How does the narrator feel about the man with the scar by the end of the

story? How do we know? (10 marks)

The man with the scar is a short story by the English author William
Somerset Maugham, surrounding the life of a war veteran, that first appeared in
the anthology by the same name published posthumously.

The narrator’s initial assumptions about “the man with the scar” undergoes
subsequent transformation after he listens to the brief account of the titular
character’s eventful life as relayed by his (narrator’s) friend at the bar. At first,
undoubtedly, the narrator was much curious about the man with the scar’s mien,
especially the “broad, red” and “great crescent” scar that lay along the length of his
temple to chin. The narrator’s interest in the tall, hefty man is evident from the
initial assemblage of observations that he provides of “the man with the scar”. His
observations convey the idea of “the man with the scar” as a poor person in shabby
clothing who barely subsists by selling lottery while being drunk. The bodily
descriptions of the central character sets him up as a jolly good fellow – “[…] round,
fat and good-humored face. He had small and undistinguished features, and his
expression was artless”. But his naïve expression contrasts with the big scar on his
face the same way “his face went oddly with his corpulent body”. These seeds of
suspicion acts as a discreet hint towards the real personality of the protagonist that
gets revealed mid-way through the story. He was indeed a “ruffian” and a “bandit”
in the past, as suggestive of his “powerful” body and “[un]common height”.
The reader is not made privy to the narrator’s reaction until the embedded story of
the man with the scar’s past is done narrated by his acquaintance.

“My friend stopped and for a time I was silent. I must explain that he was a
Guatemaltecan and spoke to me in Spanish. I have translated what he told
me as well as I could, but I have made no attempts to tone down his rather
high-flown language. To tell the truth I think it suits the story.”
 Other than making a remark about the “high-flown language” of the story
that apparently suits the valor and seriousness of its content, the narrator does not
seem to let the reader in on his thoughts about “the man with the scar”. Perhaps, at
this point, the narrator was still hoping that the real story behind the scar that so
enticed him in the first place would be somewhat of the valiant kind. But the final
nail to this coffin of his much understandable hope is hammered in when the
narrator’s friend tells him the not so momentous reason behind the scar’s origin.

“‘But how did he get the scar?’ I asked at length.

‘Oh, that was due to a bottle that burst when he was opening it. A bottle of
ginger ale.’
‘I never liked it,’ said I.”

The final piece by the narrator in this exchange can be discerned in two
conspicuous ways though it need not be limited to two. The first one being an
ingenuous expression of his obvious distaste for the ginger ale and the other one, a
veiled remark about the irrevocable disappointment in finding that the gnarly scar
was neither “caused by a saber [n]or by a fragment of shell”. This disillusionment
regarding the origin of the scar diffuses into the larger discontentment with whole
character of “the man with the scar”. The mid-17th century proverb “appearances
are deceptive” proves to be fitting for the direction the narrator’s judgment took
route.

Keeping in mind that this short story is categorized under the module titled
Disabilities which aims to show how fiction has dealt with the issue of disabilities
at different levels, in man with the scar, disability is definitely related at the level of
narrative perspective. The narrator as a casual, curious onlooker, assigns the
central character with certain qualities – picked out from the inventory of his
internalized assumptions – based on how he perceives the outward appearance of
the “man with the scar”. The signifier of the giant scar is indeed attributed the
signifieds of bravery, heroism and selflessness by the narrator albeit his friend
playfully and rhetorically questions its beauty “It doesn’t add to his beauty, does
it?”. Here, the friend sees the scar as an ostensible impediment to the central
character’s beauty but the narrator who is just a passive observer confers the
signifier so much value. For instance, the protagonist is solely refered to as “the
man with the scar” throughout the story and never by a name; the scar devours/is
forced to devour (by the narrator) his whole identity. This excessive validation is
exactly what clouds the narrator’s judgement and disappoints his imagination
towards the end.

Sona P Varghese

M2

Roll No: 12