Praising the author of The Heart of the Matter, William Golding wrote: "No serious writer of [the twentieth] century has more thoroughly invaded and shaped the public imagination as did Graham Greene." If this is true, one might say that George Orwell plays a close second -- if he does not exceed Greene. After all, "Big Brother" and doublespeak are immediately recognized by most people as signifiers of authoritarianism, even if they have not read 1984. So, naturally, one could perceive a rivalry between these two writers: both journalists, both denizens of the world, both boldly addressing the issues of the day through fiction.
You can sniff some gloating in Orwell's review for The New Yorker of The Heart of the Matter, which takes no small pleasure in reducing the "ridiculous" plot to seemingly implausible skeleton. In less than two thousand words, Orwell attacks smug Catholics, the novel's setting in Africa, and its utter lack of interest in the interior lives of the people who actually live there. While I find myself nodding in agreement with some of Orwell's critiques -- especially that "Africans exist only as occasionally mentioned background" -- I strongly disagree with Orwell's most trenchant attack. He writes,
"Scobie is incredible because the two halves of him do not
fit together. If he were capable of getting into the kind of mess that is
described, he would have got into it years earlier. If he really felt that
adultery is mortal sin, he would stop committing it; if he persisted in it, his
sense of sin would weaken. If he believed in Hell, he would not risk going
there merely to spare the feelings of a couple of neurotic women. And one might
add that if he were the kind of man we are told he is - that is, a man whose
chief characteristic is a horror of causing pain - he would not be an officer
in a colonial police force."
Essentially, Orwell can't brook the contradiction of Scobie -- that he could be both willful adulterer and tortured Catholic, that he could be both worn down by pity and be a colonial officer. While this critique might hold water with other writers -- after all, we want some cohesion to our characters, some distinctive character to a character -- the student of Greene might reply that this is Greene's major insight, throughout all of his fiction. Greene himself remarks that, if there were an epigraph for all his novels, it would contain the "honest thief, the tender murderer, the superstitious atheist." Greene delights in these paradoxes, and he recognizes, perhaps more honestly than Orwell, that we are contradictions. The whisky priest, the quiet American, the guilt-ridden police chief: so many of his characters are made up of two halves that, yes, simply don't fit.
Greene himself was this contradiction: he was a devout Catholic -- at least for much of his life -- yet also a philanderer. He was a critic of empire but also blind, it seems, to some of empire's subjects. I suspect Greene would reply to Orwell that a man could indeed have two halves that always remain in conflict, that never lock in place. Being able to live with this contradiction is, indeed, the struggle in Greene's work.
3 comments:
Orwell also seem to make incredibly inaccurate statements in Greene's depictions of his Catholic characters, especially when we examine those of Padre Jose and Scobie. Orwell says, "But all the while-drunken, lecherous, criminal, or damned outright- the Catholics retain their superiority, since they alone know the meaning of good and evil." First and foremost, by stating that the characters are sinful and also aware of good and evil, Orwell seems to acknowledge that people can be contradictions and he in fact believes that they are by making the assumption of their knowledge. How then, can he say that the matter of Scobie's halves not fitting together is bad if he is willing to admit that incongruities are what give the Catholics superiority? Personally, I believe that Orwell's assertions and assumptions are misinterpretations of Greene's message. Greene depicts Catholics as typically the more sinful characters, while he illustrates non-Catholic characters such Helen to be innocent and victimized. Although Orwell is entitled to his interpretation, he uses questionable assumptions as the basis of his argument.
I agree, that Scobie’s irreconcilable and contradictory nature is not necessarily a point of weakness in The Heart of the Matter. However, I think this criticism is understandable, considering the type of author that Orwell is. He is the mind behind one of my favorite novels, Animal Farm. In Animal Farm, each character serves a distinctly symbolic function in the story, either as a historical figure, group, or even idea. For example, Napoleon is a general portrayal of ruthless, oppressive dictators (but is most likely specifically Stalin), Squealer characterizes propaganda machines, and Boxer represents the naïve, dedicated working class in totalitarian states. Because these characters fit pre-determined molds, they are only allowed contradictions as far as that mold will let them. Thus, a character like Napoleon cannot have two irreconcilable “halves” unless Stalin did. Greene’s characters, on the other hand, are usually not single-minded symbols. Orwell’s characterization style certainly has its merits, but it stands inferior to Greene’s when telling a real story of human drama, and therein lies Orwell’s misunderstanding and, subsequently, his criticism.
Andrew -- We have also seen in Greene's work that a Catholic faith is not a prerequisite to goodness. In fact, it hinders some. Take Coral Fellows as a prime example. Preternaturally mature, she is a dogged atheist, yet she still possesses the goodness to help the whiskey priest. Tench, too, does not have any religious belief, but recognizes the priest's goodness.
Dan -- excellent point on Orwell's characters. Even his more complex Winston Smith of 1984 possesses a uniformity of character. Again, this is not automatically a weakness, but it does help us understand why Orwell would object to the self-contradiction of Greene's characters.
Post a Comment