BERNARD SHAW AS AN ICONOCLAST

(AN INQUIRY INTO HIS PHILOSOPHY OF

MARRIAGE AND SEX WITH REFERENCE TO
MAN AND SUPERMAN AND ARMS AND THE MAN)

SUBMITTED BY

IRUM SHABBIR

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LITERATURE

INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
ISLAMABAD
March 2002
 BERNARD SHAW AS AN ICONOCLAST
(AN INQUIRY INTO HIS PHILOSOPHY OF
MARRIAGE AND SEX WITH REFERENCE TO
MAN AND SUPERMAN AND ARMS AND THE MAN)

SUBMITTED

IRUM SHABBIR

TO

THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LITERATURE

INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY ISLAMABAD

A DISSERTATION IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE AWARD OF

MASTER'S DEGREE IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE & LITERATURE
March 2002

I certify that all material in this dissertation borrowed from other sources
has been identified and that no material is included for which a d e g r ~ ehas
previously been conferred upon anybody.
Sign
 Dedicated

To

My great Mama Jan, Abu Jan, Aunti and

Mamo Jee, who encouraged me at every

stage in the writing of this dissertation

with love and prayer.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am extremely indebted to my respected supervisor, Professor S.M.A. Rauf

for his patient guidance, cooperation and ungrudging help at every stage in the

writing of this dissertation despite his heavy engagements. It is true that

without his counseling, it would not have been possible for me to accomplish

such an arduous task.

I am also greatly thankful to Professors Sajjad Sheikh, Muhammad

Farooq Malik, Gordon College, Rawalpindi, my friend Saadia Butt and

younger sister Surnmera Shabbir, for helping me enormously in completing

this project.

Irum Shabbir
March 2002
 CONTENTS

Page No.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

INTRODUCTION 1

CHAPTER 1
Pre-Shavian Dramatic Scene

CHAPTER 2
Shaw as an Iconoclast

CHAPTER 3
Shavian Philosophy of Marriage and Sex

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 INTRODUCTION

Modem drama is generally indebted to Bernard Shaw who gave a new direction

to it. Shaw brought about a revolution in the world of English theatre. This is

contrary to the earlier dramatic tradition which focused on human problems of

universal significance, detached from the contemporary socio-political and

economic problems and presented a romantic view of life. Shaw shatters the

romantic notions of life which, according to him, are the root cause, of miny

social evils and injustices in the society. Shaw, therefore, deemed it necessary to

reconstruct the edifice of society on a new set of moral values to abolish all kinds

of ills from the society.

Bernard Shaw is considered anti conventional because he claimed the

right of private judgment, as against the conventional values. In this respect,

Shaw is commonly described as a disciple of Ibsen, who enabled the theatre to

escape from the vapid and meaningless ideas which dominated it so long. His

work gives people new images of truth by destroying outmoded pieties and

beliefs of idealists.

Bernard Shaw is influenced by the anti-idealistic stance of Ibsen. Shaw is

also called a realist. He exposes the essential reality of the conventional beliefs

and ideas behind the external condition. For him, this external condition is not
real but only a distortion of reality. In short, Shaw is a seeker of reality behind

external phenomena.

The purpose of this study is to examine Shaw as an iconoclast and the

causes which play a major role in his conversion into an iconoclast. Anti-

romantic as he is, Shaw is against the conventional moral values. He constructs a

system or systems in his plays and then fits things into them. He projects several

theories. Shaw not only discusses the contemporary issues in detail but also

provides the solution of the problems. This makes him an optimist. As a believer

in Creative Evolution, he looks forward to the day when man would become a

superman. The only hope for man, according to Shaw, is that he would surpass

and create a new man which means a conscious evolution. To prove the

hypothesis of this study, I have examined his philosophy of marriage and sex

with reference to Man and Superman and Arms and the Man.

This study extends over three chapters. To arrive at the fundamental

features of Shavianism, it is imperative to focus on the Pre-Shavian dramatic

scene. So the first chapter deals with the main trends of Pre-Shavian drama. The

second chapter is directed to explore Shaw's revolt against the accepted social

conventions and moral values. In addition to this, factors which contributed to

Shaw's iconoclasm, are also examined. In the third chapter, the study of his

philosophy of marriage and sex is carried out with special reference to his plays

Man and Superman and Arms and the Man to determine the extent of Shaw's

iconoclasm.
CHAPTER 1

Pre-Shavian Dramatic Scene

Before embarking upon discussion on the Shavian dramatic scene, it is important

to cast a glance at the earlier trends in dramatic art. In the modem era, Shavian

comedies rejuvenated the sterile and perishing British theatre. As Arthur Ganz

says: " ... Shaw brought to the theatre an exuberant humour that was not only

unparalleled in its vivacity and endless inventiveness but ... astonishing in its

sweetness".'

Prior to Shaw, there were four main types of comedy: Romantic Comedy,

Comedy of Humour, Comedy of Manners and Sentimental Comedy.

In English theatre, romantic drama with its free spirit was the chief fruit of

the Renaissance. Shakespeare was the greatest champion in the tield of

Elizabethan drama. In his hands romantic comedy reached its climax: Tbelfth

Night, Merchant of Venice, As You Like It. He was gifted with a magnificent

imaginative power through which he gave a new spirit to the old stories.

Shakespeare might be called an iconoclast as he had revolted against classicism.

In Shakespearean comedy, his 'comic idea' and vision of 'human

happiness' are very profound. He writes a kind of romantic comedy which fulfils

the 'Elizabethan aesthetic demand' of the theatre-goers of that age.

 He wrote a number of romantic comedies like As You Like It, Mid-

Summer Night's Dream etc.

His comedies, being romantic, are conceived in an imaginative setting in

contrast to dull and dreary world of everyday life. In other words, "Characters

and scenes alike are viewed through magic casements which transform reality".

In his comedies, the settings are also romantic. Such as the "Fresh wild-

wood paths of Arden" and the "glowing gardens of Illyria" etc, In reality, "he (or

rather she) is making his conquests in these realms of the spirit accessible not

only to himself but to all others in whom he has inspired the same way of

apprehending existence"? His Romantic comedies are "artist's vision, not a

critic's exposition".

The world of his Romantic comedies is also characterised by

improbabilities. In the same way, the pastoral element heightens the romantic

quality of comedies such as As You Like It and Mid-Summer Night's Dream.

There is no strict observance of dramatic unities: the unity of time, the unity of

action and the unity of place. Usually, these comedies end in marriage and

reconciliation.

Another romantic element in the plays, around which.they are built, is the

theme of passionate youthful love. As H.B. Charlton says, "Rosalind, Viola and

to a less extent, Beatrice, are Shakespeare's images of the best way of love. They
 ..
... are Shakespeare's representation of the office of love to lift mankind to a richer
life". '
These comedies also exhibit a variety of dramatist personae. The

characters are the seekers of complete, permanent and more 'humane happiness'.

His heroines are enthroned as queens of comedy. They provide happiness to the

world by solving the seemingly difficult problems. In fact, he "found women

more sensitive to intuition and more responsive to emotion that he first promoted

them to dominion in the realm of comedy".

The fools in Shakespearean comedy are quite witty. Like a 'stalking

horse', they use their wit. But their way of reformation differentiate them from

other or traditional fools. As H.B. Charlton puts it, "They entice to a richer

wisdom by alluring the imagination into desire for larger delights." '
Instead of using conventional satire and ridicule, Shakespearean Romantic

comedy convinces a person to good by its attractive presentation. Hence, the

worth of it is judged by their basic earthly wisdom.

Shakespearean dramatic art is contrary to Shavian dramatic art.

Shakespeare projects his views but indirectly. He does not pin us to a dogma but

suggests it in the dramatic form. While the plays of Shaw are usually actuated by

some didactic purpose.

 Objectivity is the quintessence of a great art. A dramatist has to sacrifice

himself and to undergo a continual extinction of his personality. Shakespeare

maintains utmost detachment from his characters in his plays. His chief aim is to

select a man of this world and express his views, notions and caprices

objectively. On the contrary, Shavian plays are full of creeds and views

pertaining to the dramatist's own bent of mind. In other words, Shakespearean

dramatic art lies in complete concealment of any didacticism without the

projection of subjective estimation. On the other hand, Shaw is outspoken and

blunt. Thus the difference between them is that for Shakespeare artistic

presentation is of utmost significance while Shaw is more interested in presenting

his ideas in the plays.

Elizabethan and Jacobean dramatists are conscious of the likes and

dislikes of the audience. Therefore, keeping in view its demands, Shakespeare

included romantic improbabilities, disguises, battles, sword play, broad farce,

ribald jokes, quick wit - battles and happy coincidences in his plays. Thus he

continued to hold his audience spellbound.

There were a few contemporary writers of Shakespeare who attempted a

new trend in dramatic art. Among them was Jonson. He entered into the world of

drama when the 'University wits' and Shakespeare were dominant in the world of

theatre. In the hands of Shakespeare and 'University Wits', drama was steadily

drifiing away from the classical patterns in order to satisfy the taste of audience

for glory and thrill. Though Jonson came forward as a pioneer and an innovator
of the 'comedy of humour', he invited the attention of his age to classical

tradition. But he did not blindly copy the Greek and Roman playwrights. Instead

of this he "... wed ancient form to contemporary substance"? D.H. Craig says that

Jonson "set out to establish for the first time in England a literary canon, and to

install himself as its centre".

-.
Being the originator of the revolutionary movement of the 'Angry Young

Men' in the dramatic method, he flourished 'comedy of humour'. And his plays

proved to be a turning point in the course of Elizabethan drama. They

transformed Elizabethan drama by drawing comedy from the realm of luxuriant

romanticism to the world of facts. Though he follows the best in classical model,

the setting, incidents, characters and dialogues of his plays are contemporary with

the times. He provides "profit and delight" through his comedies such as: The

Alchemist, Every Man in His Humour.

Through his Comedy of humour, he ridicules the foibles, affectations,

avarice, dishonesty, lechety, witchcraft and hypocritical puritanism of his age.

Jonson's characters, since they are dominated by one particular humour and

dispersed to a particular idea, appear to be mono-maniacs. In the introduction to

.
Every Man Out ofHis Humour, he defines 'humour' thus:

Why, Humour, (as tis ens) we thus define it ...

As when some one peculiear quality
Doth so passesse a man, that it doth draw
Ail his affects, his spirits, and his powers,
In their confluctions, all to runne one way,
This may be truly said to be a Humour
('Grex' 1 179-109)
 He assigns himself the task of arousing comic laughter on those foibles

and absurdities which, according to him, are hostile not only to the .social

framework of society but to himself also. He tries to fight out any social evils and

undesirable undercurrents of Victorian life. So like Shakespeare, he does not

borrow plots but he picks up the material from the contemporary life. He defines

the aim and scope of his comedy thus:

Deed and language, such as men do vse:

And persons, such comoedie would chuse,
When she would shew an Image of the times,
And sport with humane follies, not with crimes.
(Every Man in His Humour, Prologue, 1121-4)

Jonson deems satire and humour as weapons and is filled with zeal to

reform. He projects the people of different kinds and discovers and ridicules their

follies, affectations and hypocrisy. But in the end, there is gaiety as all 'humour'

characters recognize their shortcomings, shedding them all.

Before proceeding further, it is essential to note Jonson's strict adherence

to the Unities. Owing to this, his characters do not get a wider scope for their

gradual evolution. So there is no complexity in them. Hence, they are not always

full-blooded but appear to be static. In contrast to Jonson, Shakespeare's

characters are more dynamic, life-like and full blooded.

In Jonsonian Comedy the female characters are not as charming and

resourceful as in Shakespearean Comedy. In ShakespearemComedy the female

who always come to their rescue. In contrast, the female characters in Jonsonian

Comedy are depicted to expose the vices and moral degradation of the upper

classes.

Taking his characters from everyday life, Jonson also endevours to evolve

the life-like dialogues of these characters. Because in his view, speech of a person

is the mirror of his personality. So to present a vital comic speech, he uses some

kinds of rhetoric. Therefore, "simile, metaphor, image, jargon and hyperbole

become integral parts of Jonson's language and enhance the comic irony he aims

.10 Even then, his style avoids all unnecessary embellishment and is very

precise and clear. This art of keeping the language true to life paved the way for

Ibsen, Shaw and Galsworthy.

Jonsonian 'Comedy of Humour' developed into the 'Comedy of

Manners', which gets exposure in the plays of Etherege, Vanbrugh and Congreve.

However, the successor whose mode of drama is similar to Jonson is George

Bernard Shaw.

Shaw like Jonson gives importance to the cerebral speeches over action.

Both banish the exotic locations, glamorous characters and' portrayal of emotions.

Instead of projecting the psyche of characters, both prefer exterior presentation of

characters. And the dialogues, setting and characters are from contemporary life.

Venkata Reddy rightly points out, "In so far as Jonson is a realist and the motive
and interest of his plays social, he may be claimed to be the founder of modem

English comedy"."

In the later half of seventeenth century or restoration period, 'Comedy of

Humour' appeared in a new guise - 'Comedy of Manners'; exposing the manners

and outlooks of existing society.

The 'Comedy of Manners' was only the depiction of the mannerism of

courtly class. In other words, it was "wholly aristocratic, the manners displayed

being not those of men in general (such as Jonson showed in his humours), but

the affectations: and cultured veneer of fine society. For these men a manner was

not a trait native to an individual, but a quality acquired by him from social

intercourse".'*

In the "Comedy of Manners" happy heroines, rake heroes, licentious

situations, love intrigues, smutty dialogues and cynical attitude towards the

institution of marriage are frequently present.

The "Comedy of Manners" is slightly different from the Comedy of

Humour. The distinction lies in stagecraft rather than in the manner; there is an

attack on the unsocial or ludicrous abnormality but in a different way. Instead of

whipping and moralising, the offenders are treated with a lighter hand. It reveals

the 'acquired follies' of the bourgeois class. As in The Way of the World,

Congreve holds up to ridicule the affected wit of the characters instead of their

natural folly.
 The "Comedy of Humours", says Bonamy Dobree, "never attempted to

paint the full man, moved by inconsistencies, urged by conflicting passions,

whereas the comedy of manners did; and the passions were by no means all on

the superficial level of frills and sword knots, repartee, and bawdy talk that is

often taken for granted as the characteristic note of Restoration work". "

William Congreve is considered the greatest dramatist of the Restoration

period. In other words, 'Comedy of Manners' is his speciality. He is well-known

for his wit and elegance. His most brilliant comedies are Love for Love and The

Wuy of the World. He provided a unique prose style. His diction is very accurate,

brilliant and witty. Moreover, the dialogues are given more importance as

compared to the plots. In his plays Congreve delineates the fashions and foibles

of the upper class, devoid of morality. However, his plays do not have universal

appeal. Their importance lies in social documentation.

English Comedy took a new turn in eighteenth century. It was due to the

influence of the reign of William 111 and Queen Anne. Now social immorality

was replaced by morality. As the first exponent of sentimental comedy, Richard

Steele was strongly opposed to the immorality of Restoration comedy. In contrast

to vicious satiric comedy of manners, sentimental comedy displays the victory of

virtue over vice. Its primary purpose is the moral reformation of society. The

famous plays written by Steele are The Funeral, The Tender Husband and The

Lying Lover.
 He presents the fine heroes; his female characters are a source of "pure

delight" and "guiltless joy". For Steele love is neither a game of wit nor physical

appetite to be fulfilled, but an exalted emotion. Dialogues appear to be quite

artificial and it seems as though characters are expressing themselves through

long speeches. The realm of intellectual laughter is replaced by a realm of

emotion.

Richard Brinsely Sheridan revolted against sentimental comedy. He

revived the sparkling wit and elegance of Restoration comedy, purifying it of its

immoralities. In other words, he strove to reestablish the old traditions. He

triumphantly fabricated a delightful and romantic atmosphere akin to

Shakespearian comedies. Like Jonson, he portrays vivid characters who are

provided a pleasant and romantic environment. Moreover, his plays are void of

depth and contemporary interpretation of human nature.

His comedies have a jovial atmosphere without serious purpose. The only

moral they have is that, the most admirable way of living is to be generous and

open-hearted. He may be called the heir of Congreve. He amalgamated realism

with genial romantic atmosphere.

After Shakespeare, drama could not maintain its glory. The art of dramatic

composition suffered a decline. However, in the nineteenth century, the plays of

Ibsen gave a new direction to dramatic art. Under the influence of Ibsenism,

Schopenhaur and psychological investigation of Freud, the ordinary human life

was treated by Shaw in a revolutionary manner. This paved the way for the drama
..
of ideas.

In the Twentieth Century scenario, Shaw is the specimen of excellence

and the greatest practitioner of the Comedy of Ideas. 'He deals with the

contemporary issues in his plays. He introduces long prefaces in order to explain

the theme of his plays and the nature of his characters. He tries to probe reality

concealed behind external phenomena. Much influenced by the realistic drama

pioneered by T.W. Robertson, he was the greatest exponent of realism. So he

highlighted his message with his realistic attitude.

In contrast to his predecessors, Shaw employs the medium of drama as a

science. Neglecting the role of imagination, which is the backbone of all arts, he

propagates his fond theories. He uses drama.= a vehicle for presenting his

philosophies. In his plays, there is neither powerhl characterization nor much

dramatic action of the traditional sort. Generally his characters are mere

mouthpieces. There is less organic unity and sequential succession of events. His

plays are devoted to propagating his fond philosophies or iconoclastic views.

Nevertheless, Shaw ranks next to Shakespeare in the history of English

drama. His shortcomings notwithstanding, Shaw retrieved English drama from its

decline position after Shakespeare. He put a stamp of realism on this art by

focusing on the contemporary issues. This is evident from what he says himself.

The play, according to him, is "a moral, instructive, suggestive comedy of

 modem society, guaranteed correct in philosophic and economic detail, and

unactably independent of theatrical consideration^".'^ In brief, Shaw viewed

..
drama as a means to provide sugarcoated pill to the ailing society.
'<+
Endnotes

'Arthur Ganz, George Bernard Show (np: The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1983), p.55.

Allardyce Nicoll, British Drama (np: George G. Harrap and Co. Ltd., 1925). p.123.

HB. Charlton, Shakespearean Comedy (London: Methuen and Co., 1984), p.278.

'Ibid., p.278.
'lbid., p.283.
Ibid., p.286.

' Ibid., p.289.

K. Venkata Reddy, Ben Jonson: His Dramatic Art (New Delhi: Prestige Books, 1994).
p.29.

Quoted by Reddy, p.20.

lo Reddy, p.79.

Ibid., p.221.

l3 Bonamy Dobree, Restoration Comedy 1660-1720. (London: Oxford University Press),

p.35.

I' ~ i c h o l a sGrene, Bernard Show: A Critical View (Hong Kong: Macmillan Press. 1987).
p.53.
 Shaw as an Iconoclast

In the preceding chapter it has been attempted to trace a brief survey of dramatic

scene before Shaw. Now it would be in the fitness of things to discuss Shaw as an

iconoclast, who struck a new note as a modem dramatist.

Shaw is renowned for his iconoclasm -rejecting dogmatism and adopting

scepticism. Colin Wilson explained Shaw as an iconoclast thus: " ... Shaw
achieved fame as an iconoclast, an enemy of convention and hypocrisy, an

advocate of social reform and not as a philosopher with a theory of evolution".'

His anti -conventional nature is also clear from this statement: "I never gave up

an old belief without feeling inclined to give three cheers and jump into air".2

After trying many platforms, he found the stage as the fittest platform in

the world for achieving his evolutionary purpose of modifying and reforming

London. He used theatre for the communication of truth and emphasized the two

essentials which made drama vital: actual human circumstances and the craft of

theatre. He devised a dramatic art that combined aestheticism and didacticism

simultaneously. He was the first to open the windows of English theatre to a fresh

and vivifying current of ideas.

 Employing the weapon of laughter, he has warred against the many follies

and abuses of prevailing institutions. As a destroyer of evil, Shaw finds the

solution in turning the social set up topsy-turvy. He himself proclaims:

I n my own activities as a playwright ... I tried slum -

landlordism, doctrinaire, Free Love (pseudo - Ibsenism),
prostitution, militarism, marriage, history, current politics,
natural Christianity, national and individual character,
paradoxes o f conventional sociecy, husband - hunting,
questions o f conscience, professional delusions and impostures,
all worked into a series of comedies o f manners in the classical
3
fashion.

Now concerning the iconoclasm of Shaw, it is important to note that he is

not a born anti-conventional. Behind this transfiguration, there are some specific

causes. Actually the personality of an individual is shaped by the circumstances

of his life. A mind starts developing from the childhood. Every event, social set-

up, social interaction and culture, colours the mind and helps in its development.

This is true of Shaw as well. His iconoclasm is the consequence of many

untoward circumstances of his life which gradually made inroads into his

impressionable mind. His conversion to iconoclasm was, therefore, a slow

process.

The first and foremost influence is that of his family. Shaw's father was

economically a collapsed man. Though good-natured, he was weak and rash. His

addiction to alcohol, which led to his financial stringency, was the cause of his

strained family relations. In the same way, Shaw's mother, due to her strict

upbringing of the children, was less affectionate with them. His father being
responsibility of earning the livelihood for the family. Consequently Shaw spent

his childhood in poverty and neglect. He could not even get his basic schooling.

Because of this, he developed his detestation against poverty, the basic cause of

all evils.

Shaw's mother was thus a courageous woman. After shifting to London,

she supported the family by giving music lessons. His anti-conventional view of

woman may, therefore, be attributed to the influence of his mother. In this

cotuiection Sally Peters says:

But it was his mother's assertion o f female power and her

defiance of assigned female roles conserning sexuality,
respectability, and career fulfillment that most affected haw.^

The impact of his mother is further evident from the fact that: ". .. he not
only idolised his mother but that all the women in his plays from Candida on are

mother figures". The environment of Shaw's family was also conducive to the

promotion of his iconoclasm. This is evident from his confession that "in our

family, we did not bother about conventionalities or sentimenta~ities".~

As already discussed, Shaw's father was careless about his economic

responsibility as the head of the family. He did not, therefore, enjoy the status of

father. Instead of him, another male figure, Lee, a musician, was prominent in his

family. Though not a family member, he was a dominant figure in Shaw's

household. It was Lee who indirectly supported the Shaw's family. Shaw's

mother learnt the art of singing from Lee and later she used music to meet the

financial requirements. This being so, Shaw is more fascinated by the personality
of Lee. Therefore, the development of Shaw's concept of intellectual man,

considered a perfect breadwinner by the mother woman for her children, in the

iconoclastic philosophy of marriage, can be, in other words, impact of Lee,

besides other influences. This argument can be proved by Shaw's affirmation

about Lee: "he was a man of authentic genius".7

In addition, Shaw's anti-conventionalism owes to the revolutionary

change in the social complexion of the Victorian age. The Darwinian theory of

Evolution shook the foundation of religious belief of the people with regard to the

divine creation of man. The people were, therefore, in doubt whether man is an

incidental by-product of the series of variation, as held by Darwin, or he was

created by God. This gradually led to the erosion of people's belief in orthodox

Christianity. Moreover, the Victorian society became materialistic in the wake of

Industrial Revolution. It brought about moral degeneration in every walk of life.

The old values were set aside and there emerged a new code of life based on self-

interest and utilitarianism. Born in such a religious climate and changing moral

values, Shaw could not remain unaffected by them. His mental make-up was

coloured by the prevailing spirit of the time.

Broadly speaking, there are two factors which are responsible for the

weakening of a person's commitment to conventions and values of his society.

First, it is due to the social and economic factors; and, secondly, it is due to the

social interaction. The social components include poverty, inequality etc. A

person who suffers from poverty and economic injustice will revolt against the
society and look for a platform which can save him from deprivation, discontent

and hstration.

This holds good in the case of Shaw as well. Being unsatisfied with the

social order of his time, he was looking for a platform from where he could fight

economic injustice, and exploitation. Although, there were many socialistic

movements opposing the surviving social order, Shaw joined the Fabian Society

in 1884. He remained one of the most active members of that society. He was an

ardent believer in socialism and wanted to purge it of the flattering myths and

sentimentalism that were destroying its true image.

Shaw's social interaction with the intellectuals of his time also contributed

to the shaping of his attitude and mental outlook. As Arthur Ganz says: "Shaw's

ideas ... suggest his relation to the intellectual currents of his age ...".

The first influential person is Henry George, whose Progress and Poverty

directed Shaw's attention towards economics in 1882. In his book, he raises the

problem of unequal distribution of wealth. He suggests that landowners,.who

made unfair profit out of rent, should be taxed. This would be helpful in universal

prosperity and well-being of the people. Shaw's indebtedness to George is

evident from what he says: "The importance of economic basis dawned on me"

due to Henry George. It is the study of George's book Progress and Poverty

which paved his way for socialism.

 Shaw was also deeply influenced by Marx in the beginning, who held that

"the value of commodity is the amount of labour that went into it"." This will

lead to competition which would in turn drop the price to the normal actual

labour value. In the capitalistic economy, on the other hand, there is exploitation

of workers. The capitalists reduce the number of workers and increase the

working hours. Consequently, they have to work longer hours to earn their living.

The invention of machines further affected their economic lot. This led to the

downsizing of workers which added to their economic hardship. The upshot of

this was the conflict between the capitalists and the workers. Marx was not

opposed to the introduction of machine, but he was of the view that it should not

be used to render the workers unemployed. The employers and the employees

should cooperate with each other and then there can be economic prosperity for

both of them.

Subsequently, Shaw realized that Marx's labour theory of value was not

practicable for society. For he believed that value is directly proportional to the

desire of the consumer.

It was Jevon, another economist, whose theory influenced the mind of

Shaw and he developed the opposite theory of value. According to him, the value

of a commodity is determined by its 'demand'. In addition, the 'law of economic

rent' by Ricardo, provided Shaw more knowledge about economics. According to

'the law of economic rent', the landowners lend their lands on rent and get 'least

profit' without working. This is 'surplus' which is in fact the unearned money
making the rich more rich. In this way, the rich exploit the poor. In the eyes of

Shaw, this is injustice and the remedy he found in the establishment of socialism.

It is then evident that Shaw is in favour of communism rather than

capitalism. He thinks that "Capitalistic civilization is not only responsible for

disease which it vainly tries to cure and crime which it punishes with disastrous

effects, but it has also other ways of spoiling human life. It has invented-war,

which is the most terrible of all human inventions'.." Being a socialist, Shaw is

of the opinion that political system is a 'branch' of economic system. The

improvement in economic system will automatically create an advancement in

political system. However, with the passage of time, the subsisting political

environment converts Shaw's views. Shaw begins to view communism wearing

the mask of capitalism because it remained unsuccessful in establishing an

exploitation-ffee society. The communists were also dictators in practice .and

power was being misused in their hands. Thus for Shaw, communism as well as

capitalism is not at all desirable or worth aspiring for. As he asserts about

capitalism that "Not only our judiciary but also our political organizations have

been cormpted by vicious capitalistic system of ~ovemment".l*

All this led him to construct an iconoclastic political economic theory

apart fiom existing capitalism and communism. He dealt with idleness and

unequal distribution of wealth very seriously. He raised the voice against the idle

rich who feed themselves upon the hard work of the poor workers like parasites.
Shaw denounced the idea of uneven distribution of income for creating classless

society.

According to him, better society can only be constructed by abolishing

inequality of income. This will also directly affect men by raising their level to

supermen. He considers poverty as the source of all evil in social institutions like

marriage, property, family and even the organizations of charity and religion.

In Major Barbara, Shaw depicts the problem of poverty due to capitalism.

He says: "society is dependent on rich capitalists like Lazarus and Undershaft and

how absurd it is to talk of religion and independence until it can shake off the

shackles of ~a~italism"."

As Shaw's belief in existing 'political machinery' weakens, his belief in

socialism is also enfeebled. It creates a blank in his mind, later to be filled by his

religion of 'Life Force'. This religion also strengthens his belief in socialism. In

other words, his doctrine of 'Life Force' is dependent upon socialism.

Quoted by Arthur Ganz:

Claiming that socialism is not being realised because 'the work

is beyond the political capacity of the human animal as he
exists to day' and that to 'improve the nation' by breeding the
superman 'we must trust to nature: that is, to the fancies of our
males and females', Shaw says that income must be equalized
as the only way to abolish class and thus 'make the whole
community intermarriageable'. "

The above statement also clarifies the link between Shaw's political

economy and his doctrine of 'Life Force',

 Shaw derives his religious theory, containing the idea of superman, under

the impact of a number of philosophers like Bergson, Nietzsche, Butler,

Schopenhauer etc. His new philosophy was founded on natural and scientific

history. It was a negation of the orthodox religion of his forefathers.

Shaw nullifies the Darwinian theory of natural selection because the

evolution, according to it, was thoroughly without 'vital impulse'. In addition, it

was founded on the principle of the 'survival of the fittest'. Shaw considers

Darwinian theory of Evolution a mindless mechanism without spiritualism and

meaning. As Samuel Butler says that Darwin had "banished mind from the

universe".15

In presenting his theory of Creative Evolution, Shaw is greatly obliged to

Lamarck and Butler. It is Butler's anti-Darwinism which considerably influenced

Shaw. Instead of Darwin, Butler accepted Lamarckian hypothesis. Larnarck

posited that modification in the circumstances changed the needs of organism;

this generated structural transformation due to alteration in habits and 'use and

disuse of specific organs'. The point of difference between Lamarck and Darwin

is that the latter stresses that the cause of change is outer circumstances. While

Lamarck suggests that will is the important source of transformation in living

being according to the variation in environment. Though, both for Lamarck and

Butler, purpose, will and effort are essentials for evolution in species, Lamarck

believes that life starts from dead matter, while for Butler life originates from

unorganized world.
 What Shaw adopted from Butler is his faith in will and effort as main

factors in Creative Evolution. So far as the newly adopted qualities are

concerned, Butler argued that acquired characteristics were transmitted to

descendants by unconscious memory. This idea again inspired Shaw in the

development of his evolutionary process. As Shaw himself wrote in the preface to

Back to Methuselah:

You are alive; and you want to be more alive. You want an
extension of consciousness and of power. You want,
consequently, additional organs: that is, additional habits. You
get them because you want them badly enough to keep trying
for Ulem until they come. Nobody knows how: no bod knows
why: all we know is that the thing actually takes place.ti'

Besides Butler, Shaw takes support in his idea of will from Schopenhauer

who thinks that will is the "true motive power in the world"." But

Schopenhauer's notion is pessimistic. Because he considers that will liberates

life, full of demands and desires, in death. So Schopenhauer'iwill has its ultimate

end in death.

_- So it is Henri Bergson, a French thinker, from whom Shaw borrowed the

term 'Creative Evolution' for his religious theory of Life Force. The idea of
--
Bergson like Butler, that 'life may overcome death'I8 is also shared by Shaw.
._LC

Nietzsche, a Geman philosopher, also exercised his influence on Shaw,

specially in respect of the conception of superman. However they differ on the

point of creation of superman. Nietzsche perceives supernlan as a 'personal

efflorescence' l9 - accidental elevation like ape to man and similarly from man to
superman. In contrast to him, Shaw's superman evolves through a procedure, that

is, from 'Life Force'. Shaw is of the view that best men and women come close

together through the force of Creative Evolution, and thus superman is created.

Another major influence on Shaw is that of Ibsen. In Ibsen, Shaw

recognized a thinker of extraordinary penetration, a moralist of immense

influence and a philosopher going to the roots of those very questions, the

solutions of which he passionately craved all his life. To Shaw the Ibsenian plays

represent the struggle for intellectual and moral emancipation; a revolt against the

-
machine made morality of our hypocritical age.

Shaw had great detestations for all the orthodoxies and respectabilities,

and made a mockery of false ideals espoused by society. Driven by the same free

spirit, he had professed socialism and zealously fought for equal opportunity, for

social justice, for women's fieedom, for liberty of thought, of action and of

conscience. Like Ibsen Shaw too believed that the really effective progressive

forces of the moment were the revolt of the working class against economic
..
exploitation and of the women against idealistic slavery.

Shaw postulated the drama as the natural agent for advanced ideas,

constantly challenging with Ibsen the conventional truth which is in a fair way to

become a lie. He found the contemporary English drama lamentably dated in

ethics and philosophy. Shaw and Ibsen were not satisfied with plays being

produced on the English stage because they failed to promote the set of moral and
ethical values. The true prophet of the drama of future speaks in these significant

words:

It is an instinct with me personally to attack every idea which

has been full grown for ten years, especially if it claims to be
the foundation of all human society. I am prepared to back
human society against any idea, positive or negative, that can be
brought into the field against it; ... and I believe that when we
begin to produce a genuine national drama, this apparently
anarchic force, the mother of higher law and human order, will
underline it and that the public will lose all patience with the
conventional collapse which serves for the last acts to the
serious dramas of today.20

Shaw single-mindedly assumed the onus of advancing the mission of

Ibsen and was, therefore, ready to welcome any original and genuine sign of an

Ibsenite approach in English drama. Shaw was fully conscious of Ibsen's unique

achievement, which was, according to Shaw, "to proffer a ,morality which was

original all through".2'

In short, Shaw struggled his whole life to bring a radical change in the

social system of society. For this purpose he thinks that evolution of man into

superman through 'Life Force' is a necessity. Shaw minutely observed the

injustices in different institutions and boldly depicted the harsh realities in his

plays. He rejected the prevailing conventions and propounded his own

iconoclastic theories. In Man and Superman Shaw says, in the. words of Tanner:

I have become a reformer and like all reformers and iconoclast,

1 no longer break cucumber frames and burn glass bushes. I
shatter creeds and demolish ideals. 22

Devendra Kumar comments very beautifidly about the iconoclasm of

Shaw thus:
 He crusaded against the smug beliefs of his time and fought for
ideas many of which were unacceptable to his contemporaries.
He has been described by some critics as an anaethoma to the
smug world of respectability.23

In short, Shaw is an anti-romantic, an iconoclast who shatters all

hypocrisy and illusions by the battering rod of truth.

 Endnotes

' Colin Wilson, Bernard Shaw A Remsessmenr (London: Hutchinson and Co. Ltd.. 1969).
p.148.
Quoted by Katherine K. Kelly in "Imprinting the Stage: Shaw and the publishing trade,
1883-1903" in The Cambridge Companion to George Bernard Shaw ed. Christopher lnnes
(United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p.32.
Wilson, p.101.
'Quoted by Sally Peters in "Shaw's life: a feminist in spite of himself' in The Cambridge
Companion ro George Bernard Shaw, p.6.
-'t,4
I \

I Wilson, p.28.

rJ lbid., p.4.
1
(\
' Ibid., p.14.
'Arthur Ganz, George Bernard Shaw (London and Basingstoke: The Macmillan Press Ltd.,
1983), p.27.
Wilson, p.56.
la Ibid., p.62.
I' S.C. Sen Gupta, The Art ofBernardShaw (London: Oxford University Press, 1936), p.38.
l2 lbid., p.36.
I' Ibid., p.123.
l4 Quoted by Ganz, p.38.
Islbid., p.42.

" Ganz, p.48.

" Ibid., p.50.
l9Ibid., p.51.
Archibald Henderson, Bernard Show; Playboy and Prophet (Appleton and Co., 1932),
p.340.
21 A.C. Ward, Bernard Shrnv (London: Longmans, Green & Co.. Ltd.. 1950), p.9.
22 Devendra Kumar Singh, The Idea of the Supennun in The Plays of G.B. Shaw (New Delhi:
Atlantic Publishers and Distributors., 1994). p.12.
lbid., pp.8-9.
CHAPTER 3

Shavian Philosophy of Marriage and Sex

Shaw's iconoclasm has been discussed at some length in the preceding chapter.

Now it remains to examine his philosophy of marriage and sex with special

reference to Man and Superman and Arms and the Man.

Shaw breaks away from the traditional concept of marriage and sex.

Traditionally marriage is considered a sacred bond between man and womah for

the perpetuation of human generation. But "Shaw has made a naked

demonstration of his hatred for the institution of marriage because in his opinion

the present system of marriage does not suit the needs of evolution".'

He smashes the elements of traditional marriage: romance, love and

respectability. He considers love as a tyranny which is 'really empty of

subst.ance' and is really based on a 'pious fraud'. He demonstrates this in his play

Candida in which Morell is the paragon of 'conventional morality'. He appears to

be truthful and loyal in his love for his wife, Candida. But in reality he has a

relationship with his private secretary, Miss Proxy. Though.their so-called legal

marriage is considered a successful one, in reality it is based on fraud. So Shaw is

against this marital love and romance. In the collection of prefaces, Shaw openly

denounces the legal bond of marriage thus:

 If marriage cannot be made to produce something better than
we are, marriage will have to go or the nation will have to go. 2

Therefore, marriage in his view is a "legalized prostitution" devoid of love

and romance. In his plays, the heroines do not surrender to romantic fools. As

they are not likely to prove good husbands, they will not fulfil the basic purpose

of nature.

In fact, in the Shavian terminology, marriage is something more than a

mere personal affair. Its social implications are far-reaching and significant.

Marriage has its essential purpose which is the creation of superman. His birth

will be no mere accident, but the result of a carefully planned eugenic breeding.

Shaw says:

The pretence that women do not take the initiative is pan of the
farce. Why, the whole world is strewn with snares, traps, gins,
and pitfalls for the capture of men by women. Give women the
vote, and in five years there will be a crushing tax on
bachelors(p.l9).'

Shaw invites his reader's attention to the essential function of marriage,

that is, procreation of better race. He is against the conventional marriage as is

'developed' by the society but without any alteration and modification in it. It is a

purposeless alliance, only a means 'to make merriment'. Shaw imparts greater

importance to eugenics. 'Reason' for Shaw is the most important factor which

directs man to visualize the truth and helps in the evolutionary process. So Shaw

believes in the harmony of intellectual man and intellectual woman. An ignorant

and dull couple will only give birth to an ignorant individual. In the words of
Devendra, "Ignorance is poison between a male and a female and obstructs the

growth of the superman".3 Raina and Ann do not many the innocent romantics as

they cannot help in the birth of super race.

Though Shaw believes that combination of two intelligent and "reason"

dominated persons makes it easy to give birth to a superman. According to him,

political, social and economic institutions should provide a favourable chance to

people by establishing complete liberty and parity. In fact these factors confirm

the union of two intellectuals. So Shaw advocates and stresses the need of

revolution, not only in the field of marriage but also in the fields of economics,

politics, and justice. It will discourage the rich, who control the fields of

economics, politics and justice to manipulate the power upon the weak and poor

person. As Devendra says about Shaw:

He desired to change the static character o f our living and to

make it dynamic and vital in order to release man into a greater
awareness o f life's purpose ... He propounds the concept of
superman to meet the challenge of the contemporary problems of
the human life by readjusting the basic orientation of existence.'

Shaw also disagrees with the Greek thought that man is a puppet in the

hands of fate. Contrary to this, he maintains that man has a power to control his

own destiny. He M e r says that it is Life-Force which possesses man and

compels him to progress towards evolution. So "Shaw accepted the institution of

marriage, though not ungmdgingly as one of the tools of Life-Force."

M a n andSuperman (England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1946). This and all subsequent references
in parenthesis are from this edition of the play.
 Moreover, Shaw holds that for the procreation, sex is fundamental. This

instinct, according to him, is momentary, intense and meant for creation. Sex is a

great reality, in other words, a gateway to creation. So Shaw insists that married

people should not pose that they many out of deep. emotions of love

respectability, romance and sentimentality. He deems all this untrue. In fact, these

values are hindrances in the 'creative purpose of sex'. More pointedly,

sex should be viewed apart from all these unreal associations as

a thing-in-itself, as the fundamental instinct in life which ought
to be satisfied, not because it is romantic and pleasurable, but
because it is real and evolutionary. 6

Shaw's philosophy of marriage and sex is expressed in his many plays like

Candida, Getting Married, Pilanderer, Man and Superman, Arms and the Man

etc. In Arms and the Man Shaw has tried to expose the hollowness of romantic

ideals in marriage. Similarly in Man and Superman, Shaw has fully explained his

philosophy of marriage and sex. According to A.M. Gibbs,

In Arms and the Man and Man andSupermon comic structure is

affected by Shaw's critical treatment of nineteenth-century
romantic stereotypes. In these two plays male characters who,
in different ways, reflect nineteenth-century romantic ideals
take second place in the affections of the leading female
characters to the distinctively Shavian heroes, Bluntschli and
Tanner; and the plots of the plays develop in accordance with a
shifting of sympathies from one kind of romantic ideal to
an~ther.~
Arms and the Man'

In Arms and the Man Shaw has cast the light of his brilliant common

sense on the relationship of sexes along with the theme of war. He has mocked

the romantic love. Since it is Shaw's one of the early plays, he does not fully

define his philosophy of marriage and sex as in Man and Superman. Yet even in

this play Shaw has sketched the vainness of romance, love and sentimentality.

In his plays, Shaw has presented complete rejection of traditions. As

Barbara Below Watson says about the plays of Shaw:

Both thought and character in the Shavian drama proclaim the

possibility of radical change, for they defy law itself, not just
some abuse of the law. They defy custom itself, not just some
perversion of custom. ...Criminality, in Shaw, is an intellectual
thing. The illusions that harm you are the allusions you believe,
'
and our laws are a codification of our illusions."

Similarly, in Shaw's plays, instead of sentimentality, instinct rules. In the

beginning of the play Shaw presents romantic love in the form of Raina's 'higher

love' for Sergius. However both are disillusioned, when instinct dominates and

makes sentimentality valueless. So Raina does not surrender to the romantic fool

Sergius while she chases Bluntschli. According to Nicholas Grene:

Bluntschli's real romanticism, as distinct from Sergius's pose,

is his restlessness, his willingness to follow instinct and
impulse. In this he is, presumably one of the first of Shaw's
heroes of the Life ~ o r c e ?

'All textual references in parenthesis are from The Complete Plays of BernardShmv (Great
Britain: Odhams Pres Limited. n.d.).
 Shaw attacks the institution of marriage because it needs some

modifications. After some modifications, it will be a meeting ground of male and

female, providing opportunity to fulfil the sexual desires for procreation.

Now the necessary modifications, according to him, fire that it should not

follow the conventional at values like respectability, romance, sentimentality and

nobility. Because these are hurdles in the union of two people and then in the

creation. Similarly, only two intellects should marry. Shaw wants to cure this

ailing society. And this can only be done, in his view, with the creation of

superman. Therefore, modification is essential in the marriage institution.

In Arms and the Man, there are two couples: Raina and Bluntschli and

Sergius and Louka. What Shaw wants to show is the intellectual superiority of the

first couple over the other. In doing so, he convincingly delineates his own

theory.

In the beginning Raina follows values dictated by her mother and society.

She gets engaged to Sergius - a follower of romantic notions. They both are the

believers of the romantic conception of love. To quote Raina: "[looking up at the

picture] Oh, I shall never be unworthy of you any more, my soul's hero: never,

never, never. ... My hero! My hero!"(p.94). Such an utterance of Raina testifies

her romantic view of love.

Then she meets Bluntschli, a fugitive. He holds realistic views about life

because he looks at Sergius' charge from the realistic point of view under the
very nose of Raina. As it is revealed from the following exchange between

Bluntschli and Raina:

Blunuchli: "... Perhaps I'm quite wrong, you know: no

doubt I am. Most likely he had got wind of the
cartridge business somehow, and knew it was
a safe job,

Raina: That is to say, he was a pretender and a

coward! You did not dare say that
before"(p.98).

Being a soldier Bluntschli's act of running away from battlefield is an

anti-conventional attitude. Instead of fighting in war and sacrificing his life he

deems it necessary to preserve it. So to save his life he runs away from the

battlefield. From the romantic point of view this is an act of cowardice. But in

Bluntschli's view, he does this because he is realistic and an instinct follower.

That is why he used to keep chocolates in place of cartridges because in his

opinion, "what use are cartridges in battle? I always cany chocolate instead: ..."

.
(p.97). This he does because for him food is more important. And when there will

be nothing to eat, he will eat chocolate to keep himself alive.

Similarly, the heroine of the play, Raina, is another realistic character,

delineated by Shaw. Though living in conventional, idealistic and romantic

society, she is compelled to live according to the romantic notion held by her

orthodox mother. But she follows the dictates of her instinct. She saves the life of

Bluntschli by hiding him in her room despite the fact that he is a fugitive and an

enemy. This she does, not because she is kind-hearted but because she is realistic

as well. She does not even mind that Bluntschli criticizes her fianci (Sergius)
while giving his view about the ideal war hero and saves his life. As Raina-says:

"They re sure to see you: it's bright moonlight. I'll save you" (p.99).

However, at the arrival of Sergius from war, she hides from him this

episode. She praises her hero. In the same way Sergius confesses his "higher

love" for Raina. The following exchange brings out their romantic notion of love:

Sergius:Dearest: all my deeds have been yours. You inspired

me. I have gone through the war like a knight in a
tournament with his lady looking down at him!

Raina: And you have never been absent from my thoughts for
a moment. [very solemnly] Sergius: I think we two
have found the higher love. When I think of you, I feel
that I could never do a base deed, or think an-ignoble
thought (p.105).

After making love with Raina and assuring his love to her, he too makes

amorous advances towards Louka - a maidservant. This exposes that Sergius is

also suppressing his instinct and following idealistic notions of society. He says:

...what would Sergius, the hero of Slivnitza, say if he saw me

now? What would Sergius, the apostle of the higher love, say if
he saw me now? What would the half dozen Sergiuses who
keep popping in and out of this handsome figure of mine say if
they caught us here? (p.106).

These lines clearly indicate that he obeys his instinct when he is alone. In other

words, Shaw openly displays that romantic love is nothing but words and merely

a pretension.

One noticeable thing is Louka's opportunities, which she hands over

Sergius to make love to her. She pursues him because he is her best match. She

obeys her instinct. She does not deceive herself like Raina and Sergius. To show
Sergius a reality and for capturing him in her trap, Louka tells Sergius about

Bluntschli and makes him jealous:

Louka: [avoiding him]No: I dont want your kisses. Gentlefolk

are all alike: you making love to me behind Miss Raina's back;
and she doing the same behind yours (p. 106).

This reveals that she is a realistic girl and boldly criticizes the "Gentle folk" who

are very conventional. But all their conventionalities are hollow, merely a drama.

At another place she says:

... And I tell you that if that gentleman ever comes here again,
Miss Raina will many him, whether he likes it or not. I know
the difference between the sort of manner you and she put on
before one another and the real manner (p.107).

Her realism is also evident from the her following remarks:

... You know how to hurt with your tongue as well as with your
hands. But I dont care, now I ve found out that whatever clay
I'm made of, you re made of the same. As for her, she's a liar;
and her fine airs are a cheat; and I'm worth six of her (p.107).

Louka is also Shaw's realistic character like Bluntschli. But she belongs to

a lower class. She tries to disillusion Sergius and encourages him to accept

reality. Though she is a maid-servant, she wants to many Sergius who is from

upper class. She prefers Sergius to Nicola who is only a servant and less

intelligent than Sergius.

Shaw's technique of describing two couples in contrast brings forth the

fact how respectability, nobility and romance stand in the way of the matrimonial

alliance of two intellectuals. Louka finds Sergius her match. It is her instinct and
intellect which encourages her to trap Sergius. In the same way, Raina, considers

Bluntschli a perfect man who impresses her instinct.

Louka belongs to the lower class while Sergius to the upper class. In the

same way, Raina is from upper class. In the beginning of the play, she does not

know that Bluntschli is the son of a rich hotelier, even then she prefers that

fugitive to a war hero. She finds him a perfect match for her. In the end, it is

disclosed that he is a wealthy man. As Nicholas Grene says: .-

... we are intended to see in Raina's feeling for her 'chocolate -

cream soldier' something more than a schoolgirl crush, which
was in fact all her love for Sergius was. 10

It was Catherine, Raina's mother, who preaches honesty but practises hypocrisy.
..

She urges Raina to worship Sergius. Raina says: "Oh, I know Sergius is your pet.

I sometimes wish you could marry him instead of me. You would just suit him.

You would pet him, and spoil him and mothers him to perfection" (p. 108).

Her argument depicts her suppressed desires against conventions and surprises

her mother. As Raina further says:

[capriciously: halfto herselfl I always feel a longing to do or

say something dreadful to him - to shock his propriety - to
scandalize the five senses out of him. ... I dont care whether he
finds out about the chocolate cream soldier or not. I half hope
he may (p.108).

This remark too clarifies the change in her attitude. Now she has started looking

at things realistically. She also sees Sergius flirting with Louka and asks him

"Have you been flirting with Louka?" Sergius replies: "[hastily]No, no. How can
you think such a thing?"(p.l07). But Sergius' answer does not satisfy her. This

act of Sergius breaks through the romantic fortress of Raina.

Nevertheless, when Raina meets Bluntschli for the second time, she poses

to be a girl of high ideals. She explains to him that her relationship with Sergius

is based on noble and high sentiments.

Please be serious, Captain Bluntschli. Can you not realize what

it is to me to deceive him? 1 want to be quite perfect with
Sergius: no meanness, no smallness, no deceit. My relation to
him is the one really beautiful and noble part of my life. I hope
you can understand that (p.112).

Apparently these lines show sincere love but in reality all these are mere words

without substance.

As Raina tells a lie to save the life of Bluntschli so when he comes for the

second time to return the coat, she again tells a lie to hide him from Sergius and

her father. She does all this in front of Bluntschli and then, she tries to convince

him that she is very moral and she has "told only two lies" in her whole life. So

he should be thankful to her that she has saved his life and disgraced her morality.

She defends herself thus:

... you were not surprised to hear me lie. To you it was

something I probably did every day! every hour!! That is how
men think of women (p.113).

Though she is trying to pose nobility and idealism but she remains unsuccessful

in drawing the curtain over her reality. Because Bluntschli is "quite a straight

forward man"(p.113). He is well aware of the difference between reality and

appearance. As he says to Raina. "I cant help it. When you strike that noble
attitude and speak in that thrilling voice, I admire you; but I find it impossible to

believe a single word you say"(p.113). He tells her that he has found her out

because of instinct. As he says: "Instinct, dear young lady. Instinct, and

experience of the world" @. 113).

Then she confesses the truth and accepts in f?ont of him that she has

always adopted the pose of nobility and of sentiment in front of every one but he

is the first man who has dogmatically rehsed to believe in her pretensions. As

Raina says:

I mean the noble attitude and the thrilling voice. [They laugh
together]. I did it when I was a tiny child to my nurse. She
believed in it. I do it before my parents. They believe in it. I do
it before Sergius. He believes in it (p.113).

So it is Bluntschli who encourages Raina to face reality. And his realistic

attitude appeals to her more. In the same way, it is Louka'who makes Sergius

realize that social distinctions do not matter and that human beings should be

considered human beings. She convinces him to follow instinct. As she says:

I would marry the man I loved, which no other queen in Europe

has the courage to do. If I loved you, though you would be as
far beneath me as I am beneath y.ou, I would dare to be the
equal of my inferior. Would you dare as much if you loved me?
No: if you felt the beginnings of love for me you would not let
it grow. You would not dare: you would many a rich man's
daughter because you would be afraid of what other people
would say of you (p.116).

This statement gives him incentive and courage, he accepts reality and yields to

his instinct. Consequently he says: " ... I will not be a coward and a trifler. If I

choose to love you, I dare many you, in spite of all Bulgaria" (p.117).
 When Sergius and Raina come in contact with Louka and Bluntschli

respectively, their romanticism is washed off and they realize the fallacy of the

views they had cherished. So Sergius comes to know that romantic love does not

exist: "And how ridiculous! Oh, War! War! the dream of patriots and heroes! A

fraud, Bluntschli. A hollow shame, like love" (p.118). His love dreams are

shattered. It has now dawned upon him that romantic conception of love is

unreal, ridiculous and hollow. This is manifest from what Sergius says: "our

romance is shattered. Life's a farce". Bluntschli then says [to Raina,

whimsically] "you see: he's found himself out now" (p. 1 18).

This change in the attitude of Sergius is due to Raina's inclination towards

Bluntschli. Sergius is thus disillusioned of the romantic notion of love.

Therefore, this play delineates Shaw's idea about love and marriage. It is

this thought which develops with the passage of time and ripens in his play Man

andSuperman which reflects his complete theory of marriage and sex.

Man and Superman

Shaw's philosophy of marriage and sex is fully explained in his play Man

and Superman. The central thesis of Shaw is evident from the following lines in

Epistle Dedicatory.

... and my Don Juan is the quarry instead of the hunts - man.
Yet he is a true Don Juan, with a sense of reality that disables
convention, defying to the last the fate which finally overtakes
him. The woman's need of him to enable her to carry an
Nature's most urgent work does not prevail against him until
his resistance gathers her energy to a climax at which she dares
 to throw away her customary exploitations of the conventional
affectionate and dutiful poses, and claim him by natural right
for a purpose that far transcends their mortal personal purposes
(P. 18).

His concept that people prefer their instinct to the prevailing conventions,

is explained in Arms and the Man. However, this view develops fully in Man

and Superman. Shaw believes in Life-Force which unites man and woman. This

union leads to the birth of a superman. Being an advocate of this, Shaw.

denounces all conventionalities, especially relating to marriage and sex.

Traditionally it is believed that woman is pursued by man. To safeguard

the morality, man and woman enter into matrimonial bondage and vow to remain

true to each other through thick and thin. To Shaw this is all snobbery and

affectation, for they actually restrain the voice of their instinct. As Don Juan says:

The great central purpose of breeding the race: ay, breeding it to

heights now deemed superman: that purpose which is now
hidden in a mephitic cloud of love and romance and prudery
and fastidiousness, will break through into clear sunlight as a
purpose no longer to be confused with the gratification of
personal fancies, the impossible realization of boys' and girls'
dreams of bliss, or the need of older people for companionship
or money. The plain-spoken marriage services of the vernacular
Churches will no longer be abbreviated and half suppressed as
indelicate. The sober decency, earnestness, and authority of
their declaration of the real purpose of marriage will be
honoured and accepted, whilst their romantic vowings and
pledging and until -death -do - us - partings and the like will
be expunged as unbearable frivolities (p.160).

Shaw views the man - woman relationship as a biological phenomenon.

He gives more importance to the birth of superman through the phenomenon of

creative Evolution. Therefore he provides purpose to this relationship.

Furthermore, he illustrates that Life-Force first enchants woman as "Vitality in a

woman is a blind fury of creation. She sacrifices herself to it"(p.60). It is because

of this power that woman captures man. Thus both man and woman become the

passive slaves of this force and do whatever this force directs them. As Don Juan

says:

In the sex relation the universal creative energy, of which the

parties are both the helpless agents, overrides and sweeps away
all personal consideration, and dispenses with all personal
relations. The pair may be utter strangers to one another,
speaking different languages, differing in race and color, in age
and disposition, with no bond between them but a possibility of
that fecundity for the sake of which the Life Force throws them
into one another's arms at the exchange o f a glance (p.161).

Shaw considers marriage a blockage in the completion of the purpose of

Life-Force. Conventional marriage is reduced into a meaningless phenomenon. In

conventional marriages, one intellectual can many a fool. This will mar the aim

of creative purpose of Evolution and delay the birth of superman. As Ramsden

was in favour of Ann's marriage with Octavious, a romantic fool instead of

Tanner. But Ann submits to her instinct and being a tool of Life-Force, she traps

Tanner and marries him.

In Shaw's view woman is in quest of a father or a breadwinner for her

children. Woman as a custodian of Life-Force, chooses man to ensure the target

of Life-Force. Man wishes freedom and therefore, he tries to avoid the yoke of

matrimony and runs away. This is evident from the following speech of Don

Juan:

Sexually, Woman is Nature's contrivance for perpetuating its

highest achievement. Sexually. Man is Woman's contrivance
for fulfilling Nature's behest in the most economical way. She
 knows by instinct that far back in the evolutional process she
invented him, differentiated him, created him in order to
produce something bener than the single-sexed process can
produce. Whilst he fulfils the purpose for which she made him,
he is welcome to his dreams, his follies, his ideals, his
heroisms, provided that the keystone of them all is the worship
of woman, of motherhood, of the family, of the hearth (p.147).

To elaborate this theory, Shaw compares the man - woman relationship

with the spider-fly relation in the preface to Man and Superman.

It is assumed that the woman must wait, motionless, until she is

wooed. Nay, she often does wait motionless. That is how the
spider waits for the fly. But the spider spins her web. And if the
fly, like my hero, shews a strength that promises to extricate
him, how swiftly does she abandon her pretence of passiveness,
and openly fling coil after coil about him until he is secured for
ever! (p.20).

From all this it is obvious that it is because of the influence of life-Force

that Bluntschli, Marchbunk and Tanner are selected by Raina, Candida and AM

respectively.

Shaw clearly shows that in the hands of Life-Force, man turns into a

submissive prey to female charm. The creation of man by woman is to

impregnate her. Doubtless man has alone established and enlarged the civilization

without consulting woman, because man does not want to become merely the

instrument of woman's purpose. But woman captures her prey as she permits

man to extol her with his own romantic imagining and after the proclamation of

his love, he is unexpectedly entrapped by her.

In fact, woman's basic requirement is to provoke the sexual desire in man

for the consummation of her purpose, that is, to become a mother of superman.
Shaw liken woman to the queen bee who kills the male after union. As Tanner

says:

... Tavy, if woman could do without our work, and we ate their
children's bread instead of making it, they would kill us as the
spider kills her mate or as the bee kills the drone (p.92).

Shaw makes it clear that biologically the status of woman is primary while

that of man is secondary. Viewing from this standpoint, it is obvious that Shaw

considers marriage as a biological phenomenon. As Gupta rightly says:

Shaw's principal objection to marriage, however, is not that it is

based on false economics but that it rests on false biology. II

As already pointed out, that the aim of Nature is evolution. In Man and

Superman Ann chooses Tanner to marry him but he does not consider himself

appropriate for procreation of the superman and he tried to run away but he is at

last captured by Ann. Shaw lays emphasis on the birth of superman for the

progress of society. He gives importance to man's guiding force - reason. That is

why Tanner and Ann are conducted by reason rather than by emotions. Since Ann

is governed by the principle of wisdom, she refuses to marry Octauvius in spite of

his gentility, respectability and poetic temperament. He lacks the genius

possessed by Tanner. So Shaw views marriage as the means to create superman.

At the end of the play Tanner tells Ann the cause of his submission to her. When

Ann says: "Well, I made a mistake: you do not love me". Tanner replies: [seizing

her in his arms] "It is false. I love you. The Life Force enchants me. I have the

whole world in my arms when I clasp you" (p.205). At another place he says:

"The Life-Force. I am in the grip of the Life Force" (p.203).

 It is then evident that Shaw does not completely deny the role of marriage

in the creation of superman. He accepts the institution of marriage but with some

amendments. He dismisses the romantic notion of love and marriage for it is not
..
directed to the creation of better race. Conventional values of life in any form

have outlived their usefidness. In The Revolutionist's Handbook Shaw says:

To that recurrent catastrophe we shall certainly come again

unless we can have a Democracy of Supermen; and the
production of such a Democracy is the only change that is now
hopeful enough to nerve us to the effort that Revolution
demands (p.228).

Hence conventional values should be replaced by a new set of values. It is only

by adhering to the new scale of values that we can reconstruct the society on a

rational basis.
Endnotes

Devendra Kumar Singh, The Idea of the Superman in the Plays ofG. B. Shmv (New Delhi:
Atlantic publishers and distributors. 1994). p.3.
Quoted by Singh, p.32.
3
Singh, p.38.
4
Ibid., p.79.
' Ibid., p.54
S.C. Sen Gupta, The Art ofBernardShaw (London: Oxford University Press, 1936). p.32.
7
A.M. Gibbs, The Art and Mind of Shmv (Hong Kong: The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1983),
p.35.
*
Fabian Feminist: Bernard Shmv and Woman, ed. Redelle Weintraub (London: the
Pennsylvania State University Press, n.d.), p.1 17.
9
Nicholas Grene, Bernard Show: Critical View (Hong Kong: The Macmillan Press Ltd.,
1984), p.30.
'O Grene, p.30.
" Gupta, p.27.
 CONCLUSION

As a dramatist Shaw's effort is directed to demolish t h e o l r i and conventional

values of life and to propagate his own views about the differ-nt aspects of life.

This being so, he is described as an iconoclast. In chapter two r have attempted to

trace the background of his iconoclasm. Examining the bac-ground it appears

that his iconoclasm owes

- to his own personal experiences o f l It is not based

on sound reason. It is more sentimental rather than convir . ~ c i n g Should

. the
. - -
soldiers follow his advice to carry the 'chocolate cream' insteac 1o f cartridges, the

defeat of the warring countries will be a foregone conclusion. I n the same way if

the purpose of marriage becomes to produce superman, t h e -cry institution of

marriage will lose its significance. For it will be t o o dc-uitl to find an

economically sound and intellectual husband for every woman, i n the absence of

which, according to Shaw, the birth of superman will b e an i-possibility. Shaw

therefore, does not seem to be a very practical thinker.

His iconoclasm is a reaction against the old values o f life which, he thinks,

have failed to deliver the goods. Like many thinkers of h i s t i - - e Shaw is guided
by a more pragmatic and utilitarian approach to life. The roma- ntic views of life

according to him, have outlived their usehlness and therefor-, they should be

eliminated from the scheme of life. Discarding emotion a n d fee- ling from the life

of man, he is virtually reduced to the status of a robot. . .

Shaw, Bernard. The Quintessence oflbsenism. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books., 1986.

Shaw, Bernard. 7 k Complele Ploys ofBemardShaw. London: Odhams Press Ltd., nd.

Wilson, Colin. Bernard Shav. London: Hutchinson and Co. Ltd., 1969.

Weintraub, Rodelle, Ed. Fabian Feminist BernardShaw and Woman. London: The Pennsylvania
State University Press, nd.

Ward, A. C. The Ninereen - Twenties Literature and Ideas in the Post-War Decode. London:
Methuen and Co. Ltd., 1930.

Ward A.C. Twentieth Century Literature The Age of Interrogation 1901-1925. London: Methuen
and Co. Ltd., 1928.