Someone mentioned earlier in this thread that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was known for his anti-Semitism in his writings (I’ve read both The Yellow Face, which I was deeply impressed by, and The Three Gables, which sort whooshed by my head until now and has me badly disappointed)…
I don’t know that Doyle was known for his anti-semitism: he certainly championed the cause of Oscar Slater, a German Jew wrongly convicted and imprisoned for murder, widely publicising the injustice and even paying for the defence of a man he personally disliked, simply because he saw that Slater had been wronged. Hardly the actions of an anti-Semite, but those of a wholly honourable man.
go away for a little while and look what happens… Now that the combatants have decamped to the Pit, let’s get back to the original issues.
do you think that’s a sign of increasing maturity in her writing, or a change in social attitudes, or both? Christie’s characterisations were never her strong point, but certainly her post-WWII novels are more sophisticated in this regard than her early novels of the 20s. So it may be that she found she no longer needed to rely on stereotypes to advance her plot. Equally it could be that post-WWII, changes in social attitudes started to influence her. Or both?
Can you point me towards those tracts? I read the series of radio plays, “The Man Born to Be King”, many years ago and don’t remember an anti-Semitic slant, but I was considerably younger and may not have appreciated it. Was that the one you meant, or was there something else?
I assume the passage you mean in Busman’s Honeymoon was the arrival of the two bailiffs, each representing a different money-lender? I certainly appreciate your reaction.
But in another ongoing story arc, the Hon. Freddie Arbuthnot marries Levy’s daughter, and agrees that their children will be raised Jewish. Even there, of course, he comments that it may be to the children’s advantage, since Levy was a financier and that might give them an “in.” However, the marriage doesn’t trigger any disapprobation.
As far as I know, Ngaio Marsh was of 100% European heritage, mostly (I think entirely) British. Her Maori first name, which is the name of a flowering tree (and has several other meanings) was suggested by her uncle, a missionary. Her appearance doesn’t suggest non-European heritage, and she certainly doesn’t look Maori.
Well, the timing of release of “The White Man’s Burden” is significant. The sub-title of the poem is “The United States and the Phillipine Islands”. Kipling published it while the United States Senate was debating whether to ratify the Teaty of Paris, which ended the Spanish-American War and would transfer much of Spain’s remaining colonial empire to the U.S. Sounds pretty much like he was encouraging the U.S. to become an imperial power; certainly, according to this article, American imperialists such as President McKinley and V-P. Roosevelt saw it that way.
Actually, I can think of an instance where some inadvertent racism sort of works, perhaps even in furthering a point the author intended.
The passage is from C.S. Forrester’s excellent The General. The protagonist is describing a possible promotion for someone who works for him:
In the context of the novel, it more or less works.
The general in question is a man of considerable bravery and efficiency, honorable and quite well-meaning, but utterly lacking in any kind of insight about either himself, or his culture. Forrestor presents him as the archetype of the sort of general who made World War I such a slaughter, because they were determined to win a twentieth-century war with nineteenth-century methods. The kind of off-hand and unthinking racism contained in the quote reinforces how much the general is a product and a prisoner of his training and background. He doesn’t mean anything by it, but that doesn’t help, anymore than his good will makes any difference to the thousands who die in battles in WWI because he cannot see that things have changed.
I rather doubt that Forrestor meant it, but still it works. Probably because Forrestor himself was racist in exactly the same way. And had the same sort of lack of insight. I think it can certainly still be seen as offensive, but it still works artistically.
Yes, I was wrong about Ngaio Marsh being Maori: misled by her name, I think. Which is interesting in itself, for a child born of European parents in 1899 to be given a Maori name. Even today it would probably raise eyebrows {or lead to accusations of “political correctness”, and certainly suggests, particularly for the time, an unusual degree of respect in her family for “native” culture, which may have been reflected in her later work. However, I’m venturing into the realm of speculation here: anyone read a biography of Marsh which would back this up? Or refute it?
There was a girl named Ngaio in one of my classes at university. I’m pretty sure she was of European extraction. I wonder if her parents were influenced by Marsh’s first name.