Samuel Butler - EREWHON,
OR OVER THE RANGE -1872
Let me first give the author’s recommendation
about how to pronounce the title of this book.
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION
“The Author wishes it to be understood that
Erewhon is pronounced as a word of three syllables, all short—thus, Ĕ-rĕ-whŏn.”
This being said, it is clear that it is the
backward writing and reading of “nowhere.” The prefaces to the second and third
edition are interesting because they are pointing out an important debate at
the end of the 19th century that was to go on developing into what
is known as eugenics till it led to the criminal development of the Nazi
project of cleaning up the planet of some “races,” an unacceptable word that
covered all types of ethnic (Jews and Gypsies), national (Russians, Ukrainians
and many other groups), political (communists, trade-unionists, etc.) or social
(gays, some religious groups particularly among German Protestants, handicapped
people, socially “unfit” people, etc.) groups racially defined at least
negatively since they were accused of endangering the purity of the Aryan race.
This Aryan race was understood in conformity with the 19th century
tradition of the Germano-European theory that even pretended the Indo-Aryan languages
were the result of a migration from Europe to India, though no origin was
specified for these Germano-European people: it was a time when the unique
African origin of Homo Sapiens was not even imagined, let alone the various and
successive out-of-(black)-Africa migrations starting around 180,000 years ago
or maybe even earlier. This Germano-European theory has today been discarded
with the slow emergence of the specific migration out of Africa around 45,000
years ago, their settling somewhere around the Iranian Plateau and then the two
migrations from there after the Ice Age, one to Europe and one to India or the
Indian sub-continent, Sanskrit being a language of the second migration and the
language descending from the common source of the two groups is Farsi in Iran
and South Iraq, just like Basque is the language descending from the languages
of the first Homo Sapiens in Europe before the Ice Age (Cro-Magnon, Gravettians,
etc.) who were speaking a set of Turkic languages or dialects.
The second edition preface alludes to The
Coming Race, an 1871
novel by Edward Bulwer-Lytton, and to his (Samuel Butler’s) own chapters on machines
in connection with Charles Darwin since he, Samuel Butler, is considering the
evolutionary theory as applying to machines as well as to vegetal and animal
species, making machines a living species of sorts. On the Origin
of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races
in the Struggle for Life was published on November 24, 1859 and as
such was a well-known book by Charles Darwin when Samuel Butler started the
present book. But The Descent of
Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex was first published in 1871 and as
such is contemporary with The Coming Race
and Erewhon. We can and must note
here Darwin does not use the word “race” as the basic concept but “species” and
for him man is a species like all others. There is no eugenics in Darwin though
his theory of evolution and natural selection will be vastly used to justify
theories like behaviorism and so called social Darwinism particularly popular
at the end of the 19th century with an important American movement
after the Civil War (check Russell
Herman Conwell, 1843-1925, his preaching in that period that was to
produce the essential book Acres of
Diamonds in 1915 in which he defends
the idea that poverty is a punishment from God and riches and economic success
are a reward from God http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/rconwellacresofdiamonds.htm,
accessed January 4, 2017), and such
theories were to develop into the criminal Nazi pretension to purify humanity
by exterminating what they considered as inferior races.
At the end of
the 19th century it was common to believe social classes that determined
various social life styles would eventually lead to either some genetic
evolution towards differentiated human species or to some programmed
conditioning producing different types of integrated individuals. The former
approach is represented by H.G. Wells and his The Time Machine, 1895, in which he develops the crossing of
Darwin’s evolution and Marx’s vision of a class society, thus producing a
future with two species, the Morlocks living underground in total darkness and
descending from the working class of the Victorian industrial world, and the
Eloi living on the surface in full idleness eating fruits that grow around
them. These Eloi descend from the old bourgeoisie of the Victorian industrial society.
In fact, in this world the basic class organization described by Karl Marx is
inverted by biological evolution and the descendants of the working class
dominate the world and exploit the descendants of the bourgeoisie as pure
cattle that they capture regularly to provide themselves with meat: in a way a
direct illustration of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The latter approach
of programmed conditioning is best represented by Aldous Huxley and his Brave New World, 1932, in which people
are conditioned into five classes, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, and in
which those who cannot conform are annihilated while those who survive as
standard human beings are expelled into some reservations that you can visit as
a “tourist.”
H.G. Wells will
be active in various movements in the 20th century defending strict
eugenics. He advocates the elimination of all “races” of color, except the Jews
(who are not of any color really) because they intermarry. In a later film, Things to Come, 1936, he describes an
entirely white future that conquers the universe under the total power and
control of scientists. Note Brave New
World did not specify skin color but it can be assumed this world is
entirely white. The common point between H.G. Wells and Aldous Huxley is their
connection to Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-1895)
who was an English biologist, known as "Darwin's Bulldog" for his
defense of Charles Darwin's theory
of evolution. He was instrumental in developing
scientific education in Britain, and he opposed Christian leaders who tried to
stifle scientific debate. A noted unbeliever, he
defined himself as an "agnostic" as
for his attitude towards religion. H.G. Wells attended classes by Thomas Henry
Huxley, and Aldous Huxley was his grandson.
In that context
of this theory of evolution, the Marxist vision of class society, and eugenics,
the last one comprising social segregation, racial rejection and the
extermination of those considered as unfit for or unproductive in society, we
have to assess the position of Samuel Butler and his Erewhon.
This assessment
is important but we have to say straight away that with this work of fiction we
shift back to England, and yet in that period England and the USA were widely
exchanging literary works and inspiration, as I have indicated with the mention
of Social Darwinism and Behaviorism that are essentially American, though
eugenics that emerge from this context is vastly represented at the time and in
the following fifty years in Europe, starting with Sweden even before the First
World War.
The very first
element we have to refer to is the very common pattern used in this book, that
is to say a world that exists as a survival beyond a natural limit, in this
case a range of mountains. This pattern has been before and will be used after
Samuel Butler. We have to mention Robinson
Crusoe by Daniel Defoe (1719), Gulliver’s
Travel by Jonathan Swift (1726), The
Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket by Edgar Allan Poe (1838) and Journey to the Center of the Earth by
Jules Verne (1864) before the present novel. But the pattern or theme will
become a real gold vein over the next few decades. Let’s mention a few works. Around the World in 80 Days by Jules
Verne (1873); King Solomon’s Mines by
H. Rider Haggard (1885); The Island of
Doctor Moreau by H.G. Wells (1896); The
Village in the Treetops by Jules Verne (1901); The Lost World by Conan Doyle (1912); The Moon Pool by Abraham Merritt (1913). There are a lot more after
the First World War but the context is then different though in many ways it is
the continuation of what was already done before, with an essential development
in films since the cinema becomes a really popular medium then. One of the best
films along that line is Metropolis
(1927) by Fritz Lang. The theme is still very active. For one example we could
consider The Dark Tower series by
Stephen King as being based on a limit beyond which, or under which a lost and
forgotten world exists, and this world is both the victim of our surface world
and the warning about or prediction of what is going to happen to our surface
world.
This being said the
author is trying hard to make us believe it is a real trip and the report about
this trip written by the person who is the main character in the novel,
including a mention of the French-German war and the siege of Paris in 1870-71.
Of course the trip from that lost world somewhere in Queensland in Australia to
The Adriatic Sea and an Italian ship for their escape in a balloon is totally
unrealistic. But we must not forget it is a novel and not a scientific report.
At the same time
the tone is that of a journalistic report, objective with long “quotations”
(that are of course fictitious) and even here and there direct criticism of
some ideas and opinions expressed by the Erewhonians. And yet it is never
ironical, sarcastic or caustic in any way that would imply this is a direct
criticism of English society, or more generally of industrial society, the
society of the first industrial revolution, that of the steam engine and coal. However,
we often take some of the views expressed by some Erewhonians as direct
criticism of England, but is it serious or is it plain entertainment. More
generally, does Samuel Butler criticize the modern industrial society of the
time and its foreseeable future, or is he just making fun of it for our plain
entertainment. I am inclined to think that anyway it represents a mood or way
of thinking common in those days, at the end of the 19th century. It
does not matter whether the author shares these opinions or not: they are
expressed and as such represent their time. I will even say they represent some
values emerging in that last third of the 19th century, especially
if we consider Charles Darwin and Edward
Bulwer-Lytton’s already mentioned novel generally known under the title of VRIL
(1872).
The Erewhonian
society represents the emergence of a culture of “rights” with the rights of
animals, the rights of plants and beyond these the rights of machines too. But
the rights of men are just more or less surrounded and besieged by all the
other rights. You can only eat animal flesh from animals which have died a
natural death, or eggs which are beyond the possibility to be incubated into a
chick, hence that are rotten or half rotten, etc. Even grains have rights since
they contain life. We are confronted to a fundamentalist absolute theory and
practice of total respect of life, be it vegetal, animal or mechanical. And yet
this question of machines brings up a completely different opinion.
If machines were
granted the rights they deserve to have because of the life they contain, man
is understood as having only one future, to become “a domestic man” (in other
words to be domesticated) “under the beneficent rule of machines.” This vision
is expressed as a fear, a fearful and frightening prediction, and in Erewhon
they decided, several thousand years ago to ban machines completely, including
watches. It is not specified how they tell times since sundials are also
machines. But they seem to mean mechanical machines, machines that have many
parts that are articulated onto one another. They insist on the steam engine of
course and there is somewhere the mention of an abandoned railway station (like
in The Dark Tower by Stephen King).
The most interesting element being the life that is stated as part of machines
with evolution from one machine to the next and the possibility for one machine
to reproduce into another machine of the same type or slightly modified on the
very model of sexual reproduction. It is said so seriously that we may doubt
whether it is comedy, humor or reality. One century and a half after this book
when some intellectuals are defending the concept of the “Singularity” within
the context of robotization and systematic automatization we can wonder: around
2050 machines will be more intelligent than men and will replace men in all
productive and administrative tasks. Several times the idea that machines are
evolving a lot faster than man and animals is there to prove the author is
serious somewhere and this argument of the speed of inventions and the
exponential acceleration of this speed is the fundamental argument of the
proponents of the Singularity. Think of Moore’s Law for example:
“Moore’s Law is a computing term which originated around 1970;
the simplified version of this law states that processor speeds, or overall
processing power for computers will double every two years. A quick check
among technicians in different computer companies shows that the term is not very
popular but the rule is still accepted.” (http://www.mooreslaw.org/,
accessed January 4, 2017)
So at this level
this book is a witness to the emergence of the right to live, live and let
live, for all living beings, and to the future exponential speed of development
of machines and its danger for humanity. This ambiguity is just the same as the
one we noted with The Scarlet Letter.
The rights of love shared equally by men and women are emerging but the bigotry
of some survives this emergence and even today such rights are vastly
questioned by some in some countries, including our own, the West as opposed to
the Rest. In the case of this book the rights of plants, animals and machines
are fine and dandy but what about the rights of men? Erewhon has a lot to say about this, and the first idea is that we
are dealing with the rights of men and not of women, and certainly not of
children, sorry, I mean boys only, girls are not even mentioned. Women can only
be wives and within the strict limits imposed by society. Gender is of course
not envisioned. We are dealing here with an extremely male dominated society.
The main character falls in love at first sight with the younger daughter in
the family where he lives, though he is expected to marry her elder sister who
has to be married first, and what’s more this younger daughter falls in love
with the main character at first sight and they both elope and escape from this
world. But no premarital sex, of course not, and marriage under the authority
of a regular priest as soon as civilization is reached. But reproduction in
Erewhon is reduced to a chore, a burden for adult humans.
The theory that
before being born everyone, in fact millions and millions of unborn individuals
totally immaterial but entirely real in abstract definition exist in pure bliss
in another universe or layer of this universe and these individuals have to
request their freedom to be born, and sign a document that states they will not
be able to come back, for them to be granted the right to look for a consenting
couple who will accept to bring them to life after a long period during which
the unborn candidate to be born is pestering that couple. In other words, boys
and girls are not born in cabbages and roses but they are born – literally meaning
carried through – from the Unborn world into this human life. Each one of these
born Unborns is at once attached to formulae that define their entire
responsibility in their decision to be born meaning that parents are nothing
but the vessels of this birth and the victims who have to be protected against
these born children. You will find a contradiction when the author envisages a
special tax to be paid by parents when at the age of twenty their children are
not economically independent, that is to say are not making enough money to
autonomously provide for the needs of themselves and their families. But the
subject of this book, as much as the author of it, is wide enough to contain a
contradiction.
That leads us to
education. Simple if not minimal education indeed. State-owned schools are only
providing the children with the famous three Rs (reading, writing and ‘rithmetics).
By age 10 they are liberated from school and have to get into some kind of
apprenticeship with someone who is practicing this or that profession in order
to learn it. By 20 maximum they have to be established in society as autonomous
economically responsible individuals. The status of the Colleges of Unreason is
in contradiction again with this principle since they are for young people
after ten years of age. But the
principle is that children are supposed to learn unreason as part of reason and
thus to learn how to express any idea in a most contradictory and
non-committing way. Any asserted idea is suspicious if it is not wrapped up in
some contradictory seasoning. At the same time this Erewhon society is shown as
being extremely sectarian about many things that cannot in any way be
questioned. It sounds like a bigot society imposing the basic bigotry of no
assertion for all questions that are not set as immovable, such as the criminality
of the possession and use of any machine or mechanical device.
The second unquestionable
idea is that what we call diseases are considered as a criminal activity on the
side of the sick. The sick are responsible for their sickness and they have to
be punished including by dying because of the decision not to provide them with
any help or treatment. On the other side all that we would call crimes, like
embezzling or stealing, is seen as social derangement in one particular
individual who has to be cured of this dysfunctioning by a severe diet and
regimen, bread and water, or bread and milk for a certain length of time, plus
the use of a straightener to check the diet and perform the regimen of physical
punishment like flogging on the deranged person seen as a victim who has to be
saved. We can note it is the absolute reverse of our societies in which crimes
are seen as the responsibility of the criminals only and these have to be
punished including by death since reform is not the basic objective. On the other
hand, we believe sickness is not the “fault” and “guilt” of the sick who have
to be cured and niot punished for their ailments. At the same time isn’t it the
emergence of the idea that reform should be the basic objective of the
treatment of crime and criminals. And further on isn’t health the
responsibility of individuals who have to have some endurance, and pay for it,
to get the treatment they need and some may think they deserve. This insurance
principle is obviously a way to imply the sick are responsible for their
sickness and must cover the cost of the treatment with some kind of insurance taken
from their own pockets. Isn’t Samuel Butler thus advancing on these two questions
along lines that are not yet entirely accepted and implemented in some
developed countries like the USA, for one example.
That leads me to
saying this novel is in many ways a reflection of its time and a reflection on
the historical and social movements that are at work in European and industrial
societies, maybe in the long run more than the short run. Yet it is very
backward on women and children. Suffragettes and education for all at the
highest level each one can reach are far from this book published in 1872. At
times some most positive reforms and ideas are emerging in a context of absolute
conservative and even reactionary opinions.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU