For most people life is quite a simple affair: acquire some education,
find a job, marry, bring up children, grow old and die. There are the usual
entertainments and challenges in the process: the society, colleagues, petty
jealousies, workplace rivalry, children’s caprices, social networks, weekly
religion, etc. Very few people are beset by a haunting passion that drives them
toward the hazy moon beyond the usual horizon. Somerset Maugham’s novel, The
Moon and Sixpence, tells the story of a man who gave up his career and
family at the age of 40 for the sake of pursuing his moon.
Charles Strickland gives up his stockbroker job in London at the age of
40 and leaves for Paris to pursue painting. He doesn’t even care to inform his
wife
why he is leaving. Nor has he left her any money. When the narrator
meets him in a shoddy hotel in Paris on his wife’s request, Strickland says
tersely, “I’ve got to paint.” He is not concerned about his family at all. He
has looked after them for 17 years, he says, and now they should look after
themselves. As simple as that.
But why is he pursuing painting now when he has crossed half of his
life? If not now, when? That’s Strickland’s counter-question. He may not be a
good painter. But he
cannot resist his heart’s demand. He compares himself to a man falling
into the water. “When a man falls into the water it doesn’t matter how he
swims, well or badly: he’s got to get out or else he’ll drown.” He has to
paint; there’s no other choice.
When the narrator points out that his act is very irresponsible and
reminds him that the world couldn’t go on if everyone acted like him, his
answer is: “That’s a damned silly thing to say. Everyone doesn’t want to act
like me. The great
majority are perfectly content to do the ordinary thing.”
Yes, Strickland is extraordinary. He is like a man who has been
enchanted by a pied piper. He has no choice but paint. And he paints. The
eminent artists in Paris mock his painting but that doesn’t deter him a bit.
Dirk Stroeve is the only painter who perceives the worth of Strickland’s
paintings. He knows that Strickland’s genius will be recognised eventually.
When Strickland falls seriously ill, Stroeve takes him to his own home
heedless of his wife’s warning against it. When Strickland recovers he assaults
Mrs Stroeve sexually. She seems to like that too. Dirk is too sentimental to be
macho and Strickland is the personification of masculine power. Blanche Stroeve
not only becomes a nude model for Strickland but also leaves her husband.
Eventually Blanche realises that Strickland doesn’t love her and that he is
incapable of love and she kills herself. Even Blanche’s death doesn’t move
Strickland.
Strickland is incapable of love, reflects the narrator. Love “is an emotion in which
tenderness is an essential part, but Strickland had no tenderness either for
himself or for others; there is in love a sense of weakness, a desire to
protect, an eagerness to do good and to give pleasure… it has in it a certain
diffidence. These were not traits which I could imagine in Strickland.”
He was “at once too great and too small for love.”
But Strickland leaves Paris after Blanche’s death. Dirk also leaves.
Dirk returns to his hometown while Strickland finds his abode in Tahiti where a
young Tahitian woman, Ata, will subjugate herself to his whims and fancies and
bear his children though he is not concerned about any of them. He continues to
paint until leprosy grips him and slowly kills him.
When his family members in London come to know about his ignominious
death, they moralise it: “The mills of God grind slowly, but they grind
exceedingly small.” The narrator is not quire sure of that. Who are we to judge
people? Some people like
Strickland are born out of place and they have to go searching for their
appropriate place even if the quest is a reaching-out for the moon.
Strickland became very famous after his death. His paintings sold for
enormous sums of money. He was indeed a genius. The rules of the normal people
don’t apply to geniuses. Strickland had no heart in the normal human
understanding. The man had dismissed love bluntly as a “weakness” and “a disease”.
Yet the narrator tells us that Strickland had his own greatness.
Strickland was single-minded about his passion. He was not affected by
normal human vices like greed and jealousy. He had no desire for fame or even
simple appreciation. He made no compromises with anyone. He never wanted
anything from fellow human beings except to be left alone. He could sacrifice
not only himself but also others for reaching his ends. He had a vision and he
pursued it with his entire being.
Strickland was modelled on Paul Gauguin who abandoned his career and
family to pursue painting.
PS. This is part of a
series being written for the #BlogchatterA2Z
Challenge. The previous parts are:
3. The
Castle
Tomorrow: No Exit
Strickland definitely is quirky like the most of the extra-ordinarily talented people. Their ways of thinking, their set of values are strikingly different from the rest of the world, the ordinary people. Though Strickland might have been genius artist he had all the darker shades of lust laced to his characteristics. I had a strong emotion of hatred felt towards Strickland though the narrator has tried to justify Strickland's deeds and praised his genius.
ReplyDeleteIt is almost impossible to like Strickland. He was subhuman mostly, superhuman aesthetically. Art without heart is not likely to find fans.
DeleteLong time back I had picked up this book but due to various reasons could not read beyond a few pages. Maybe I had to return this book to the library to take clearance for my transfer. I am happy that I got an overall idea about the book and will read it. I think painter Vincent van Gogh met with a similar fate as that of Paul Ganguin.
ReplyDeleteVan Gogh and Gauguin were contemporaries and suffered similar fates:both were recognized after death. But Van Gogh was a saint at heart.
DeleteGeniuses have a world of their own that the ordinary may not connect with. Reaching out for the moon doesn't seem practical in real life. And yet there's the example of Paul Gauguin. It's a mystery how their minds work.
ReplyDeleteMystery indeed because these artists underwent tremendous suffering in order to pursue their moons whereas they did have much easier options.
DeleteReminds me of Van Gogh. Geniuses are often driven by quirkiness. They aren't easy people even to deal with. Thanks for the summary.
ReplyDeleteVan Gogh and Gauguin were contemporaries and suffered similar fates:both were recognized after death. But Van Gogh was a saint at heart.
DeleteThanks for the summary! Another one in my list now 😊
ReplyDeleteI shall add more to the list :)
DeleteWhat an interesting book! Adding it to my TBR list.
ReplyDeleteGlad you liked.
DeleteVery interesting book and review, I am definitely going to read, thank you!
ReplyDeleteWelcome. I wouldn't call these reviews, I'm trying to present some good books in my own way.
DeleteAnother intriguing story, and intriguing book.
ReplyDeleteThe bit about most people okay with the mundane is quite true, as is the fact that anyone like Strickland would always be considered weird and an outlier. That doesn't justify his lack of emotions though.
Thanks for this post.
Lack of emotions is what makes Strickland repulsive but intriguing. Difficult to like him.
DeleteHave read The Ant and the Grasshopper from Maugham years ago. This looks interesting. Will check it out!
ReplyDeleteMaugham was one of the most popular writers of his time. Have a nice time with him.
DeleteWell written summary and review. Good to know about the book and the artist.
ReplyDelete