Class, Culture and Popular Theatre in 19th Century

7/23/2019 Class, Culture and Popular Theatre in 19th Century

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/class-culture-and-popular-theatre-in-19th-century 1/19

Representing Empire: Class, Culture, and the Popular Theatre in the Nineteenth Century

Author(s): Michael HaysSource: Theatre Journal, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Mar., 1995), pp. 65-82Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3208806 .

Accessed: 06/08/2014 06:59

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Theatre Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.177.221.19 on Wed, 6 Aug 2014 06:59:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3208806?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/3208806?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup



Representing mpire:

Class,

Culture,

nd the

Popular

Theatre

n

the

Nineteenth

Century

Michael

Hays

The

power

o

narrate,

r to

block ther arrativesrom

orming

and

emerging

s

very

mportant

o

culture

nd

mperialism,

andconstitutesneof

hemain onnections

etweenhem.

-Edward W.

Said,

Culturend

mperialism

The workofdiscoveringolonial nd imperialistmoments

n

the iterary roducts

of

nineteenth-century

urope

and America

has

gone

on for ome time

now,

but

with

the

appearance

of

Edward Said's

powerful

ew

book,

Culturend

mperialism,

roader

dimensions

nd

further

bligations

ave been attached o the task

of

the

criticwho

would

engage

n this

nterprise.

he

question

hould

no

longer

be whether

here re

such

moments, ut,

rather,

ow these moments re fundamental o the

historical

development

f

imperialist

iscourseand

to the

production

f Western

ulture

n

general,

nd,

more

mportantly,

ow

retelling

histale of

"literary"

roduction

an

move

beyond providing

further

xamples

of western

mperialism

nd

cultural

hegemony

o

become a

means

of

understanding

ow,

for

xample,

British

mperial

culture

cquired

its

authority-its

ower

to

impose

itself

oth

at

home and

in

the

world at large.

As Said

demonstrates,

hebest

way

to

cometo

grips

with

hese

roblems

s to

return

to the cultural

rchive

Said's

primary

oncern s novel and narrative

iction

n the

nineteenth

entury)

o

see

what

tory

tcan tellus about

he

ways

n which

upposedly

autonomous

worksof

art

participate

n

the aborof

elaborating

nd

consolidating

he

practice

f

empire y fixing

nd

naturalizing

he

patial

s well

as

social

relations

hat

empower

he

mperial

enter,

onnecting

t to

and

defining

he

priorities

hat

egulate

other,

ubordinate

peoples

and

places.

This

ssay

s ntended

s

a

small

contributiono

the

ask

hat

aid

has so

impressively

et out

for is

readers.

f

begin

by

reassembling

some

ofthematerial rom is

book,

t

s both o

signalmy

debt o his text

nd to mark

off he

pace

inwhichthis

ssay

aims to nsert

slightly

ifferentonstructionf the

history

f

mperial

ulture

n

England

nd

France,

ne which

uggests

hat

ts

presence

is

not

quite

o

pervasive

nd its

development

ess uniform

han

Culturend

mperialism

seems

to

claim.

The

story

will sketch ere

highlights

he

differenceetween he

riumphant

ale

of

imperial

way

Said locates

n

British

middle

class)

fiction

n

the

nineteenth

entury

Michael

Hays

teaches t

Cornell

niversity.

e

has

published

idely

n

the

reas

of

theatre

istory,

theory,

nd

criticism.

is

most ecent

ooks re

Critical

Conditions and

the

orthcoming

elodra-

matic ormations.

Theatre

Journal

7

(1995)

65-82 @

1995

by

The

Johns

Hopkins

University

ress







66

/

Michael

ays

and the omewhat

ifferent

nd

disruptive istory

hat

merges

rom

consideration

of

the

popular

theatre

f

the

age.

For

t was not

only

the

space

and the voice

of the

colonial

Other

thathad to be elided

or

usurped

n orderto

stage

the

discourseof

empire; hepolitical nd culturalmaginationfthe owerclasseshad tobe captured

and made

to work

for

he

empire

s well. As

I

will

show,

traces

f

this

process

can

already

be

found

n the

ultural

truggle

hat

itted

he

novel and

"literature"

gainst

the

popular

theatre

nd drama

early

n

the

century.

f,

s Said

suggests,

he

discourse

of

empire ervades

the

rtof the

end of the

century,

hisbecomes

fully ossible

only

when

the

energies

f

internal ultural ifference

ave

finally

een

submerged

n

a

unifying

antasy

bout

the

mperial

dventure

hat an be

staged

for

ll

classes to

enjoy.

As

I

suggested

arlier,

aid sets

side the

endency

o

hunt ut

occasional nstances

of

mperial

nastiness

n

the

otherwise

estheticallyulfilling

orks

of thenineteenth

century.e baldly sserts hat, ythe imeConradwritesHeart fDarkness,heres no

use

looking

for

other,

on-imperialist

lternatives

o the discursive nd

geographic

imagination

hat nderlies

iterary

arrative

n

England.

Neither onradnorMarlow

gives

us a

full

view of

what s

outside he

world-conquering

ttitudes mbodied

by

Kurtz,

Marlow,

he circle

f isteners

n thedeck

of the

Nellie,

nd

Conrad."

ndeed,

according

o

Said,

"the

Heart

f

Darkness orks

o

effectively

ecause its

politics

nd

aesthetics

re,

o to

speak, mperialist."

e

goes

on to

demonstrate

hat-by

the

ate

nineteenth

entury-aesthetics,

olitics,

nd

epistemology

re all

grounded

n

and

ordered

y

the

temporo-spatial

nd

cognitive

mperatives

f

mperialism,

here

s

"no

use

looking

for

other,

non-imperialist

lternatives,

ince

the

system

has

simply

eliminatedhem nd madethem nthinkable.hecircularity,heperfectlosure fthe

whole

thing

s

not

only

esthetically

ut also

mentally

nassailable."'

Of

course,

aid

has

chosen

Conrad s

his

example

here

precisely

ecause he knows

Conrad

was

aware

f

he

depredations,

hehuman

nd

geographic

ounds nflicted

y

European

mperialism.

his makes

his

demonstration

ll the more

telling:

mperial-

ism,

ike

the

narrative

orm

mployed

y

Conrad,

has

monopolized

he ntire

ystem

of

representation";

here

s no other

antage

point

fromwhich

o write ince

Conrad,

too,

is

necessarily

aught

in folds

of the

culture,

he

discourse

and

history

f

nineteenth-centuryurope.

Despite

his own

sense

of

marginality,

nd

despite

his

subversive

nd

ironic

ualification

f

the material

f his

narrative,

onrad

can

only

see theOther, hatwhich s "non-European,"hroughhe maginative ilter f the

imperial

enterprise:

Independence

was

for whites

and

Europeans,

the lesser

or

subjectpeoples

were

to be

ruled;

cience,

earning,

istory

manated

from he

West"

(24).

And so

did

thenovel.

Much ofthe

remainder

fSaid's

remarkable ook documents

the

ways

n which

he

geographic

nd human

relations

edeployed

nd

represented

n

narrative

works

produced

n

nineteenth-century

rance

nd

England converge

with

those

of cience

nd

political

conomy

o erase

the

possibility

f

magining

hat

here

could

be another

way

of

eeing,

n alternative

o

speaking

or s

well as about therest

1Edward

W.

Said,

Culture

nd

mperialism

New

York:

Knopf,

1993),

24.

All further

age

references

cited

n

the

text.







REPRESENTING

MPIRE

/

67

of the world.

Already

n

Jane

Austen's

Mansfield

ark

1814)

the

colonial

plantations

owned

by

Sir

Thomas

are

portrayed

s a "natural"

xtension f the

Bertram state

t

Mansfield

ark-the

periphery

hat

upplies

he enter

with he

money

nd

commodi-

tiesnecessary or tsproperfunctioning.Austen heresynchronizesomesticwith

international

uthority,

aking

t

plain

that hevalue

associated

with

uch

things

s

ordination, aw,

and

propriety

must be

grounded firmly

n

actual

rule over and

possession

of

territory.

..

What

assures the domestic

ranquillity

nd

attractive

harmony

f one is the

productivity

nd

regulated iscipline

f the

other"

87).

Said sees

this

geopolitical

nd economic

rdering

f

the

periphery

o a center

nd

the concomitantnstitutionalizationf the

authority

f the master ver the

subject

peoples

of the colonies

as

fundamentally

elatedto the structures nacted

in

the

domestic elations

f

the

family

nd servants t Mansfield ark.The

mperial

rdering

process

does

not

generate

he domestic

tructure,

ut t

does

provide

he

framework

that llows thenovel-throughSirThomas-to construe nd adjustthesedomestic

relations

n

terms f a "moral

geography" elonging

o the

ociety

nd culture

made

possible

by

the

trade

n

slaves

and

sugar

and

by

the colonial

planter

lass

(94).

This

same

moral

geography merges

n

the remainder

f

Culture

nd

Imperialism

s the

enabling

ground

or he

mperial

iscourse

hat

ervades

he

ulture ftheend of

the

century,

discourse

f

nevitable omination

f

"subject

aces"

that,

s Said

correctly

points

out,

was for the most

part accepted

by

the

working

lass

and

women's

movements

f the ate

nineteenth

entury

s

well.

But however accurate nd well told this tale of the

imaginative ntertwining

f

cultural

production

nd

imperial

ractice

s,

however

ffectively

t

gives

"voice"

to

anotherwayof peaking bout the ultural onditionnd functionf henovel, talso

serves to demonstrate

n tsown

right

he

principle

f

narrative xclusion nunciated

in

the

openingpages

of

Said's

text: he

power

to narrate-and

the

narrative

rising

therefrom-can,

nd

inevitably

oes,

block access

to other

narratives,

nd to

other

conditions nd

practices

hat

may

be coextensive

with

the

socio-political,

conomic

and cultural

mperatives

hat

are

discovered nd defined

by

Said's

investigation.

Earlier n

Said

has claimedthat

British ulture

ince

at least the eventeenth

entury

has fixed

socially

desirable,

mpowered

pace

in

metropolitan

ngland

or

Europe

and

connect[ed]

t

by

design,

motive,

nd

development

o distantor

peripheral

worlds...

,

conceivedof as

desirable

but

subordinate."

ccording

o

Said,

Britain's

culturaldentitysboundup with heformulationfthesegeographic elationsnd

the

attitudes hat

ccompany

hem

52).

It

seems to me

that,

orrect

s

this

ssessment

s for he

ate nineteenth

entury,

t s

too

monolithic

n

its

construction

f the

dea

of

a

"British

ulture" hat s

historically

consistent

oth

n its

operations

nd in the

nature

f the

objects

t

manipulates.

do

not--cannot-deny

that such

colonizing

patializations

ppear,

but

I

do

want

to

suggest

hat,

rior

o theend

of the

nineteenth

entury,

his

rder

f

"British

ulture"

was

not

quite

so

firmly

nd

uniformly

stablished

s

Said

implies.

Because

of

the

extraordinary

readth

f the ssues with

which he is

grappling,

nd

because of his

focus on

the novel and narrative

iction,

aid

has been

obliged

to

ignore

the full

dimensions fthestruggle or ultural riorityhat ookplace inEngland tselfthe

need to convince

ll

parties

nd

classes that he

mperial

ispensation

was indeed

to

their

enefit)

nd, further,

o

downplay

he

way

in

which

his

truggle

s

instantiated







68

/

Michael

ays

in

the

history

nd

dramaturgy

f

the

popular

theatre

n

the mid-nineteenth

entury.

Among

ther

hings,

hen,

what want o show here s that

y

conflating

he

discourse

of

and

on)

the

novel with "literature"

nd with British ulture

s a

whole Said

re-

enacts he erasure f nternal ultural ifferencend socio-economic onflicthat he

novels

he discusses

seem

to effect. he result s

to

elide the

alternative

ossibilities

recorded

directly

nd

indirectly

n

the

history

f the

nineteenth-century

opular

theatre.

Interestingly

nough, suggestion

fthis

possibility

s

already

mplicitly resent

n

Said's

discussion

f

Austen's

Mansfield

ark.He

points

ut that

when Sir

Thomas ets

about

re-establishing

is rule

ver

he

pace

and the nhabitants

f he state

ne of

his

first

estures

s

to forbid

he

performance

f Kotzebue's Lover's

Vows hat

had been

planned

n

his

absence.

Sir Thomas also burns

all the unbound

copies

of the

play

found

n

thehouse.

Said,

correctly

would

say, nterprets

hese

vents

n

terms f

both

thepotentially estabilizingffectmplicitn theatricalizinghespace ofMansfield

Park,

nd

the confusion

f

"proper"

oles

that

ir

Thomas

averts

hrough

is

quick

action.

But this brief

reading

moves little

beyond

the

ground

already

covered

by

Lionel

Trilling

n

his

1954

ssay

on

Mansfield

ark,

hough

aid's

overall stimate

f

the

novel

points

in a

quite

differentirection.2

Had Said

thought

urther

bout the

distinctions

etween

bound

and

unbound

opies,

between

he

novel

and

the

drama,

and between

reading

nd

the activities f

viewing/performing

hat re so

tellingly

evoked

by

this ection

f

the

novel,

he

might

ave been

led to reflect urther

n the

active

cultural tatus

of other

genres

s

well,

and their

relation

o the novel and

"literary"

iscourse

n

general.

would

iketo

do that

here,

y

working hrough

ome

thoughts rovokedby the fact hatAustenhas Sir Thomas

burn

only

the

unbound

copies

of

Kotzebue's

play.

It would seem

thatwhat

secures

he

physical

s well as

the

discursive orm f the

novel

here s that

t s bound.

The

play,

n

theother

and,

s

performance,

s

figured

as

unbound,

pen

to

the

dangers

f revision

nd role

playing,

lternative

rders nd

practices.

Thus,

at the

very

moment

hat

this

novel enacts

the

suppression

of

a

particular lay,

t

opens

the

way

to

peculation

ot

imply

bout

the

historical

ole,

he

binding

cultural

function

pparently

ssigned

by

Austen

to her own and

other

nineteenth-century

ovels,

but about

the

lternative

istories

otentially

vailable

n

and

(perhaps)

nacted

by

other

enres,

nd

especially

n that

omplex

ocio-aesthetic

webproducedbya playwhenstagedbefore livingpublic n thetheatre.

A

bound

copy

of

Kotzebue's

play

could,

presumably,

ake

its

place

alongside

Austen's

novels

n the

ibrary

t Mansfield

ark.

There,

othwould

be

available

for

controlled

erusal,

ubject

o Sir

Thomas's

observation

nd

interpretation,

ust

as

the

characters

n

Austen's

novel

are

subject

to

the

narrator's

ontrol.

he

library,

he

physical

ocus

for

eaderly

nowledge

and

interpretation)

hus

patializes

new

set

of

relationships.

t

removes

rom he

hands of

others oth

the task nd the

materials

for ither

ndependent

r

nterdependent

onstruction

f

alternative

paces

or

mean-

ings,

and becomes

the

center

of an

abstract,

inding

order in much

the

way

2

See

Lionel

Trilling,

he

Opposing

elf

New

York:

Viking,

1955).

My

thanks

to

Daniel O'Hara

for

pointing

out this

imilarity.







REPRESENTING

MPIRE

/

69

metropolitan

ngland

becomes

hecenter

f

the

Empire

n

Said's

description.3

n the

other

hand,

the unbound

play

and its

separate

"sides"

(the

individual sheets

the

performers

f

Kotzebue's

play

would

have

had

in

order

o earn

heir

eparate

parts,

whether tMansfield arkor n anactualtheatre) ould themselves otonly uggest

multiple

oices and

possibilities

or he

taging

f

different

paces

and

interpretations,

but

bring

o mindthe

many-sided

udience nd

frequently

insubordinate"

erform-

ances

staged

by

the ower class

public

that ttended he

theatre,4

nd,

thus

open

a

space

for he xamination f

thedrama

s

a

vehicle

for he

dissemination

f a culture

and

politics

n

England

that

was

not

yet

fixedwithin he

mperial aradigm.5

Seen

in this

ight,

Austen's

treatmentf Kotzebue's

play

functionsn a manner

analogous

to

hertreatment

f

Fanny

Price,

he owerclass outsiderwho is introduced

into

heorder fMansfield

ark.

n

each

case,

figure

etached rom

et

evealing

he

shadowy

contours f

a

context

f

cultural onflict

s

"placed"

and redefined

y

the

narrative.What s implicitnbothcases is theefforto bind and restrictlternative

cultural

nergies

within

hefictive

epresentation

f

a

new

aesthetic s well as social

order.

Thus,

at the

very

moment

t

binds the

history

f

popular performance

n

the

name

and

in

the

space

of

literature,

usten's

novel reveals the traces

of

a

quite

different

ultural

otential-and provides

he

mpetus

or

further

nquiry

bout

the

subversive

spects

not

only

of

Kotzebue's

play,

which

t

the

turn

f the

century

ad

already

been damned

in

England

for ts

sexual

and

political

frankness,6

ut,

more

importantly,

bout

the

popular

theatre

nd

drama

n

general,

n

inquiry

hatwould

tease

out the

story

f

the

cultural

olonization f the ower classes

in

England

and

expand

the

tory

f colonialdiscourse ound

n

thenovels discussed

n

Said's text.

3

For

further

iscussion

f

the

development

f

his

readerly,"

nd

iterary

ias

against

hedrama

and

performance,

ee

my

From

ublic

pace

o

Private

pace:

taging

he

iscourse f he

Academy"

in

boundary

12

(Winter/Spring

985):

173-88.As

I

will

suggest

ater

n

this

ssay,

not

only

he

development

f

this

iterary

ias,

but he

development

f

realism

n

the

drama, oo,

eems o mark

phase

n

the

growing

mprise

f

mperialist

iscourse

n

the

ealm f

ultural

roducts

ther han he

novel.

4

The

"Old Price"riots

f 1809

re

probably

hebest

known,

ongest asting,

nd

mostviolent

example

f

the

popular

udience's

bility

o

self-consciously

ssert ts

right

o

determine

ts

place

n

the ultural omain f he heatre.urtheriscussionbout he tatus f he ublicn the heatrend

theOld

Price

iots an be found

n

my Comedy

s

Being/Comedy

s

Idea,"

n

The ublime

special

issue

of

Studies

n

Romanticism

Summer

987):

21-30

nd n

Anastasia

ikolopoulou,

rtisan

ulture

and the

nglish

othic

elodrama

780-1830,

npublished

issertation,

ornell

niversity,

990.That

the ower lass udience

was

still

hought

obe

n

need f areful

iscipline

nd

educations

late

s the

1860s

s

amply

emonstrated

y

Dickens's

ssay

f

ebruary

5,

1860

later

iven

he itle

Two

Views

of

Cheap

Theatre")

ublished

n

All the

ear

Round,

16-21.

SJonathan

rac

has

suggested

n

conversationhat

his onnectionlso lends further

nteresting

savor o the itle

nd

contentsf

Shelley's

rometheusnbound.

6The

play

had

been

astigated

s

an

example

f

he

endency

n

German rama to

xcite iscontent

among

he ower

lasses

of

society,

y representing

bscurity

nd

virtue,

ank

nd

vice,

s close

and

inseparable

ssociates,"

nd

also for ts

portrayal

f a

womanwho

is too

ndependent,

ne who

"deviates rom

he ecorums

f

her

ex."These

omments,

aken rom he

Anti-Jacobin

eview

(1799)

and 9 (1801) re cited yDavidSimpsonnhisvery aluablediscussion f henationalistndanti-

theoretical

ttitudeshat

eveloped

n

England

fter he

French evolution ith

regard

o

literary

culture.ee his

Romanticism,

ationalism,

nd he

evolt

gainst

heory

Chicago:

niversity

f

Chicago

Press,

993),

specially

9-103.







70

/

Michael

Hays

Of

course,

his

ssay

s not the

place

to

undertake

full

nalysis

f the

theatre nd

the cultural

olitics

f the ast

century.7 y

aim here

s, rather,

irst

o

indicate hat

other ultural

alesthan hose old

by

Austenwere vailable

early

n

the

century,

nd,

then, oadd to Said's discussion fculture nd imperialism yofferingsupplement

regarding

he

way

in

which uch cultural

ifferences

an also

be traced ater n

the

popular

theatre

n

England

and elsewhere)

articularly

hat f

the ate

1850s nd

60s.

This

supplement

s

not ntended

o

refute,

ut

to amend and

augment

he

tory

f

the

imposition

f

mperialist

iscourse

hat

Said tells. also want to make

clear at

this

point

that am not

trying

o

suggest

thatthe theatre n

general

or

melodrama

n

particular

as somehow

free f

nationalist,olonialist,

r racist

epresentations

rior

to the atenineteenth

entury.

ather,

want o

argue

for he

necessity

f

ooking

t the

emergence

f

popular

drama

primarily

elodrama)

s

a marker f nd

participant

n

the

politically

harged

historical ransformation

f

British

nd other

uropean

ocie-

ties

n

the nineteenth

entury,

ocieties

orwhich the

novel,

s

Said

suggests,

ould

later ecome

both

unifying

nd

exclusionary

esthetic

con-the verbal

rendition f

the

patial,

inguistic,

nd social dimensions

f "our" culture.

It

is

particularly

mportant

o make this

rgument

bout the melodrama

ince the

genre

has so

frequently

een denied a careful istorical

eading-precisely

ecause of

the

pre-eminent

ultural tatus

granted

he novel.

Even

so

fine

cultural ritic

s

Raymond

Williams

alls

rey

o the

endency

o

denigrate

hemelodrama n

thebasis

of a received

udgment

bout

its artistic

value." He

utterly

ails

to

examine the

historical

pecificity

f

ndividual

plays

or the

way

in

which the

genre

functions

n

tandem

withother

ehicles f

cultural

roduction,

nstead

finding

t

paradoxical

hat

a form hat eemed to have moments f "social and moral consciousness"was so

convention

ound. Rather

han

xamine heuses to which

hematerial

taged

nd the

conventions

f

he

taging

were

put,

he concludes

hat hemelodrama

was,

ultimately,

"no

more han ensational

resentation...

a

mode

to

be

patronized

nd

mocked."'

To the

degree,

then,

hat Said conflates

he

development

f the novel with

the

development

f

the

oncept

literature"s

a mode

of

organizing

he

discourse

f

uch

7

A

few ritics

ave

lready egun

hework

f

xploring

henineteenth

enturyopular

rama nd

its ultural

ontext

n

some

detail.

Generallypeaking,

hese

ffortsan be divided

nto wo

groups:

thosewhich,ike eter rooks's heMelodramaticmaginationNewYork: olumbia niversityress,

1985),

re

caught p

in an

essentially

odernist

erspective

nd

read hemelodrama

hrough

he ens

of

psychoanalysis

n

order o

provide

n

overarching

et f

bstractions

bout

he ubversive

otential

of esthetic

ffect,

nd

thosemore

oncerned

ith

he oncrete

inks etween

he

melodrama,

ts

ublic,

and

relationsf

discourse

nd

power.

he atter

ry

nvarious

ways

understand

he

omplex olitical

dialectic

f ubversion

nd

repression

hat s

played

ut

n

the

paces

nd the

anguage

nhabited

y

themelodrama

nd its

udiences.

nteresting

ontributions

o this

atter ort

f

nvestigation

an be

found

n Marc

Baer,

Theatre

nd Disorder

n late

Georgian

ondon

Oxford

nd New York:

Oxford

University

ress,

992)

nd

especially

n

Anastasia

Nikolopoulou's

rtisanulturend

the

nglish

Gothic elodrama.

ruceMcConachie

lso takes

p

some

of these

uestions

n relation o

American

theatre

n

Melodramatic

ormations,

merican

heater

nd

Society

820-1870

Iowa

City:

University

f

Iowa

Press,

992).

"See

Raymond

Williams,

roblems

n

Materialism

nd

Culture.

elected

ssays

London

nd

New York:

Verso, 980), 37-38.Anyone amiliar ith he heatrend themelodramanthenineteenthentury

will

havenoted he

ther

estures

hat

eny

egitimacy

o

the

atter,

recisely

ydenying

t

the

high

status

ow

accorded

o the

novel

nd to "literature"-thus

ffectively

rasing

he ultural

ituation,

the

xpectations,

nd desires

f

he

udience

especially

he ower

lass

public)

hat

articipated

n

the







REPRESENTING MPIRE

/

71

cultural

production,

e is

obliged

to

forgotelling

he

story

of the

tensions nd

resistances

hat

may

have

operated

within nd

against

his

process,

owever

unsuc-

cessfully,

n other

enres.

f,

s

Said

says,

henovel s

fundamentally

iedto

bourgeois

society,nd "accompanies nd ... is a partof theconquest fWesternociety y les

bourgeois

onquerants"

70,

the

reference ere s

to

a

book

by

Charles Moraze

which

carries

his

title),

t can

only

do

so at the

expense

of

or withthe

complicity

f

other

literary

orms

nd

other

cultural

frames f reference.

n other

words,

the

socio-

aesthetic

patialization

f

imperialist

iscourse

must

prevail

in a

multiplicity

f

cultural

ealms,

nd

in all social

groups

t

home

before t can

be

fully mplemented

s

a

universalizing

iscourse

broad.

So,

ust

as it has become

possible

nd

necessary

o

read

thetensions

nd

resistances

mbedded

n the

xchanges

etween

ubject

eoples

and

their

ostensible

masters,

t behooves us

to look for the

traces

of

oppositional

potential

within

hat

otherwise

might

eemto be a monolithicultural

nterprise-to

remain pen to thepossibility

f

discovering otentiallyounter-hegemonic

ultural

moments

hat

re made

visible

not

through

he

eruption

f overtclass and

socio-

economic

onflicts,

ut

nstead

hrough

heir

epresentation,

ediation

nd

transfor-

mation

n those

spaces

other

hanthe novel

n which

oppositional

ultural

nergies

have

not

yet

been

fully isplaced.

This s

especially

mportant

f

we

hope

to avoid the

deadly possibility

f

unconsciously eproducing,

lbeit

in inverted

fashion,

he

totalizing

mperialist

aradigm

of "us" and

"them"

by erasing

he

nternal onflicts

and

difference

hat

re also

part

of the

history

f the

mperialmetropolis.

t is also

pertinent

o

my argument

o remember

hat "colonial" and

"imperialist"

re

not

synonyms.

he

latter

arrieswith

t

a

history

f

nationalism,

tatism,

nd institution-

alized

racism

nd

repression

hat s

notcoextensive ith he

former,

nd that

equires

itsownspecificnalysis.

If,

hen,

we turn

o

the melodrama

f the

early

1860s,

we can do

so with

n initial

hypothesis

hat

hediscursive

nity

aid discovers

n the

ge

of Conrad

had not

only

not

yet)

prevailed

arlier

n the

entury,

ut that

thad

been held

n

abeyance

y

an

as

yet

nconclusive

truggle

or ultural

ominance,

oth

n the

public

realmof

politics

(forcefully

anifest

n the1830s

nd 40s

n

such

episodes

s

theChartistnd

Corn

Law

conflicts)

nd

in the cultural

ealm.

ndeed,

t

is

only

with

the

plays

of

Robertson,

Pinero and

Jones,

nd

the modernist

reoccupations

f

Shaw,

that

what

might

be

called

"aestheticized"

ramatic ulture

nd

imperialism

re

functionally

ntegrated

o

the

degree

hey

re n Conrad's novels.9

rior

o

this,

he

project

f

political

nclosure

and cultural ubmersion

uggested

n

Mansfield

arkhad

yet

obe

completed.10

o

get

representational

vent.

We,

of

course,

ave

nheritedhis

spect

f

the

nineteenth-century

ultural

discourse

n,

for

xample,

ur earned istaste or he bombast"

nd

"unrealistic"ituationshat

re

understoodo

be the

taple

f he

popular

melodrama. s a

fair

emonstration

f

he rasure f he

cultural

pecificity

f

the

melodrama

nd

of the lternative

oices

nd

expectations

hat

might

e

sought

ut

n

ts

history,

ee

James

.

Smith,

elodrama

London:

Methuen,

973).

9

As Ellen Gainorhas

shown, haw,

like

Conrad,

s aware of the

complex

nd destructive

relationship

hat xists etween

ngland

nd

ts olonies. ut

he

also enacts

mperial

ulture

n

ways

that

re

fully

n

ccordwith ts

rojects.

ee Ellen

Gainor,

Bernard

haw:

TheDrama f

mperialism,"

inThe erformancef ower. heatricaliscoursend olitics,d. Sue-Ellen ase andJanelleeineltIowa

City:University

f

owa

Press,

991),

6-74.

1'

Michael

ickering

ecently

ade related

rgument,

inding

t doubtful

hat

mperialism

as

in

any

sense

popular olitical

dea

before israeli's econd

premiership

f 1874-80." ee

his "Mock







72

/

Michael

Hays

to that

point,

both

the

popular

drama and its

audience had to be

reconfigured,

included

fully

within he

cultural

olitics

arlier

egitimated

y

Austen's

narrative.

The drama

and

ts

udience)

had

to,

s

it

were,

earn o

speak differently,

o

accept

he

binding losureofthediscourse nd practice f mperialismnsteadofproducing

cultural

hetoric

f

ts own.

At the

ame

time,

he

"better"

lasses had

to

reconfigure

their

erceptions

f

certain

egments

f the ower

class

public-find ways

to

merge

them

positively

n

the

political

nd economic

paces

of their

worldly

ractice

nd in

the cultural

paces

open

to

representation

n

the theatre. ome of the

dimensions f

this

project

f transformation

ill be outlined

n

theremainder

f

this

ssay.

An

interesting

arker

f this

process,

nd

ofthe

resistance till

o

be overcome

an

be found n

Charles

Reade's It's Never ooLateto

Mend,

erformed

n

London

at

the

Princess's

heatre

n

1865.11his

play participates

n

a

socio-political

einscription

hat

was also

being

dvanced t the ime

n

a number

fother

ields

f ultural

roduction:

thefabulationfa new setof ocialmodelsof the nation" nd its nhabitants; new

image

of social

integration,

ontrol,

nd

stability

hat

historians

Michelet,

orex-

ample,

n

France)

nd

early ociologistse.g.,

pencer) ought

o theorize s a meansof

defining roper,

nclusive

ositions

or ll classes

even

the criminal s Foucaulthas

shown)-a

social recodification

hatmade

possiblepsychological

nd

anthropological

representations

f

the ndividual nd

thenation hatwerecrucial

o the

development

of the culture

of

high

imperialism

nd to

the

description

and

concomitant

marginalization)

f

colonial

peoples

outside henational

center."

There

re,

of

course,

umerous

paces

n

which

parts

f

this

ultural

ransformation

and

integration

re worked

out.

Some

of

the most

relevantwill be mentioned

n

passingin the discussionthatfollows.The focushere,however,s on thedrama.

Reade's

play

and

a number

f others

taged

n

the50s and the

60s

contribute

o the

imperial

roject y

enacting

dealized

transformations

f

exemplary igures

rom oth

inside nd outside

he

metropolitan

enter.

t the ame

time

heynecessarily

oint

o

some

of

the

contradictions

ithinBritish

ociety

hat

had

produced

the

compelling

internal

eed to

deploy

henew

cultural nd territorial

iscourse

perative

n Reade's

play.

f

choose

to focus

xclusively

n t's

Never oo ate o

Mend t

s

because believe

that close

reading

fone

play

will serve o better

nitiate

hisdiscussion hanwould

a

general

ummary rawing

on

a number f

plays.

Set

in

context,

t

can serve

to

document

a liminal

moment

t which

the

impoverishment

nd abuse

actually

experienced ytheunemployed,hedisplaced, nd thedisfranchised,ythepoten-

tially

rebellious

rtisans,

aborers,

nd

smallholders

n

England

are

placed

on

stage

and

transformed

nto

he ccasion

or he

production

f

willing articipants

n middle-

class

political

conomy

t home

and the

mperialist

dventure

broad.

Blacks and

Racial

Mockery.

The

'nigger'

minstrel

nd British

mperialism"

n

Acts

ofSupremacy:

he

British

mpire

nd the

tage

1790-1930,

d.

J.

.

Bratton,

t al.

(Manchester

nd

New York:

University

f

Manchester

Press,

1991),

185.

"

The

play

is Reade's

dramatized

version of

his novel of the

same

name,

but also

carrying

he

subtitle,

A Matter

of Fact

Romance"

(1856)

which was

in turn

developed

fromhis

early play,

Gold

(1852,firsttagedJan. 853).Aswillbe seen later nthis ssay,thetransformationshat akeplace from

one version

to the next

provide

interestinguggestions

bout

the inksbetween

iterary ractice

nd

shifting

ultural

paradigms

n

the

1850s nd

early

60s. With ach new version

ofthetale there re shifts

in

character nd

emphasis

that

mark the

evolving

context

n

which

t

appeared.







REPRESENTING

MPIRE

/

73

Initially,

t

seems

that the

play

is

organized

around

what

we

have come

to

understand

s a

classic "melodramatic"

ituation.

young

man,

George

Fielding,

s

deeply

n love with

his

neighbor,

usan

Merton,

ut finds imself

rejected

s

a

suitor

because Susan's father illnotallow hertomarry manmarked s George sbyhis

failure o

pay

the renton his farm.This seems

especially

ruel because

George's

mother

ad,

years

before,

elped

Susan's

father

ut

of

seriousdifficulties.f

course,

behind

all of this urks

the

villain,

Meadows,

a

money

ender

nd land

speculator

whose name

s

ironically

vocative

f one

ofhis

primary

nterests.

e has

bought

up

the

debt

on a number

f houses

in

the

village

and is anxious

to

foreclose

whenever

possible.

At the

very

beginning

f the

play

Meadows states

his

position

uite

clearly.

"I

have

always

put my

foot

n

whatever

as

stood

n

mypath."12

eedless

to

say,

he,

too,

s

desperately

n

ove with he

beautiful

usan, nd, therefore,

lso anxious

to

get

George

out of

the

way.

Meadows conspires oforceGeorge o leave hisvillageand voyagetoAustralian

search

of

the

money

he

needs

to wed

Susan.

He

then ricks

usan

into

believing

hat

George

has

married

omeone

else. Because of

this

Susan,

after

putting

up great

resistance,

grees

to

marry

Meadows;

but on

the

very

ve of

their

wedding

Fielding

returns,

nd

after ome

further

oments

f ension he

play

ends

happily

with

George

and

Susan

together

nd Meadows

on his

way

to

prison.

n

other

words,

he

play

fits

our modern

understanding

f

a

rigorously

ormulaicmelodrama.But what

is

of

interest

ere is not

the

possibility

f

proving

hat

there

might

have

been

such

a

formula.What

matters

s the

way

n which he

formula

s

used

o both

figure

nd

occult

social and

economic ssues

that,

f onfronted

irectly,

ould no doubt

have

produced

a farmorethreateningicture f thepolitical ituationnEnglandat thetime.The

formulaic

spect

of the

play,

recisely

ecause

of ts

familiarity,

llowed

the

audience

to

easily

dentify

ith

the

young

overs

nd,

at

the

same

time,

nderstand

oncrete

formulations

f

social,

political,

nd economic

nequity

s

parts

of

a

momentary

dilemma.

What

then

s

the

historical

round

that

s

engaged

by

the

generic ractice

f

the

play?

f

we turn o

the

opening

cene we note that

t

actually egins

with

Meadows

trying

o

foreclose

n

the home

of saac

Levi,

an

aging

Jew

who,

ike

Meadows,

was

also

a

money

ender,

ut

who

now

simply

wants o

ive out

his

final

ays

n

the

peace

ofhis own

home.

This,

nd

his

treatment

f

Fielding,

rovide

xamples

f

peculation

and exploitation hatare not merely melodramatic"ropes.They correspond o

economic

practices

which,

t the

time

the

play

was

written,

ere

in

fact

driving

numbersof

people

off heir

and.

Laws

that

llowed

absentee andlords

to

amass

extensive

holdings

nd

extract

mpoverishing

ents

rom

enants

ad

already

been

denounced

a

decade and

more

earlier,

ut

with

the

growth

f

suburbs

round

the

major

manufacturing

owns,

he

problem

ad

worsened.

ndeed,

t

thetime

he

play

was

written,

and reform

gitation

een further

purred

y

the

attempts

f

London

landlords

to

appropriate

ommon ands for

building

development.13

ut here the

12

CharlesReade,

t's

Never

oo ate

o

Mend.

An

edition

f

Charles eades

unpublished

rama

with

an introductionnd notes yLeoneRives Toulouse:mpr. oulousaine,940), 0.Allfurtherage

references

illbe

cited

n

the

ext.

'3In

The tructured

rowd.

ssays

n

English

ocial

History

Brighton,

ussex:

Harvester

ress,

981),

106-10,

arold

Perkinndicates hat

Hampstead

eath,

lapham,

nd

Wandsworthommons

ere







74

/

Michael

Hays

topical

issue

of

land

speculation

nd economic

exploitation

n the

part

of

large

landholders

s a

group

s

displacedby

a

portrayal

f the

solated vil

caused

by

one

individual

n

particular.

Meadows's

"melodramatic"

ruelty

laces

him

outside

the

"normal" ocioeconomicrder,n a position efined s muchby iterarynddramatic

tradition

s

by

his

specific

ctions: heecho

of

Shylock aintly

reserved

n

the

figure

of the

Jewish

moneylender

educes

Meadows's

status o

that

of

social

pariah,

ince

Levi

is,

n

comparison,

worthy

member

f

theworld

figured y

the

play.

This shift

f

focus

lso

helps

blunt

he force f the

complaints

oiced

by

another

character

n

the

opening

ct:

Tom

Robinson,

n old

friend

f

George's

who

has been

visiting

rom he

ity,

ives

voiceto

some

very

erious

hough

ot

very

well

elaborated

political

nd economic

harges. ngland

s

not ivable

he

says,

This

erymorning

heard neof

your lodhoppersay,

The

quire

e a

goodgentleman;

he

often

ives

me

day's

work " should hinkt

was the

lodhopperave

he

entlemana

day's

work,nd the

gentleman

ave

him

shilling

nd madefive

y

t.

...)

Come

George,

ngland

s the

pot

f

youhappen

obe married

o duke's

aughter:

nd

got

ifty

thousand

year-and

wo ouses nd coach.... But hissland s

the ead Sea

to

poor

man.

[27]

Such

sentiments,

hen

expressed

n

thecontext fthe

Chartist nd labor

agitation

f

the recent

past,

had been sufficientause for the

speaker

to be

transported

s

a

fomenterf

riminal

ctivity,

uthere

hey

ave

a

different

ffect.14

hile he

mere act

thatRobinson

s allowed to

give

voice to

these deas

implies

heir

perative

xistence

in

the

realworld

ofthe

udience,

heultimate ole

hey

lay

n this

drama s

in

fact

o

transformhehistoricalround n which hey tand.Rather hanmarking confron-

tational

situation,

ne

which would

delineate

the

class, economic,

nd

political

inequities

n

England

hathad

been

furtherxacerbated

y

the conomic ownturn f

the ate

1850s,

hey

pen

the

way

to

a

transformationf thereal ocial and economic

tensions

n

England

nto discursive

nity

made

possibleby

the

Empire.15

ven

before

this

happens,

however,

he

truth

alue

of

Robinson's omments

s

diminished

y

our

discovery

hat

he s

really

thief ho has fled he

ity

n

order o avoid arrest. he

fact

targets

f

uch

fforts.

he

year

fter eade's

lay ppeared,

he

Metropolitan

ommons

ct

1866)

was passed to prevent hiskind of encroachment. thermajorcitiesexperienced imilarexpansion

into

new areas

as fashionable

uburbs

developed;

Clifton or

Bristol,

AlderlyEdge

and

Wilmslow for

Manchester,

nd

Edgbaston

for

Birmingham.

ee

J.

M.

Golby

and

A. W.

Purdue,

TheCivilization

f

he

Crowd

New

York: Schocken

Books,

1985),

145.

14

For some

examples

of the

transportation

f these

criminals,"

ee

E. P.

Thompson,

The

Making f

he

English

Working

lass

(New

York:

Vintage,

1977),

222, 226-27, 249,

513.

1s

he

degree

to which this

discursive

hift ucceeded

in

changing

he

tory

f ower class

emigration

is evident

if

one

compares

the events

limned

by

the

play

with the

explanation

offered

y

a later

historian

f the

empire.

G.

M.

Trevelyan's

confidence

n

the

imperial

discourse

with which he was

raised allows

him

to

assert

that,

until the

end of the

Victorian

ra there

were

still

arge

numbers

of

persons

born

and bread

as

agriculturalists,

nd

desiring

no better

han to obtain

land of their

own

beyond

the ocean.

It

is

only

of recent

years

that fear

has

arisen est the

English

race,

at home

and in

the

Dominions,

may by

choice

eschew the

rural ife nd

crowd too

exclusively

n

the cities.

Trevelyan,

History f England,3 (1926,Third ed., reissued with minorcorrections,Garden City,New York:

Doubleday

&

Co.,

1952),

207. As

Eric

Hobsbawn later

demonstrates,

twas enforced

overty,

he result

of

economic

undermining

f the

agrarian

ife,

ather han

free

hoice that

was the

primary

ause

of

such

emigration.

.

J.

Hobsbawn,

The

Age

ofCapital

New

York:

Scribner,

975),

181ff,

00.







REPRESENTING

MPIRE

/

75

that he

play

shows

such malcontents

re

"criminal"

nd

also under

urveillance o

doubt served

to reduce

the

anxiety

f

the

"better"

arts

of an audience that

would

surely object

to the

politics

implicit

n his

lines.

Nonetheless,

hey

have

been

introducednto theplay, ust as Meadows's land speculationhas: class divisions,

political

nd

economic

onflict

isturb he mall

worldon

stage,

nd

by

the

end

of

he

first ct

the

original

ocial

nexus

of the

village

s

thoroughly pset.

If the

play

implicitly

sks

whether

ngland

could

be the

politically

nd economi-

cally

fragmented

nd

oppressive

lace

suggested

y

these

characters,

he

answer

to

this

uestion

s

also

already

vailable

n

the ituation

t

the

lose

ofthe ct.

"England"

is not

ust

the

pace

occupied

by

these ndividuals

r this

illage.

Australia

s

proposed

to

George

and to

the

audience

as an extension

f the

English

domain,

territory

f

promise

or

nergetic

orkers

n search

f

better uture-not s

penal colony

where

lower-class

roublemakers

uch

as Robinson

had

habitually

een

sent.16

ikewise,

Robinson'sdiscourseofresistanceo socialand economic xploitation ill be trans-

formed

n the

rest f

the

play,

merging

inally

s a

positive

vocation

f

participation

in

an

imperial

project

that allows free

movement

etween

the

colonies

and

the

England

for

ll native

Englishmen.

The

difference

etween his

reatment

f

theAustralian olonies

nd thatfound

n

Dickens s

worth

oting

ere,

ince

t

provides

ome sense

ofthe

rapid

transformation

of their tatus

s the

need to

recast

he

relationship

etween

he

ower

classes

and the

colonies

grew.

As

Robert

Hughes

points

ut,

Dickens's

reatment

f

Magwich

n

Great

Expectations

1861)

shows

that

he retains

farmorerestrained

iew of

the

Australian

convict.17

ince

the

novel s set

n an earlier

eriod,

Dickens

s

historicallyustified

n

barringMagwich'sreturnoEngland, ut at the ametime, henovelclearly etains

the

idea

that

although ransported

onvicts

may

redeem

themselves

hrough

ard

work,

oth

they

nd

thecolonies

remain

egregated

rom he

metropolitan

enter.

f

course,

n David

Copperfield,

icawber

willingly migrates

o

Australia,

ut his choice

and his

situation

re

exemplary

f a

literary

unction

ssigned

to the colonies

n

the

industrial

ovel

of

he

1840s nd

early

850s

where,

s

Raymond

Williams as

pointed

out,

they

served

as

a

means

of

resolving

onflict

hrough

permanent hysical

removal

f the

characters

o a

space

outside

England.'s

Said

presentsMagwich

n

particular

s

yet

another

emonstration

f

the

way

in

whichthe

novelists

e invokes

make use of

thecolonies

without

ver

really llowing

'6

Transportation

o

Australia

fficially

nded

n

1868,

uthad

been

under

riticismor

ome

years,

particularly

fterhe

iscovery

f

gold

hat

igures

o

importantly

nthis

lay.

ee Robert

ughes,

he

Fatal hore:

he

pic f

Australia's

ounding

New

York:

nopf,

987),

specially

hs.

5-16.

As

Hughes

suggests,

he

original

urpose

f

transportation

o

Australia as

to

"sublimate,

eter,

eformnd

colonize"

582).

Of

hese our

ims,

nly

he ast emained

elevant

tthis

oint

n

time.

clear

icture

of

he ffort

ndertakeno

ncourage

orking

lass

migration

o

Australia

s

provided

y

Ellen

Clacy

in

A

Lady's

Visit o

the

Gold

Diggings

f

Australia

n 1852-53.Written

n

the

pot

y

MrsCharles

lacy

(1853),

d. Patricia

hompson

London:

Angus

&

Richardson,

963).

he also

signals

he nternal

pressure

hat

fueled his

effort:Much

s

done

now-a-days

o

assist

emigration,

ut

far

greater

exertions

re

neededbefore ither

hedemand or abour

n

the

olonies

r

the

oversupply

f

t

n

England anbe exhausted158).Atthe timeReadewrotehisplay onlythe atter ondition till

obtained.

17

he

atal

hore,

86.

"

See

Raymond

Williams,

ulture

nd

ociety

New

York:

Harper

&

Row,

1966).







76

/

Michael

ays

these

places

formal

pace

or

presence.

n

contrast,

eade,

n

both

the

novel

and

the

play,

boasts

of the

authenticity

f his

representations

f

the

places

and

the

practices

that re available

for ower

class

self-transformation,

transformation

hat

does not

evict hem romhemetropolis,utprovides hemwith hewherewithalo returnnd

re-establishhemselves

n

England

s

model

burghers.

he

Empire

holds out ts

hand

here

to the

poor

Englishman

n

need-George Fielding

will

attempt

o

found

new

and better

ife

by farming

nd

prospecting

or

gold

in

the Australian

olonies,

nd

Robinsonwill

oin

him

ater,

fter

e

spends

some

time n

one

of the

new

prisons

where

he

will

be

disciplined

y

the

ilent nd

solitary ystem

f

which

Foucaulthas

written

o much-and whichDickens o

distrusted.19

The

next two

acts

of

the

play

offer urther

nsights

nto both

ocals,

but

only

to

legitimate

he roles

these

places

play

n

makinggood

fellow itizens f

what would

have

earlier een

regarded

y

the

upper

classes

as

potentially

angerous

ndividuals.

From hecontemporaryudience'spointofview, hemost tartlingfthese ctswas

surely

he

econd,

which

akes

us

into he

new

"borough aol"

in

which

Robinson

as

been

confined

long

with

Josephs,

young

ad

who,

n thefirst

ct,

had

been

caught

stealing otatoes

fromMeadows.

Here

again

it s

Meadows who is the

sourceof an

injustice

ver

which

the

audience

will be

free

o

weep-without

ever

calling

the

political

nd

legal

systems

nto

uestion.

ndeed,

his

s

probably

he

most

mportant

function

fthe

ct

as a

whole:to

allow

for

compassionate

econciliation

etween

he

audience

and its

counterparts

n

stage.

We enter he

prison

milieu

long

with

dear,

good

Susan,

who

has

brought ifts

o

Robinson,

nd

so,

withher

nd

through

er

yes,

experience

he

egitimation

f

the

udicial

order nd the

reintegration

f

Robinson nto

society. his legitimatingunction elongsto herprimarily ecause she does not

participate

n

the

worldly

ffairs

f

men,thus,

perhaps,

ndicating

need

to

keep

women out of

public

life and

politics

n

orderto create

n

"untainted"

ource

of

cultural

alidation

n

this

moment

f

vast

cultural ransformation.

In

the econd

scene

of this ct

Robinson escribes is

condition s

follows:

When

first

ame ere hadn't

bad

heart,

hough

y

onduct

asbad.

was

felon,

ut

I was a

man.And had

secret

espect

or he

aw;

who

hasn't? nless e s a

fool

s

well

as

a

rogue.

uthere find he aw as

great

felon s

any

f

my

als.

Here he awbreaks

the

aw;

steals

prisoner's

ood

ontrary

o

the

aw

and

claps

prisoner

n

a blackhole

contrary

o

he

aw,

nd

forces

im o elf-murder

ontrary

o he aw.

o

now

.. I

despise

theaw becauset sa liar nd thief.loathehe awbecauset sa murderer.

[45]

This is

strong

tuff. ut

we must

keep

in

mind thatRobinson'sremarks re also

representative

f he iberal

enal

doctrine

f

he ime nsofar s he

presents

imself

s

someone

who

has

been

bad but

s notbad of heart. n other

words,

he is

potentially

open

to

self-discipline

nd

reform-if

iven

he

opportunity-which

s

precisely

hat

the new

prison

ystem

as

opposed

to

the

old

jail regime)

was

supposed

to offer.n

effect,

he

play

tests hisnotion

y pitting

wo

figures

eemingly epresentative

fthe

state

gainst

ach

other:

den,

the

prison haplain,

nd

Hawes,

the

prison

governor.

Edenconfronts

awes,

saying you

have no

right

o

reduce

prisoner's

ood,

norto

torment im na punishmentacket."WhenHawes insists hathe,notEden, smaster

19See

Michel

oucault,

iscipline

nd

Punish

New

York:

Vintage,

977),

/1.







REPRESENTING MPIRE

/

77

of the

prison,

den

responds,

the aw is

your

master

nd mine."Hawes

persists,

nd

Eden

vows he

will

appeal

to the

Home

Secretary,

nd if thatdoesn't

work,

to

the

Crown,

nd

beyond

hat o the

people

in

other

words,

o the udienceofthis

play)

n

order osee whetherthe awcanpenetrate prison" 44).Nevertheless,awes sends

Robinson o

the "black hole"

and causes

Josephs

o suffero

horribly

hat

he

finally

commits

uicide.

But these re

solely

he cts

of a

governor

who has failed o

follow

the

rules set

down

by

the

state. As with

Meadows,

it is

the individual who is

delinquent,

ot the order

hathad made their ctivities

ossible.

This

exculpation

f the

regime

eems

to me to be

exactly

parallel

to the

public

response

precipitated

y

an

event

n

the olonieswhich

ctually

ook

place

somewhat

later

n

the

year

hatReade's

play

was

staged:

when

E.

J.

yre,

heGovernor f

Jamaica

ordered

retaliatory

assacre fter ome black

islandershad killed several

whites

during

n

uprising,

he

response

n

England

focused

primarily

n

Eyre,

not on the

institutionshatmade hisregime ossible.Theimportantifference,fcourse, ies n

the

fact hat

for

Robinson,

white

Englishman,

he

finalresult s

integrative;

e is

ultimately

o be reunited

with

the

ocial

body

n

England,

while theblacks

iving

n

Jamaica

re

either ncluded

n

the

mperium

s its

ervants,

r as

"subjects"

hat ad

a

theoretical

ight

o

protection

rom

rbitrary

urder,

ut notto

socio-politicalquity.

As

Edward Said

points

out when he

briefly

iscussesthis

ncident, uskin,

Carlyle,

and

Arnold

upportedyre's

ction

as

did Charles

Kinsley,

ennyson,

nd

Dickens,

who for some reason

Said

fails to

mention)

while

Mill,

Huxley,

Darwin,

Herbert

Spencer,

nd Goldwin

Smith enounced

Eyre

s a

tyrant

nd murderer

ho

violated

the "natural

rights"

f

English

ubjects.

These

rights,

owever,

id not

nclude the

"native"right oresistmperial uthority.20

It

is

precisely

his difference

hat

helps explain

the

functional

mportance

f

the

prison

cenes

n

Reade's

play.

Robinson,

who would have

earlier een

regarded

s

a

potentially

angerous

ubject

nd,

like

his Irish

ounterparts,

ould have been cast

away

in

one of he

white olonies

n

Australia

s,

here,

irstreformed"

nd then ecast

as

a

legitimate articipant

n

a

new

national rder hat

promises

new

harmony

f

interests

n

England,

a

harmony

ased on a new

understanding

f

interpersonal

relations t home

and a common

mastery

f

subject

peoples

abroad. The

very

real

socio-economic

lls adumbrated

y

Robinson's ituation

nd

remarks,

nd the

political

resistances

hey

might

ngender,

ill be

displaced

by

a

discourse

hat

rges

he ower

classes to direct heir ttentionlsewhere, eyond heeveryday eality fEngland n

order o

achieve

ocial and economic

egitimation.

enry

awcett,

contemporary

f

Reade's,

best sums

up

thiswished-for ew order

n

his Economic osition

f

he

British

Labourer

1865);

he

looks forward o

a

society

f

well-fed,

ell educated

citizens,

with

skilled rtisans nd

peasant proprietors

t

the

base-scavanged

for nd

waited

upon

by Negroes

nd Chinese.21

20

For

furthernformation f the

Eyer

controversy

ee Bernard

emmel,

Jamaican

lood

nd Victorian

Conscience: he Governor

yre

Controversy

Boston:

Houghton

Mifflin,

963)

and Gillian

Workman,

"Thomas Carlyle and the GovernorEyre Controversy:An Account with Some New Material,"

Victorian

tudies18

(September

1974):

77-102.

21

ited

in

G. M.

Young,

Victorian

ngland.

ortrait

f

n

Age,

nd.

ed.

(London

and

New York:

Oxford

University

ress,

1953),

111.







78

/

Michael

ays

This

dea seems

to be

the

mperial,

conomic

ognate

f the

"coherent

eterogene-

ity"

hat

pencer

had

proposed

n

his

First

rinciples

1862)

as the

necessary

pshot

f

biological

volution

nd

the

founding rinciple

n the

progress

f

human ocieties

s

theymovetoward thegreatesterfectionnd themost omplete appiness."22ven

if

the "nature"

of this

process

emerges

omewhat

differently

n

the

play,

the

goal

appears

to be

the same.

And,

to the

degree

hat

Robinson

s

successfully

rged

nto

participation,

he

opposing

groups

n the udiencetoo

may

be convinced o set

aside

certain

istorical nimosities.

ndeed,

he

play

offershe ame sort f

reconsideration

of

the tatus

nd

situation

f the

working

lass

formerly

he

"inescapable"

ource

of

the

petty

riminal)

s did

popular

contemporary

ooks such as Samuel Smiles's

Self-

help

1859)

and William

Anderson's

Self-made

en

(2nd

ed.

1865).

While

urging

workers

o abor

diligently

o

mprove

heir

ot,

hesebooks also

projected

new and

positive

mage

of

aboring

olk or

he

upper

classes-as

aspirants

o the

ame values

as their

etters

nd as

co-producers

f the

wealth

nd

power

of a

greater

ngland.13

An

example

of the

degree

to

whichthis dea

of

greater

nity

nd mutualunder-

standing

ad

spread

n

England

t the ime an be found

n theAnnual

Report

f the

YorkshireUnion

of Mechanic's

nstitutes

or 1861. The Mechanic's nstitutes

re

offered

s

"an

admirable

ommon

round

whereon herich nd

the

poor,

he

ducated

and

the

gnorant

might

meet,

might

earn o understand

ach other

etter,

nd

perhaps

respect

ach

other

more."24

can

think fno

better

escription

f

the

deal

ideological

function

f Reade's

play

in

the

context f

the

popular

theatre f the

day

and,

more

particularly,

n

terms

f

hemixed

udience

t thePrincess's.

While

watching

his

lay,

the

working

lass

and lower

middle lass

spectators

ouldhave

their elf-esteem

ifted

and feel ncouraged ounitewith heir betters"n oint ppreciationf he ransform-

ing

effort

f the

colonial

adventure

hat

unfolds

n the next act.

The

upper

class

members

f the

audience,

on the

other

hand,

could discover

virtues"

n

the

ower

classes

that

ould

make them

ocially

nd

politically

moreattractive.

nd

together

they

ould

momentarily

nact

version

fthe

"coherent

eterogeneity"

heorized

y

Spencer.

ndeed,

his

eems

tobe the

value ofthe

play

as

whole,

value attested

o

by

its

runof

148

performances

byway

of

comparison,

ean's

production

f

Winter's

ale

at

the

Princess's

few

years

arlier an

for 07

performances

nd

was considered

uite

a

success).

Its

unifying

iscourse

nd

its

representation

f an

internally

oherent

England

allow the

members

f theaudience

to

surmount

heir wn

class differences

just

s

they

nd

their

eers

were

xpected

o unite

n "common nterest"

hen imited

franchise as extended o certain rtisans ndmembers f the owermiddleclass in

1867.25

This new

cultural

aradigm

egins

o take

hape

when

Robinson

s freed

n

parole

as

part

of the

"ticket

f eave"

program

hathad

in

fact

ecently

een introduced

n

England

nd

that

om

Taylor,

eade's

friend

nd

sometimes

ollaborator,

ad

already

22

ee

Herbert

pencer,

First

Principles

fourth

d.,

1900),

340-71,

407,

530.

23

For

some

further omments

n

this

ubject

ee

E.

J.

Hobsbawn,

The

Age of

Capital,

38.

24

Cited

in

J.

F.

C.

Harrison,

Learning

nd

Living,

790-1860.

A

study f

the

English

dult education

movementToronto:Universityf TorontoPress,1961),75-76.

25

On

the

Reform

Act and

political

value

of

this

vercoming

f difference

hrough

limited

ranchise

as well

as the

resultant

plit

between

artisans

nd

the

"masses,"

see

Hobsbawn,

The

Age of

Capital,

24,

but

cf.

Trevelyan,

History f

England,

,

203-06.







REPRESENTING

MPIRE

/

79

celebrated

n

The

Ticket-of-Leave

an

(1863).

Robinson s

enjoined

o

"repent,

nd

...

labourwith

his]

hands,

nd

stealno more"

50).

After

eceiving

letter

rom

usan

to

George,

he

sets

off orAustralia

o

build a

new

ife.

hus,

he

ension

roducedby

the

violenceof theprison cenesandbyJosephs's eathfinds eleaseboth na confirma-

tionofthe

ustness

ftheorder ehind he

penal

system

nd,

once

again,

n

the dea of

thecolonies

s a

place

to

workout one's authentic

elation

o the

metropolitan

enter.

Thanksto the

Empire,

George

nd

Robinsonwill be

united

n

their

uest

to

become

true,

fulfilled

nglishmen.

his thenbecomes the core

of

the

third ct and central

moment

fthe

play,

heultimate ransformationfAustralia rom

enal colony

nto

land

of

opportunity,

nd the

legitimation

f

colonial

exploitation

s

a

necessary

adjunct

of such

opportunity-exploitation

efined

s

a

"profitable"

nteraction

e-

tween

colonials

of

every

lass and

the

colonized

nativeswhom

they

upervise.

Reade claims

o have done extensive esearch or he cenes

n

Australia nd

forhis

presentationfJacky,he okenAboriginef heplay.Nonetheless,t sobvious hat e

(like

Isaac

Levi,

whom

I

mentioned

arlier)

s

actually

literary

rtifact,

revised

example

of

the

stage

"African,"26

ut

into

play

here

o confirm

larger

iction f the

general

elation

etween

he olonist nd

the olonized

ubject.

t

s

Reade's claim hat

what

he offers ere

is

historically

ccurate

hat

makes

Jacky

ifferent

rom

ther,

earlier

tage

figures

f

this

type.

Reade himself

ad,

for

xample,

ncluded

several

other

Australian lacks"

along

with

Jacky

n

the

play

Gold,

ut none of

themwere

focused

upon

as instances

f

the racial distinctionshatfound and

justify

olonial

exploitation.

hey

were

merely

seful

comic)

background,"

s

was

the

tereotypical

stage

rishwoman,

Mary

McDoggherty,

ho

appeared

with hem.

n

the

novel

and

in

the ater lay, owever, newelements ntroduced. acky's resence, speciallynthe

more

tightly

ocused context

f the second

play,

serves to

delineate

what Reade

claimed

was

the

"reality"

fAustralian ife.

He

proudly

nnounced

hat

he had

read

"some

thirty

ooks"

on Australiawhile

preparing

he

novel,

ust

as

he had

done

preparatory

esearch

or

the

prison

scenes. This

new

"realism,"

which is

actually

concernedmore

with

details

things)

hanwith

persons

and

thusmoves

towardwhat

Luka'cs aterdefined

s

naturalism),

elps

create

visual/spatial

ontext hat rans-

forms haracters

uch

as

Jacky

rommere tock

igures

n

the

genre

nto

uthoritative

("anthropological")

epresentations

f

cultural

roups

nd

their

elations.27

26

n

addition

oother

ources,

eade's

ortrait

f

Jacky

ertainly

wes

omething

o

towe's

ncle

Tom's

Cabin,

book

thathad been

given

a

number f

dramatic reatments

n

England

in

1852 and

later,

and whose

proclaimed

factual asis

had,

in

part, nspired

his own "realism."See

Wayne

Bums,

Charles

Reade.

A

Study

n Victorian

uthorship

New

York: Bookman

Associates,

1961),

131-33.

27The

historical

ole and the

significance

f

this

mergence

f "realism" n the

drama

n

the

1850s has

not

yet

been

explored

n

any

detail and

certainly

merits urther

nquiry.

Though

Lukacs

has

proposed

that

the

development

of realism nvolves a move from he

historical rama

to

thehistorical

ovel and

a shift rom he

depiction

of

a

"totality

f action: to a

"totality

f

things"

Lukacs,

The

Historical ovel

(Boston:

Beacon

Press,

1963),

92],

the

questions

that

impose

themselves

here are

whether this turn

toward the

"epic"

(a

term hatBrecht ater

aid

claim

to

as

part

of

his

dramaturgic

esponse

to

realism)

should indeed be

defined

generically,

s

a shift rom

he dramatic o the

epic

(the

novel);

whether

and

why)

realism

develops

earlier than is

usually

assumed

in

the

drama;

and

to

what

degree

this shift

marks theabsorption fthetheatre-particularlyhe melodrama and the audience forwhomitmight

have embodied

vestiges

of

resistance nd

difference--into

he

imperialist

ultural

project

s

a whole.

For a

discussion

of the

early stages

of the

"literary"

erspective

that inks the

development

of the

realisticnovel to the

changing

perspective

n

character

n

nineteenth-century

ramatic

riticism,

ee







80

/

Michael

ays

Thus t

s thatwhen

George

eappears

n

the

play

he is

accompanied

y

Jacky,

ho,

needless to

say,

s his

servant.

ogether

hey

onfigure

nd

justify

he

fundamental

structuresf

mperial

ultural elations.

We see "Massa

George"

akeon

what

can

only

be understood s "the whiteman'sburden"ofeducatingJacky-in"comic"scenes

about such

things

s

Jacky's

ntellectual

nability

o

negotiate

he

change

n

tempera-

turefrom he heat

of

midday

to the chill

of

evening, change

that

George's

colored

"friend"

s

apparently

ot

able

to

predict:

When

Jacky

good

deal

hot

here

..

he

can't feel

berry

ittle

old a

longway

off .

Jacky

ot

white

fellow"

59).

From

here,

the

play

moves

to a

portrayal

f

Jacky

s

the

stereotypical

appy

savage,

willing

o

serve,

but

lacking

mental and moral

sufficiency:

eorge

comments n

his

"poor

shallow brain"

62).

But

Jacky

s

above

all

loyal.28

hen

George

gets

ick,

Jacky

tays

with him and tends him

as

best he

can,

but,

of

course,

he

doesn't

do

too well.

Fortunately,

obinson

ppears

on

the cene

ust

n

time;

t s

he,

not,

Jacky

hat

knows

how to

get George

back

on

his

feet.Robinson's arrival

also makes

possible the

introduction

f more

comic business

demonstrating

oth

Jacky's gnorance

nd

an

Englishman's

pluck":

when

Jacky

hreatens obinsonwith a

tomahawk

sic),

he is

easily

put

n his

place

by

a

few

trong

words

67).

After his series

of

patronizing

nd

emphatically

acist

representations,

he

play

moves

on to the crucial

momentwhen

Jacky

nacts the deal role

of the

colonized

subject.

earning

hat

George

nd Robinson re in

search

f

gold,

he

leads

them o

a

nugget arge

enough

to secureboth their utures. his

moment

ot

only

sets

up

the

"happy

end" the udience

expects,

t

also

givesGeorge

nd

Robinson n

opportunity

to comment

urther

n

Jacky's

haracter. e

is

presented

s

both a

savage

and

as

"natural"man: "thesepoorsavageshave gotan eye likea hawk for verythingn

nature"

76).

Jacky

s

the "noble

savage"

who

gladly

revealsthe existence f a

great

nugget,

whichhe refers

o as a

"yellow

tone,"

o his

whitemasters. obinson

ays

to

George:

"Here

is

a

true

philosopher.

Here's

Ebony

despises

Gold"

(77).

Idealism

combines

nicely

with

apital

t

this

point

o

prove

that

he

"philosophical" borigine

desires o

help

his whitemaster

o

empire

nd economic

well-being.

his

s

no doubt

the

Englishman's

ompensation

or

being

cut

off rom

ature. t

is

also the

point

at

which the

lower and

upper

class members

of

the audience share

again

in

the

pleasurable

discovery

f

n

idealized

space

beyond

he

metropolis

seful

or

uilding

mutual onfidence

nd,

possibly,

ucrative oexistence-thanks o

this

demonstration

of their

ommon

English

uperiority

ver

subaltern

eoples.

What

s most

nteresting

bout

this ection

f

he

play

s that t

s n

fact ased

in

real

events.

But those

events,

which

had been

widely

publicized

n

England

n the

early

1850s,

are

not

reproduced

n the

play.

nstead of

the

story

f

an

educated,

native

Australian

who worked

for

Dr.

W.

J.

Kerr,

nd

who,

after

eporting

heexistence

f

a

huge gold

nugget,

was

rewarded

albeit

nsufficiently)

ith

"two

flocks

f

sheep,

two saddle

horses,..,.

a

quantity

f

rations,

nd..,.

a team

of

bullocks

o

plow

some

Jonathan

rac,

"Hamlet,

Little

Dorrit,

nd the

History

fCharacter"

n Critical onditions.

egarding

he

Historical

Moment,

d.

Michael

Hays (Minneapolis:

University

f Minnesota

Press,

1992),

82-96, and,

further, rac,CommissionedpiritsNew Brunswick,NJ:RutgersUniversity ress,1979),chs.5-6, and

David

Simpson,

Romanticism,

ationalism,

nd

theRevolt

Against

Theory.

28

The

Anthropological

eview

f

1866

p.

120)

asserts

hat

[the

Negro

and the

Mongol]

are beardless

children,

whose

life s

a

task

and

whose chiefvirtue

onsists

n

unquestioning

bedience."







REPRESENTING

MPIRE

/

81

land

in which

he

and

his

brother]

re about to sew maize and

potatoes,"

nd instead

of

factual

eportage

n the

waning

f he

gold

boom

n

Australia,

r

the

political

nrest

among

the

white)

workers

here,

r the

anti-Chinese

entiment

hathad

grown

up

around1860 therewere bout15,000 hinese nAustralia tthe ime)when therewas

less

land

to

prospect,

we are

introduced o

Jacky

whose

representative

tatus

s

underlined

y

the

fact e

is made thechief

f an

aboriginal

ribe.29

Of

course,

he

play

does notmove

quite

o

simply

r

directly

s I have

presented

t.

Events

n

the

last act

unfold,

s did those

of

the

first nd

second,

n a

context f

"melodramatic"

ension

hat eaves

the audience

no time to reflect n the

possible

discrepancies

etween

known facts

nd the

play's

situation,

he characters r

their

actions.

Jacky

s

quickly

eft ehind

n

the

final

cenes

of the

play

so

thatwe can have

a

joyous

reunion

between

George

and

Susan-a

reunion

hat seems to set

up

an

equation

between

Susan

and the

empire,

oth

of which must

be

wrested

from

he

hands of lesserbeings,with the formererving o complete nd validate the life

founded

by

the

atter.

he end

of the

play

also

brings ogether

hevarious

figures

f

the

first ct

in such

a

way

as

to re-establish

on

a

new

socioeconomic

lane)

the

community

hat

had

initially

een

disrupted

y

Meadow's

corrupt

nd antisocial

activities.

t

seems

ove,

hard

work,

nd

moral

righteousness onquer

all,

while the

(melo)drama

hat

ustains hem unctions

uperbly

s a

means

of

uniting

ll

classes n

the audience

in

the

desire

to

experience

urther

epresentations-if

ot the actual

labor-of

the

unifying

nd

sustaining

roject

f

empire.

In

this

ense,

Reade's

work

s

exemplary

f

the

pecifically

imperialist"

rientation

that

merged

n

the

drama of the

1850s nd

60s. FromTheWhite

lave,

r The

Flag of

Freedom1849)toBritish orn1872)performancesn theatres or heworking lasses

and formixed

audiences

urged

the

unity

nd dominance

f

the

British race"

in

the

imperial

nterprise.

his

type

f

play appeared

most

forcefully

fter

he

Crimean

War,

which

n

itself

an be seen

as a

crucial

tagingpoint

for he

nternal

eordering

f

British ultural

llegiances.30

hese

fabulations f

general nglish uperiority

verthe

colonizedother

efashion

he

ctual tatus

f

the

poor

and

working

lasses and

banish

the real

conditions f

existence

while

offering

n their tead the

mage

f the

mperial

domain

and the

deal f distant

ands and wealth

s

compensation

or he otherwise

painful

need

to submit o the

palpable

constraints

spatial,

conomic,

nd

political)

that

governed

ife

n

metropolitan

ngland.

It s not

surprising,

herefore,hat hediscourse f

empire

nters he

vocabulary

f

the

working

lass movement

more

ully

t

this

ime,

nd that

(false)

onsciousness f

29

The earliest

report

of the

discovery

of

the Kerr

nugget,

which is

obviously

the source of the

incident

n

It's Never oo

Late to

Mend,

ppeared

in

the Bathurst ree

Press,

July

6,

1851. This and other

versions

of

the

story

pread rapidly

o

England,

and,

as

part

of the ore of the Australian

gold

rush,

no

doubt

gave impetus

to Reade's

initial

play

Gold. everal

of the

originalreports

ave been

reprinted

n

Gold

Fever.

TheAustralian

oldfields

851 to the

890s,

d.

Nancy Keesing

Sydney

nd London:

Angus

&

Richardson,

1967),

39-44.

30

For further

etails on the

way

in

which thiswar

figured

n

the

development

of

British

politics

nd

culture ee J. . Bratton,TheatreofWar:theCrimea on theLondonStage1854-55," nPerformancend

Politics

n

Popular

Drama,

d. David

Bradby,

ouis

James,

nd

Bernard

harratt

Cambridge

and

New

York:

Cambridge

University

ress,

1980),

119-37. See

also,

Acts

of upremacy.

he

British

mpire

nd the

Stage

1790-1930.







82

/

Michael

Hays

national

superioritympedes

the

development

f

an

alternative

ritical

nalysis-

though

not to the

point

of

preventing

he ater

e-emergence

f

class

confrontationn

England.31

ndeed,

t s

only

f

we

make the fforto

see how this

ame

about,

only

f

we seek out the culturalmoments hatmarkthe difference etweenindividual

experience

nd the

universalizing

iscourses hat

mask,

rivialize,

r

distortt

that

we

can

get

at the nternal esistances hat

ermeate

uch

hegemonic

evelopments-and

thereby

void the

tendency

o

produceequally

reductive

ounter-discourses

n

our

criticism.

his is

especially

mportant oday

since,

in

the name

of

post-colonial

consciousness

nd

identity

ormation,

hese discourses

may

ead

us

to

overlook

or

deny

the

counter-hegemonicnergies

hat

re not

only always

present

n a

given

society,

ut that an also

provide

further

mpetus

oward

building

more

open

and

historicallyware-dialogic-modes

of

inter)cultural

nderstanding.

31

John

Foster

provides

further,

uite

interesting

ocumentation of the

development

of

this

nationalist

nd racist

English"

consciousness

n

his

discussion

of

the

impact

of

the

Crimean War

and

the

emergence

of the anti-Irishmovement

n

1861.

Foster,

Class

Struggle

nd the ndustrial

evolution.

Early

ndustrial

apitalism

n

three

nglish

owns

New

York: St.

Martins,

974),

329-46.

Class, Culture and Popular Theatre in 19th Century

Documents

Transcript of Class, Culture and Popular Theatre in 19th Century