Howards End by E.M. Forster offers a view into the divisions of class that have been omnipresent in our world. Forester gives life to her explanation of this division through her various characters, each with their own unique stories. In this book social class is not a stagnant concept that characters are forced to accept, and although some do others desire to push the boundaries of what it means to have a desirable social status. Leonard Bast is one such character, that epitomizes the idea of redefining class. He attempts to walk on the fine line of class and the classless. However, the question arises, does this line he believes he walks on even exist? Is it possible for an individual such as Leonard to transcend the boundaries of social class, move beyond the lower class category he is placed in, and join the ranks the upper class as he so desires? Throughout the book, the life of Leonard Bast has shown this answer to be no. There is too much power in wealth to transcend the label put upon you for thereof.
Leonard is a frustrated individual who sees himself as a man who belongs on the higher end of the social ladder as seen on page 39, a line that reads, “he would have died sooner than confess any inferiority to the rich.” Conversely, the lines that follow read, “This may be splendid of him. But he was inferior to most rich people, there is not the least doubt of it. He was not as courteous as the average rich man, nor as intelligent, nor as healthy, nor as loveable. His mind and his body had been alike unfed, because he was poor, and because he was modern they were always craving more food.” The contrast of these two lines show a sense of pride from Leonard, but nothing in his favor for transcending the boundaries of clas...
... middle of paper ...
... the truth of the power of wealth came down on Leonard one last time.
Leonard was a proud man that refused to accept defeat in his quest to become socially successful. However, the one aspect of life that he could never escape was ideology. The world has put a definition on what it means to be in the upper levels of social class and the lower. How class is defined is very stagnant in the world, but Leonard refused to accept this. He did everything he could to convince the upper class that he had the characteristics of a upper class man, but his wealth did not agree. If Leonard had been a wealthy man with the same “story” I am almost certain he would have been gladly accepted by those of the upper class, but he met his demise at their hands. Leonard Bast was the epitome of challenging the norms, and the epitome of it’s potential unsuccessfulness in meeting his end.
In August of 1799, Charles Brockden Brown published his fourth novel, Edgar Huntly Or, memoirs of a Sleep-Walker. Brown’s American Gothic novel follows the narrator, later named Edgar Huntly, as he labors to find the mysterious murderer of his beloved friend, Waldgrave. Throughout the novel, Brown begins to challenge the status quo of “Classism.” In her 2011 book Using Critical Theory: How to Read and Write About Literature, Lois Tyson defines classism as the “belief that our value as human beings is directly related to the social class to which we belong: The higher our social class, the higher our natural, or inborn superiority” (112). The belief goes on to state those of the highest class should assume the roles of leadership as they are
The Gospel of Wealth is primarily about the dispersion of wealth and the responsibilities of those who have it. Carnegie thinks that inheritance is detrimental to society because it does not do any good for the inheritor or the community. Inheritance promotes laziness and the lack of a good work ethic does not teach the young sons of wealthy men to make money for themselves or help those in community they live in. Carnegie believes that charity is also bad and instead of handouts money should be given to those in a position to help the needy help themselves to be better citizens. It is the responsibility of the wealthy to use their surplus earnings to start foundations for open institutions that will benefit everyone. Men who only leave their money to the public after they are dead which makes it appear to say that if they could take the money with them they would. For this reason Carnegie is in support of Death taxes to encourage men to spend and use their money during their life. Carnegie says in his essay that a definite separation of the classes is productive for society and is very natural. If the classes were to become equal it would be a forced and change thus being revolution and not evolution...
The American standard of success has always been defined by the effort put into receiving this success. Some are lucky and have success come with ease, others have to put in a great deal of work and even then they still fall short of their desired position. Throughout, “The Great Gatsby”, F. Scott Fitzgerald scrutinizes the collapse of the American dream through Jay Gatsby. Through the eyes of Nick Carraway, the readers experience the rise and fall of Jay Gatsby’s successes. From the initial sequences of the novel it is apparent that wealthiness is the point of which you are judged in the time period the book takes place.
... stealing, and sleeping with random women, there was no way they could help make the United States a better place. The commercial class needed such people in order for their own business’s to prosper, yet they still disapproved how the lower class spent its free time. Instead of helping change the lower class’s lifestyle, the commercial class just complained about it.
In the documents titled, William Graham Sumner on Social Darwinism and Andrew Carnegie Explains the Gospel of Wealth, Sumner and Carnegie both analyze their perspective on the idea on “social darwinism.” To begin with, both documents argue differently about wealth, poverty and their consequences. Sumner is a supporter of social darwinism. In the aspects of wealth and poverty he believes that the wealthy are those with more capital and rewards from nature, while the poor are “those who have inherited disease and depraved appetites, or have been brought up in vice and ignorance, or have themselves yielded to vice, extravagance, idleness, and imprudence” (Sumner, 36). The consequences of Sumner’s views on wealth and poverty is that they both contribute to the idea of inequality and how it is not likely for the poor to be of equal status with the wealthy. Furthermore, Carnegie views wealth and poverty as a reciprocative relation. He does not necessarily state that the wealthy and poor are equal, but he believes that the wealthy are the ones who “should use their wisdom, experiences, and wealth as stewards for the poor” (textbook, 489). Ultimately, the consequences of
He praises Social Darwinism by claiming that wealth proves an individual’s ability and fitness in society. Carnegie argues, “The best minds will thus have reached a state in the development of the race in which it is clearly thoughtful and earnest men into whose hands it flows save by using it year by year for the general good” (495). Carnegie refers to the rich as the “best minds” as they are the most successful and educated individuals. The affluence makes the rich superior to the poor, allowing the rich to be better qualified to improve society. Hence, Carnegie suggests that the rich must be paternalistic by controlling all the wealth and distributing them to the public properly: “The rich man […] who know[s] that the best means of benefiting the community is to place within its reach the ladders upon which the aspiring can rise-parks, and means of recreation […] certain to give pleasure and improve the public taste; and public institution of various kinds, which will improve the general condition of the people […]” (Carnegie 495). Instead of alms-giving, Carnegie calls for the rich to build public institutions for everyone to share. This way, the poor can eventually rise and harmony between the socioeconomic classes will be established. However, in the communists’ perspectives, these capitalist principles are ultimately flawed as it does not recognize the values of disfavored members in
Andrew Carnegie, a Scottish-American steel tycoon and one of the wealthiest men of the nineteenth century, believes that social inequality results as an inexorable byproduct of progress. In his 1889 article entitled “Wealth,” Carnegie claims that it is “essential” for the advancement of the human race that social divisions between the rich and poor exist, which separate those “highest and best in literature and the arts” who embody the “refinements of civilization” from those who do not (105). According to Carnegie, this “great irregularity” is favored over the “universal squalor” that would ensue if class distinctions ceased to exist (105). Carnegie states that it is a “waste of time to criticize the inevitable,” believing that poverty is an inherent characteristic of society rather than the result of elitist oppression (105). Carnegie may conclude that the rich do not necessarily owe the poor anything, but he also believes that wealthy philanthropists such as he should donate their vast accumulations to charity while they are still alive. In Carnegie’s mind, contributions to supporting educational institutions and constructing landmarks serves to
A penny saved may be a penny earned, just as a penny spent may begin to better the world. Andrew Carnegie, a man known for his wealth, certainly knew the value of a dollar. His successful business ventures in the railroad industry, steel business, and in communications earned him his multimillion-dollar fortune. Much the opposite of greedy, Carnegie made sure he had what he needed to live a comfortable life, and put what remained of his fortune toward assistance for the general public and the betterment of their communities. He stressed the idea that generosity is superior to arrogance. Carnegie believes that for the wealthy to be generous to their community, rather than live an ostentatious lifestyle proves that they are truly rich in wealth and in heart. He also emphasized that money is most powerful in the hands of the earner, and not anyone else. In his retirement, Carnegie not only spent a great deal of time enriching his life by giving back; but also often wrote about business, money, and his stance on the importance of world peace. His essay “Wealth” presents what he believes are three common ways in which the wealthy typically distribute their money throughout their life and after death. Throughout his essay “Wealth”, Andrew Carnegie appeals to logos as he defines “rich” as having a great deal of wealth not only in materialistic terms, but also in leading an active philanthropic lifestyle. He solidifies this definition in his appeals to ethos and pathos with an emphasis on the rewards of philanthropy to the mind and body.
In the “Gospel of wealth”, Andrew Carnegie argues that it is the duty of the wealthy entrepreneur who has amassed a great fortune during their lifetime, to give back to those less fortunate. Greed and selfishness may force some readers to see these arguments as preposterous; however, greed is a key ingredient in successful competition. It forces competitors to perform at a higher level than their peers in hopes of obtaining more money and individual wealth. A capitalist society that allows this wealth to accumulate in the hands of the few might be beneficial to the human race because it could promote competition between companies; it might ensure health care for everyone no matter their social standing, and parks and recreation could be built for the enjoyment of society.
... their positions and their stand in society. Material privileges and money distinguish the upper class people from the harder working lower class, and with this we can see how morals play an important role in their life. Arrogance and vanity control the lives of those with all the money, and modesty and inner happiness is what lower class people strive for. In Rebecca, Daphne Du Maurier is able to glorify a phenomenon that takes the main character life from the bottom of the sea to a cruise ship sailing the seven seas. The narrator goes through the different social classes but keeps her own mind and morals; she is not over taken by all the riches and material privileges that come with such a life, but on the contrary, she remains true to her self and makes sure that the only thing that matters is the she and Maxim De Winter share and carry on with their lives.
Jay Gatsby, as the protagonist of the novel, is one the few characters that is affiliated with the lower class. In Gatsby’s childhood, he suffers through poverty. Paradoxically, Gatsby is the most prestigious when compared to other characters, yet he was the only character to lack wealth in the past. With this, Fitzgerald proves that the current status of wealth justifies the current acceptance of a character. After attaining wealth, Gatsby remains distinguished from other wealthy characters due to the fact he once lived a life of destitution. Unlike Tom and Daisy, who live an empty life, Gatsby lives a life replete with motivation. Even though Gatsby was presented as one of the corrupted characters, he was considered prolific because he had a dream. This is achieved because Gatsby once experienced a low class life, unlike Tom and Daisy who grew up with prosperity.
“Money is the root of all evil”(Levit). Man and his love of money has destroyed lives since the beginning of time. Men have fought in wars over money, given up family relationships for money and done things they would have never thought that they would be capable of doing because of money. In the movie, based on F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel, The Great Gatsby, the author demonstrates how the love and worship of money and all of the trappings that come with it can destroy lives. In the novel Jay Gatsby has lavish parties, wears expensive gaudy clothes, drives fancy cars and tries to show his former love how important and wealthy he has become. He believes a lie, that by achieving the status that most Americans, in th...
All throughout the movie social class is a problem. Social class is the division of classes based on social, economic, and achieved status. All of the events on the ship are broken down based on which social class each person falls under. The upper class were those who were on a luxury trip, and
The economy is booming with success, and your wealth portrays ones position in society. George Babbitt is infatuated with having the latest “gadgets” and technology in his home, as is the rest of Middle-class America. Lewis portrays society as a group of self-centered people who must have the best of everything (sounds similar to our world today). Middle-class America is disturbingly the same to the last detail in the 1920’s. Life begins for Babbitt waking up to an unappreciative family, and a typical fake show of affection from his wife. Babbitt realizes his life is dull and mundane. Even the kiss from his wife is typical. Babbitt, like most men in the 1920’s, finds his home not as a haven but as a depressing reality of what his life has really become. Babbitt recognizes he is disgusted with his life, and that he doesn’t even love his wife. Only when Babbitt escapes his home does he find satisfaction. Babbitt is found in his community as a role model of every businessmen, even the mechanic at the gas station commends him for organization. Babbitt temporarily feels relief when freedom encompasses his life, but later in the novel Babbitt illustrates that even “business” is shaped by society. Just as business is shaped in Zenith, so are the women who live there.
Class distinction is one of Jane Austen’s themes in the novel, and the differentiation related to it is evidently depicted. Reading the novel from the first chapter, I realize that the author clearly illustrates that class is what matters most in many of the incidences displayed by the characters. Unless an individual is of a given class, the idea that he or she has money is not valued, since only birth in a certain background is what is of value. When a person openly values money over class, such a person is frowned upon. In general terms, the Novel shows a social world extremely stratified and full of pretension and class struggle.