-Louise. Then she explains to him that by working, she is now able to pay her room and board for one year. She has deposited a check for the amount in his account. He does not understand. This, she explains, is the only way she can obtain independence of spirit. Next, she informs him that she is not really traveling alone. She is going with Bernard. John is in a temper. Mrs. Culver enters. When

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

177

she is told of her daughter's plans she does not approve. Neither her arguments nor John's will change Constance's mind. Mrs. Culver leaves when Bernard arrives. John is forced to pretend that he is unaware of his wife's plans. Bernard self-consciously pretends that he also does not know of her plans. When Bernard exits, she cannot control her laughter at his awkwardness. John is confused. She explains to him that she is looking once more for her lost love, but that she will return to him. John is further frustrated, for having threatened to resume his affair with Marie-Louise, he learns that she is having an affair with someone else. Constance finally assures him that she will return to him after her little adventure. He accepts the fact and tells her to return soon. THE BREADWINNER, A COMEDY IN ONE ACT * Characters: Charles Battle Margery Battle, his wife Judy, their daughter Patrick, their son

Alfred Granger Dorothy, his wife Diana, their daughter Timothy, their son

Scene One: Judy and Patrick, Diana and Timothy, while waiting to play tennis, discuss their lives and their parents' lives. Their interests and their conversation are in the teen-age idiom, circa 1933. Alfred treats his children as equals; he constantly attempts to be a "regular fellow" with his bad jokes and his forced humor. Diana and Timothy are not tolerant of their father's behavior. They feel he has outlived his usefulness to (their) society. Patrick and Judy would agree, although their father has no sense of humor. This discussion of their parents presents them as being decrepit. When Margery and Dorothy enter we see that they are not old, either physically or in their ideas. They are under forty, rather heavily made up, and entertain the impression (not mistakenly) that they still appear attractive to men. Dorothy has had several affairs to retain her semi-glow of youth and Margery is just now considering an affair with one of her husband's business associates. An affair seems the best solution to compensate for connubial boredom. Alfred enters. When his joking has worn thin, he explains why he is at home in the middle of the business day. Charles * "The action of the play is continuous. . . . In order to rest the audience the curtain is lowered twice during the performance." Pin short, a fulllength play.]

178

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

has made an unfortunate investment and unless he can obtain a large loan, he will be hammered from the stock exchange. As Charles' solicitor, Alfred was surprised when Charles did not keep an appointment with him. Charles is always punctual. The thought occurs that Charles has committed suicide. As they discuss this possibility, Charles enters. Scene Two: The last few lines of dialogue from the preceding scene are repeated in this scene, and Charles enters. Instead of going to the office, he went for a walk. The Granger children leave. Margery attributes her husband's condition to war nerves. Judy and Patrick regard the war as a convenient excuse which adults use whenever anything goes wrong. Moreover, the war has made life difficult for the younger generation; the adults blundered into the war and now it is left to the younger generation to right the confusion. The war made Charles appreciate the very fact of living, and now he has decided that the daily routine of the stock exchange is not living. He wants to enjoy life. As the clock chimes three, he describes the proceedings on the stock exchange when someone is hammered. The telephone rings and it is discovered that while Charles was describing the event, it was actually taking place. Alfred cannot understand, for Charles' reputation was so respected that he had been granted a large loan to keep his business going. Charles still has the check in his pocket; he chose not to use it. He is leaving his family to go to the colonies. Patrick is upset to learn that his father is more bored with his ideas than he was with his father's. Patrick is not receptive to his father's suggestion that by earning his own legal education he will make a better Labour M. P. Margery is disturbed. She would not go with him to the colonies even if he asked her, but when he does not want her to go, the circumstances seem different. Charles still has some money which he can keep legally, if not morally. He can ignore the morality and proposes to take a small sum for himself and leave his family the rest. Alfred talks to Charles alone and asks him to tell him about the other woman. There is no other woman. Alfred is confused, but Charles cannot be bothered, for he must pack if he is going to leave immediately. Scene Three: The final dialogue of the previous scene is repeated and Charles exits to pack. Alfred still thinks there is another woman, and he tells his wife to get the truth from Margery. When Dorothy talks with Margery, she knows there is no other woman. She asks Dorothy to talk to Charles to persuade him to stay. Charles is made nervous by

PLOT OUTLINES OF THE SUBJECT COMEDIES

179

Dorothy's talk. She believes he is leaving because he loves her, although Charles protests this is not so. Dorothy continues to press the point, and by her own construction of the situation, confesses her love for him. Of course, she cannot go with him; he does not have enough money. Dorothy kisses him and leaves. Diana quickly enters. Diana knows her mother has thrown herself at Charles. It is such a pity that her mother cannot separate her own feelings from those of others. Diana wants to run off with Charles. They could go as man and wife. She could earn extra money by prostitution, and they could add to that income by a bribery scheme she thought out. Finally, she confesses that the real reason she loves him is because he has no sense of humor. He is quick to dismiss her proposition, and she exits to send in his own daughter. Judy can understand him and even respect his actions. She strongly suspects that he has more of a sense of humor than the others who express their humor so conspicuously. Now she is free to do what she wants to do. She never wanted to be a young lady; she is going on the stage. He tells her such a goal will not be easy; she will have to work. He tells her to be natural - it is not easy, but it is "the final triumph of artifice". Judy leaves when her mother enters. Margery weakly attempts to persuade him to stay. Charles knows that her arguments are as listless as their love for each other has become. He wishes her well and bids her goodbye.

Appendix

Β

FIRST PUBLICATION OF MAUGHAM'S ORIGINAL PLAYS *

Date Written

Title

Date Published1

Volume *

1903 »

1897-98

Schiffbruchig fMarriages Are Made In Heaven)

1898-99

Mademoiselle Zampa

1898-99

A Man of Honour

1912 4

1899

The Explorer

1912

1903

Loaves and Fishes

1924

1903

Lady Frederick

1912

I

1904

Mrs. Dot

1912

I

1905

Jack Straw

1912

I

unpublished

* The dates of writing and the information concerning the unpublished plays were found in Raymond Mander and Joe Mitchensen, Theatrical Companion to the Plays of Maugham (London, Rockliff, 1955), pp. 289301. 1 The publisher is London, William Heinemann, Ltd., unless otherwise noted. 2 W. Somerset Maugham, The Collected Plays, 3 vols., 3rd ed. (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1955). 3 Published in Laurence Housman & W. Somerset Maugham, eds., The Venture (London, Pear Tree Press, 1903). 4 Chicago, Dramatic Publishing Co., 1912.

181

FIRST PUBLICATION OF ORIGINAL PLAYS

Date Written

Title

Date Published

1908

Penelope

1912

1909

Smith

1913

1909

The Tenth Man

1913

1910

Landed Gentry

1913

1913

The Land of Promise

1923

1915

Our Betters

1923

1915

The Unattainable

1923

1917

Love in a Cottage

unpublished

1918

Caesar's Wife

1922

1919

Home and Beauty

1923

1919

The Circle

1920

1920

The Unknown

1920

1922

East of Suez

1922

1923

The Camers Back

unpublished

1924

The Road Uphill

unpublished

1926

The Constant Wife

1927

1926

The Letter

1927

1928

The Sacred Flame

1928

1930

The Breadwinner

1930

1932

For Services Rendered

1932

1933

Sheppey

1933

Volume

I I

I Π Π

III Π π ΠΙ m

II ΠΙ π m ΠΙ

Appendix

C

PRODUCTION RECORD OF THE ELEVEN COMEDIES*

I. THE STAGE London

Play

Year Opened

No. 1

Year Revived

No. 1

1907

422

1908 1909 1909 1914

321 246 168 185

1913 1946 1923 1953 1947

57 144 90 30 30

1916

141

1923 1919

548 253

1926 1949 1946 1950

152 32 59 200

1921

181

1927

70

1930

158

1931 1944 1937 1946 1944 1953

86 110 36 26 30 31

New York Year Opened

No. 1

Lady Frederick

1908

96

Jack Straw Penelope Smith The Land of Promise The Unattainable Our Betters Home and Beauty The Circle

1908 1909 1910 1913

112 48 112 76

1916

45

1917 1919

112 102

1921

175

1926

295

1931

55

The Constant Wife The Breadwinner

* The information found in these tables is compiled from Raymond Mander and Joe Mitchensen, Theatrical Companion to the Plays of Maugham (London, Rockliff, 1955), passim. 1

Number of performances.

PRODUCTION RECORD OF THE ELEVEN COMEDIES Π.

Stage Title (Cinema Title When it Differs)

183

THE CINEMA

Producing Corporation

Country

Date

Lady Frederick (The Divorcee)

U. S. A.

1919

Metro Pictures

Jack Straw

U. S. A.

1920

Famous Players-Lasky

Smith

England

1917

The Land of Promise (The Canadian)

U. S. A. U. S. A.

1917 1926

Famous Players Film Paramount

Our Betters

U. S. A.

1933

R. K. O. Radio Pictures

Home and Beauty (Too Many Husbands)

U. S. A.

1940

Columbia Pictures

The Circle (Strictly Unconventional)

U. S. A. U. S. A.

1925 1930

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer

The Constant Wife (Charming Sinners)

U. S. A.

1929

Paramount

Appendix

D

CHAPTER HEADING QUOTATIONS

In an interview the writer had with one of Maugham's friends, Dame Harriet Cohen, distinguished English concert pianist (now retired), she stated that she had heard Maugham say that his primary critical inspiration for playwriting was William Hazlitt. A reading of Hazlitt's criticism suggested what could be construed as substantiating evidence; however, it was not conclusive. The association did not seem to be sufficiently important for this study to justify a detailed comparative analysis. Nonetheless, the suggestion of Hazlitt's influence continued to pique my curiosity, and the following letter was written to Maugham: 5 August 1962 Dear Mr. Maugham, For six years I have wanted to write to you but have never done so because you always write that you do not wish to be bothered. Now I am braving your displeasure because I think I have a worthwhile request. In those six years as a graduate student at Stanford University and as a director and teacher of dramatic literature and theatre history at Mills College I have had the pleasure of meeting three of your friends or acquaintances, Chandra-Sekhar, Harriet Cohen and the late Bertram Alanson, who suggested that I write to you when they discovered that I was writing my doctoral thesis on your dramatic comedy. First, let me say that I have derived much pleasure from your writings. It is incomprehensible to me that the critics have not held your works in higher regard. It is my belief that they erred in their judgment by comparing you only to writers of the past. The style of your dramatic comedy may be in the Restoration tradition, but your ideas, your view of society, belong in many ways to a period later than that in which you wrote. For example, your concern with the loss of values in a society disrupted by the immoralities of war is also the concern of many dramatists writing in the past fifteen years.

CHAPTER HEADING QUOTATIONS

185

But it is not my purpose to tell you what you have done. Miss Cohen suggested that I limit myself to two questions. It is not easy to pick the two most important ones. However I have selected two questions which, if answered, would be of considerable help to me. Miss Cohen seemed to remember that in a conversation she had with you, you mentioned the great importance William Hazlitt's criticism had in determining your development as a playwright. Was Miss Cohen's memory correct, and if so, why did you choose Hazlitt in preference to others? My second question is more personal. In spite of its candor, it is not intended to be disrespectful. In your most recent autobiographical work, "Looking Back", you are perhaps more revealing than you have been in the past in telling about some of your own conflicts with conventional morality. I speak specifically of your experience with Syrie Barnardo. Is it possible that instead of confining their criticism to accurate appraisal of your works, the critics, influenced by conventional morality, attacked your works because they attached a stigma to your marriage? With the greatest appreciation for your contribution to English letters, and for whatever consideration you might give to my request, I remain, respectfully yours, (signature) Ronald E. Barnes Maugham's response was considerate and very prompt: Dear Ronald Barnes,

11th August, 1962

Thank you for your charming letter and all the nice things you say. It was extremely kind of you to write to me; I was touched and much pleased. You must forgive me if I do not answer your questions. To do so would take a lot of thought and time, and at my advanced age - nearly ninety - and in my indifferent state of health, it is asking too much of me. I am sorry. Yours sincerely, W. S. Maugham (signature) Unfortunately, his response contributes no more definite conclusion. Thus, the chapter heading quotations stand only as a monument to the critical perception of Hazlitt and can be regarded as only circumstantially relevant to Maugham's dramatic comedy.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS Agate, James, The Contemporary Theatre, 1923 (London, Leonard Parsons, 1924). , The Contemporary Theatre, 1924 (London, Chapman & Hall, Ltd., 1925). , ed., The English Dramatic Critics, 1660-1932 (London, Arthur Baker, Limited, 1932). , First Nights (London, Ivor Nicholson and Watson, 1934). Aldington, Richard, W. Somerset Maugham, An Appreciation (New York, Doubleday, Doran & Co., Inc., 1939). Baker, George Pierce, Dramatic Technique (New York, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1919). Barnes, Eric Wollencott, The Man Who Lived Twice (New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1956). Bentley, Eric, The Playwright as Thinker (New York, Meridian Books, 1946). Brophy, John, Somerset Maugham (London, Longman's Green, 1952). Burke, Kenneth, The Philosophy of Literary Form (New York, Vintage Books, 1957). Camden, Carroll, The Elizabethan Woman (Houston, The Elsevier Press, 1952). Cazamian, Louis, Criticism in the Making (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1929). , The Development of English Humor (Durham, Duke University Press, 1952). Cordell, Richard Α., W. Somerset Maugham (New York, Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1937). Cowles, Virginia, The Gay Monarch (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1956). Crane, R. S., ed., Critics and Criticism (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1952). Cust, Sir Lionel, King Edward VII and His Court (New York, E. P. Dutton and Company, Inc., 1930). Dodds, John W., The Age of Paradox: A Biography of England 1841-1851 (London, Victor Gollancz Ltd., 1953).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

187

Eliot, T. S., Essays of Elizabethan Drama (New York, Harcourt Brace & Co., 1956). Esslin, Martin, The Theatre of the Absurd (Garden City, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1961). Fergusson, Francis, The Human Image in Dramatic Literature (Garden City, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1957). , The Idea of a Theatre (New York, Doubleday Anchor Books, 1953). Ford, Ford Madox, Parades End (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1950). , England and the English (New York, McClure, Phillips & Co., 1907). This was published under the name of Ford Madox Hueffer before he adopted Ford as a surname. Frazer, Sir James George, The New Golden Bough, edited with a Foreword and Notes by Theodore H. Gaster (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1959). Freud, Sigmund, The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud, edited with an Introduction by A. A. Brill (New York, Random House, 1938). Friedell, Egon, A Cultural History of the Modern Age, 3 vols., translated by Charles Francis Atkinson (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1932). Frye, Northrop, Anatomy of Criticism (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1957). Granville-Barker, Harley, On Dramatic Method (London, Sidgwick & Jackson, Ltd., 1931). Grossvogel, David I., 20th Century French Drama (New York, Columbia University Press, 1961). Guicharnaud, Jacques, Modern French Theatre (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1961). Guthrie, Tyrone, A Life in the Theatre (New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1959). Hassall, Christopher, A Bibliography of Edward Marsh (New York, Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1959). Includes an example of his critical notes on the proof pages of Maugham's The Summing Up. Hazlitt, William, The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, 21 vols., edited by P. P. Howe (London, J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1931). Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, edited by A. R. Waller (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1904). Holland, Norman N., The First Modern Comedies (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1959). James, Henry, The Scenic Art (New York, Hill & Wang, 1957). Jensen, Sven Arnold, William Somerset Maugham. Some Aspects of the Man and His Work (Oslo, Oslo University Press, 1957). Jonas, Klaus W., The Gentleman from Cap Ferrat (New Haven, no publisher, 1956). , ed., The Maugham Enigma (New York, The Citadel Press, 1954). , ed., The World of Somerset Maugham (New York, British Book Centre, 1959). Kant, Immanuel, Critique of Aesthetic Judgement (Oxford, University Press, 1911). Kaufman, Walter, ed., Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre (New York, Meridian Books, Inc., 1956).

188

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Knox, E. V., The Mechanism of Satire (Cambridge, University Press, 1951). Kronenberger, Louis, The Thread of Laughter (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1952). Laver, James, Edwardian Promenade (Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1958). Lawson, John Howard, Theory and Technique of Playwriting and Screenwriting (New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1949). Lee, Sir Sidney, King Edward VII, 2 vols. (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1927). MacCarthy, Desmond, William Somerset Maugham (London, William Heinemann, Ltd., 1934). Mclver, Claude Searcy, William Somerset Maugham: A Study of Technique and Literary Sources (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1936). Mander, Raymond and Mitchensen, Joe, The Artist and the Theatre (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1955). , Theatrical Companion to the Plays of Maugham (London, Rockliff, 1955). Maugham, W. Somerset, The Art of Fiction (New York, Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc., 1955). , Ashenden (New York, Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc., 1928). , Books and You (London, W. Heinemann Ltd., 1940). , The Collected Plays, 6 ' vols. (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1931). , The Collected Plays, 3 vols., 3rd ed. (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1955). , East and West: The Collected Short Stories (Garden City, Garden City Publishing Company, Inc., 1921). , The Gentleman in the Parlour (Garden City, Doubleday, Doran & Co., Inc., 1930). , Liza of Lambeth (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1951). , Of Human Bondage (New York, Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc., 1915). , Points of View (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1958). , Quartette, adapted by R. C. Sheriff (London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1948). , The Razor's Edge (New York, Doubleday, Doran & Co., Inc., 1944). , Strictly Personal (Garden City, Doubleday, Doran and Company, Inc., 1941). , The Summing Up (Garden City, International Collector's Library, 1938). , Theatre (New York, Doubleday, Doran and Company, Inc., 1937). , Up at the Villa (New York, Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc., 1941). , A Writer's Notebook (New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949). , The Writer's Point of View (London, Cambridge University Press, 1951).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

189

Maurois, André, The Edwardian Era, translated by Hamish Miles (New York, D. Appleton-Century Company, Inc., 1933). , / Remember, I Remember, translated by Denver and Jane Lindley (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1942). Menon, V. K. Krishna, The Theory of Laughter (London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1931). Montgomery, John, The Twenties (London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1957). Myers, Henry Alonzo, Tragedy: A View of Life (New York, Cornell University Press, 1956). Nathan, George Jean, The Critic and the Drama (New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1922). Nicoli, Allardyce, A History of Late Nineteenth Century Drama, 18501900, 2 vols. (Cambridge, University Press, 1949). Nicolson, Harold, King George V (London, Constable & Co., Ltd., 1952). Palmer, John, The Comedy of Manners (London, G. Bell & Sons, Ltd., 1913). Perry, Henry Ten Eyck, The Comic Spirit in Restoration Drama (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1925). Pfeiffer, Karl G., W. Somerset Maugham, A Candid Portrait (New York, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1959). Ponsonby, Sir Frederick, Recollection of Three Reigns (London, Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1951). Rothenstein, William, Men and Memories, 1872-1900 (New York, CowardMcCann, Inc., 1931). , Men and Memories, 1900-1922 (New York, Coward-McCann, Inc., 1932). Rowe, Kenneth Thorpe, Write That Play (New York, Funk & Wagnalls, 1939). Sawyer, Newell W., The Comedy of Manners (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1931). Schlegel, August Wilhelm, Lectures on Dramatic Art and Literature, translated by John Black (London, George Bell & Sons, 1886). Sedgewick, G. G., Of Irony, Especially in Drama (Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1948). Shaw, George Bernard, Advice to a Young Critic, edited with a Foreword by E. J. West (New York, Crown Publishers, Inc., 1955). , Shaw's Dramatic Criticism, edited by John F. Mathews (New York, Hill and Wang, 1959). Sitwell, Sir Osbert, Laughter in the Next Room (Boston, Little, Brown and Company, 1948). Smeall, J. L., English Satire, Parody and Burlesque (Exeter, A. Wheaton & Company, Ltd., 1952). Smith, Willard, The Nature of Comedy (Boston, Bruce Humphries, Inc., 1930). Stanislavski, Constantin, An Actor Prepares, translated by Elizabeth Reynolds Hapgood (New York, Theatre Arts Books, 1948). Starkie, Enid, From Gautier to Eliot: The Influence of France on English Literature, 1851-1939 (London, Hutchinson, 1960).

190

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Stott, Raymond Toole, The Writings of William Somerset Maugham (London, Bertram Rota, Ltd., 1956). Sully, James, An Essay on Laughter (London, Longman's Oreen and Co., 1902). Swinnerton, Frank, The Georgian Literary Scene, 1910-1935 (London, Hutchinson & Co., 1935). Sypher, Wylie, ed., Comedy (New York, Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1956). Thompson, Alan Reynolds, The Anatomy of Drama, 2nd ed. (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1946). , The Dry Mock (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1948). Thorndike, Ashley H., English Comedy (New York, The Macmillan Company, 1929). Towne, Charles Hanson, et al., W. Somerset Maugham (New York, George H. Doran Company, 1925). Trilling, Lionel, The Liberal Imagination (New York, Doubleday Anchor, 1954). Turnell, Martin, The Novel in France (New York, New Directions, 1951). Ward, Richard Heron, William Somerset Maugham (London, Geoffrey Bles, 1937). Weber, Eugene, Paths to the Present (New York, Dodd, Mead & Company, Inc., 1960). Young, Stark, The Theatre (New York, Hill and Wang, 1958).

ARTICLES Atkinson, Brooks, "Anatomy of Criticism", Theatre Arts, V X L I V (April, 1960). Cowley, Malcolm, "Criticism: A Many-Windowed House", Saturday Review, August 12, 1961. Housman, Laurence, and Maugham, W. Somerset, eds., The Venture (London, Pear Tree Press, 1903). Maugham, W. Somerset, "Looking Back", Show, June, July, August, 1962. Stokes, Sewell, "W. Somerset Maugham", Theatre Arts, X X I X (February, 1945). Weightman, John, "Humor and the French", The Twentieth Century, vol. 170 (July, 1961).

UNPUBLISHED M A T E R I A L Sharp, William Leslie, "The Relation of Dramatic Structure to Comedy in the Plays of George Bernard Shaw". Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1953. Williams, Edwin Wallace, "Complications in the Plots of the Plays of W. Somerset Maugham". Unpublished M.A. thesis, Stanford University, 1953.