For my post this week, I would like to briefly discuss the connections I see between the issue of class and the early game of cards which Mr. Fisker wins. Prior to the game at Mr. Fisker's farewell party, Sir Felix had done quite well for himself. Indeed, Sir Felix notes that "if all were paid,he would have over L3,000" (1.47). However, the "if all were paid" is key because of the shaky foundation for the entire group of card players. So, let us return to the card game. Mr. Fisker is included though the other young men wished that he had retired with the older gentlemen (1.90). It is the introduction of Mr. Fisker to the gambling group that upsets the status quo. Sir Felix loses heavily and is forced to use his I.O.U.'s as payment for his debt to Fisker. This course causes much ado concerning the necessity of being ready to pay any I.O.U that should arise. Fisker, in what is suggested to be American good humor, does not pressure for the immediate payment of the debts. However, the gentlemen arrange to pay him.
This passage reveals an important fact of British class, at least as presented by Trollope. Entering into the network of credit is an important sign of being a gentleman. Though Fisker suggests that the other players merely send him the money by mail, his lack of ability to enter into the network reveals him as a lower-class character. However, there is another side--the old notion of gentlemanliness. Paul Montague seems to operate by an different system of financial ethics; though he wins in this round of gambling, it seems likely that he would pay for his debts were he to lose. In fact, he offers to undertake the debt of those who have lost in order to pay Fisker. However, he is ineligible for such a thing due to his newness to the club. Montague's values, especially prior to this scene, match up more closely with an upper-middle class family--frugality and a willingness to pay his debts. Of course, given his close association with Roger Carbury, one can almost hear Carbury's voice speaking from the shadows for Montague to avoid foolishness. In one sense, the financial ethics practiced by the members of the club seem reminiscent of eighteenth century aristocratic excess. However, the title of the novel is The Way We Live Now, suggesting a currentness to the practices of the various groups. Perhaps, Trollope is suggesting that the financial ethics, especially of the gamblers, is out of touch with the reality of the day in which it was written.
Jonathan,
ReplyDeleteI think you bring up a really good point about the issue of gambling/class. What you suggest here could be expanded as well to the issue of cheating. When Sir Felix witnesses Miles cheating at Loo, his reaction is not simply “you stole from us!” but rather a question of honor. While it is certainly not honorable for Miles to cheat, it is equally questionable whether or not to bring the issue to the attention of the group, at least some of whom he knows would prefer to remain in ignorance and maintain the image of gentlemanly honor. This is a reaction Dolly very much as when Sir Felix tells him. Like the scene you highlight with Fisker and the need of the men to pay him before he leaves because they desire to be viewed as gentlemen who pay their debts to this outsider, the issue of cheating revolves around the image of gentlemanly behavior.
You both raise a crucial question: what code of honor governs the gambling at the club? Is it a hold-over from an earlier era or a reflection of the new spirit of capitalism (Felix says gentlemen used to pay their debts, but how would he know? He's only a second-generation aristocrat.) Matt suggests the latter in his post, but I'm not so sure. How would we know? And how do these gambling practices map onto capitalism -- alike or different?
ReplyDelete