William Somerset Maugham
The text under analysis is a short story belonging to the pen of popular British writer, William Somerset Maugham. For nearly fifty years he produced a stream of novels, short stories, and reminiscences, as well as a number of plays of less merit than his nondramatic work. He has been described as “a major literary craftsman of the century”, and his work reflects his high regard for clarity, lucidity and simplicity of style. His most famous novels are Of Human Bondage, The Moon and Sixpence and Theatre.
The title of the story, The Ant and the Grasshopper, is quite predictable, it alludes to the well-known fable of La Fontaine which has the same title.
Maugham uses the fable to introduce his story of the Ramsay brothers, the reader’s expectations from the development of the plot are already determined to a certain extent. The author recalls his childhood and how he learnt certain of the fables of La Fontaine by heart back then (flashback). One of them was The Ant and the Grasshopper, it’s an inner story and it’s similar to the story of Tom and George.This fable teaches “the useful lesson that in an imperfect world industry is rewarded and giddiness punished”. The ant spends the whole summer gathering its winter store, while the grasshopper sits on a blade of grass singing to the sun. Winter comes and the ant is comfortably provided for, but the grasshopper has an empty larder: he goes to the ant and begs for a little food. The ant asks what the grasshopper was doing all summer. And gets the answer: “Saving your presence, I sang, I sang all day, all night.” So, the ant replies: “You sang. Why, then go and dance”. Such an introduction supports the title, develops and strengthens the intertextual connections between the pretext and the present text.
Maugham’s The Ant and the Grasshopper is a story about 2 brothers who has rather different lifestyles. They are the representation of ant and the grasshopper of La Fontaine’s fable. Tom (the grasshopper) takes life easy while George (the ant) works hard, takes no joy and in turn gains very little happiness from life and at the end Tom, with all his faults, is the lucky one; while George with all his virtues ends dull and upset.
In this story the author uses the retardation of the exposition, it helps to create tension. The narrative structure of the story is framing, the beginning and the end of the story coincide. It contributes to the integrity, compactness and completeness of the text.
The exposition is practically blending into the rising action (3rd paragraph), such stylistic devices as hyperbole (as though the burden of the whole world sat on his shoulders) and litotes (I’m not in hilarious spirits) and priority implication (He sighed. “Yes, it’s Tom again”) plunge the reader into the events and support the interest to the very end. The reader starts wondering who is Tom and what he did (narrative hook).
The choice of short simple sentences (He wanted to enjoy himself. He would listen to no expostulations. He left his wife and his office.), anaphora – initial repetition (he) make the rhythm and style of narration muscular, energetic, pulsating.
The whole story is built on contrast as means of foregrounding. The writer opposes the characters of the two brothers. George is considered “ respectable ”, “ hardworking, decent, respectable, and straightforward ”, “ Poor George, only a year older than his scapegrace brother, looked sixty. He had never taken more than a fortnight's holiday in the year for a quarter of a century. He was in his office every morning at nine-thirty and never left it till six. He was honest, industrious and worthy. He had a good wife, to whom he had never been unfaithful even in thought, and four daughters to whom he was the best of fathers. He made a point of saving a third of his income and his plan was to retire at fifty-five to a little house in the country where he proposed to cultivate his garden and play golf. His life was blameless.”, whereas Tom is portrayed as an “ idle, worthless, dissolute, and dishonorable rogue ”, “ charming and unscrupulous. I have never met anyone to whom it was more difficult to refuse a loan. He made a steady income from his friends and he made friends easily”, “For twenty years Tom raced and gambled, philandered with the prettiest girls, danced, ate in the most expensive restaurants, and dressed beautifully. He always looked as if he had just stepped out of a bandbox. Though he was forty-six you would never have taken him for more than thirty-five. He was a most amusing companion and though you knew he was perfectly worthless you could not but enjoy his society. He had high spirits, an unfailing gaiety and incredible charm. I never grudged the contributions he regularly levied on me for the necessities of his existence. I never lent him fifty pounds without feeling that I was in his debt. Tom Ramsay knew everyone and everyone knew Tom Ramsay. You could not approve of him, but you could not help liking him. ”
We can see the author’s irony in describing George, the narrator seems to be mock-serious when proclaiming sympathy with him (Poor George, …).
The contrast is skillfully employed in presenting different angles of vision of the two brothers. Throughout the whole text we don’t see Tom’s direct speech, the author describes it indirectly “ I have never met anyone to whom it was more difficult to refuse a loan. ”, “ he made friends easily ”, “ you could not but enjoy his society ”, etc. So, we can say that Tom was quite eloquent. As for George, he didn’t forget about his work and talked like a layer “ You're not going to deny that ”, “ And you can't deny that ”.
At the end of the story we can see George’s real face, he is angry and envious (“ George grew red in the face. ”, “ George Ramsay beat his clenched fist on the table. ”, “It's not fair, I tell you; it's not fair. Damn it, it's not fair.”)
The narrative structure is focal for the message of the story. The development of the action turns into “a somersault story” in which the outcome is opposite to what the reader expected (defeated expectancy effect).
Message: The fable carries the message that hard work is rewarded while laziness is punished. The story presents a more realistic view of the world. Sometimes good things do happen to lazy or even quite bad people, causing them to end up better off than those of us who work hard all our lives.
