A New Source for Shaw's Major Barbara

56 A NEW SOURCE FOR SHAW'S MAJOR BARBARA By David B. Harrison (University of Colorado, Boulder) Although Shaw's debt to Marx is virtually a commonplace, his debt to Engels has been overlooked. An examination of Engels' "The Attitude of the Bourgeoisie Towards the Proletariat "! reveals the extent of Engels' influence on Maj or Barbara.2 Act Two, which provides the theoretical foundation for the play, is, in fact, not only a dramatization of Engels' treatise, but also a mirror image of Engels' analysis of charity. Undershaft's argument against charity, in Act Two, rests on two points. First, charity is affordable only because of the inequalities of the present system; hence Bodger's money is needed to keep the Salvation Army solvent. And second, charity, because it addresses the symptoms and not the ills— that is, it only temporarily placates the suffering--never cures the cause of the ills, but rather maintains the status quo. In dramatic terms, if charity had not been provided by the Salvation Army, ". . . there would have been rioting this winter in London" (p. 129).3 The effect of charity is to prevent rioting and thus to countenance the suffering and inequalities of the present system. Not surprisingly, these ideas were current in English as early as 1892, when Engels, writing about charity, argued: "The English bourgeoisie is charitable out of self-interest; it gives nothing outright, but regards its gifts as a business matter, makes a bargain with the poor, saying; 'if I spend this much on benevolent institutions [The Salvation Army], I thereby purchase the right not to be troubled any further, and you are bound to stay in your dusky holes . . . this I require, this I purchase with my subscription of twenty pounds for the infirmary."4 in the same chapter, Engels outlines the economic reasons for the English bourgeoisie 's self-interest. Summarizing Malthus, Engels says: "Charities and poor rates are properly speaking nonsense, since they serve only to maintain the excess labor, and thereby to lower the wages of the employed." A more concise and thorough summary of Undershaft's argument can scarcely be found. Written in 1905, Major Barbara is a clear demonstration that Shaw had read Engels. The similarities between Engels and Shaw are simply too close to be accidental. Engels begins by extolling the virtue of the English bourgeoisie's charity: "They who have founded Philanthropic institutions such as no other country 57 can boast of" (p. 564).5 Shaw too begins by extolling the virtue of charity, as he glorifies Barbara's zeal and shows Bill's near conversion. Engels then exposes the hypocrisy of English charity and derides the bourgeoisie for first "sucking out [the proletariat's] very life-blood" and then placing themselves [the charitable bourgeoisie] before the world as mighty benefactors of humanity when you give back to the plundered victims a hundredth part of what belongs to them!" (p. 564).6 Shaw also exposes the hypocrisy of charity, both through Snobby Price's "confession" and through the Salvation Army's willingness to accept money from both Bodger and Undershaft. Finally, Engels finishes with a withering attack on the motives behind charity, describing them as a "business matter" between the rich and the poor whereby the poor "must despair unseen": a contract that the bourgeoisie purchase for their donations of "twenty pounds for the infirmary" (p. 565). Shaw too finishes with a withering attack on the motives behind charity, as three times Bill repeats his bitter question "wot prawce selvytion nah?" (Shaw, pp. 132, 137, 138). Not only are the tone and presentation similar, but also the language, particularly in the Preface, where Shaw describes Undershaft's argument in language identical to Engels'. Engels states that "Money is the God of this world" (p. 412). Shaw states that "Money is the most important thing in the world" (p. 30). Engels continues, saying the effect of poverty "exercises the same ruinous influence upon the mind that alcohol does on the body" (p. 412). Shaw continues, saying poor people—that is, the effects of poverty --"poison us both morally and physically" (p. 172). Most compelling of all, however, is a direct reference to Engels...