Mr.

Know-all – analyze the narrator of the story

Throughout “Mr. Know-all”, the story teller first appears to be so prejudiced against Non-Britons (Mr.
Kelada in particular) but later changes his own perception after realizing positive traits of Mr. Know-all.

I. In the first half of the story, the narrator clearly expresses his racist viewpoint via his
judgements and attitudes towards Mr. Kelada.
- “I was prepared to dislike Max Kelada even before I knew him” just because the
name Kelada doesn’t sound British (“I should have looked upon it with less dismay if
my fellow passenger’s name had been Smith or Brown”). The name even doesn’t sound
a non-white name (the narrator implicates Kelada maybe from Alexandria (Egypt) or
Beirut (Syria) by saying “The Union Jack is an impressive piece of drapery, but when it
is flourished by a gentleman from Alexandria or Beirut, I cannot but feel that it loses
somewhat in dignity”)
- “I did not like the look of it [Mr. Kelada’s luggage]; there were too many labels on the
suitcases, and the wardrobe trunk was too big.” …. “Mr. Kelada’s brushes, ebony with
his monogram in gold, would have been all the better for a scrub.” (Tạm dịch cho ae dễ
hiểu: Bàn chải gỗ mun của gã được khắc chữ bằng vàng lồng vào nhau là thứ tốt nhất để
kì cọ.) Mr. Kelada appears to have a showy character, which is contradictory to the
reserved one, a typical feature of British  another reason that the narrator detests Mr.
Kelada.
- To the story teller, Kelada also shows off his knowledge too much. “He talked of New
York and of San Francisco. He discussed plays, pictures, and politics.” … “He ran
everything. He managed the sweeps, conducted the auctions, collected money for prizes
at the sports, got up quoit and golf matches, organized the concert and arranged the
fancy-dress ball.” Meanwhile, British people dislike those who try to be intellectual. 
that’s why the narrator hates Kelada. Contradiction: Kelada seems to be
knowledgeable and critical (good traits). But He is still hated by the narrator
because the narrator judges him in the eye of a British and within the range of
British culture.
- When Kelada implies that he is a British, the narrator “blinks” in doubt: “Are you
English?”, he asks quite tactlessly. In the narrator’s eyes, Kelada “was short and of a
sturdy build, clean-shaven and dark-skinned, with a fleshy, hooked nose and a very large
lustrous and liquid eyes” (Tạm dịch: Gã Kelada thấp và đậm người, gương mặt cạo râu
nhẵn thín, nước da sẫm màu, mũi to khoằm, đôi mắt rất to, sáng và trong vắt  toàn là
đặc điểm hình thể của ng Á hoặc Phi châu). That’s why the narrator mock Kelada that
“King George has many strange subjects” (Tạm dịch: Vua George có nhiều thần dân thật
kì lạ.) He also believes that “a closer inspection of [Mr.Kelada’s passport] would have
betrayed the fact that Mr. Kelada was born under a bluer sky (ý là tropical country) than
is generally seen in England.”
II. In the second half of the story, the narrator turns out to appreciate Mr. Kelada
- Event: (miêu tả như Thúy là quá ổn r, t xin cop lại để tiện theo dõi)
o As a man who takes his pride seriously, Kelada determines to win the argument about
the genuineness of the pearl. He even willingly bet a hundreds dollar to prove to everyone
that he is indeed an expert on pearl.
 o Nevertheless, when seeing Mrs Ramsay’s “terrified eyes”, he chooses to help Mrs
Ramsay by telling a lie to keep the secret covered, which consequently cause him to “put
up with a good deal of chaff”.
- After this event, the narrator has a positive change in attitude: “At that moment, I did
not entirely dislike Mr. Kelada”. He realizes that Mr. Kelada is not a fool; instead, he is
really sympathetic and kind. Self- confident as he is, Kelada dares to sacrifice his honor
and money to help someone in need.
 This positive change in attitude also proves the humanism of the story. (giá trị nhân
văn của tác phẩm, t ko biết dịch như này đúng chưa?)