One of the passages I have highlighted in the book is in the very first chapter when Malone is talking to Gladys.
"But chances are all around you. It is the mark of the kind of man I mean that he makes his own chances. You can't hold him back... There are heroisms all around us waiting to be done.... ... ...But you shouldn't do it merely to please me. You should do it because you can't help it, because it's natural to you - because the man in you is crying out for heroic expression." (pg. 5-6)
I found this passage really interesting when I first read it because it encompasses such an "antique" view of what and why men, in particular, should do things. I thought about how it's now "okay" or accepted for women to be the heroes too. However, as the story continues to develop, I see how Gladys' trivial statements at the beginning are actually developing into truly meaningful things for Malone. During the beginning of the book, I was honestly annoyed with Malone because it didn't seem like he had any kind of direction or passion for himself. It was only to please others (Gladys in particular). But as the story is unfolding, I think that he's finding that thing inside him that "can't help it." Like his persistence in convincing Challenger to not only tell him about his expedition but also following and how comfortable he feels about going. I think that he's developing passion from curiosity and this parallels with how he's transforming from a boy into a man (as discussed in class).
In the end will Malone find that a part of him was always "crying out for heroic expression" and will end up being the kind of man that Gladys has envisioned? Will he discover a passion for adventure and the unknown? Will he regret not being more skeptical about Challenger's claims? Or will he continue to be "gullible" even after his trip to the lost world because in all reality, he did simply believe what he was told about there not being a lost world without question until he met Challenger. Will this cause him to question other "norms"?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Malone definitely develops a taste for exploration. The night following his ascent of the gingko tree he considers, "Suppose I stole softly away, suppose I made my way down to the central lake, suppose I was back at breakfast with some record of the place--would I not be thought of as an even more worthy associate?" Though I think this passage shows his newly developed adventurous nature, it may have more to do with merit than heroism. However, the closing paragraph of the book clearly shows that Malone has become everything (and more) which Gladys spoke of.
ReplyDelete[PS: STOP READING IF YOU HAVEN'T FINISHED THE BOOK]
Choosing to return to the plateau with Lord John Roxton--without any prompt from Macdona or Gladys--displays Malone's personal decision to seek out heroism "because [he] can't help it, because it's natural to [him]."
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen I hear the word heroism, I start to recall the scene that Malone and Roxton rescued their comrades, and killed the ape-men. Then I cannot help to thinking about bloody scene and blood lust, which we discussed in class. Further, I relate heroism to the blood lust. I think at that time, most heroes are the savage invaders instead of scientists. People considered heroism behaviors as conquering the world.
ReplyDeletePerhaps, because the time period, Europeans conquering the world was a paradigm. Lord John Roxton was certainly the heroic ideal; he was the man Malone wanted to be for Gladys. Although he was the "model man", I found it almost strange that Roxton was so impeccable. He was the only character who never showed any serious flaws. I kept expecting him to mess up somewhere--especially when little hints about the "blue clay" kept popping up. Roxton alone found a fortune of diamonds but instead of keeping them to himself--which would be expected due to the self-seeking nature of human beings--he evenly divvies them up four ways. Even when it was (indirectly) his fault that the bridge had collapsed, he took an admirable blame upon himself for not being more careful of the "half-breeds" and their "long memories for blood-feuds" (127).
ReplyDeleteSo, I posted my blog before finishing the book, and now that I do know what happens, I'm really not surprised at all, but I'm glad it ended the way it did. I would have been really annoyed if Malone stayed around and fought for Gladys' love even more. I'm glad that he did realize that he has passion within him and even heroism.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I like the point Heidi made about Roxton being the "heroic ideal." I didn't really notice that he was so nearly flawless until I read your post. I really don't know what the significance of that is. I do, however, think it's not coincidence that it's Roxton and Malone who will be returning, together, to the lost world. I see them as characters that learned from each other the entire novel and it's as if they were meant to be together and learn from each other.
The point Heidi makes is one that I, as well, hadn't noticed while reading the novel. Again, as Ashley asked, what was the purpose of this Roxton character to be such a renaissance man? Well after thinking about, I started to think that maybe, since the book follows Malone’s venture into manhood as Ashley talked about, it wasn't just coincidence that Malone and Roxton ended up on the same journey as comrades. Maybe this was done as a sort of foreshadowing as to what Malone was to come to be in the future, or maybe to merely show of what he aspired to be. As Heidi listed all of Roxton's traits it became obvious that Roxton was the ideal man, and that of which would woo Gladys. So it is clear that there is a purpose that he and Malone ended up together on this exploration.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I believe in becoming such a man, Malone realized his faults in chasing such a shallow woman. It's as if he, in going on this spectacular journey, realizes the insignificance of impressing Gladys. Could this be the reason there was no mention of Roxton having a significant other? Or why there is such little mention of women in the book? Because such a man loses interest in such a thing when he experiences such greatness? If not then why were these things true? Was it because this was simply a book of adventure in which no women were involved? Thoughts?
Heidi makes a very good point that I like everyone else had not realized. I think that for the lifestyle that Lord John lived, he could not afford to have any flaws, since in many of his ventures there was no room for error. This does seem a little far fetched though; a tall order for any man. It is a little ridiculous that we are expected to believe that Lord John is so "ideal" or "perfect." Doyle did succeed in convincing us of his perfection during the story though, since during the story nobody questioned his actions. So it seems that the observation that Lord John is the future Malone, an observation that Stf67 made (Dr. Tiff?), is a more reasonable explanation. Lord John was always quick to take charge in any situation, even straying from his normal adventurous self to attempt to make scientific observations. This is a character trait that Malone had always aspired to.
ReplyDeleteIt does seem as if Malone did indeed inherit some of Lord Johns traits towards the end of the book. Near the beginning he seems to be a man who did not have much control over his own life. He never considered himself to be heroic or manly in anyway, and would only behave in such a manner to impress the shallow Gladys (irony of ironies though, she marries a solicitor's clerk). Towards the end however, when he finds out that Gladys DID marry that solicitor's clerk, he "[vanishes], like all disconsolate and broken-hearted heroes..." (262). It seems that he has taken a full 180 degree turn, as many of us expected and hoped for. He is no longer mild mannered Malone but Lord John-mini, a heroic character with a thirst for adventure.
If I'm allowed to be a little feminist, I'd say Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is a little chauvinistic. Perhaps it isn't Conan Doyle in particular and has more to do with the time period, but the women in this novel display such trivial triffles. I thought at first that Challenger's wife may more admirably represent logical women of the time until I remembered that he placed her on a perch when she got annoying. Malone describes Challenger taking his pleading wife off of the stool: "He took her down as if she had been a canary" (28). But contrary to what Challenger seems to believe, women are not birds which can be placed in a cage for a man's amusement...
ReplyDeleteBut aside from that, I think that Roxton didn't have a female counterpart because women, at the time, were probably restricted to certain womanly duties. If England was following the "Cult of True Womanhood" of the traditional Victorian era, then women would definitely be socially out-of-bounds to go off on an excursion to South America, hold weapons, or fight missing links. So my guess is that a woman would slow Lord John Roxton down.
It is weird that our discussion is about feminism now. Well, I think Conan Doyle wants to highlight the relationship between man and man. In the story, Challenger and Summerlee have the same dream and they finally shake hands together. Also, as mentioned, Malone will probably become another Lord John in the future.
ReplyDeleteHowever, compared to these men-men friendships, the relationships between men and women are very ironic in the story. Challenger always places his wife on a perch when she is annoying. Malone leaves Gladys for another adventure in the end.
It seems that Conan wants to emphasize the affection between man and man.
I feel the main plot is about how four men, who have totally different personalities and backgrounds, become a team and work perfectly together in the end. Further Conan also describes their relationship with the half-breed, the Negro, and the Indians.
I suppose the quote at the beginning of the book (about the boy who's half a man or the man who's have a boy) supports the notion that Conan Doyle is writing specifically to men--a notion which i wholeheartedly agree with--but I hold to the thought that this is stemming from the social atmosphere of the time. I did some research and found that the "Cult of True Womanhood" was still applicable in the first half of the 20th century. Therefore, a woman's only acceptable role was to stay at home and maintain purity. I'm not trying to be overtly feminist, but I think this is the most logical answer as to why the women were portrayed they way they were in the novel. Not specifically because Conan Doyle was chauvinistic but because of the dominant view of society.
ReplyDeleteANYWAYS, I agree with Herman that a main point lies in the fact that people with different backgrounds can put aside their differences and achieve a common goal.