Arms and the Man: The Advent of Shavian Satire

Kulsum Khan Dr. Nikhat Taj EOB-651 May 17, 2020 ARMS AND THE MAN AND THE ADVENT OF SHAVIAN SATIRE Arms and the Man is Bernard Shaw’s second play. It was first produced in 1894, at the Avenue Theatre in London. His first one was Widower's Houses, published in 1892, but Arms and the Man was his first commercial success-although the success came about only in 1898, when it was published as part of a collection titled Plays: Pleasant and Unpleasant. At the time of its production, audiences were heavily accustomed to melodramas, and could neither discern nor appreciate the underlying serious nature of Shaw’s plays. At the time, Shaw was already a renowned critic, both in art and music. He was also an avid socialist; he was a member of the Fabian society, which he had joined in 1884, and which he gave lectures both to, and for. He contributed to the collection of Fabian Essays-along with the likes of Graham Walls, Sidney Webb and Annie Besant. The 1880s saw an upsurge of socialist activity in Britain. The members of the Fabian Society were opposed to violent upheaval, instead relying on the power of local government and trade unions to bring about transformation. For Shaw, this manifested in his playwrighting, and paved the way for a playwrighting career dedicated to social commentary. In Arms and the Man, Shaw exposes, through satire, the idealistic treatment of war, and the romanticism of love, along with issues of class. The play is set during the Serbo-Bulgarian War in 1885, and this foreign setting helped Shaw offer thinly-veiled commentary on war and class without it being too cutting. Shaw deemed comedy a palatable format, even while he was of the view that comedy by itself made no sense; unless it was utilised to send a message to the audience, it was something empty. “The world, as he [Shaw] looks out upon it, is a painful spectacle to his eyes. Pity and indignation move him. He is not sentimental, as some writers are, but the facts grind his soul… in a word, art has an end beyond itself; and the object of Shaw’s art in particular is to make men think, to make them uncomfortable, to convict them of sin,” (Salter 446, qtd in Smith). His plays deal with socio-political issues covertly, weaving them into the fabric of witty, humorous dialogue, subtly turning the conversation to the world outside the theatre. As Nicole Smith observes, “Part of the reason it is so easy to forget that there a number of encoded social messages within the text is because is remarkably deft at conveying injustices and problems through characterization and language. His writing style is thus very critical of the Victorian-era society yet instead of doing this overtly, he relies on gestures, dialogue, and setting to set the stage for the debate. His “public speaking" would, in this sense be limited to the voices of his characters who come from variable class backgrounds and have a system of language that is suitable for their class. Only through this mode can Shaw open a platform for class debates.” Smith goes on to note the subtlety with which Shaw portrays the sensibilities of distinct classes. She gives the example of the opening scene of the play, where Raina, the young female lead, is standing on her balcony, admiring the view of the Balkan peaks. Shaw sets up a scene that initially seems romantic, but then draws attention to the room to which the balcony is attached- “The interior of the room...is half rich Bulgarian, half cheap Viennese....The counterpane and hangings of the bed, the window curtains, the little carpet, and all the ornamental textile fabrics in the room are oriental and gorgeous; the paper on the walls is occidental and paltry” (Shaw 19). However, when the description turns to Raina herself, Shaw describes her to be “in her nightgown, well covered by a long mantle of furs, worth, on a moderate estimate, about three times the furniture of her room” (Shaw 19-20). Smith argues that an audience can gauge from this description that Shaw is marking the hypocrisy of the upper-middle class, for their tendency to keep up with appearances. Only that which is openly visible is truly paid attention to. Smith makes her point thus- “This is an especially succinct observation in this scene since there is opportunity for sentimentality and romanticism (since she is framed by a lovely setting) but this is not enough for Shaw; he must shift the object of the reader’s gaze away from physical beauty to the darker world of class and character.” Shaw’s characters are known for making massive overarching statements about their world without seeming to do it, as if any implied social critique might have been incidental. Characters like Bluntschli are able to remark about terrible experiences of war in a way that seem little more than a jest-yet he speaks of horrifying occurrences, such as his friend being shot and burned to death. Raina and Catherine Petkoff live in a world where war is a time when heroes are made. To them, a soldier is a model of gallantry, and war not much beyond a thrill. Raina’s betrothed, Sergius, is hence nearly rendered an idol to worship. With the arrival of Bluntschli, all their ideals are shattered, as he pulls back the curtain on the grim reality of war, albeit with infinite good humour. His conduct is a source of disdain to Raina-whether it is his habit of carrying chocolate rather than ammunition, his opinion of Sergius as “Don Quixote flourishing like a drum major” (Shaw 31), or his sharp instinct to survive using any means possible, Bluntschli proves to be the antithesis to Raina’s fantasy, yet she finds herself admiring his honesty, humour and vitality. Shaw often used women as central figures in his plays, and Raina, though subject to fancies, is at times visibly discerning, as when she remarks that “perhaps we only had our heroic ideals because we are so fond of reading Byron and Pushkin, and because we were so delighted with the opera that season at Bucharest. Real life is so seldom like that! Indeed never, as far as I knew it then” (Shaw 21). Bluntschli also shows the illusion that privilege brings with itself, as his first exchange with Raina shows-the audience notices Raina’s fanciful ideas, and Bluntschli’s gentle sarcasm as he tolerates her notions. Bluntschli proves to be a weapon of Shaw’s sharp wit, as he deftly translates realities about war and class in a way that characters like the Petkoffs can assimilate. Even though the Petkoffs have climbed the social ladder recently, Shaw exposes the snobbery of the nouveau riche through Catherine Petkoff, who initially does all in her power to ensure Raina’s engagement to Sergius, but upon learning that Bluntschli is well off and a respected man, poses no qualms about matching him with Raina. He, as well as Louka, make Raina and Sergius to question their ideas of love, and to examine themselves and their relationship, which leads to the realisation that they were together for the sake of an elaborate courtship, where ritual, expectation, and social status was more important than honesty, loyalty and true feeling. While Bluntschli does this in an almost affectionate manner, Louka forces Sergius to acknowledge her pride and her feelings, and despite being born in low standing in society, manages to rise up in a world to a position of dignity using her sharp ambition and wiles. Shaw proves himself a master of satire, as he juggles social issues with impractical notions and romanticism, and turns them into a farce, helping audiences laugh at themselves without having to bitterly reproach their shortcomings. W. J. McCormack, in his introduction to the volume of Plays Pleasant, remarks, “Shavian laughter demands that we keep our wits about us,” (McCormack xiv). German playwright and critic Bertolt Brecht notes of Shaw: “Probably all of his characters, in all of their traits, are the result of Shaw's delight in upsetting our habitual prejudices.” Indeed, Shaw derives joy in shaking up utopian perceptions, and replacing them with a more realistic worldview, subject to brutal truths, mistakes and imperfections, but a worldview that manages to make itself amusing, affable and altogether preferable at the end of the day. REFERENCES: -Cengage. “Arms and the Man.” Encyclopedia, May 5, https://www.encyclopedia.com/arts/educational-magazines/arms-andman#THEMES 2020, -McCormack, W. J. Introduction. Plays Pleasant, by Bernard Shaw, 1898, Penguin, 2003, pp. vii-xiv. -Smith, Nicole. “Analysis of the Social Context of Arms and the Man by George Bernard Shaw.” ArticleMyriad, December 4, 2011, https://www.articlemyriad.com/analysis-social-context-arms-man/