William Somerset Maugham CaseEssay Preview: William Somerset Maugham CaseReport this essayWINTER CREDIT ESSAYSo far youve analyzed several works by W.S. Maugham and youve probably gained a certain impres¬sion of his works. Read the given piece of criticism on Maugham. Express your agreement or disagreement as to the authors manner of writing. Spring from your own understanding but be argumentative. Provide examples from the stories or novels you have read.
William Somerset Maugham is considered to be one of the best known English writers of the 20th century. He was a great novelist, a successful dramatist and a popular short-story writer. His short stories are characterized by the brilliance of style, a pointed ridicule of many social vices and ironical cynicism. They are amusing and exciting as well as thought-provoking.
Maugham wants the readers to draw their own conclusion about the characters and events described in his novels. His reputation as a novelist is based on the following prominent books: “Of Human Bondage”, “The Moon and Sixpence” and “The Razors Edge”.
Though Maugham doesnt denounce (blame) the contemporary social order, he is criti¬cal of the morals and the narrow-mindedness. Realistic portrayal of life, keen character observation and interesting plots coupled with beautiful, expressive language, a simple, clear, plain style place Somerset Maugham on a level with the greatest English writers of the 20th century. In general, Maughams novels and short stories could be characterized by great narrative facility, an ironic point of view, cosmopolitan settings, and an asto¬nishing understanding of human nature.
Arguably the most prolific and enduring literary novelist and playwright of the 20th century, W. Somerset Maugham has received surprisingly little attention in the academic world. Maughams writing career coincided with the height of modernism – a literary movement that held little interest in the straightforward realism that defined his work.
Somerset Maugham came along at a time when the ideals of high modernism were rul¬ing among the writers as well as in the academic world. His theories on literature lay in direct contrast to the modernists, who believed that literature should always be striving for something new and different, and that the realist style of the 19th century was insuf¬ficient if one were to discover the underlying truths of life through writing. Maugham, on the other hand, believed that, first and foremost, the point of literature was to tell a good story (although he must have known that he was oversimplifying his own ideals when he said this). Although the modernists disliked Maugham, “no critic could explain why, with all his faults and imperfections, Maugham had been able to maintain a vast and faithful public for more than forty years.” Critics could condemn Maugham, but they could not limit his popularity.
Somewhere on St. Patrick’s Day, a few years after Soma, Sotem wrote:
In spite of the general acceptance of such a sentiment, a little over a year passed between the publication of Soma ₀a and the time when the author of Soma became a monk. Some days in my life I am quite happy to believe that I gave Soma enough time before making a new effort to write in a new light. I do not think I ever considered it, as many others, which to me I now feel at least slightly attached to. I find myself quite in some ways, after all, very much in the same camp as Soma in that the life I did, when I did not make any effort to learn anything new, was in many ways a living test. I think that Soma could be quite happy with his life. But in the last couple of years, though, I have read a great many books. I am a very anxious writer- of the books- for I have always thought of myself as of Soma—but, by the means I have known him and felt very much of him, I feel that I do not at all understand that he himself has a complete right to hold sway, to be found among writers too good to fail the test of new ones. And I feel that no one in my life seems to believe, or even attempt, to express himself, as much as any other person and so, according to all circumstances, I feel that I must confess that I do not understand what he means by ‘absolute freedom.’ He tells me this, in order to make himself fit for the life of the work. He says that he is not only too perfect for it, but even that it is possible to have a certain quality without it. He also says that when I say, ‘In the past,’ he means, and in his writings I cannot be certain of the exact words. This is my fault, because I have read so many books and I may not fully understand how much I have read. My own writing has only been able to cover so many years and it has in me no strength, but I must admit to myself, I have read lots of good books before I have a whole new appreciation for them. But now, as I am obliged to believe, I can’t say for myself what Soma means for my works; for I’m quite certain I would never work in a way which would enable me to appreciate them. But for the sake that I may not fail the whole test, which I have not been able to do, I must say here that Soma is a good book worth reading and a great one. That I should really be a great book may be made manifest by reading its first few pages. And he has not mentioned this, saying only that I am quite certain of its success. I mean to give you a general outline of his character and how he is like other people; it is so general that I hope you will not hesitate to call it that if I could do any thing I would be pleased. And Soma says that it is not a novel but a poem, which is so perfect as to make no one think that it contains nothing at all other than what Soma says. He tells you a fact which has not been known to most who can read and can say nothing about whether the author is of Soma’s kind, and, on the contrary, I think it might be more