With the idea of Orientalism which England used to homogenize "the other" to the East, we can only glean that which is expressed through literature, such as Leonard Woolf's Pearls and Swine, to make sense of what this "other" really entails. Woolf gives us varying perspectives through the characters of the Archdeacon, stock-jobber, and the Commissioner of India. Imperialism is an underlying theme, and by the end of this story all sense of imperialistic pride has somewhat been sucked out.
This video depicts the Great Rebellion of 1857, which is obviously a few years before this short story was written. But it gives a lot of insight as to what direction England was headed with this idea that she was "Top Dog."
Wrote one British officer: "We have power of life and death in our hands, and I assure you we spare not."
"The cruelty of the sea [poise] is only the reflex of England's own conduct in India. The European troops have become fiends."
I would also like to briefly touch on the title of this story. Did anyone else catch the Biblical reference? "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you" (Matthew 7:6). How can we relate this to the idea of Imperialism, if we can at all?
As the introduction to our reading states, Leonard Woolf wrote this story based on his own experience in Ceylon as an imperial civil servant from 1904-1911, thus making the tension we see from the Great Rebellion of 1857 older but not yet inapplicable. From what you see of the clip from the PBS site relating to "The Story of India," is it a possible assumption that we can see a definite decline in successful British Imperialism from 1857 to when Pearls and Swine take place? Here is one key passage I'd like to point out from the text, located on p. 33:
"'Well, we rule India and the sea, so the sea belongs to us, and the oysters are in the sea and the pearls are in the oysters. Therefore of course the pearls belong to us. But they lie in five fathoms. How to get 'em up, that's the question. You'd think being progressive we'd dredge for them or send down divers in diving dresses. But we don't, not in India. They've been fishing up the oysters and the pearls there ever since the beginning of time, naked brown men diving feet first out of long wooden boats into the blue sea and sweeping the oysters off the bottom of the sea into baskets slung to their sides. They were doing it centuries and centuries before we came, when--as someone said--our ancestors were herding swine on the plains of Norway.'"
I noticed the Biblical reference too. To me, it seems obvious that since the Indians are diving after the pearls, it is the Enlgishmen who are considered swine. Woolf is of course an Englishman himself, and so I doubt that he meant this phrase to be overly harsh, but still poignant and purposeful. The Indian pearl divers are being forced to give pearls, an essential piece of their culture, over to the enterprising Englishmen who neither understand nor appreciate their true cultural value.
ReplyDeleteI also find it interesting that the oysters were left out in the sun to rot so that their pearls could be taken. It is like they are causing the holders of beauty (the oysters) to suffer so that the English can take their object of value (the pearl) for themselves. It seems to point to the whole notion of Imperialism. Allow the culture to rot, so that the conqueror can take everything of value.
ReplyDeleteAshley, love the post.
ReplyDeleteI believe what Woolf is trying to convey through his biblical reference, is the view the English seem to have with the "uncivilized" world. It seems to me the English of the time seem to think that their imperialsim is not appreciated by the savages of nations like India.Perhaps they believe it is like casting pearls to swine, the Indians don't know how to accept the brilliant governing strategies of the civilized English. of course this is not Woolfs view of English imperialism, but I can't help but wonder if the title is tounge in cheek. (I may be way off base here as well haha).
Great job, Ashley! You really included some interesting historical information that helps me understand the prevailing attitude of the British during this time period. I have seen other depictions of British treatment of the Indians during the British occupation. One well done movie is "Lagaan." It is about a small Indian village that peacefully changes the attitude of some British officials by challenging them to a game of cricket. After seeing this movie, reading your blog, and reading Woolf's story, it is not surprising that the Indians rebelled against the British. The English view was that the people of India could not handle the responsibility of governing themselves. This is not only depicted in Woolf's story but is also echoed in Forster's "A Passage to India."
ReplyDelete