Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Oliver Goldsmith
Introduction
In this essay, Goldsmith talks about prejudices which people have
about other people from other countries. They consider their nation
good in every respect and think that other nations are not as great as
theirs. People no longer consider themselves general inhabitants of
the globe, or members of that grand society which comprehends the
whole humankind.
The writer says national bias is infecting our minds and affecting our
behaviour. It makes us obscene, disgusting, and proud of ourselves.
We will love our nation but without prejudice towards other
countries’ people. He says that the essence of faith is just like
superstition and excitement. So we should be the world’s people, not
the resident of a single nation or small community. He prefers the
term “a world citizen” to that of an Englishman, a Frenchman, a
German, a Spaniard, a European or so on.
Summary
The essay is about the narrator‘s encounter with some elderly people
and a conversation about nationalism. He starts off by stating that he
was drinking at a bar and was drawn into a conversation held by a
group of elderly men about political affairs when one of the men
stated that the English were better than the Dutch, the Germans, the
French, and the Spaniards. He praised the English for their bravery,
generosity, mercy and other virtues. When asked for an opinion, the
narrator decided not to talk as he was sure to contradict that
statement while the rest of the group agreed with the man. When
directly asked, the narrator had to speak his thoughts reluctantly. He
could not make such a broad statement about the characteristics of
the other European nations unless he has made the tour of Europe
and examined the manners of these several nations with great care
and accuracy.
The narrator goes on to say that perhaps a more impartial judge would
not hesitate to affirm that the Dutch were more frugal and
industrious, the French more temperate and polite, the Germans
more hardy and patient of labour and the Spaniards more sober and
composed than the English who undoubtedly were brave and
generous, but at the same time rash, headstrong, and impetuous and
too apt to elated with prosperity, and to despond in adversity. He
quotes a philosopher who says that we should not be “countrymen”
but we should be “citizens of the world” meaning we should view
ourselves as inhabitants of the world and not of a certain part of it.
Theme/Message
In this essay first published in the British Magazine in August 1760,
Goldsmith argues that it is possible to love one’s own country
“without hating the natives of other countries”. It is good that people
have good opinions about their own countries, but at the same time,
they should not think in negative terms about the people of other
countries. We should not pass judgments about others without
meeting these people. We can understand others only when we live
with them. We come to know through the author that there is no
doubt that The English who are brave and generous, is at the same
time rash, headstrong, and impetuous; too elated with prosperity and
to despond in adversity, On the other hand, the Dutch are more frugal
and industrious, the French more temperate and polite, the Germans
more hardy and patient of labour and fatigue, and the Spaniards
soberer and composed than the English. People should not think at
the national level but should think at the global level. They should
consider themselves citizens of the world.
Q. What we’re the views expressed by the Englishman? Did the writer
share his views?
Ans. The Englishman said that Dutch were greedy, French were
sycophants, Germans were beastly gluttons, Spanish were tyrants but
English were bold and kind. The writer didn’t agree with him because,
to him, all these views were prejudicial.
Q. What are the virtues and faults that the writer finds in the English?
Do you think this is an expression of prejudice? Why? Why not?
Ans. The writer said that English were brave and generous but at the
same time, they were rash, headstrong and impetuous also. This is not
an expression of prejudice rather a genuine one because he sincerely
talks about both virtues as well as faults of the English.
Q. Why did the other gentleman begin to feel jealous of the writer?
Ans. The other gentleman began to feel jealous of the writer because
he could not digest his honesty. He could not digest the bitter truths
spoken by the writer. He thought that he was an invert enemy of
England. He thought that the writer did not have a moral right to be
called a citizen of England. He thought that he was the enemy of
government also.
Ans. Olive Goldsmith says that national prejudice is not the natural
and necessary growth of love for our country. It is wrong to think that
national prejudice cannot be ended without denting our patriotic
feelings. National prejudice is not the natural and necessary growth of
our patriotic feelings.
Superstition and communalism are also the growth of religion. But it
is wrong to say that they are necessary growth of religion. These are
undesirable parts of religion. Instead of giving any benefit to religion,
superstition and communalism are injurious to religion. They are
actually the base or illegitimate branches of the plant of religion.
Superstition and communalism can be very easily cut off from the
plant of religion. Such a cutting off will not do any damage to the plant
of religion. As a matter of fact, the plant of religion will have a
healthier growth if it was freed from superstition and communalism.
It is possible to love one’s own country without hating other countries.
One can defend the law and liberty of one’s own country without
hating the rest of the world. The writer can prefer to be a citizen of
the world. He would not like to call himself a citizen of this country or
that. He calls upon the reader not to hate people belonging to other
countries.
Q. What do you think Goldsmith’s attitude is toward his country?
Ans. Goldsmith’s attitude toward his country is not the most loyal as
he is not jingoistic. He has an open mind, or free spirit and feels he is
a citizen of the world, not to just one particular race of people or
country. He is not bashful. He has a disagreement regarding the
prejudices many people have and is influenced by some of these
attitudes. This can be backed up by the following quote: It is not very
possible that I may love my own country, with out hating the natives
of other countries.”
Q. How does Goldsmith’s use of the word “prejudices” differ from the
way we use it today?
Ans. Goldsmith relates prejudice to nationality whereas we relate
prejudice to race. In paragraph 2 Goldsmith makes a remark towards
the French, “…a set of flattering sycophants.” We as a society relate
prejudice to skin colour, not by race alone.
Message