Fiction -- History and criticism; Political fiction -- History and criticism; Politics in literature
Commenting on one of the causes of the failure of the farmers’
movements of the seventies, Garland said: “They had made the mistake of
supposing that the interests of merchant, artisan, and mechanic were
also inimical.” In the novel these interests are not at all inimical.
They are rather parallel, for the labor movement (which includes the
last two groups mentioned by Garland) has as its natural antagonist the
moneyed class to which the peasants’ adversaries belong. And in the
novel the laborer is treated as sympathetically as the peasant, with
the single exception of Disraeli’s _Sybil_, which gives an antagonistic
picture of the trade unions. But there are two significant differences
between the peasant class and the industrial labor class. The latter
has adopted different methods and has met with a large degree of
success.
The political behavior and history of the labor movement emerges very
clearly in the novel. This group fought its first violent battles to
achieve organization. When this was accomplished, concerted action
in which the strike was the principal weapon was begun to attain
better working standards. In societies in which unions are still
free, the strike has retained its tactical importance, but it has
been accompanied by progressively less violence. And as strife has
decreased, a more effective technique has taken its place. The labor
movement has gone into politics. The most overt form of this policy is
the formation of a labor party like the one so successful in England.
Less direct but still effective is the method used by American unions
of supporting the party which seems most likely to serve labor’s
interests. Peasants’ leagues and farmers’ groups had been formed to
take direct political action, but none achieved such spectacular
success as these labor groups. Unlike the peasants, the laborers had
to a large extent provided their own leadership. Indicative of their
more cohesive and militant nature is the frequently expressed distrust
of people in the movement coming from non-labor classes. In _Marcella_
the radical Nemiah Wilkins is suspicious of Socialist Harry Wharton.
He feels that he is too well dressed and educated to lead a labor
movement, and he looks forward to the day when they “would be able to
show these young aristocrats the door.” Penelope Muff, a dedicated
organizer in _Fame Is the Spur_, has the same feeling toward two women
who work actively in the Socialist cause. They give both time and
money, but to Pen they are outsiders taking a dilettante interest in
the poor.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account