Ana içeriğe atla

The Pragmatist View in “Mrs. Dalloway”


Virginia Wolf’s “Mrs. Dalloway” presents a modern narrative technique in which the reader is drawn into the character’s consciousness. Wolf’s unusual style of stream of consciousness technique give life to the characters’ insights granting Wolf the freedom to manipulate time and place. Simply put, Mrs. Dalloway revolves around a day in London, yet it accommodates many events and thoughts regardless of the time or the place of the novel. While Wolf’s stream of consciousness technique distorts the traditional notion of time it imitates the post-war London’s modern structure of time that craves for efficiency and swiftness. Despite the variety of characters inhabiting London, we see an interconnection between them, alluding to the city’s inorganic but multifunctioning structure which is linked to the city’s need for efficiency and swiftness. In this essay I will analyze the ways in which the characters inhabit the post-war modern London city, and I shall argue that the need of efficiency and order is reflected in the characters’ consciousness and in the city’s reaction to peculiarities and problems.

While the use of stream consciousness highlights the character’s insights and grants the reader the ability to understand the characters in a deeper level, it also underlines how the characters are oblivious to each other indicating the individualist and consequently pragmatist aspect of the modern city. To put it another way, in Wolf’s stream of consciousness technique the reader acquires a clear access to the character’s thought process, however as the plot unfolds, we see that characters only share a small portion of their thoughts to each other unveiling the superficial and mechanized structure of the characters relationship. Calissa foreshadows people’s disinterested gaze on each other in the beginning of the novel with an observation she makes “Peter—however beautiful the day might be, and the trees and the grass, and the little girl in pink—Peter never saw a thing of all that. He would put on his spectacles, if she told him to; he would look.” (p.5) Peter’s pragmatist interest “It was the state of the world that interested him” (p.5) fits to the city’s efficient and swift structure. However, the “little girl in pink” or “the trees and the grass” do not carry a value that can contribute to him. Peter’s view of the world is the most appropriate view for the modern city that values rationality, efficiency and individuality. Clarissa’s view of the world on the other hand, offers a more comprehensive portrait of what people think and react. She dwells on what other people do and what they think which makes her a precious narration. However, the fact that she is crashed by her overwhelming thoughts and concerns indicates how the modern city requires its individuals to build a sort of barricade against other people.  Calissa tries to justify her decision to marry Richard by highlighting this need of building a personal space “For in marriage a little licence, a little independence there must be between people living together day in day out in the same house;” (p.6) suggesting that individuality is required and important for an ordinary modern city individual. This requirement of individuality is then linked with efficiency and swiftness in the sense that the characters do not really attempt to deeply understand each other, they show a superficial and mutual affection and understanding to each other which is only sufficient to maintain a superficial yet beneficial relationship. Calissa’s marriage with Richard portrays an example of such a pragmatist view of the world. Calissa is content with Richard yet the passion she holds for Peter raises the problem and implies that the decision to marry Richard depended on Calissa’s rationality rather than her emotions which weaves one of the dilemmas that crashes her. Calissa’s inner conflicting nature implies her struggle to fit in to the modern society and hence shows the modern city’s nature to reward rationality and punish sentimentally only if you acquired the modern mind-set.

The modern city poses a sort of conformity punishing those who are different which complements the modern city’s structure that craves for order and efficiency. One of the most prominent examples that can be drawn from the text is Septimus’s incurable state of madness which is not understood by any of the characters. His unfathomable madness leads to his death which sheds a light on how the modern city reacts to peculiarities or differences. Even though it is an unanswerable question whether understanding Septimus would change the outcome or simply delay it, the death of Septimus reveals that the modern city individual’s mind-set faces problems by prioritizing swiftness and efficiency. After Septimus throws himself out of window crashing onto the railways, Dr Holmes and Mrs. Filmer try to obstruct Septimus’ wife from mourning. “She must be brave and drink something, he said (What was it? Something sweet), for her husband was horribly mangled, would not recover consciousness, she must not see him, must be spared as much as possible, would have the inquest to go through, poor young woman. Who could have foretold it?” (p.107) Dr Holmes offers a solution that can only be produced by a rationalist mind-set that values reasoning rather than sentimentality. In other words, Dr. Holmes produces the most efficient solution which is using sedative drug on Septimus’ wife and wiping out any trace of Septimus’ death. Dr. Holmes precisely utters the word “brave” as an indication that the urge to mourn at that very moment should be suppressed and the most reasonable decision should be taken. Even though it is the fundamental nature of death that mourning occurs by the loved ones. Dr. Holmes does not find it essential nor normal and finds it as a burden or an agony “must be spared as much as possible”. Dr. Holmes’ reasoning rejects sentimentality and values efficiency which reflects the modern city’s structure suggesting that the city dictates a pragmatist and efficiency-based mind-set that gradually devalues emotions. 

In conclusion, Wolf’s “Mrs. Dalloway” depicts the modern London’s urbanized structure that values efficiency. The character’s different approach to the same scenes sets a distinctive portrait of how modern city’s mind-set project a pragmatist view. More importantly, the ways in which this pragmatist view is depicted in the characters’ consciousness and the city’s efficiency-based solutions.

Woolf, V., Pasquier, M., & Brugière, B. (2020). Mrs Dalloway. Paris: Gallimard.


Yorumlar

Bu blogdaki popüler yayınlar

Rhetoric in Hobbes' Leviathan

  Hobbes’ Word Play Hobbes argues in favor of a monarch or an oligarch. To be more precise, he is in favor of the idea that multiplicity comes with complexity, harming the integrity of the state. In his opinion, men are mostly power-driven, greedy beings who must surrender themselves to a sovereign power that can spread the terror of punishment. According to Hobbes, this fear of punishment is the only effective motivating force that can keep people from brutally murdering each other. While this Hobbesian idea of the state portrays the sovereign’s subjects almost as though they are slaves, this essay will argue that Hobbes is not fundamentally against liberty and allows it within the constraints of laws. Hobbes's description of liberty suggests that only external impediments are against freedom. He states that liberty is “the absence of external impediments” (189) and, although these impediments may take away man’s power to do what he would, they do not prevent men from using th...

Rousseau on Legitimacy of State

Hobbes'dan sonra Rousseau okumayı Proust'tan sonra Daphnes ve Chloe okumaya benzetiyorum. Proust aşkı öyle yapay, çıkarcı ve öyle çirkin yansıtıyor ki, ondan sonra okuduğun her romana ister istemez Proust'un realist bakış açısından bakıyorsun. Belki de realizm sevdamı bırakmalıyımdır. Hobbes'un determinist bakış açısı da birçok argümanını epey ikna edici kılıyor. Bazen bu bakış açısından kaçmak istiyor insan. Hobbes kimmiş lan, ben ölümlü tanrıya irademi falan teslim edemem, gayet özgürüm demek istiyor. Yine de gel gör ki Hobbes haklı. Nasıl, Kant ödev ahlakında nasıl ki herkes davranışlarının topluma yansıdığını varsayarak hareket etmeli diyorsa, Hobbes da yapılmak istemediğini yapma diyor. Buna karşı çıkmak da biraz zor. Rousseau abi Social Contract'ında denese de Emile kitabındaki ikna ediciliğini devam ettiremiyor gibi hissediyorum. Birazdan okuyacak olduğun yazıda da oldukça soyut fikirler göreceksin ve yer yer kendine e ama niye diye soracaksın. Bil ki ben de ...

Hobbes’ Paradox

Hobbes’ Paradox Resolved According to Hobbes, people are born with passions that ultimately lead them into a never-ending war. They require artificial power to stop killing each other. Unless such a power is erected, Hobbes suggests, leaving the state of nature is impossible since people are not inclined to cooperate and trust each other. The core reason why it is impossible to leave the state of nature is because of the innate passions people have that drive them to be constantly in conflict. Hobbes states that in the condition of nature, “any reasonable suspicion” renders any covenant or promise invalid since “bonds of words are too weak to bridle men’s ambition, avarice, anger, and other passions…” (196). Here, Hobbes highlights the importance of punishments, suggesting that without the motivating fear of punishments, covenants are practically invalid. It is also important to understand what Hobbes means by the condition of nature. He argues that because men are born equal, they...