Essay Questions

Although commercially successful, The Razor’s Edge did not really catch fire and become a must-read novel until the 1960’s. What might explain this delayed reaction?

The novel was originally published while the World War II was excruciatingly crawling to an end. The horrors of Nazi atrocities and the use of the atomic bomb contributed to the darkness that prevailed in fiction and helped give rise to one of the most popular movie genres of the post-war years, film noir. In other words, although the population was trying to figure out the meaning of life in the face of overwhelming odds the answer would be good, they were not ready to go off on a mystical trip for enlightenment. By the 1960’s, the search for the meaning of life was back in vogue, the Beatles and the Beat Generation had made Hinduism the coolest religion on the planet and even the stylistic structure of the book in which Maugham becomes—like Tom Wolfe or Ken Kesey—an active participant in the telling of the story were all primed to make a rediscovery of the novel almost inevitable.

The author situates a version of himself by name into the story as a character. Maugham uses this same device in a number of his fictional works. Why might be the reason?

The most obvious explanation for why Maugham inserts himself directly into the narrative is one that must be derived not just from this singular utilization but as a result of a consistent pattern that is related to his writing style. Many of his short stories are infamously based on actual stories he collected over the years through the art of conversation and the more lurid practice of simple eavesdropping. The result is that throughout his fiction, Maugham engages a narrative perspective that attempts very strongly to create the sense that the story he is telling is true. The same holds true here. Maugham strongly insinuates that story is actually true on the very first page when he writes:

“The man I am writing about is not famous. It may be that he never will be.”

For a man whose literary output is so dominated a particular device that he is identified with that device—becoming a character in his own story—what could be more effective for the purpose of trying to get people to believe the story is true? As for why he would want that, just take note of how many movies begin with text on the screen informing the audience “The following is based on a true story.” People just trust true stories more than fiction.

Is Larry Darrell just a more motivated version of Holden Caulfield?

Significant differences exist between Larry Darrell and the protagonist of Catcher in the Rye, Holden Caulfield, of course. They are two very different characters in terms of background, charm, self-esteem and narcissistic self-interest. At heart, however, an argument can definitely be made—primarily because he doesn’t tell his own story but rather has it filtered through another perspective as just one part of a larger tapestry—that Larry Darrell is really just an older, more experienced and certainly wiser hater of phonies and their phony phoniness. Larry turns every which way to try to find meaning and happiness, but there is always something there to disappoint. The question becomes is Larry really on a quest to find meaning or a quest to find something that doesn’t seem phony?