(I wrote this review last year, so my opinions might have changed, but thought this might be relevant to the one I just did of Mary Barton).
It's a book by a guy writing under the name of Robert Tressel, and an excellent insight into socialism in early 1900s Britain. It seemed a bit simplified to me at first but after reading the introduction I must admit I missed some points. Perhaps it's not as relevant to present day New Zealand but the reasoning is still the same, and the situation is very similar in a lot of countries which still seem trapped in the industrial revolution.
The story follows a group of workmen and their families for over a year, showing the problems they're facing; and also the scheming of the bourgeoisie to exploit their employees as much as possible (names like Adam Sweater and Mrs Starvem help to overstate the point a little). Like Gaskell in Mary Barton, Tressel emphasies the suffering of the workers One of the workers, Frank Owen, turns out to be a socialist, and gives several 'lectures' to the others - telling them that they are being exploited, explaining how they're being exploited - and is generally ridiculed for it. Clearly the author was (naturally) furious with the entire system. The amount of repetition regarding this seems unnecessary, but does make the book an excellent 'beginner's guide to socialism' (from my limited knowledge of the subject).
There is also an emphasis on the frustration felt by Owen at the lack of understanding shown by the workers (the novel is based on his own experiences) - and while I can't find any specific article to back me up on this (and could be completely wrong), I think this is related to Gramsci's idea of hegemony (relying on what I recall from proofreading my sister's essay), so it appears to have been observed and documented before Gramsci (but only recognised as social control - nothing so elaborate as his theories about hegemony).
It's interesting to note that while reading the book, I somehow got the impression that the author had never actually been one of the workers he was writing about, but I was completely wrong. The person who wrote the introduction also got this impression on first reading. It's possibly to do with the somewhat derogatory tone taken towards most of the characters - including the workers - for perpetuating and believing in the system.
The life of the author is also interesting, and relevant, but something you'll find out about if you do read the book (or an introduction). In my opinion the prose wasn't particularly good, and the ideas were repeated too often - at times too sarcastic for a modern reader? but it's definitely worth the time all the same.
Before I forget: the 'ragged trousered philanthropists' are the workmen - philanthropists, because they're willing to sacrifice their - and their families' - necessities, working in unhealthy conditions for a pittance, and content to be exploited for the comfort of their 'masters'. (Ragged Trousered is pretty self explanatory).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment