William Thornhill Goes Bananas (Again)

A. Prunila 5A

Q: Discuss the presentation of the theme of social mobility and hierarchy.

Erich Fromm, a German social psychologist, once famously stated that “Greed is a bottomless pit
which exhausts the person in an endless effort to satisfy the need without ever reaching
satisfaction.” In ​The Secret River​, Kate Grenville-award-winning author-illustrates William
Thornhill as a vivid and flawed character who is consumed by said greed and is continuously
controlled by the lust for more wealth, as well as the fear of losing the livelihood he has acquired
since in his impoverished upbringing. The author utilises this character to depict how upwards
social mobility results in the corruption of morality and the loss of perspective, and in contrast,
how specific minorities are unable to ascend in the hierarchy. William’s increasingly hedonistic
tendencies and callous demeanor toward his servants highlight the changes he undergoes through
social ascension which are in turn contrasted with the manner in which he is treated by Captain
Suckling due to the stigmatisation of convicts in New South Wales, providing the readers with
representations of the treatment of both lower and upper classes in a hierarchical society.

In Part Three, the reader is exposed to a gradual warping of William’s mindset from survivalist to
ambivalent (relative to his childhood experiences that is) due to his elevated social status through
his attitudes regarding the acceptance of his application for servants. As William reflects on how
he applied for convict servants he contemplates “Why not? A man had to think on a big scale to
do any good for himself.” (page 170) When Grenville summates Thornhill’s view towards the
possession of other human beings as “Why not?”, the blas​é rhetorical question implies that he
believes that there is no moral invalidity or significance in equating human beings to possessions.
Furthermore, due to the specifically short length of the question, the author suggests that William
no longer acknowledges the complexity of individual humans and now instead sees those beneath
him on the hierarchical ladder as simple as pawns or numbers in a system that he can accumulate
to improve his status. This demonstrates a complete disregard for the value of human life as well
as an utter loss of perspective and appreciation of the quality of his own life which is due to his
constant need to expand his wealth and climb the socioeconomic ladder out of fear of retreating to
poverty. As a consequence, through William Thornhill’s overly indulgent attitudes we as readers
are led to conclude that upwards social mobility results in twisted perspective and morality.

Once William obtains his convict servants, the cruel manner in which he treats Dan presents a
sharp contrast with how personable Thornhill used to be to him when he was living an
impoverished lifestyle and how his elevation in society has distorted his outlook in order to
emphasise how loss of perspective accompanies upward social mobility. William reminds Dan
that “[He] would do good to remember [his manners]” (page 175) as a response to Dan informally
exclaiming that “Wapping New Stairs ain’t the same without our William Thornhill!” The
contrast between the formality and apathy William expresses by ordering Dan to “remember [his
manners]”, and the lighthearted nature of Dan exhibited through the colloquial use of the
vernacular copular verb form of the more formal “isn’t” emphasises the vast difference between
the mannerisms of those in the lower classes and those who are - or who are attempting to seem
like they are - a part of the higher echelons of society. Additionally, because Dan is a former
acquaintance of his, Grenville alludes to a loss of humanity in William as he does not remove the
“gentry” façade he’s concocted with the rise of his social class, not even for an old friend. His
unwavering devotion to maintaining said disdaining façade is significant, for it indicates to the
reader the dramatic shift in the way William converses and composes himself in the presence of
any member of the impoverished class as an attempt to further distinguish himself from his
poverty-stricken past. In both Thornhill’s society and the present day world, the level of education
and civility one possesses is often correlated to their socioeconomic status. Due to being
conditioned to this generalised stereotype, William, Dan, as well as many members of modern
society expect those who speak formally to be part of the higher echelons of society. This is
another reason why William chooses to integrate sophisticated dialect into his own vocabulary.
Essentially, class consciousness motivates societally ascending people such as Thornhill to alter
their speech patterns. Thus, Grenville depicts how William’s detached demeanor toward his
servant is a result of his ascendancy up the social hierarchy which leads to his newly formed
corrupted attitude and morality.

Once William arrives at the wharf, his interaction with Captain Suckling demonstrates that
although William has indeed made strides towards socio economic prosperity, the mere fact that
he was once a convict will likely always affect how he is perceived and treated by the majority of
society. Captain Suckling remarks that “[He] never forget[s] a felon’s face” (page 172) at the first
sight of William Thornhill at the wharf. The use of alliteration in “forgets a felon’s face” draws
out evil connotations through the hissing and whispering sound of the repeated “f” sound. This
emphasises how society not only perceives former convicts to be evil or villainous, but it also
displays how William’s past transgressions will not be forgotten through the hyperbolic “never
forget.” The author brought this to the reader's attention in order to critique the issues in both
early nineteenth century society and present society regarding the stigmatisation of convicts and
prisoners, and how certain minorities such as convicts were and are not given the opportunity to
succeed due to mistakes they have made in the past. In turn, this oppression impedes any
possibility of social mobility for the minority in question. This changes William Thornhill’s
morality for the worse, for he establishes further resentment for his past which in turn further
cultivates his will to achieve economic prosperity due to his unquenchable thirst for monetary
gain. Therefore, through the disheartening interaction with Captain Suckling, it is made evident to
the reader how regardless of William’s progression towards wealth, the felony he once committed
in London will forever tarnish his reputation and prevent him from truly obtaining the status of a
member of the gentry due to the negative preconceptions most people have regarding felons.

To summarise, Kate Grenville uses William and his obsession with financial success and
ownership to demonstrate to the reader how movement up the socioeconomic ladder typically
results in a warped perspective and lack of morality, which is emphasised through William’s
increasingly ambivalent lifestyle and his behaviour towards his servants. The author also
illustrates how specific minorities are disenfranchised and thus unable to experience full upward
social mobility through Captain Suckling’s disdain towards William due to his past as a convict.
Perhaps through these critiques of social mobility, Grenville is suggesting that any attempts made
for the purpose of altering one’s social standing will result in a loss of original identity, and an
unquenchable thirst for wealth and ownership. By establishing that an innate human greed resides
within all of us, and that allowing said greed to control us leads to a corruption of the human
psyche, the author implies that corruption is inevitable and can be interpreted as the normalised
process of “growing up”, and that William Thornhill all along is not battling with a subconscious
antagonistic entity but instead developing his true identity.