|
Mike Donelan Homosexuality is a pertinent topic in the third novel, The Acceptance World one which Peter Templer and Nick Jenkins share different views on. When Templer sees Nick in the lobby of the Ritz alone, he supposes Nick is waiting for "some ripe little piece" (36 AW), but their brief exchange leads Nick to joke that he is waiting for a man, and Templer quips "Things have come to that, have they?" (36 AW) This off-hand comment draws upon Templer's homophobia which can be traced back to the beginning of A Question of Upbringing when Ackworth passed him a "note" confessing his love for Templer. We already know Nick does not regard homosexuality in any negative light, as he attends numerous parties of Mr. Deacon's, who is gay, and he has sex with Gypsy who has shown signs of lesbian tendencies according to Mr. Deacon: "`I was given to understand -well, hasn't Swinburne got some lines about 'wandering watery sighs where the sea sobs round Lesbian promontories?'" (113 BM) Templer's unexpected meeting with Nick in the lobby of the Ritz leads not only to the off-hand comment that Nick is waiting for a male partner, but also leads to the two discussing the film Madchen in Uniform. Templer is of the opinion that the movie is about lesbians, but Nick repeatedly refutes this view. During their discussion Templer notes "I couldn't face (Madchen in Uniform). After all, one meets quite enough lesbians in real life without going to the pictures to see them." (42 AW) This is revealing in that Templer believes there are too many lesbians, and transitively, too many gays that it would be a waste of one's time and money to go see a film made about the subject of homosexuality. Jenkins on the other hand is more open to the idea of homosexuality. He makes friends readily with Mr. Deacon and while he doesn't get along as well with Gypsy Jones socially as he does sexually, he is still able to tolerate her. His open mindedness leads him to take a more liberal stance on the topic. In the conversation he has with Templer regarding the picture, he claims "it isn't about lesbians" (42 AW) Because he is so accepting of the idea of homosexuality, he sees the more universal idea of the movie, which is love, regardless of the fact it is between two women. We see further evidence of Nick's attitude when speaking of Eleanor Walpole-Wilson. Even though we do not have any clear evidence from the text so far, it has been implied that she does not particularly enjoy the company of men and the dances where she would interact with them. We will eventually see she settles down with a partner of the same sex in the countryside, which should not bother Nick at all, due to his relaxed attitude towards homosexuality. A third woman who Nick does not look down upon due to her sexual preferences is Mona. Mona is introduced into the novel as "a friend of Gypsy's belonging ... to a stage of Gypsy's life before she was known to Mr. Deacon." (242 BM) At Mrs. Andriadis's party Templer notices "`She really hates men.'" (243 BM) While it can be implied that she has had sexual encounters with Gypsy and may be a lesbian, Nick makes no further fuss about the matter. Even much later when Templer and Jenkins are talking about Madchen in Uniform and Templer says Mona will be "disappointed" if it's not about lesbians, Nick does not have any issue with the subject being brought up. Nick's positive outlook on homosexuality may be misinterpreted as mild ignorance to the untrained eye, especially during discussions of the film. Nick has yet to address the subject himself and never engages in any narrative where he divulges his point of view. If we look at the series as a whole up to this point we see he allows for some other vehicle to announce the sexual inclinations of Mr. Deacon and Gypsy. Max Pilgrim's song at Milly Andriadis's party infuriates Mr. Deacon, but Nick still does not come out and tell the reader Mr. Deacon is gay. The reader must work hard to uncover this fact through careful analysis of the lyrics. We see that "This verse gave great offence to Mr. Deacon... He was evidently very angry. `Insufferable!' he said. `And from such a person.'" (118 BM) At the very same party Mr. Deacon recounts a conversation he once had with a man who said `"Gothic manners don't mix with Greek morals." Gypsy would never learn that.' (113BM) Homosexuality plays an important role in the unfolding of the plot throughout The Acceptance World. We learn a lot during conversations about other people's points of view, but not a lot about Nick's point of view, leading us to believe he is tolerant of gays and lesbians. While this novel may be geared more towards addressing the economics of the 1930's, Nick also addressed the world of love as equal for all. One might say it is an accepting world. |
|
Kim Sugerman Throughout A Dance to the Music of Time the reader becomes connected to Nick and his flaws. Nick looks to the reader as well as other characters for approval. He presents himself in a good light by showing his successes and his more prominent friends; he goes out of his way to mention that his acquaintances are well known or maintain a prestigious position in their field. It becomes clear that while he is passive, his ego plays a large part in his actions. He looks for validation that he is successful and respected. The support of the observer seems important as he gives his account of the past. The importance of his ego and perception become evident in the scene between Nick, Uncle Giles, and Mrs. Erdleigh in The Acceptance World. Nick is a perceptive spectator who is concerned about what other characters believe about him, and he explains his actions to the reader. When Uncle Giles talks with him about business and money, the subject of Nick's employment comes up. He is still involved in publishing of art books. As Uncle Giles explains this to Mrs. Erdleigh, his tone of voice becomes disdainful and Nick immediately says that they sell "other sorts too" (8). He comments to the reader that he added the last part only because Uncle Giles "made the publication of art books sound so shameful a calling" (8). Nick can no longer live up to his uncle's standards, which he has always considered below his own. This causes him to believe that he has done something inappropriate and thus fell like "a witness, cross-questioned by counsel" (8). Mrs. Erdleigh becomes interested in Nick. He wants her outward approval since he knows that she is evaluating him, but he does not know what she believes. After he shares that he is a Sagittarius, she "was evidently pleased" (9). This gives Nick a sense of accomplishment and gives him hope that the rest of their conversation will go well. While Mrs. Erdleigh contemplates the idea of using cards to tell fortunes, Nick is enthusiastic. He gives his reasoning to this strange request that "to have one's told gratifies, after all, most of the superficial demands of egotism" (10). Nick is sensitive to the critiques and advice of Mrs. Erdleigh. She comments on the fact that he "lives between two worlds" (14). She continues on to say that he is often "at odds with those who might help [him]" (15). This shows how Nick's sensitive ego prevents him from being helped by those that he thinks are his competitors. This could include a wide variety of characters, including those like Widmerpool. While this part of Mrs. Erdleigh's prediction is not yet clear, the reader gets the sense that it will become important in future books. She further damages his ego by telling him that he "expects too much, and [is] also too resigned" and that he "must try to understand life" (15). Not only does Nick have high expectations, he is too lazy to strive for them. Her comment about trying to understand life is interesting, because at first glance that is what Nick seems to be trying to do. He is passive in most situations and analyzes other people's personalities and actions. However, he is unable to fit it all together. He cannot find a niche for himself socially, which seems to be apparent to Mrs. Erdleigh. The reader also gets the sense that he does not understand life since he is always presenting the best side of himself and of his friends. When she tells Nick this, he does not know how to react. He is in awe, but is sensitive to the fact that the analysis was so "severe," (15) and can only promise to try harder. As she continues, he still has very little idea of what to say, and can only mutter short responses. Nick's ego is shocked and can only leave contemplation for after the unsettling conversation with Mrs. Erdleigh. The interaction between Nick and his uncle shows an interesting side of their egos. When he is first introduced to Mrs. Erdleigh, Nick is sure that she is comparing him to Uncle Giles. The two are different and were "placed violently in contrast together in her mind" (7). What is unsettling to him is the fact that he cannot tell "whether the comparison was in [his] uncle's favor or [his] own," (7) and what basis the judgment was on. He is envious that Uncle Giles has his fortune told first. He says that he "was naturally much more interested in what she would say about [himself]" (12). His ego is sensitive to the fact that Mrs. Erdleigh chooses Uncle Giles to have his fortune read first. After she is done predicting his uncle's future, Mrs. Erdleigh says "I expect he wants to hear about love" (13). Uncle Giles laughs disapprovingly and Nick states that he tried to formally deny that is what he wanted to hear about. He continues on to say that "it was perfectly true that the thought was uppermost in my mind" (14. He hopes that "the cards would reveal nothing too humiliating to [his] own self-esteem" (14). Not only is he concerned about what the cards have to say about his future, he worries about what Uncle Giles will make of the prediction. When he is around his uncle, Nick feels a need to justify and defend himself. Nick makes the reader very aware of his feelings about past actions. From this the reader senses that although he is passive and quiet, he possesses a sensitive ego and has a need to prove himself correct. His explains his actions to the reader because he needs to feel justified. He also becomes confused by the comparison between himself and Uncle Giles. He does not like this, since he has grown up scorning his uncle. Nick is a complex character who presents himself in the best light and needs to feel validated by other characters and the reader. |
|
Jake Bean The 1930's in Britain was a time marked by a grave economic depression. The economic chaos caused by depression echoed throughout government as well. Politicians and policy makers frantically sought a solution to the problem at hand. There is no doubt that the Great Depression shook the social, political, and economic scenes of Britain. In Anthony Powell's Acceptance World, Widmerpool's speech at the Old Boys dinner truthfully portrays many aspects of the economic conditions of Britain during the Great Depression yet is unable to elicit any new found respect for Widmerpool. After his preamble, Widmerpool correctly sights the trade depression as one of the contributing factors to the Great Depression. During World War I, Britain avoided borrowing huge sums of money to pay for the war effort by selling foreign assets. By the end of the war Britain had lost over 300 million in foreign investments. This loss in foreign earnings caused Britain to become more dependent on their exports. However, during the war many of Britain's trading partners had begun importing goods from other countries less affected by the war. At the same time, the United States passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which raised U.S. tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods. As a result, U.S. imports plunged by more than a half. In an effort to help Britain's rebuilding economy, Winston Churchill also adopted a Tariff Reform as a measure of protectionism. The compilation of these actions led to what Widmerpool described as, "the most devastating trade depression in our recorded history"(193). After his discussion of the "trade depression"(193), Widmerpool goes on to speak of Britain's abandonment of the Gold Standard. In 1914 Britain was forced from the Gold Standard in order to continue funding war operations. The "insufficiency of money in the hands of consumers"(193) to which Widmerpool attributes the departure of the Gold Standard was caused by an unequal distribution of wealth throughout the social classes. The economy was producing more than it could consume because consumers didn't have enough money to buy the products they produced. The departure from the Gold Standard eased some of the pressure of the Great Depression by loosening monetary and fiscal policy therefore helping maintain current levels of production and consumption. In spite of Widermpool's success in the city and his knowledge of economics, he is unable to sway his old schoolmates impressions of him. When he first embarks on his speech, "Le Bas - indeed everyone present- was obviously taken aback by [his] sudden, uncomfortable diversion"(191). While others had spoken of their lives after leaving Eton, his decision to speak of his own affairs seemed to violate the "school rules"(191) which "governed [this] particular assembly"(191). Although he believed that he had become successful since leaving Eton, Nick admits that "[Widmerpool] was not yet important in the eyes of those present. He remained a nonentity, perhaps even an oddity"(191). Templer seemed to enjoy the humor behind the idea of Widmerpool giving a speech commenting, "this is getting embarrassing"(192). Nick admits that Widermpool's speech had a "mixed"(195) effect on those present ranging from Parkinson's "groan of boredom"(195) to Tolland's rapt attention. Overall, the impressions left by Widmerpool's speech were trumped by Le Bas stroke, which cut short any further commentary by Widmerpool. Months later, his speech was only remembered as possibility bringing about "Le Bas's disabling attack"(196). In the end, although Widmerpool's speech gave a valuable assessment of the economic state of Britain, it is unable to bring about any change in the old boys' perception of him. Works Cited "Gold Standard." Wikipedia. "The Great Depression in the United Kingdom." Wikipedia. "Harley Smoot Tariff." Wikipedia. |
|
John Bukawyn In some societies alcohol is a necessity at any social gathering because this type of beverage has a relaxant effect of the consumer, making this person more sociable around others. Both in A Buyer's Market and The Acceptance World, by Anthony Powell, alcohol is present at the various dances and parties that Nick attends. While it is unclear how much Nick, himself, drinks, the amount of alcohol that Stringham consumes contributes to the end of his relationship with Milly Andriadis and possibly with Peggy Stepney. Also, his habits cause him to embarrass himself at the Old Boy dinner. In a more severe and unexpected case, though, Mr. Deacon's excessive drinking leads to his own death. Within the two novels Stringham and Mr. Deacon make ill choices regarding alcohol, which lead to a spectrum of consequences: from diminutive embarrassment to death. After Nick, Widmerpool, Gypsy, and Mr. Deacon bump into Stringham at a coffee stall in the middle of London, Stringham brings the group to Milly Andriadis's party. Here Nick learns of Stringham's love affair with Milly. At first the couple appears to be happy and energetic, as Milly kisses him and stands, "clinging to Stringham's arm" (106, ABM). Over the course of the party, however, Stringham does consume some amount of liquor and this is evident in the argument he has with Milly. He does not slur his words or make incoherent statements, but rather he proposes that he will go to the Embassy, which at this point has been closed for some time and simply an outlandish idea. Whether Charles is actually drunk or just being facetious is indistinguishable, but Nick does suggest that he could be drunk: "I suppose he had had a good deal to drink" (145, ABM). This statement not only implies that Stringham may be drunk now, but also hints that this behavior from Stringham is not uncommon and somewhat expected. As a result of this drunken quarrel, the relationship between the two is ended and never recovers. Similar situations may have complicated Stringham's marriage with Peggy Stepney and possibly alcohol could have played a significant role in the complication. At the Old Boy dinner at the Ritz hotel, Stringham arrives late after, "hitting the martinis pretty hard" (184, TAW). Immediately after apologizing to Le Bas for his tardiness, he orders a bottle of champagne from the waiter and finishes off his neighbor's whiskey and soda. His drinking habits have certainly grown worse since the reader last saw him at Milly's party. It is plausible that Stringham's depression fuels his drinking. Drinking alcohol is often considered a way to deal with depression, and it is certainly possible that Stringham is trying to cope with his break-up with alcohol. The opposite, however, can also be an option. At the close of the dinner party Stringham reveals to Nick that his wife, Peggy, "couldn't take it" (199, TAW). The reader is left to wonder what it was exactly that Peggy couldn't take, but from the behavior that Stringham exhibits at the Ritz and at Milly's party suggests that it is his drinking problem that correlates with their separation. At this point in the series Stringham has a problem, which is only further emphasized by Mr. Deacon's accident. Over the course of A Buyer's Market, Nick becomes close with Edgar Deacon, a somewhat well-known artist. At Milly's party, Mr. Deacon becomes enraged with Max Pilgram over his own qualms with the promiscuous song that Pilgram sings. Mr. Deacon becomes so angry that he is eventually ejected from the party. The reader may speculate that alcohol may have contributed to Deacon's reaction, but this is not the case because Nick explains that, His behavior at Mrs. Adriadis's, occasioned, of course, far more by outraged principles than unaccustomed champagne, had been, so I discovered from Barnby, quite exceptional in its unbridled nature...(229, ABM). At his own party, however, he has a similar quarrel, but now he is influenced by alcohol. Infuriated by the club's, "existing sanitary arrangements," (229, ABM), he was walking to complain to the management, when he stumbled down the stairs to his death. Nick considers that, "he might have taken a little more to drink that was usual," (229, ABM) and concludes that Mr. Deacon's drunkenness is the main factor in his death. The film, A Dance to the Music of Time, also emphasizes this. The moment before Mr. Deacon falls, he lifts his glass, which is presumably filled with liquor, and shouts to the party-goers. This simple action of lifting his cup, as if giving a toast, signifies that it was alcohol that caused him to stumble and fall down the stairs. Although Mr. Deacon dies with the help of alcohol, it does not necessarily mean that he drinks often. On the contrary, becoming intoxicated is completely out of character for Mr. Deacon, however, his death only amplifies the dangers of alcohol. From Stringham's embarrassment to Mr. Deacon's death, alcohol influences these character's actions. Even though Mr. deacon falls to his death and Stringham ruins his relationships, what is to say that Stringham will not suffer the same fate as Mr. Deacon? Stringham's drinking habits are terrible at the close of The Acceptance World, and will most likely continue to grow worse simply because of the progression of how much he drinks. At first, he drinks enough to merely blur his judgment at Milly's party, but later it seems like he constantly drinks, forcing Peggy Stepney away from him. At this point in the series, if Stringham continues to drink the way he does, he will follow Mr. Deacon's path and drink himself to death. |
|
Alex Svec The unequivocal enigma of the paradox pertaining to that of which is vindicated and at the same time consummated, can only be described as one thing, B.S. That sentence, to my limited knowledge, has no real meaning. I just took some of the big confusing words I know, with help from dictionary.com, and assembled them into one mess. If I wrote an entire essay using words much like the first few and read it the class, I am guessing that I would be met mostly with blank, bored stares, and very little opposition against my writing. Why is this? The answer is that, in reality few people would actually know what I am saying, and even fewer would be willing to call me out on out of fear that what I said might actually have substance or out of politeness. Our society is such that the actual presentation, be it a speech, essay, play, novel, movie, is more important than what is being presented. As long as it sounds good what is being said is relatively unimportant. Widmerpool's rant on the economic state of England is a perfect example. The "point" of this essay is not to determine whether Widmerpool's speech actually makes sense or holds value; rather it is my goal to show some interesting ironies on a multitude of levels. The credibility of Widmerpool's words is completely unimportant. Whether they actually have meaning or not doesn't matter. The complex vocabulary is simply a means to gain acceptance, and to try to impress. Sadly, a wide range of terminology is all that is required for such acceptance. Regardless of what people think of him, Widmerpool has established himself as an intellectual solely because of his choice in words. He is not there to have an honest conversation on the economic situation of England, he is there to prove a point, and whether he knows economics or not, he expresses himself as someone to be respected. Powell knows and understands this, and intentionally shows it through Widmerpool. Ironically, Powell falls victim to the same game. "In general, things are apt to turn out unsatisfactorily for at least one of the parties concerned; and in due course only its most determined devotees remain unwilling to admit that an intimate and affectionate relationship is not necessarily a simple one: while such persistent enthusiasts have usually brought their own meaning of the word to something far different from what it conveys to most people in early life." Translation: Love means different things to different people. That was a completely random quote I took from the novel, I no doubt could find a thousand other equally intricate ones. Whether subconsciously or not, Powell realized that in order to become successful and have his novel accepted, he would also have to play along and write in a style such that others would find him intelligent. I think it is safe to say that we are reading Powell because of that exact fact. While factual, the content of the novel is not ground breaking. Any pre World War II history book dealing with England would most likely share the same information. Powell simply adds characters and big words, keys to acceptance. Paradoxically, I am examining and writing about an author who attempted and succeeded in gaining acceptance by usage of complex vocabulary, who also, in his writing, examined the very same fact about one of his characters, and whether it was self-reflection or not is indeterminate and beside the point. The irony is that I am doing the same thing, obviously to a lesser extreme. While I do not care about acceptance as much as either Powell or Widmerpool did, I am obviously looking for success in the form of a number between zero and six. Thankfully, Mr. Gould, an intellectual himself, is smart enough to look through the charade of large unambiguous words and straight to the content, which happens to be most important. Appearances can only take someone so far, what's underneath the shiny surface is far greater, and will hopefully one day be valued equally. *It is most likely feasible to find irony in everything and anything I wrote with the exception of the last sentence. That includes this sentence. |
|
Author Nicole Lee In The Acceptance World, there are a two references to practices of divination -- Planchette and fortune telling cards. Near the middle of the novel, the Templer's hold a luncheon at their house, with guests including Mona, Stripling, Mrs. Erdleigh, and Jenkins. Jean brings out Planchette, suggesting they all try it. Even earlier in the novel, Mrs. Erdleigh brings out her fortune telling cards for Jenkins. These two practices involving supernatural elements each have their own unique history, which has evolved over time. The first mention of something resembling a Ouija board was recorded around 540BC. A French historical account noted that Pythagoras' sect conducted séances at "a mystic table, moving on wheels, which moved toward signs, which the philosopher and his pupil, Philolaus, interpreted to the audience as revelations supposedly from an unseen world." The Ouija board has grown to be one of the most popular divination methods in the western world. The original board was a large piece of paper and the wedge was heart shaped with two wheel on each end and a pencil attached to the third end. People would lightly place their fingers on the wedge and it would move to draw pictures and write words. However, it did not always give an explicit answer. In the Acceptance World, the guests at the Templer's party found that "in trial after trial, no results were received…while sometimes the pencil shot violently across the surface of the paper, covering sheet after sheet, as a new surface was substituted, with dashes and scribbles."(93) When the trio of Jenkins, Mona and Mrs. Erdleigh placed their fingers on the planchette, it eventually worked, writing "Karl is not pleased," which they then have to further interpret. Some believe the spirits prompt and direct the movement of this pencil. In 1892, William Fuld patented the Ouija board that we are familiar with today. The 60s and 70s were its most successful period, in which it actually outsold Monopoly at one point. The modern Ouija board is twelve by eighteen inches and has the letters of the alphabet written across it in a crescent moon shape with the numbers zero to nine written below. The words `yes' and `no' appear at the top and the word `goodbye' is usually at the bottom. Users place their fingers on the planchette which is placed on the board. Someone then asks a question out loud and the planchette will come to rest on one letter after another, spelling out a message. Rules often vary from user to user, but usually include basic ideas such as never playing alone, beginning and ending a séance "properly," and always using the board in a "comfortable" environment. In The Acceptance World, Quiggin and Templer "felt complete scepticism regarding the whole matter (of Planchette)."(94) However, the game proved their doubts wrong when it began moving in "an up and down rhythm,"(94) which no one seemed to be manipulating. Small, unconscious movements of the hands of participants account for the movement of the planchette, but what actually guides the motions is a debated topic. Materialists argue that they are the result of psychological automatisms and that the movements are simply due to a type of muscle reflex that causes your hand automatically move. Simultaneously, the player's subconscious mind controls the words that are spelled out. On the other hand, spiritualists believe that communication obtained in this manner is provided by deceased spirit beings anxious to maintain contact with the world of the living. For many, a Ouija board is nothing more than a harmless game, but others believe it can be dangerous, with the potential of allowing bad spirits access to the human world. In the Acceptance World, Mrs. Erdleigh expresses her opposition to Planchette, as "she laughed reprovingly," and said, `you know, I really rather disapprove. I do not think Good Influences make themselves known through Planchette as a rule. And the things it writes cause such a lot of bad feeling sometimes.'"(90) Many superstitions accompany Ouija board use, such as the alleged indestructiveness of the board. One is that Evil spirits contacted through the Ouija board will try to win your confidence with false flattery and lies. Another is that once an evil spirit "inhabits" a board, no other spirits will be able to use it. Mrs. Erdleigh directly states, "I know trouble will come of it if we do (play)."(91) Another practice involving divination in The Acceptance World is the use of cards by Mrs. Erdleigh, when she offers to ask them about both Uncles Giles and Nick Jenkins. The use of playing cards for fortune telling has been in existence for centuries, most likely originating in the 16th century when the Romany gypsies arrived in Europe. They did not bring the cards from their homeland, but instead adapted the cards they found into what we know today. The gypsies used many of their Romany ideas to create these fortune telling cards. Their meanings are deciphered from their suite and number. All of the numbers have general connotation assigned to them, while a number and suite together have a more specific meaning. For example, a 3 relates to creativity and communication, a 7 relates to surprises, and king and queen represent a male and female respectively. More specifically, a 2 of hearts signifies that there is romance in the air, a 6 of spades means sorrows are passing on a journey away from difficulties, while a 5 of diamonds means a change of scenery with financial struggles. In the novel, Mrs. Erdleigh asked Uncle Giles, "Was there anything special (that you want to know)?" and he responded "Usually need to look ahead in business… That would be Diamonds I suppose. Or Clubs?" This in fact would be diamonds, as the general suite represents money matters. When a fortune teller chooses a card, there are many guidelines available for assistance. The suite can be chosen based on hair and eye color: for example, fair to red hair and blue/grey eyes is a diamond, auburn or grey hair with hazel or green eyes is a heart, brown hair and light brown eyes is a club, and dark hair and eyes is a spade. The suite can also be chosen based on zodiac sign, as there are three signs matched up with each suite. A third way of choosing suites is by personality factors: the heart corresponds to a shy and helpful person, the spade a calm and logical person, the diamond an ambitious person, and the club a instinctive friendly person. Overall, the cards are used to gain insight of a person's actions and how they relate to the present and future circumstances. The idea of divination in The Acceptance World is a common theme. It is interesting to note how practices have changed over the centuries, but still managed to keep the same general concept. Although most of the information that comes through Ouija boards and fortune telling cards is relatively dull, sometimes inaccurate and misleading, it is still widely used all over the world today. "The Midnight Tour: Ouija Boards." Armstrong, Kelly. 2006. Accessed 4 Nov 2007. http://www.freewebs.com/themidnighttour/ouija.htm "History of Ouija Board." http://members.aol.com/curiostybk/history.html Horowitz, Mitch. "Ouija!" http://www.mitchhorowitz.com/ouija.html "Ouija Boards: To Ten Ways To Contact the Dead." Discovery Channel. 2007. Accessed 4 November 2007.http://www.discoverychannel.co.uk/best_of/top_ten_ways_contact_dead/top10ways_contactdead_ouijaboards/index.shtml Greer, John Michael. The New Encyclopedia of the Occult. Llewellyn Publications, St. Paul MN. 2004. Page 351 "Ouija Boards." Castle of Spirits. Gilbert, Rowena. 1997. Accessed 4 Nov 2007. http://www.castleofspirits.com/index.html Drury, Nevill. Dictionary of Mysticism and the Occult. Harper and Row Publishers. San Francisco. 1895. "Ouijastitions." 2007. Accessed 4 Nov 2007. http://www.museumoftalkingboards.com/ouistit.html "Fortune Telling with Playing Cards." Ravensong Astrology. 9 April 2004. Accessed 4 November 2007. http://www3.sympatico.ca/terrir/divination_index.html Webster, Richard. "Fortune Telling With Playing Cards." http://www.llewellyn.com/bookstore/article.php?id=426 Theiss, Allie. Gypsy Magic for the Prosperity's Soul. 2005. http://www.gypsyadvice.com/gypsy_lore.htm http://www.discoverychannel.co.uk/best_of/top_ten_ways_contact_dead/top10ways_contactdead_ouijaboards/index.shtml |
|
Kym Louie Mark Members and J.G. Quiggin first meet at one of Sillery's tea-parties at the university. Members has already made a name for himself as a poet. He makes himself at home at Sillery's: "he cast himself [...] full length on the floor," asking, "'You don't mind, Sillers? I always lie on the floor (AQU, 181).'" Quiggin arrives awkwardly, and seems out of place. He "sat sourly on the extreme edge of the sofa, glancing round the room like a fierce little animal (180)." Though he speaks freely, he does not seem comfortable, and is overcritical of the other students at the university. When Sillery revealed that they were from the same neighborhood, "if he had hoped to strike dismay into the hearts of his listeners, he could hardly have expected a more successful result so far as Quiggin and Members were concerned (182)." Neither wants to be like the other, and they each leave this first meeting with distaste for the other. In The Acceptance World, Members becomes secretary for the well-known author St. John Clarke. Nick's publishing firm has been having difficulties with St. John's introduction to The Art of Horace Ibister, certainly due to Member's growing control over St. John. According to Barnaby, "`you'll never get that introduction now.... St. John has undergone a conversion (TAW, 25).'" Members believes in the ideas of old aristocracy that connections and social ability are of highest importance. St. John was well known, and thus had potential for many connections. Also, Members was a great asset to him because as he grew older, "he wrote less, while his desire to cut a social figure gained in volume (TAW, 28)." Members could do that for him. As he cultivated these connections for St. John, he too was able to make connections. While waiting at the Ritz for Members, Nick instead meets Quiggin, who, to Nick's surprise, has replaced Members as St. John's secretary. Though Members' influence is no longer keeping St. John from writing the introduction for Nick's firm, Quiggin has his own ideas for how St. John should act, ideas which are keeping him from writing the introduction. Like Members, Quiggin tries to convert St. John to his political views. His views are directly in conflict with Mark's and instead of wanting to move upwards within the system, he wants to get rid of the current system. He works to replace Mark's ideas in St. J's mind with his own. St. J's popularity makes him seem useful to Quiggin as a means to popularize Marxism; the two appear together at a protest for the Means Test. Both Quiggin and Members are hostile to the other. Members is bitter about losing his position to Quiggin, and Quiggin is determined not to lose it back to Members. When he tells Nick of St. J dropping Members as a secretary, Quiggin speaks "savagely", and makes accusations that "Mark can be rather querulous when he does not get his own way (TAW, 52)," claiming that he would "cop[e] with the practical side of the job more - well - conscientiously (TAW, 52)." Members accuses Quiggin that he is careless and that "the strain [from bringing him to the protest] might easily kill St. J (TAW, 130)." Despite how much Quiggin wants to retain his position as St. John's secretary, his relationship with Mona takes precedence, and he loses interest in St. John. Instead of Members regaining the position, Guggenbuhl takes the job, eliminating both Quiggin and Members from the competition for the position. The next time Nick hears of the two of them, they are good friends. Quiggin sees his troubles with Members and St. John as "so preposterous that only a certain degree of jocularity could carry it off (TAW, 173)." Members and Quiggin "appear to be on perfectly friendly terms with each other (TAW, 172)," going out to celebrate the completion of Quiggin's book Unburnt Boats. Nick has noted that the pair of them "were, for some reason, always connected in my mind (TAW, 47)" and "other people too were accustomed to link their names together, as if they were a business firm, or, more authentically, a couple whose appearance together in public inevitably invoked the thought of a certain sort of literary life (TAW, 47-48)." Though earlier, when Nick had stated this, Quiggin and Mark were supposedly not on good terms, "they were not uncommonly found together, arguing or sulking on the banquettes of the Café Royal (TAW, 49)." Once the major object of conflict has disappeared, this connection manifests itself in a close friendship, successful due to many similarities. They share an interest in literature, both went to Oxford and, as Sillery noted, grew up as practically neighbors. |
|
Jake Bean The 1930's in Britain was a time marked by a grave economic depression. The economic chaos caused by depression echoed throughout government as well. Politicians and policy makers frantically sought a solution to the problem at hand. There is no doubt that the Great Depression shook the social, political, and economic scenes of Britain. In Anthony Powell's Acceptance World, Widmerpool's speech at the Old Boys' dinner truthfully portrays many aspects of the economic conditions of Britain during the Great Depression yet is unable to elicit any new found respect for Widmerpool. After his preamble, Widmerpool correctly sights the trade depression as one of the contributing factors to the Great Depression. During World War I, Britain avoided borrowing huge sums of money to pay for the war effort by selling foreign assets. By the end of the war Britain had lost over 300 million in foreign investments. This loss in foreign earnings caused Britain to become more dependent on their exports. However, during the war many of Britain's trading partners had begun importing goods from other countries less affected by the war. At the same time, the United States passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which raised U.S. tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods. As a result, U.S. imports plunged by more than a half. In an effort to help Britain's rebuilding economy, Winston Churchill also adopted a Tariff Reform as a measure of protectionism. The compilation of these actions led to what Widmerpool described as, "the most devastating trade depression in our recorded history"(193). After his discussion of the "trade depression"(193), Widmerpool goes on to speak of Britain's abandonment of the Gold Standard. In 1914 Britain was forced from the Gold Standard in order to continue funding war operations. The "insufficiency of money in the hands of consumers"(193) to which Widmerpool attributes the departure of the Gold Standard was caused by an unequal distribution of wealth throughout the social classes. The economy was producing more than it could consume because consumers didn't have enough money to buy the products they produced. The departure from the Gold Standard eased some of the pressure of the Great Depression by loosening monetary and fiscal policy therefore helping maintain current levels of production and consumption. In spite of Widermpool's success in the city and his knowledge of economics, he is unable to sway his old schoolmates impressions of him. When he first embarks on his speech, "Le Bas - indeed everyone present- was obviously taken aback by [his] sudden, uncomfortable diversion"(191). While others had spoken of their lives after leaving Eton, his decision to speak of his own affairs seemed to violate the "school rules"(191) which "governed [this] particular assembly"(191). Although he believed that he had become successful since leaving Eton, Nick admits that "[Widmerpool] was not yet important in the eyes of those present. He remained a nonentity, perhaps even an oddity"(191). Templer seemed to enjoy the humor behind the idea of Widmerpool giving a speech commenting, "this is getting embarrassing"(192). Nick admits that Widermpool's speech had a "mixed"(195) effect on those present ranging from Parkinson's "groan of boredom"(195) to Tolland's rapt attention. Overall, the impressions left by Widmerpool's speech were trumped by Le Bas' stroke, which cut short any of his further commentary. Months later, his speech was only remembered as possibility bringing about "Le Bas's disabling attack"(196). In the end, although Widmerpool's speech gave a valuable assessment of the economic state of Britain, it is unable to bring about any change in the old boys' perception of him. "Causes of the Great Depression." Wikipedia. "Gold Standard." Wikipedia. "The Great Depression in the United Kingdom." Wikipedia. "Harley Smoot Tariff." Wikipedia. |
|
Matt Cranney The Acceptance World addresses a time of radical polarization, in England and throughout the world. The Great Slump was the driving force behind this radicalization. The people of the world were suffering and were quick to adapt extreme ideologies in an attempt to better their situation. Due to the Great Slump it appeared that capitalism had failed. This led to the rising popularity of Marxism and fascism. In Great Britain several revolutionary socialist parties existed. The Communist Party of Great Britain was formed with the urging of the Soviet controlled Third Communist International in 1920, and the Socialist Party of Great Britain had existed since 1904 and participated in the Second International[1]. These parties also competed with many reform socialist parties, such as the Labour Party, who believed socialism was achievable through electoral reform. On the Far Right, the British Union of Fascists was founded by Oswald Mosley in 1932[2]. This group organized the notorious black shirts featured in the film adaptation of A Dance to the Music of Time. Mosley had direct ties to the Fascist leaders of continental Europe. He was first drawn to fascism after a tour of Mussolini's Italy, and Adolf Hitler was a guest at his wedding. Powell artfully foreshadows the Second World War by showing the ideological battle at its core. In the 1920's and 30's Socialism and Communism were viewed as democratic systems. The degree of totalitarianism of the Stalin's Soviet Union was not well known or understood, while the oppressive nature of fascism was evident. Most Leftist radicals in Britain believed that democracy would be central to the post-capital world. They were also ardent supporters of free speech and spoke out against government censorship. Gypsy Jones distribution of the "War Never Pays!" in A Buyer's Market demonstrates the alignment of the Communist movement with the anti-war movement. Although most Communists believed that a violent revolution was necessary to destroy capitalism, they opposed all other conflicts as being fought for imperial capitalist interests, with the working class being forced to do the killing and dying and the owner class reaping the economic benefits. Artists and intellectuals were often attracted to leftist politics because of its defense of free speech and its opposition to war. What artists relish the most is expression, and they prefer not to have the expression tampered with by censorship or interrupted by war. Intellectuals and artists are also more prone to romanticize and sympathize with the working class. So far in A Dance to the Music of Time, Jenkins has not become close to any working-class individuals, but he has associated with their well-to-do sympathizers. For example Lady Anne Stepney claims that "[She] was on the side of the People" in reference to the French Revolution (46, A Buyer's Market). In actuality, her aristocratic standing would more likely have made her a victim to the People's guillotine then one of their comrades. Lady Stepney's revolutionary rhetoric may represent a larger theme in the book: the politics of trendy-ness. Perhaps the characters' radical transformations have more to do with being associated with the outlaw intellectual image of communism than any actual conviction for revolution. Lady Stepney taste for trends is demonstrated again in The Acceptance World, when Nick describes "her adoption of a style of dress implicitly suggesting an art student; nothing outrageous; just a general assertion that she was in some way closely connected with painting or sculpture." She is striving to create an image of herself that is different from her upbringing. It is a teenage rebellion of identity against her parents, only extended into young adulthood. She may not actually be an artist or a member of Le People, but she is going to try damn hard to appear to be. The radicalization of St. John Clarke is an example of a hipper-than-thou social philosophy. When Member's first became St. J's secretary, St. J was a self-described "`Gladstonian Liberal'- in fact a Liberal of the most old-fashioned kind" (126). Gladstonian Liberalism is the current day equivalent of Conservatism. It is a political philosophy that put its faith in the free market and supports small government; in essence the opposite of communism. St. J also "regarded himself as a `natural aristocrat,'" preferring the company of the upper class and fabulously wealthy (126). Those may have been the trendy ideas for writers of the Victorian era to associate with, but in the volatile times of the early 1930's St. J was passé. St. J's radical contemporary, American anarchist Emma Goldman described a natural aristocrat as "not a social theorist, but a poet, a rebel, and innovator. His aristocracy was neither of birth nor of purse; it was of the spirit. In that respect [he] was an anarchist, and all true anarchists were aristocrats" (Goldman, Living My Life, 1931). Member's saw that if St. J wanted to stay relevant, his politics would need to change. He attempted to teach St. J the Freudian principles of psychoanalysis and make him aware of global events. He even introduced him to Quiggin in order for St. John to gain a broader political awareness. Member's plan was a success for St. J, but a disaster for Members. Quiggin quickly converted St. J to Marxism, and gradually replaced Members as his secretary. St. J gained membership to the entire intellectual Marxist community, and participated in political demonstrations in Hyde Park. This move gave him increased exposure, when his career should have been winding down since he had not produced a work in years. St. J grasps how political ideas go in and out of style. He is a keen player of the game. For as soon as he had gained visibility in the radical community, he pushed the envelope even further. The more radical one is, the more attention one garners. St. John jettisons Quiggin for a new secretary, the German Trotskyite Guggenbühl. Trotskyism is a form of radical communism created by the Russian general Leon Trotsky; a Trotskyite believes that in order for communism to succeed there must be global revolution, not simply one socialist state at a time. This is in direct opposition to Stalin's policy of the time, and thus the majority of the communist party's views. By being so radical St. J will be able to attract more attention to himself. Nick is able to see all of the social elements involved with people's political affiliations. He is quick to poke fun at politics trendy-ness. This is evident in his conversations with Members and Quiggin. While talking about the political affiliation of St. J with Members, Nick asks "Can't you re-convert him from Marxism to psycho-analysis?" (127). Nick is comparing the hot ideas of the day as competing religions that intellectuals must subscribe to absolutely. Nick also describes political demonstrations thusly, "St. John Clarke's collaboration in such an outing was equally predictable - apart from the state of his health- after what Members and Quiggin had both said about him. From his acceptance of Quiggin's domination he would henceforward join that group of authors, dons, and clergymen increasing to be found at that period on political platforms of a `Leftish' sort. To march in some public `demonstration' was an almost unavoidable condition of his new commitments" (130). Nick's usage of `quotations' suggests a sarcastic tone while referring to these Leftish sorts and their actions. He succinctly describes a certain circle whose actual commitment to their cause is questionable. Nick seems to suggest that their actions have less than sincere motivations, more in-tune with self promotion and public image than revolution. Nick also manages to land an amazing political one-liner when Quiggin informs him of St. J's conversion to Trotskyism; "What form does it take?" (173). Powell gives his reader a good picture of the political spectrum of his day. Although his own political views may remain hidden, he seems to share with his friend and contemporary George Orwell a keen eye for seeing through the hypocrisies of the political Left while generally sympathizing with the Left's ideals of equality and freedom. [1] http://www.europaworld.com/entry/gb-gbn.dir.159 [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Mosley |
Home