The
Eustace Diamonds by Anthony
Trollope is in many ways a great book. My
general commentary on the work is here. However,
I want to write a few words concerning something that is not so great about it.
The novel contains a nasty streak of anti-Semitism.
First, I will note accusations of bigotry and
sexism against authors of older works is fairly common. Sometimes these accusations
are based on statements or actions that an author committed or made that are
not directly related to their writing.
In other instances, such charges are made based on subtle or scant
evidence. Joseph Conrad has been accused of racism
based on his novella Heart of Darkness.
At the very least, the purported racism inherent in Conrad’s book is far from
clear and open to debate. Sadly, the anti-Semitism in the Eustace Diamonds is in the text, and it is far from subtle.
In the book, several characters who are Jewish are
described using negative and despicable stereotypes. The portrayal character of
Mr. Emilius is an unfortunate example of this.
Mr. Emilius is an Anglican preacher who was formerly
Jewish. Again and again, he is portrayed as being endowed with the worst Jewish
stereotypes and is portrayed as “greasy,” “oily,” and as a liar and a conniver.
He is described as follows,
“The man was
a nasty, greasy, lying, squinting Jew preacher”
Disparaging comments about his physical features,
which also reflect stereotypes, are also included in numerous passages,
“He was a
dark, hookey-nosed, well-made man, with an exuberance of greasy hair, who would
have been considered handsome by many women, had there not been something,
almost amounting to a squint, amiss with one of his eyes”
The Jewish character of Mr.
Benjamin is also portrayed using similar odious stereotypes. The
word ‘Jew’ is used numerous times in the text, usually paired with negative or
disparaging language.
One can argue that anti-Semitism was a product of the
times that Trollope was writing in, but there are some facts to consider. Other
writers and thinkers who were contemporaries of Trollope vocally opposed anti-Semitism.
In Our Mutual Friend, Charles Dickens
spent many pages defending Jews and criticizing anti-Semites. Friedrich Nietzsche, in multiple essays, threw
his trademark scorn at anti-Semites and defended Jewish people. These are just
a few examples.
With that, when it comes to reading older works, it is
not uncommon to encounter bigotry, sexism and indefensible beliefs. The Old Testament, The Koran and much of Greek literature contain misogynistic and
homophobic passages and are often pro-slavery. William Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice was terribly anti-Semitic.
More recently, H.P. Lovecraft’s stories
contain some overtly racist passages. The list of examples of this sort of
stuff is lengthy.
However, I must admit to being extra disappointed in
Trollope. Having read quite a few of his novels, these passages not
withstanding, his books often embody wisdom and balance. Even when he seems to
support institutions and social conventions that I find questionable, he does
so in a moderate way. He seems to show understanding for people and ideas that
are different. He often shows sensitivity towards women’s issues. The basic
morality that he conveys in his books seems solid. For all of these reasons,
this ugly streak of anti-Semitism is especially surprising and disconcerting.
These passages are part of the text. One of the many
functions of novels is that they allow an author to communicate ideas. Such
ideas are fair game for analysis and criticism. This is a set of ideas that
Trollope includes in this book that are odious and should be identified and
commented upon as such. It is important for those of us who like Trollope and
admire other values that he espouses recognize this shortcoming and acknowledge
that this set of ideas is terrible. I believe that we need to look at
literature through a critical lens. This means analyzing a book’s contents,
celebrating the good, criticizing that with which we disagree and calling out
the truly awful.
