Debunking modernism in Ford Madox Ford's 'The Good Soldier'

I have chosen Ford Maddox Ford’s novel The Good Soldier[1] to analyze in relation to the above statement as it has a great deal to discuss when considering perspective and perception. The ambiguity of the term modernism means that the answer to this essay is subjective. Whilst I’d like to agree with the statement to some extent, my answer really depends on how you define modernism. In this essay I will explore Ford’s Impressionism, and the ways in which his novel reflects a changing society.

One thing the textbook has taught us is that modernism is created from a period of uncertainty and transition from one era to the next. One interpretation of modernism would therefore be to define it as divergence from tradition. The textbook[2] states that ‘the Impressionist produces a multi-layered, complex and even contradictory narrative’(pp93), and this notion is reflected in Ford’s departure from common literary devices. An example of this is The Good Soldier’s jumbled chronology. Ford breaks away from the linear structure of traditional storytelling by having unreliable narrator Dowell share his story with the reader as he is only just coming to terms with it himself. Dowell opens with, ‘This is the saddest story I ever heard’(pp28), immediately distancing himself from the events he is about to share with us. The textbook sheds some light on this opening line, stating that ‘the narrator seems unsure about the contents of his story – from the very start the reader is negotiating multiple levels of knowledge’(pp66). It is this limited first-person narrative that defines this story as impressionistic, as we experience the story from Dowell’s blissfully ignorant perspective. One critical resource mentioned in the group bibliography that investigates these ideas further is Gasiorek’s[3] writing on Ford’s modernism. He states, ‘he mined literary history in the hope that out of its rich materials he could forge a new, modern, and widely accessible tradition.’ Gasiorek illuminates Ford’s desire to ‘show rather than tell’, which makes sense in terms of The Good Soldier’s impressionism. The novel jumps backwards and forwards in time as Dowell recalls the events, meaning we get snippets of information mixed in with his emotions and impressions of the people around him. Gasiorek then goes on to briefly define modernism, ‘modernist writing tends to be characterised by indeterminacy, the refusal of law-like explanatory systems, etc.’, which helpfully supports my argument so far. With Gasiorek’s opinion in mind, I think that the main statement is true to an extent. Although I do not believe modernism sought to destroy the world, I do think it is evident in Ford’s work that he wanted to re-shape it. The Good Soldier’s fragmented narrative does not reinvent literature completely, but rather transforms the way stories can be told in a modern world.

A huge amount of The Good Soldier is based on appearances and uncovering what lays under the surface of the lives of ‘good people’. The best example of this is Edward Ashburnham’s character, who on the surface is a well-respected, wealthy man who Dowell describes as ‘somebody you can trust with your wife’(pp32). The irony of this statement becomes apparent as the story goes on, foreshadowing the affair between Ashburnham and Dowell’s wife Florence. It is Dowell’s own respect for Ashburnham that prevents him from seeing the affair for so many years. He describes Edward as ‘the cleanest sort of looking chap’, and this impression is carried throughout the majority of the novel, regardless of the information Dowell discovers. I believe that Ford’s intention here is to show that whether or not a person is ‘good’ depends on who it is that is perceiving them. This point leads us onto the idea of morality – a concept prominent in a changing society. Ford’s novel constantly challenges themes of sexuality and adultery, and whether or not those things make a person inherently ‘bad’. This confusion around sexuality is present from the start in Dowell’s narration, ‘If poor Edward was dangerous because of the chastity of his expressions and they say that is the hallmark of a libertine – what about myself?’(pp32). Dowell then vouches for the ‘cleanliness of his thoughts’ and the ‘chastity of his life’. This is representative of the traditional Edwardian values society was accustomed to. However, it seems that Dowell knows that times are changing in his questioning of his own identity – ‘Is the proper man – the man with the right to existence – a raging stallion forever neighing after his neighbor’s womankind?’(pp32). The reader gets a very distinct impression that Dowell is conflicted not just between appearances and reality, but between tradition and modernity. This ties in with the idea of modernism being destructive; societal pillars such as faithfulness and chastity were beginning to crumble under the weight of the new world. A source from the bibliography that supports this view is Haslam’s[4], who says ‘The energy which Dowell doesn’t express sexually has to go somewhere’, going on to surmise that Dowell’s lack of sexuality is what leads us to the ‘darkest places of human consciousness.’ What this resource suggests to me is that Ford uses Dowell as a catalyst for expressing his political opinions. Although sometimes those opinions are not always clear, it is evident that Ford wanted to start a discussion around themes like sexuality and passion. An example of this is in part 4 of the novel where Dowell is contemplating morality- ‘Society can only exist if the normal and slightly deceitful flourish, and if the passionate, the headstrong and the too truthful are condemned to suicide and madness.’(pp175). This passage sheds some light on why Dowell cannot hate Edward, because ‘if he’d had the courage, he’d have done the same.’ This social agenda is what cements Ford as a modernist writer for me, and advocates the idea that modernism wanted to remake the world.

The next thing I’d like to discuss in relation to the title statement is the power dynamic between Edward and Leonora. Dowell states that Leonora ‘adored him with a passion that was like agony and hated him with an agony that was as bitter as the sea.’(pp41). Leonora is aware of Edwards multiple affairs with different women, but this goes unspoken for numerous reasons. Not only does Leonora truly love Edward, but he too wants to keep her separate from his sexual conquests. Dowell refers to Edward’s affairs as ‘passions’, suggesting that he ‘was not a promiscuous libertine. He was not; he was a sentimentalist.’(pp59). Dowell believes that Edward is not a bad person, but simply a slave to his passions. He continues to describe Edward’s shame towards these passions, stating ‘He wanted to preserve the virginity of his wife’s thoughts.’(pp59). This refers to Leonora’s Catholic background. Further on in the chapter, Dowell reveals that ‘Leonora quite seriously and naively believed her church could (…) expect her to take on the impossible job of making Edward Ashburnham a faithful husband.’ This section illuminates Leonora’s motives – not only does she still love Edward, but she also believes that it is her duty as a Catholic to make sure he is faithful to her as the church disapproves of divorce. Once again Ford is presenting us with a socially ‘taboo’ topic that challenges societal norms. Another source from the bibliography that supports this theory is Haslam’s[5] quote on gender – ‘In The Good Soldier [Ford] provides examples of differently mixed proportions of masculinity and femininity’. Drawing back to the power dynamic between Leonora and Edward, Leonora holds more control than you might think. For one thing, she takes control of his estate when she discovers Edwards debts- ‘Mrs. Ashburnham had simply forced Edward to settle all his property upon her. She could force him to do anything; (…) he was as frightened of her as the devil.’(pp59). Not only this, but Leonora’s willingness to allow Mrs. Maiden to travel with them (whilst knowing about their intimate relationship) shows that she even managed to dominate Edward’s sexual affairs. Dowell comments, ‘I suppose that, during all the time I was a deceived husband and Leonora was pimping for Edward.’(pp67). This statement alone is evidence enough that Haslam is right about the subversion of gender roles.

The last thing I’d like to draw attention to is the title itself ‘The Good Soldier’. Whilst we know from the textbook that this story was previously called ‘The saddest story’, I feel the newer title compliments the story much more appropriately. Whilst referencing the war period, the title refers to Edward’s life on the surface – ‘the public side of his record, the good soldiering, the excellent landlord he was and the good sportsman.’. It is in spite of these things that we realize there is more to being a ‘good’ person than playing the game. The story ends with Dowell admitting to the reader he too is a sentimentalist, which is hugely optimistic considering he knows what happens to sentimentalists in his society. Dowell has therefore come full circle, showing us that he is ready to accept his place in an increasingly modernized world. To conclude, I agree with the statement in the respect that modernism sought to reshape the world, though it certainly did not mean to destroy it. Ford’s assortment of literary devices and blatant social agenda demonstrate the inevitability of change.

[1] Haslam, Sara ed. (2010). The Good Soldier by Ford Madox Ford. Ware, Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions. [2] Tickell, A., Haslam, Sara, Davies, Jessica, Fraser, Robert, Asbee, Sue, Sousa Correa, Delia da, . . . Padley, Steve. (2016). Movements 1870-1940. [3] Gasiorek, A. (2001). Ford Madox Ford's Modernism and the question of tradition. English Literature in Transition, 1880-1920, 44(1), 3. [4] Bradshaw, David, & Dettmar, Kevin J. H. (2006). A Companion to Modernist Literature and Culture (Vol. 39, Blackwell companions to literature and culture). Williston: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. [5] Haslam, S. (2009). Fragmenting Modernism: Ford Maddox Ford, the Novel and the Great War. Manchester University Press.