Modernism in "Heartbreak House"

George Bernard Shaw's Heartbreak House is a notable work on many levels, but perhaps one of its most pronounced literary elements is the work's profuse embodiment of modernism. One can rather quickly grasp just how it is that modernism thrives in the work; it is flagrantly seen in the characters, in the dialogue, in the psychology of the characters, and through the transpiration of events that plays out in front of the audience.

The characters in the work do not experience idealistic lives in the least. Ellie, Ariadne, Hesione, Randall, and Mangan all find love to be challenging, if not downright futile; while Mazzini has been unable to independently and successfully enterprise a business; and the aging Captain Shotover no longer views his life through rosy lenses. What is more, all of these people live in a time that exists in a world on the verge of brutal war. Indeed, the context of this story is not only realistic, but in fact the whole of the work is a painting that is brushed with the darker hues of society. Insomuch, war, futility, anguish, despair, and deterioration provide the primary backdrops for this play. The dialogue in Heartbreak House is equally as modern as the characters who speak the words. Though the characters are usually introspective and articulate their thoughts well, they certainly do not convey Romantic hope, Transcendent insight, or Victorian morality. Consider some of the themes below, beginning with this materialistic exchange:

Ellie: A soul is a very expensive thing to keep: much more so than a motor car.

Captain Shotover: Really? How much does your soul eat?

Ellie: Oh, a lot. It eats music and pictures and books and mountains and lakes and beautiful things to wear and nice people to be with. In this country you can't have them without lots of money: that is why our souls are so horribly starved. (126)

Meanwhile, this rather pessimistic and glaring set of lines suggests the impending doom to mankind as society further mires itself in the vain and fruitless:

Mrs. Hushabye: What can [the rumbling sound] have been, Hector?

Hector: Heaven's threatening growl of disgust at us useless futile creatures. I tell you, one of two things must happen. Either out of that darkness some new creation will come to supplant us as we have supplanted the animals, or the heavens will fall in thunder and destroy us. (140)

Here is one particularly striking set of lines that, given society was already capable of conducting a world war, illustrates man's irrational power to not only destroy others but to potentially even obliterate himself:

Lady Utterword: What is the dynamite for?

Hector: To blow up the human race if it goes too far. (81)

While but a mere sampling of some of the larger concepts into the realm of Heartbreak House, one can begin to realize that the themes in this work center on the psychological and social decay of mankind and, conversely, some of the causes (materialism, meaningless pursuits, and the abandonment of rational thought) for man having reached the dangerous tipping point between survival and extinction. Perhaps one aspect of this work that seems all too realistic is not just the plot of the work itself and the characters (as well as their psychological perspectives), but also how it is the events in the book unfold. The time that is traversed in this book all takes place in one evening at a party. While the focus of the work is largely the number of discussions that all reveal the social climate of the time, there is also much discourse on Ellie's rather controversial love interest (Mangan), and a number of realistic, sinuous conversations that are dichotomously both significant and trifling. It is nearly as though the audience is watching the transpiration of an evening at an actual party, albeit the characters just so happen to be discussing stimulating, thought-provoking, and rather highly intellectual observations and ruminations about the world, society and, yes, each other.

All in all, the modern elements of Heartbreak House makes for not only an enlightening (and still relevant) take on contemporary society, but it also reminds the audience that mankind can have a grip on where it is heading as a whole. That is, so long as we are willing to make an important decision. Must we continue to find ourselves withering away as both individuals and a collective whole, or is it possible that, with disgust at our ills and dangerous ways, we can realize a path to rectifying our errors and shortcomings and salvage humanity so that we may live to see a brighter day?

Work Cited:

Shaw, George Bernard. Heartbreak House. London: Penguin, 1919.