The Summing Up by William Somerset Maugham

 The Summing Up by William Somerset Maugham

 

This is one of the best books I have read, written by one of the top five authors in my personal favorite list. It is after all The Summing Up- a conclusion penned at the end of a full life, an analysis of the most important books and authors, a look at religion and philosophy. It is a mesmerizing read.

 

It is an extraordinary combination of autobiography, literary criticism, advice for the young at heart and much more. This is a wise, old man who has reached an astonishing level of understanding, sharing with his readers perspectives on a wide range of subjects, authors, plays and novels

 

We learn about the time spent in Seville, love affairs, albeit without too much detail and learning languages. Maugham learnt Russian and read Chekhov, but came to the conclusion that learning more languages is not worth his time:

-          I met polyglots and they did not impress me as extremely smart

On Shaw and Ibsen, Maugham has remarked that they were lucky to have arrived at the right moment.

Shaw had the chance of a young generation rebelling against severe and excessive conservatism. George Bernard Shaw had wit, talent and produced clever comedies that soon became a hit with the public.

On Ibsen Somerset Maugham is harsh. Women had had an inferior, unequal position and that was changing exactly when Ibsen came about. Maugham dismisses the plots of the Norwegian’s plays in a few words:

-“we can almost say that all the plays of the Norwegian have the same scenario- a stranger comes into a stuffy room and opens the windows shaking all the others in the room as he does so. It all ends tragically”   this is not an exact quote.

Advice:

-          Read classic Literature, not just the latest- Virginia Wolf

-          An author should have more than one or two  great books

Here I beg to differ- yes, it is great to have an important body of work, but one good book is fine with me. I wish God gave me the ability to write that (short, tiny- please, please) book.

Maupassant had an influence on Maugham, especially on the earlier work, which Maugham explains: he feels that some of the early works have been rather bad, but there have been some circumstances, like some money he felt he needed for a romantic interest, which by the time the money came had been already gone. Instead, he went with that money to Egypt.

Maugham read Maupassant and even took out pages; the word might be stole- from the works of the French writer whom he esteems to have been better than many English writers of that time.

Maupassant took advice from Flaubert and the latter prevented the former from trying to publish anything for a few years. Maugham feels that was a great advantage and he wished he had such a mentor as Flaubert.

Somerset Maugham writes that no writer wishes to live in squalor. If that happens it is not by choice and it is most unfortunate, for the writer is better off with servants and living a good life.

Maupassant was lucky to have a job which allowed him to have both money and time to write.

Sometime in the 1920s the young writers have made a great progress, in the Maugham’s view, by becoming more mature and accomplished much faster than when Maugham was making his first literary attempts.

Writers take their inspiration from real life. Stendhal is mentioned and Julien Sorel. Maugham commends Stendhal for three quarters of the book that are excellent. But towards the end and the finale included become incredible because Stendhal is going back to the real story that had inspired him, that of a young man who kills his lover and is then executed.

Some writers keep notes on the real people that have inspired their characters, but the real persons who are the source of such inspiration hate it when the character is not perfect. Friends mock each other on the flaws discovered in a novel that seems to present one individual or another.

 

Somerset Maugham writes about the philosophy of Bertrand Russell, which at point he has selected as a very attractive system of thought. But Maugham has come to understand that Russell is like the architect who convinces you to build a house of brick which is the best material, but after a while says that the stone will be best and then again, he affirms that the house made of concrete would be the best possible solution, and in the meantime you have no roof over your head.

The kind of philosophy a man adopts depends on the kind of man he is

Maugham is writing also about a story that I had heard before, which is traced to Anatole France: a king wants his wise scholars to gather the books that contain the most important thoughts of humanity. They come with a number of camels which carry 5,000 books that have this important content. The king is a busy leader, who has to rule the country and so says that there are too many books, we need less. The wise men get to work and come back after a time with 500 books, but this is still too much, for a man busy with affairs of state, so they need to narrow it down further. After some years, they come back with 50 books and needless to say, with age and all, it is still too much. They need to get all of this in one book, because the king is old now. When they came back he is dying.

This metaphor that Maugham uses to point out that he was looking for a philosophical system that will satisfy him, but it was hard work.

Religion- Maugham explains the experience he had with religion and religious people, whom he could meet first hand. He had an uncle who was a clergyman and was visited by others in this profession who have proved to Somerset Maugham that very often, priests teach one thing and do the other. When he gave up on religion, Maugham felt somewhat liberated and exhilarated, albeit he was still afraid of the devil

Maugham had exceptional views on philosophy, religion and almost anything else. And he is open to suggestions and ideas coming from other people.

His views on God are sensible:

-          I will not believe in a God who is less tolerant than I am. There is this strange feature of a God who throws his wrath around and insists on being loved and worshipped which Maugham criticized and I cannot agree more with his logic

-          Then he mentions a gentleman who used to pray with his family, but would strike out the passages praising God ostensibly. This friend of the writer said that it is very ungentlemanly to insist on such lavish praise and that God surely wouldn’t like it

Indeed, there are some aspects that Maugham reveals that appear to have so much common sense and yet they are ignored and make God seem vain, jealous and sometimes even mean- with all that insistence on exaggerated praise, humble attitude towards a Being that comes out as insecure, unsure of Himself and not Godly at all, if we take these teachings and analyze them.