The after -war period proved to be difficult for the United Kingdom, which although [618896]

5
Introduction

The after -war period proved to be difficult for the United Kingdom, which although
one of the winning countries of World War II, had to endure huge losses. As a
consequence, it ceased to be one of the world‟s leading powers and was suffering of
financial and economical instability. The post -war period in Britain came as an agitated
time, when the well -established rules that dominated the country‟s system before the war
were seriously questio ned. In 1942 William Beveridge proposed “the construction” of the
Welfare State, a system that he subsequently initiated and that was meant to restore
Britain‟s prosperity and fame. Theoretically, the Welfare State was a plan that included
reforms covering the social and the economical fields, but practically its main purpose was
to save the people from falling into poverty. The beneficiary of this saving plan was the
working -class, at the time, the most underprivileged of the social classes
(www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/02 ).
In 1945 an election took place and was chosen the first socialist government that
Britain ever had; the new -elected Prime Minister, Clemet Attlee, took steps for rebuilding
the country‟s economy by political programs based on nationalization of the industries and
direct control of the state over them. Among the taken decisions were the rationing of food,
clothing and of other necessities, which gradually started to be par t of a new way of life
(www.vads.ac.uk/learning/designingbritain ).
The Conservative government chosen in 1951, lead by the Prime Minister Winston
Churchill, managed to bring Britain‟s economy to a better level by abolishing the measures
previously undertaken by the Labour Party: the control and the rationing over industries
diminished, the state started to encourage the private enterprise. But the 1950s didn‟t mean
only prosperity, but also serious crisis when Britain had to face the loss o f Suez Chanel
(Lee-Brown,Merz 14;24).
The inconvenient times that Britain came through during the post -war period
strongly influenced its socio -cultural situation, as Marwick thought that “p robably there
would be about as much agreement that Britain in th e late forties and early fifties could be
divided up into a number of social classes, though there would be much disagreement

6
about how and where lines should be drawn” (Marwick 34 -35). Although the British
society consisted in several classes, the main problem was the fact that the country was
confronted with the lack of equality among these classes, being it “equality of opportunity”
or “equality of outcome” (Saunders 44).
The war influenced not only the social classes but also the relationships between
them; the impact of the war was worse on those belonging to the working class and
middle -class. The hard time Britain passed through the 1950s and before put its mark on
the fiction of the decade, ”the winds of change” 1 sized also the cultural life and led to the
birth of a new type of literature who‟s aim was to deny the fiction of the previous decades;
the fiction of the fifties had a strong anti -modernist and anti -experimental nature and
promoted a return to tradition al forms. According to Nick Bentley‟s point of view in
Radical fictions: the English Novel in the 1950s , the fiction of the fifties was a type of
radical fiction which followed two lines of development: on the one hand, by using the
narrative techniques, comes as an experiment in response to the inappropriate realist
manner of depicting the everyday life of the marginalised groups and, on the other hand,
by using political issues to challenge the structures and the social ideologies. This radical
fiction means to him a literature that brings n ewness and originality in a combined
aesthetic -political meaning (Bentley 15 -19).
The novels written in the fifties can be divided into three major groups regarding
the themes they are concerned with:
For the first line novels such as William Golding‟s The Lord of the F lies (1954) and
The Inheritors (1955), George Orwell‟s Nineteen Eighty F our (1949) and Anthony
Burgess‟ A Clockwork O range (1962) are representative. These novels have been featured
as Dystopian or “ anti-Utopias”. They are the dir ect aftermath of the industrialism and its
negative effects and convey the authors‟ fear that the authoritarian regimes will take over
control of the country or even worse, that a new war will outbreak (Ciugureanu 88 -89).
According to the features of the d ystopian literature pointed out on the website Charles’
George Orwell Links, these novels can be assumed as portraying a hierarchical society led
by the upper -class, subjected to oppression or terror, in which the people express fear or
disgust against en gaging a life outside the state ( www.netcharles.com/orwell/articles ).

1 Popular name given to the speech held by the Prime Minister Macmillan on 3rd February 1960 in
South Africa, regarding the intention of the Conservative Government to set most of the African
territories independent

7
The second line consists of the writers who chose to return to the traditional
realistic style, as James Gindin pointed out, a style characteristic for the nineteen century
literature, ha ving as central theme the way in which the man finds his position within
society (Gindin 4). These “realistic” novels best depict Britain after the World War II and
focus on people‟s anger with the social system, the pre -established rules and the disarming
future. This type of novel is representative for writers like Kingsley Amis, John Braine,
John Wain, Allan Sillitoe and will be discussed afterwards in the section dedicated to The
Angry Young Men movement.
The third line includes novelists such as Iris Murdoch, Malcom Bradbury, Muriel
Spark, Malcom Lowry, Samuel Beckett, William Golding that are labelled as the
experimental writers. In her book, Post-war Anxieties, Adina Ciugureanu asserts that the
experimen tal novel of these authors is a continuation of the moralist novel of 1920s -1930s.
It uses various techniques with which the author plays; he prefers rather to be innovative
than to be understood and breaks the convention in depicting the events and the ch aracters,
the author plays with the language and meaning of the words (Ciugureanu 88). Important
experimental novels are Lord of the F lies by William Golding, Under the volcano by
Malcolm Lowry, Under the N et by Iris Murdoch, The Alexandria Quartet series by
Lawrence Durrell, whose authors call for omniscient, even multiple narrators, ambiguous
shifts in time, narrative fragmentation which force readers to reconstruct and understand
the order and the meaning of the events (Shaffer 3).
Besides these three types of novel, there appeared one more. This new type of
fiction fits the dystopian style, but is in form of an inverted -parable and counts on a
moralizing message. To this category belongs Lord of the Flies , in which Golding wants to
prove that the evil lies in man‟s heart and not in the society (Ciugureanu 111). Among
these types of fiction that were born in the 1950s, from afar, the one that best describes
Britain‟s socio -political situation and its vulnerabilities is the “realist” novel.
The purp ose of my bachelor thesis is to show how the views of the Angry Young
Men are refelected in certain works written by the authors belonging to the group. The
present thesis deals with the novels of Kingsley Amis and John Wain, Lucky Jim and
Hurry on Down , respectively. The study is concerned primarly with the analysis of the
major characters of the already mentioned novels. In order to provide a proper analysis of
the protagonists, it it important to place them within the liteary period to which the authors
of these novels belong. The paper consists of three chapters, where the first one in

8
concerned with the theoretical part, while the last two chapters are concerned with the
practical one.
The first chapter is an introduction to the literature of the 1950s, providing a
detailed analysis of the Angry Young Men movement. In order to understand the
complexity of the heroes of the two novels under discussion, it is important to understand
the way in which The Angry Young Men portrayed such characters . Therefore, I will
explain how the group appeared and what factors contributed to its emergence. The Angry
Young Men were the group of writers that reacted against the socio -political, but also
economical crisis which Britain encountered at the end of the Second Worl d War and the
years that followed; these aspects together with the aims and views of the labelled authors
will be discussed in the second subchapter. Born from the disillusion with the current
political regim e and its inability to minimise the social -class distinctions, the novels by the
Angry Young Men created the suitable envir onment for dis appointed, frustrated and angry
heroes. In the last section a general portrait of the hero of the 1950, which follows the same
pattern in almost all the “angry novels”, will be provided.
The second chapter is concerned with the analysis of Lucky Jim, whereas the third ,
with the analysis of Hurry on Down , on the basis of the general knowledge about the
Angry Young Men. These chapters are meant to show that the vie ws of the Angry Young
Men, previously presented in Chapter I are clearly reflected in these two novels . The major
objective of the last two chapters is to provide a complex analysis of the protagonist in the
novels under discussion. Therefore, I will go fu rther and analyze the environment in which
the protagonists live, concerning the social classes that surround them; in this way, each of
the social classes will be illustrated by references to characters representa tive for each of
them . The last section co ntains the analysis of the protagonists, Jim Dixon and Charles
Lumley. The protagonists will be analysed in term s of the relation they have with other
characters as well as in terms of the attitude they take towards important issues, such as
education and love.
Living in a period of social disorder, The Angry Young Men directed their anger
towards the social classes and were strongly discontent ed with the differences and the
discrimination among people. As a result of their disgust, the fiction of the label led writers
had a vide reception due to their identification with the disappointed protagonist.

9

CHAPTER ONE

The Angry Young Men, a Symbol of the 1950s

The objective of this chapter is to provide an extensive presentation of the literary
group that emerged in the early 1950s and to emphasize its importance in the British
literature. Therefore, the presentation of The Angry Young Men will concern a series of
aspects that play an important role in defining the value of the labelled authors, starting
from the emergence of the group to its decline.
1.1 Short history of the Movement
From the general dissatisfaction with the society emerged two literary groups that
adopted the realist manner: The Movement and The Angry Young Men . However, the two
trends are connected by the fact that their lines of development interfered, being strongl y
influenced one by the other in the beginning of their emergence. According to Blake
Morrison:
By the Movement -to get the matter of definitions out of the way -I mean
not just the nine poets (several of them also novelists) but a set of values
or beliefs to which these writers gave expression and which others in
their generation, not necessarily writers, also shared: that‟s to say, a
consensus we recognize as characteristic of Britain in the 1950s
(qtd. in Leader 16).
The name of the group was first mentioned in The Spectator magazine in 1954, by
its editor, J.D Scott, who thought that the publication of such article would bring his
magazine to a more successful level, as Leader argues that: It‟s undeniable that the term
the Movement -with a defi nite article and capital M -was created by chance, having been
dreamt up one day in 1954 by the editor of The Spectator to get his magazine talked about
(Leader 17).

10
The label included famous poets such as Donald Davie, Philip Larkin, Kingsley
Amis etc, who se common works‟ feature was in the form of a satire of snobbery; they
expressed disgust towards pre -established class system, provincialism, modern poetry or
high culture. The Movement was an important part of the 1950s literature, if we are to take
into consideration several reasons Leader decided upon when referring to the a uthors as
being precious for British literature:
[…] because it‟s the quality of the work they produced; because -to put my
card on the table – Larkin is the greatest English poet of the second part of
the twentieth century and Amis the greatest comic novelist; because
Davie is the outstanding critic of his generation; and because Gunn,
Davie and Enright are all great poets (19).
The decline of The Movement paved the way for the emergence of The Angry Young
Men; these formed a group of writers that included John Osborne, John Wain, John Braine,
Kingsley Amis and Allan Sillitoe, also members of The Movement ; the membership of the
Movement writers leads to the overlapping of the tw o labels and to a difficult distinction to
be made between them. The first novels that were published by “the angry authors” were
Hurry on down (1953 ) by John Wain and Lucky Jim (1954) by Kingsley Amis and both
opened the way of the young writers and encouraged them to express their dissatisfaction
through their novels.
Of an increased attention in the socio -political and cultural history of Great Britain
is the year 1956, when i t lost the Suez Channel and many advantages at the same time; not
accidentally it happened that in the same year was heard for the first time the label Angry
Young Men and its members started to be talked about. The origin of the name can be
assumed to the press agent of the Royal Court Theatre, who named John Osborne “an
angry young man”; this happened in London, on 8th May 1956, when Osborne‟s play Look
back in anger had the opening night and became afterwards an important work of The
Angry Young Men, nam e that was assigned to Osborne‟s contemporary writers who
displayed discontentment with the class distinction (Luebering 245).
The name was again mentioned in The Times’ newspaper article from 26th May,
used when the author of it presented the readers a c omparison of the two main characters
of Lucky Jim ( Jim Dixon) and Look back in anger ( Jimmy Porter), ending up in calling
these characters as ”angry young men”. According to the article Talent Spotter, published
in The Guardian ‟s newspaper edition from 1 2th March 2005, the label became even more
famous in 1957 when Tom Maschler published The Declaration , an anthology of essays, in

11
which some of the members of the Movement, John Osborne, Collin Wilson or Doris
Lessing, expressed their negative prospects re garding Britain‟s political situation; The
Declaration is considered to have been the manifesto of the Angry Young Men
(www.guardian.co.uk/books/2005/mar/12 ).
The Angry Young Men became a controversy, if we are to interpret Braine‟s
assertions quoted by Humphrey Carpenter :
Looking at British writing, generally, from about 1949 to now I sensed a
deadness of feeling among writers. Now things seem to be moving.
Angry Young Men is misused and over -used label, but it does have some
significance if only that i t means that the young writer is rejecting literary
formulas […] There never was a group and the people who have been
labelled Angry Young Men are all very different (154;166).
The controversy consists of the inappropriate approach of considering them a
united group as long as they, although expressing the same dissatisfaction and revolt
against the post -war society, were individualistic and were writing independently. In
addition, the controversy comes from the fact that the writers neither admitted the group
membership nor considered themselves as being angry, they did not want to be associated
with the group but wanted to catch attention through their individual voice. Kingsley
Amis‟ opinion regarding the group unity is obvious; when interviewed by Dal e Salwak and
asked to recoll ect the Angry Young Men ‟s emergence , Amis replied :
As always, I think it was all certainly all not one or two things. Rather, it
was a combination of accidents […] There was this lag of eight or ten
years after the war when no thing happened. Then by a series of
coincidences, within three years, John Wain appeared, I appeared, John
Braine, John Osborne, Iris Murdoch and Colin Wilson all appeared. And
others. Now that looks like a movement, and I can quite see, since there
was th is business of non -upper classness (middle -class, middle upper –
class perhaps, but not upper -class) people could be forgiven for mistaking
this sort of minor revolution turning point in English writing. I don‟t
think it really was that, but it had the look of being one
(qtd. in Salwak 15 -16).
Although the Angry Young Men were afraid to assume their membership of the group as
they were unsure which would be the readers‟ response to their novels, as the fame of their
works increased, they began to accept the people‟s associating them with the label.

12
1.2 The Angry Young Men and their principles
If we are to concentrate on the main features and views of the Angry Young Men, we may
take into consideration the following excerpt from Britannica :
Angry Young Men, various British novelists and playwrights who
emerged in the 1950s and expressed scorn and disaffection with the
established socio -political order of their country. Their impatience and
resentment were especially aroused by what they perceived as the
hypo crisy and mediocrity of the upper and middle classes .
(www.britannica.com)
Once the foundation of The Movement was complete, many reporters and critics
started to take notice of the new group that emerged and that was so much promising to
give birth to a n ew era in the history of English literature. The attention of the critics was
caught by the fact that the new generation of authors was bringing a touch of novelty to
literature due to their literary identity and, what was interesting, due to the fact that these
authors were bringing with them a social identity too. Not accidentally it happened that the
writers belonging to the group shared a specific social feature that it never happened before
for authors of a specific literary period to do so. The Angry Young Men met the conditions
of belonging to the group and “succeeded in joining” it (Morrison 75); some of them were
of lower -middle -class (Amis,Davie), some grew up in industrial cities (Amis, Enright),
some attended grammar schools (Davie,Holloway), som e benefited of higher education at
either Oxford or Cambridge (Amis, Wain, Enright) (Morrison 55 -57).
The confirmation of Morrison‟s account regarding the “structure” of the Angry
Young Men is made by Amis himself, one of the most important writers of the group:
[…] it so happened that three or four writers (including me), none of
whom were from upper -class backgrounds or had been to public schools
in the British sense, emerged at the same time. And they were all roughly
of an age, and it so happened that there had been a kind of delayed action
effect after the war. […] I think there was a feeling of exhaustion after the
war There were writers who were still writing, but for some reason no
new writer of any fame, any note, had appeared for seven or eight years. I
think this was partly because people were busy putting their lives together
again (qtd. Salwak 15-16).
In brief, the common social identity of the writers was that they were descending from the
lower or middle -class, benefited of subsidized educa tion and were all young writers, which
made their image even stronger in front of the critics .
As most of the authors of the Angry Young Men were of lower -middle -class origin,
they had to endure the oppression of the upper -middle -class during their upbring ing in

13
grammar schools or universities. Such institutions were mostly dominated by students
coming from such social class, who not only were superior to the ordinary working -class
students but also tended to show it. The differences between the social clas ses were
obvious for the Movement writers, who, aware of this fact, proposed to get rid of such
uncomfortable inequalities; they devised a literature which would juggle with these
differences and minimize them and whose central theme was Britain‟s class sy stem in
post-war time (Morrison 68 -69).
According to Blake Morrison, the term “class” had a bivalent value in the works of
the Angry Young Men and created ambiguities when readers had to interpret it. It could
mean, on the one hand, the social status and, on the other hand, used in slang, the physical
attraction and the two meanings became even synonyms at some time. But Morrison goes
on with the exemplification of this division; he states that, when Jim Dixon says that
Christine is “out of his class”, he refers not only to Christine belonging to a superior class
but also to the sexual connotation of the word (Morrison 69).
In The Movement: English Poetry and Fiction of the 1950s , Blake Morrison goes
further and asserts that:
What emerges in the work of th e Movement, then, is an uneasy
combination of class -consciousness and acceptance of class division: an
acute awareness of privilege, but an eventual submission to the structure
which makes it possible. […] the Movement writers were identified with a
view -point hostile to the “old order”. They resented social inequality, and
were not so credulous as to suppose that it had been eliminated as a result
of wartime Coalition and post -war Labour government. Oxford and
Cambridge […] still seemed to them to be r iddled with class prejudice
(75).
The hostility and the dissatisfaction that the writers felt during their formation years
influenced them to solve the problem in the way that their novels were a severe criticism
directed towards the old order and especial ly towards the upper -middle -class. The Angry
Young Men intensely criticized the traditional culture, its snobbery and its exclusiveness.
However, the attack of the young writers took the shape of a “token rebellion”. Their
novels were meant to bring the so cial classes closer to each other and to minimize the
differences between them (Morrison 77).
Although the fifties were considered a prosperous period, there were still negative
sides of politics and society , that influenced the writers of the Angry Young Men to direct
the aim of their novels to wards these vulnerabilities. Blake Morrison asserts that “they

14
were identified with a spirit of change in post -war British society and were felt to be
representative of shift s in power and social structure” (Morriso n 57). They were the group
that reacted against the changes in the British society of the decade; most of them
belonging to the working -class, were concerned with the changes in the society that
affected it. They strongly displayed a critical attitude towa rds the middle and the upper
classes: they criticised the hypocrisy of the people within these classes.
In their fight against social classes and against the striking differences between
them, the Angry Young Men paid much interest in creating novels in which the hero fits
the world designed by the “angry author”. Thus, without any intention to change or alter
the already -existing social order, they directed the purpose of their work in a way that the
“adjustment” and the “compromise” were the key -facts in solving the social imbalance.
The fiction of the Angry Young Men, expressing disgust towards society privileging the
upper -class and towards discrimination has earned ground during the 1950s because it
belonged with m ost of the ordinary British citizens‟ attitudes, as Lodge comes to conclude
that the Angry Young Men “focused in a very precise way a number of attitudes which
great lower -middle -class intellectuals find useful for the purposes of self -definition” (qtd.
in Morrison 81). And the people really did so; most of them, reading the “the angry
novels”, discovered a clear image of themselves discriminated and lost in the middle of the
socio -political disorder of 1950‟s England. This image allowed them to take a refl exive
look at their condition and find their identity shaped by all these everyday anxieties,
nostalgia and regret of the past (Morrison 73).
Although the members of the Movement were beset by the image of the war that
had recently finished, they tried to evade this grim reality and engage in writing novels that
would avoid the main themes discussed by other authors of the period -the war and the
current issues. The Angry Young Men considered that writing on the war issues was less
useful than concentrating on issues concerning the present. For them, making use of the
war theme was equal to an impossible mission which, at the same time, involved a
“departure from coherence and order”. The difference between the writers who worship the
war theme and Movement w riters was obvious, according to Wain:
The earlier modern poets had been formbreakers […] At such a time,
when exhaustion and boredom in the foreground are balanced by guilt
and fear in the background, it is natural that a poet should feel the
impulse t o build . Writing regular and disciplined is building in a simple
and obvious sense, like bricklaying. Too simple, too obvious? Perhaps.

15
But we are were very young and were doing the best we could to make
something amid the ruins (qtd in Morrison 89).
The d isinterest in such fiction can be deemed as a reaction against the writers of the
1930s, such as Yeats, Eliot, and Pound, who were interpreting the history in a way that
would discourage the future approach of the same issue. At the same time, the Angry
Young Men were thinking that the difficult times their country was passing through,
marked by unemployment and the emergence of the Totalitarian regimes, should have been
minimised by fiction dealing with the positive side of everyday life (Morrison 93 -94).
The views of the Angry Young Men were better reflected in their works, in which
they tried to reconstruct as much as they could the social class to which they belonged.
Their novels carry the evidence of what the fifties meant to the labelled authors. The novel
of the fifties can function as a mirror for the history of the time through the issues exposed
in several of the representative works of the Angry Young Men . The group influenced the
literature of the period in the way in which they were the reflect ion of the soci ety and were
easy to understand because the authors intended to make their novels “intelligible to the
ordinary intelligent reader” (Head 33).
In the interview called The Proletarian Writer , George Orwell debates the problem
of “proletarian literature”, term that can also be ascribed to the fiction of the Angry Young
Men, as they were both contemporaries with Orwell and descendants of the working -class
or of the proletariat. Orwell reflects upon the status of the proletarian writers and state s
that:
[..] you can see what is really the history of a proletarian writer
nowadays. Through some accident -very often it is simply due to hav ing a
long period on the dole -a young man of the working class gets a chance
to educate himself. Then he starts writing books, and naturally he makes
use of his early experiences, his sufferings under poverty, his revolt
against the existing system, and so forth. But he isn‟t really creating an
independent literature. He writes in the bourgeois manner, in the
middle-class dialect. He is simply the black sheep of the bourgeois
family, using the old methods for slightly different purposes. Don‟t
mistake me. I‟m not saying that he can‟t be as good a writer as anyone
else; but if he is, it won‟t be because he is a wor king man but because he
is a talented person who has learnt to write well. So long as the
bourgeoisie are the dominant class, literature must be bourgeois .
(www.theorwellprize.co.uk/george -orwell/by -orwell)
As “proletarian” writers, the Angry Young Men depicted in their novels the world in which
they were leaving, being confronted with the hardships of life, with the poverty of their

16
class and with the pre -established system, in particular. The novels by the Angry Young
Men appear as a long string of dissat isfaction which the writers wanted to comment on
and, using their “early experiences”, they features in these works protagonists that can
stand as a reflexion of the authors themselves.
1.3 The “hero ” of the 1950s
At the same time with the emergence of the Angry Young Men, the authors of the
group gave birth to a new interpretation of the protagonist in the novel; the young authors
brought with them a new hero that would later be considered “ the post -war type”, as A dina
Ciugureanu calls him (100). The “hero” of the 1950s is in most of th e novels a man
belonging to the working -class who benefited of higher education. What makes of some of
the novels pieces of autobiographical writings is the coincidence that some of t he authors
themselves benefited from such education thanks to Butler Education Act in 1944, which
arranged the educational system, giving th e children of working class and middle -class
parents the chance to access universities.
The “hero” depicted in the novels of the Angry Young Men attempts to break
through his own social status and get into a superior class; his failure to integrate in this
world makes him have an angry reaction against all those belonging to middle or
upper -class and lead almost to a mocked hate and envy. Although a university graduate,
“the hero ” realizes that the society doesn‟t have anything to offer and he is left at the
periphery of it; he is, in Morton Kroll‟s opinion, some sort of “ displaced person in English
society, belonging to no one, yet wanting to have an acceptable identity compatible with
their self -realization” (Kroll 556).
In A Reader’s guide to Contemporary English Novel Frederick Karl states that “the
hero” wants to reso lve the problems he has and become equal with the others; the novel of
the fifties comes as “the hero‟s ” rejection of what he considers would hold him back from
achieving the desired social position. Even so, he protests in a quiet manner and always
finds escapes from what he doesn‟t like, he wants to find his comfort and power within
society, although was educated for holding minor positions within the social hierarchy
( Karl 221 -228).
Due to the controversial time Britain was passing through in the 1950s , between
economical and political stability and instability within the social classes, the “hero” of the
Angry Young Men came as a reflection of the British young generation towards unfulfilled

17
expectations from the p art of the political parties . Although he is dissatisfied, the “hero”
adopts the “political quietism” and doesn‟t commit himself to politics
(www.nkjoleszno.pl/publikacje/tzuczkowski1).
Generally, the “hero” of the fifties is an intellectual young man, a graduate, who
displays dissatisfaction with the pre -established social arrangements of post -war England
or, as Berthold and Lea asser t that “he is dissatisfied with the inability of the Welfare state
to deliver its promises” (Berthold,Lea 19). What this “hero” thinks is that he can change
the world around him and can climb the social ladder, due to his formation in higher
education institutions. The opportunity to access universities, although belonging to the
working class, made the new “hero” penetrate the wo rld of the privileged classes and see
how it is like; this led to a crisis in the identity of the hero, he doesn‟t know where he
belongs to nor what his job should be, the protagonist is afraid of not having too high or
too little expectations regarding hi s social status. The problem of hypergamy occurs and
therefore the “hero” meets a girl from a superior social class and tries his best to catch her
attention, which will end with a marriage. The marriage means that the hero became a
member of the class to which the girl belongs
(www.nkjoleszno.pl/publikacje/tzuczkowski1).
By marrying a rich girl, the “hero” betrays in this way his original class trying to
get higher and higher and once he gets there he is resigned and becomes part of those he
was previously criticizing. Angry with the society he leaves in, against its establishments
and later finding his sal vation by marrying a rich girl, the “hero” of the fifties turns into
young man who doesn‟t worth his social status and cann ot be proud of his achievements
because he “ends up in a quiet and cosy shelter created for him by a woman […] who not
only brings spiritual comfort, but establishes the hero‟s social position”
(www.nkjoleszno.pl/publikacje/tzuczkowski1 ).
1.4 The decline of t he Angry Young Men Movement
Although it was described as realistic and traditional and embodying the great mass
of the young people of the 1950, dissatisfied with everyday life, the fiction of the Angry
Young Men was written in a satirical way, with lots of humorous scenes, which mad e it
become an emblematic type of the decade. Not even this identification of the common
reader with the views of the Angry Young Men made it possible for the group to extend its

18
presence later than 1960s. Although some of the members continued to write ev en later
after 1960, their work didn‟t face the same success as in the previous years.
The decline of the Movement can be assumed to a loss of readers‟ interest in such
novels that dealt with social themes, as the years of decay and dissatisfaction toward s the
Empire were replaced by a prosperous time concerning the social, political and economical
aspects. The decline of the writers can also be a consequence of the fact that some of the
them didn‟t identify themselves any longer with the values they procl aimed in their most
successful novels, they simply changed their subject matters (Burgess 231); as Burgess
asserts in English Literature: a Survey for Students , all novels became in time historical.
They express their own period, and that period passes, le aving the novel behind as a gloss
in its margin (231).
Born in a period of social and political unrest, the Angry Young Men managed to
overcome any obstacle and thus their discontentment with the Empire gave birth to a new
type of novel, whose protagonist is the reflection of the typical post -war Briton, unable to
deal with everyday problems but who eventually finds his escape by making a compromise
with the disorganized society and with himself.

19
CHAPTER TWO

Lucky Jim , a Campus Satire

This chapter will deal with the analysis of the major character in Kingsley Amis‟
novel, Lucky Jim. In order to emphasize the nature of Jim Dixon‟s protest, it is important to
first pr ovide an analysis of the social classes and of the way in which Amis features them.
Regarded as carrying the evidence of all dissatisfaction felt by its authors, the fiction of the
Angry Young Men is mainly a protest against the faulty attitude of the Empi re towards the
social classes and especially towards de differences between them. Being an important
work of the “angries”, Lucky Jim shares all this signs of protest. As it was expected, the
conflict is between the lower or working -class and the upper -class and therefore the focus
will be dwelt upon the relation between the two classes.
2.1 The upper -class
From the very beginning of the novel, the reader is introduced in the world of Jim
Dixon, a world in which the upper -class reigns. The control of the upper class is noticeable
from the first page of the book and it comes through Dixon‟s master, Ned Welch.
Throughout the novel, Welch proves to be the centre of the academic world in which
Dixon revolves.
Welch represents the typical man of the upper -class and at the same time the
genuine image of the man of letters. He is an old teacher, now the master of th e History
department and the person who Dixon most fears. Dixon‟s staying at the obscure university
and his job as a junior lecturer strictly depend on Welch. Although Welch is representative
for the traditional university teacher, proficient in the subjec t he teaches, there are bad
sides of his personality that make him less attractive. Such an example could serve
Welch‟s obsession for classical music; in honour of music, he often organizes musical

20
meetings. To such a meeting is Dixon invited or almost bou nd to take part. He ironically
calls this meeting “filthy Mozart”, not because he hates the composer, but, as Amis points
out, because he “wants to annoy Mozart lovers, not denigrate Mozart”
(qtd. in Morrison 75).
Another reason why Dixon expresses anger towards Welch is the latter‟s
egocentrism. Welch often holds never -ending monologues in front of Dixon, concerning
his status. He likes to make an important of himself that Dixon doesn‟t even listen to him
anymore, but pretends to.
The new modification th at occurred in the post -war British educational system and
allowed students from different backgrounds to benefit of higher education clearly
disturbed Welch. He was used to the academic milieu populated by upper -class students
and now, that the underprivi leged were offered the chance to access universities, he looks
them with superiority. He finds normal taking an authoritative tone over Dixon, as well as
normal is for him Dixon‟s performing his orders:
„You haven‟t had a reply to your letter asking for so mething definite
when he‟s publishing your thing? ‟ Welch asked. „No, not a word‟ replied
Dixon. „Well then, you must certainly write to him again, Dixon, and say
you must have a definite date of publication. Say you‟ve had an enquiry
from other journal abo ut what you‟re writing. Say you must know
definitely within a week.‟ Such fluency, like the keen glance that
accompanied it, Welch seemed to reserve especially for telling people
what to do. (Amis 83)
Although Welch pretends to be a distinguished upper -class man, by the way he speaks, by
his superior attitude and by his intellectual concerns; his behaviour betrays his attempt to
convince the reader that he really is one. Sometimes, when he thinks nobody pays attention
to him, Welch acts inappropriately for the man he claims to be:
Now, as Dixon had expected it all along, Welch produced his
handkerchief. It was clear that he was about to blow his nose. This was
usually horrible, if only it drew unwilling attention to Welch‟s nose itself,
a large, open -pored tetrahedron. But when the familiar miraculously –
sustained blares beat against the walls and windows, Dixon hardly
minded at all; the noise had the effect of changing his mood. (Amis 86)
Self-centred , obsessed with high culture and lacking sometimes the basic rules of conduct,
professor Welch represents the most accurate image of the snobbish and extravagant man
of the upper -class.

21
2.2 The lower -class
The hypocrisy of the upper -class is altered by the ge nuineness of the lower -class
and this contradiction is clearly reflected by the opposition between the characters
belonging to those classes. If Professor Welch was the pure representa tion of the
upper -class, the working -class finds its personificat ion in Margaret Peel. She is Dixon‟s
colleague in the History department and the narrator goes on in exposing the reader the
conjuncture of Dixon‟s and Margaret‟s relationship:
He‟s been drawn into the Margaret business by a combination of virtues
he hadn‟ t known he possessed: politeness, friendly interest, ordinary
concern, a good -natured willingness to be imposed upon, a desire for
unequivocal friendship. It had seemed only natural for a female lecturer
to ask a junior, though older, male colleague up to her place for coffee,
and no more than civil to accept. Then suddenly he was the man who was
„going round‟ with Margaret. (Amis 10)
Margaret is a good person but not necessarily a friendly one or had it been her nature that
she doesn‟t have friends. She a ppreciates Dixon‟s friendship as she admits that she doesn‟t
“get on with men as a rule” (Amis 3). The only man she said to have got on before Dixon
was Catchpole, but, by the end of the novel it all proves to be a lie:
[…] contrary to what Margaret seems to have told you, she and I were
never lovers in either the emotional or what I might call the technical
sense. […] Quite soon I realized that she was one of these people -they are
usually women – who feed on emotional tension . (Amis 235)
Margaret is unsecu re about her person and, in an attempt to hide it, she often acts foolish.
Her insecurity and frustration are mostly reflected by her behaviour towards Dixon.
Envious and afraid that Dixon will eventually leave her for the rich girl, Christine
Callaghan, s he tries to discourage Dixon‟s attempt to conquer Christine‟s heart by
reminding him who he is:
„You don‟t think she‟d have you, do you? A shabby little provincial bore
like you. ‟ Margaret burst out as soon as she‟d stopped speaking. „Or she
has had you al ready?‟ (Amis 158 -9)
Whenever she is discontent with people‟s treatment of her, Margaret acts hysterically. By
her neurotic behaviour she tries to arouse the compassion of the others towards her and
thus manipulating them:
There was a pause. She came wave ringly forwards, put her hands on his
shoulders, and seemed to collapse, or be dragging him, on to the bed.[…]
She was making a curious noise, a steady, repeated, low -pitched moan
that sounded as if it came from the pit of her stomach, as if she‟s been

22
sick over and over again and still wanted to be sick[…] Then she raised
herself, tense but still trembling, and began a series of high -pitched,
inward screams which alternated with the deep moans. (Amis 159)
Margaret Peel is the representation of the ordinary lower -class people. Although
she achieved a desirable status and is clearly above the others of her class, she doesn‟t even
try to change her behaviour . She still misbehaves and her destiny could be seen like that of
a tragic heroine. She recognizes the t ragic of her situation in the inability to have a normal
relationship. She is the reflection of the post -war working -class man who, alth ough
disappointed with the clearly -established order, she doesn‟t do anything to break the
borders between the social cl asses. The only things she can do are display a resigned
attitude and continue to discourage the other‟s attempt to break through the upper -class.
The social arrangements in Lucky Jim are not clearly mentioned by the narrator. But
it is Amis‟ merit that he created such a protagonist, whose disappointment is directed
towards those social classes. Thus, the reader manages to get the essence of Dixon‟s
protest by analyzing his thoughts and attitude; the reader is gradually brought in the middle
of Dixon‟s stru ggle to defeat the social system and learns how various other characters
have been “distributed” within the two classes.
2.3 The lower – versus the upper -class
One of the major interests in Lucky Jim , which Kingsley Amis obviously dwells on,
is the description of the social disorder and of the problems of the ordinary lower -class
people. The post -war crisis, the Suez War and the inability of the Government to deal with
current issues inspired Amis to write his first novel in the form of a sat ire, thus moralizing
the British society of the 1950s and many of its unfavourable aspects. In what follows, it
will be discussed the opposition between the lower and the upper -class as illustrated in the
novel through the portrayal of a character belongin g to the respective social class.
The essence of Lucky Jim is basically the opposition between the lower and the
upper -class. Amis chose to depict this striking opposition by creating complex characters
who, in somehow or other, are typical for the two s ocial classes to which they belong. As
for the working -class belong characters like Dixon and his fellows, Atkinson, Beesley,
Johns and Margaret, characters like professor Welch and his family, Gore -Urquhart and
Christine are representatives for the upper -class. However, not all these characters compete
in offering the novel the aspect of a social fresco, but seem that the main source of this
concern is the contradiction between Ned Welch and Jim Dixon. While Professor Welch

23
represents the typical man of up per-class origin, self -centred, proud of himself and content
with his social status, Jim Dixon represents the frustrated man of the lower -class, who
although benefited of higher education, finds himself stuck in the struggle to defeat the
social prejudices . He realizes that it is very difficult to break the barriers of the upper -class.
Dixon sets his target, to penetrate the upper -class, and doesn‟t give up until he sees his aim
achieved. Amis finds the solution to Dixon‟s desire to have Christine, the rich girl, in the
person of Gore -Urquhart, Christine‟s uncle. In the end, the balance of the classes tilts in
favour of Dixon: Gore -Urquhart offers him a good job and thus Jim finds his salvation and
becomes one member of the upper -class.
2.4 The social classe s and education
There is an obvious connection between the social classes, the education and the
cultural level of their representatives. Therefore, the educational system represents an
important issue in the novel. Amis himself being a beneficiary of Butl er Education Act,
succeeded in transferring most of his beliefs regarding education to Jim Dixon. The novel
consists, in addition to the opposition between two distinct social classes, in the opposition
between two distinct educational systems, let‟s say, the opposition between the old and the
new order.
One the one hand, the old order is represented by Welch, who at the same time, is
Dixon‟s main reason of disgust towards education. Dixon‟s disgust comes from his
realizing that Welch is nothing than a co rrupt teacher whose main professional
achievement can be easily assumed to his upper -class origin. Welch‟s obsession with
classical music and well as his long soliloquies make Dixon conscious of the professor‟s
value as a teacher:
Welch was talking yet aga in about his concert. How had he become
Professor of History, even at a place like this? By published work? No.
By extra good teaching? No in italics. Then how? As usual, Dixon
shelved this question, telling himself that what mattered was that this man
had decisive power over his future, at any rate until the next four or five
weeks up. (Amis 8)
. On the other hand, Jim Dixon is the representation of the teacher devoid of any
professional concern. A product of Butler Education Act, Jim Dixon is unable to de liver all
his promises regarding his job: publishing an article and preparing for the final le cture. His
failure to meet Welch‟s expectations leads Dixon to being sacked from university.

24
A critical opinion on such types of educated persons like Jim Dixon is exposed by Gavin
Keulks citing Somerset Maugham in Father and Son… , who thinks that:
They do not go to university to acquire culture, but to get a job, and when
they have got one, scamp it. They have no manners, and are woefully
unable to deal with an y social predicament.[…] They are mean, malicious
and envious.[…] They are scum. (106)
Such is Dixon‟s case, who thinks that the higher education he benefited of enables him to
acquire professional excellence without effort. Amis depicts Dixon‟s superf iciality and his
attitude towards the traditional educational system in a comic manner; several times Dixon
is surprised imitating Welch or making fun of some of the professor‟s habits:
Welch called: „Ready, Dixon?‟ With Mrs. Welch at his side, he more tha n
ever resembled an old boxer, given to a bit of poaching now and then,
standin g with his ex -kitchenmaid wife. (Amis 220)
When he‟s spoken about half a dozen sentences, Dixon realized that
something was still very wrong.[…] Then he realized what it was that so
wrong: he‟s gone on using Welch‟s manner of address. In an effort to
make his script sound spontaneous, he‟s inserted an „of course‟ here, a
„you see‟ there, an „as you might call it‟ somewhere else; nothing so
firmly recall ed Welch as that sort of thing. (Amis 223)
Summarily, the old and new educational systems are depicted in relation to the typical
characters of the novel that might refer to such standards of educated people. Welch and
Dixon are opposed characters, of whom Amis makes much fun. Th e novel is a satire of the
academic life of 1950s Britain.
2.5 Jim Dixon and the Campus Satire
In his depiction of the social unrest and of the struggle in post -war period, Kingsley
Amis offers a critical perspective on the society. His major character, Ji m Dixon, becomes
the embodiment of the intellectual poorly paid and unhappy, who creates a satirical view
on campus life, private success and academic career.
Jim Dixon, the protagonist of Lucky Jim , is a newly hired history teacher at an
obscure universit y in England. His superior is Professor Welch, who keeps Dixon‟s
didactic activity closely under observation, as he is the person on who Dixon‟s career
depends on. Dixon is an unambitious teacher who is content ed that he got the job and does
not aspire for more; his only wish it to keep his actual job, a reason why he accepts
Welch‟s orders and remarks, without even saying a word. Dixon is conscious that even a
little mistake in his behaviour would draw bad consequences and thus the only way in

25
which he is free to react against that people or orders he does not like is by displaying
funny faces or grimaces. He is dissatisfied with the society he lives in and has inside a lot
of anger against it, directed in particular to wards the social stratification. A nov ice,
throughout the novel, Jim Dixon has to face different situations and creates new occasions
to make a fool of himself ; he lacks strength, handiness and even imagination when he has
to cope with certain situations and find his escape. As examples can se rve the following
passages from the novel:
When invited at the Welches‟ to spend the weekend, Dixon wakes -up and sees a
disaster surrounding him: the bedside table, the bedding and the carpet have been all burnt
by his lightened cigarette while he was asl eep; he eventually finds a stupid solution to hide
the damages:
He got out of bed and went into the bathroom. A fter a minute or two, he
return s and carrying a safety razor blade, he started carefully cutting
round the edges of the burnt areas o f the bedclo thes with the blade. He
didn‟t know why he did this, but the operation did seem to improve the
look of the things: the cause of the disaster wasn‟t so immediately
apparent . (Amis 63)
Another time, Christine wants to know whether or not Bertrand will attend the Summer
Ball but does not want to call the Welches, as she doesn‟t get along with them. Dixon
offers to do that for her and calls at the Welches‟ , pretending to be a reporter in wish for an
interview with Bertrand:
„Evening Post here‟, he managed to quaver through his snout. „And what
can I do for you, Sir?‟Dixon recovered slightly „Er…we‟d like to do a
little paragraph about you for our, for our Sunday pa ge‟, he said
beginning to plan. (Amis 99 -100)
It seems that Dixon has specia lized in pretending to be somebody else and goes further: he
calls at Welch‟s to talk to Christine, but the professor‟s wife answers and he is bound to
recommend himself as somebody calling from London:
„Who is that speaking? It sounds like… […] Is that you, Mr…?‟, Mrs.
Welch asked again; „Farteskyah‟, Dixon bawled desperately, muffling his
mouth with his hand and trying not to cough. „That‟s Mr Dixon, isn't it?
What are you trying to…? […] Kindly stop this… ridiculou s, this…‟, Mrs
Welch went on. „ Thre e minutes u p‟, he neighed, slobbering. „Finish off,
please, time's up.‟ He added a last throat -peeling ‚„Hallaher‟, the phone at
the full length of his arm, and fell silent. This was a rout. „If you're still
there, Mr Dixon‟, Mrs Welch said after a moment, in a voice sharpened
to excoriation by the intervening few miles of line, „I'd like to tell you
that if you make one more attempt to interfere in my son's or my affairs,

26
then I shall have to ask my husband to take the matter up with you from a
disciplinar y point of view, an d also that other matter of the… ‟ (Amis 190)
Even though he tried to mistake and mislead Mr. Welch, Mrs. Welch or Bertrand, he is
soon discovered and has to endure the reproofs and make a ridiculous of himself one more
time.
Dixon i s all the time in conflict with society due to the tense relationships he has
with some characters of the novel. He is insolent, angry with the others and treats them
with indifference, is awkward and unreliable, which the others around him notice and try to
make him do their will by ordering different things. As he is afraid to express his opinions
or to object, characters as Welch, his wife or Bertrand might consider him a weak person.
Dixon is not expressly concerned with his evolution on the social ladd er and treats his job,
the related academic activities and the others with frivolity.
The most problematical relationship Dixon has with Ned Welch. Welch is the head
of the history department in the university. Although he is proficient in his job and could
serve as an example for his subordinates, Dixon considers him arrogant, annoying, a type
of person that likes to hold never -ending soliloquies and reflections about his life and
career, to give orders and always act as though he wanted to catch Dixon in a wrong side.
In order to keep good relations with his master, Dixon tries to make Welch‟s wil l although
he does not like it. Being invited to spend the weekend at Welch‟s house, Dixon accepts
the invitation in hope of changing professor‟s opinion on him. Althoug h he is totally out of
the party‟s topic, Dixon implies that he would have any idea on what instrumental music is
and even how to perform; in front of Welch he pretends to be interested:
„What‟s the next item on list , Professor ?‟, he asked. „Just one or tw o
instrumental items‟, Welch replied. „Oh, that will be nice ‟. (Amis 45)
Another time, Welch is asking Dixon to index his book notes in the library; Dixon does not
like the idea and doesn‟t know where he should gather the notes from but pretends to be
willing to help his master at any time:
„Will they have all the information here, Sir?‟[…] „No, of course they
won‟t have all the information here, Dixon. I can‟t imagine anyone
thinking they would. That‟s why I‟m asking you to go down to the library
for it… ‟ added Welch. „Oh, of course, Professor; I‟m sorry‟.
(Amis 173 -4)
Another reason of conflicts is Welch‟s eldest son, Bertrand, who Dixon hates because
Bertrand‟s egocentrism and self -confidence. Dixon finds Bertrand so annoying that he can

27
hardly abstain a nd many are the times when he loses control and challenges Bertrand in
sharp conversations:
„[…] you are a twister and a snob and a bully and a fool. You think you
are sensitive but you‟re not […]. You‟ve got the idea you‟re a great lover,
but that‟s wrong too: you‟re so afraid o f me …‟ Jim offended Bertrand.
(Amis 208)
Bertrand and Dixon are enemies because they both dispute the same woman,
Christine, for her being the niece of the wealthy Gore -Urquhart and for the many
advantages each of them would lose at the same time with losing her. Dixon hates Bertrand
because he thinks he doesn‟t fit a girl like Christine and Bertrand hates Dixon because he
has always seen in him an eventual rival in gaining Christine‟s heart. Although he doesn‟t
reveal the reason o f his anger with Dixon, but being in a huff, he has to tell Dixon why he
considers him so unbearable:
„I‟ve had enough or you, you little bastard. I won‟t stand anymore of it,
do you hear?[…] Leave my girl alone, you‟re wasting your time, you‟re
wasting he r time you‟re wasting my time.‟ (Amis 184)
Dixon is also in conflict with his mate, Johns, with whom he shares the house.
Dixon hates Johns because he is in good relationships with Welch and, at any time ready to
expose him, that‟s why Dixon affords to ma ke fun of John. Another conflict occurs in the
relationship with Michie, a clever student of his, who is always asking about Dixon‟s
syllabus and other details regarding the next term‟s matter. Dixon hates him and avoids
meeting him, because he has noticed that Michie is an intelligent student that could catch
him in a trap concerning academic issues.
2.6 Jim Dixon and the subversion of career -oriented principles
Dixon aspires to achieve a good social rank within the upper -class people, whom he
is envious with. He has just got the job as history lecturer at an obscure university. He had
the chance to study at a redbrick university because he benefited from Butler Education
Act released in 1944; thanks to this government decision, children descending from
working -class parents would have the opportunity to access higher education for free and
even engage in types of work designed for the upper classes. In Dixon‟s case, he graduated
and now he is a teacher of Medieval History, which he is not keen on, but pret ends to be.
In the position held, Jim is directly subordinated to Ned Welch, on whose decision his
staying and job at the university depend on. Dixon‟s job focuses on three main lines: the
final lecture he has to hold in order to keep his job, which involv es also the professional

28
relation with Welch, the publication of one article in the magazine and the given subjects
Dixon is expected to teach the next year.
Keeping the job is Dixon‟s wish, although he does not anything special in this way,
he just wants to bother as little as possible and satisfy Welch, ending in being promoted.
But the whole thing doesn‟t seem as simple as Dixon sees it; Welch is a fastidious person
and expects Dixon to do a lot of research for the final lecture:
„Now there‟s something on the academic side I‟d like to discuss with
you. I‟ve been talking to the Principal about the Opening College Week
at the end of term. He wants the History Department to throw something
into the pool, you see, and I‟ve been wondering about you.‟ Welch sa id.
„Oh, really? Surely there would be others better qualifi ed to be thrown
into the pool?‟ „Yes, I thought you might care to tackle the evening
lecture of Department‟s going to provide, if you could ‟ added Welch.
„Well, I would rather like to have a crack at a public lecture, if you think
I‟m capable of it‟ Dixon managed to say. (Amis 17)
Dixon couldn‟t refuse Welch‟s proposal, as he e xplains to Gore -Urquhart in the beginning
of the lecture:
„This lecture of yours tonight, now. Whose idea was it?‟ Gore asked.
„Professor Welch‟s. I could hardly reuse, of course.‟ (Amis 214)
Concerning the article Welch suggests him to have published, Dixon sees the elaboration
of it very easy, although he is aware of it being a low quality piece:
[…] he had a good idea of what this article was worth from several points
of view. From one of those, the thing‟s worth could be expressed in one
short hyphenated indecency; from another, it was worth the amount of
frenzied fact -grubbing and fana tical boredom that had gone int o it.
(Amis 15)
Even Dixon wants to see his article published, he is lazy to write it because he is not sure
whether or not it will worth his effort. The discussion Dixon has with Beesley concerning
the publication of his article is obvious for how devoted he is to the work area:
„It is a good article?‟ Beesley asked finally. Dixon looked up in surprise,
„Good? How do you mean, good? Good?‟ „Well, it is any more than
accurate and the sort of thing that gets turned out? Anything beyond the
sort of thing that‟ll help you keep your job?‟ Beesley asked. „Good, good.
You don‟t think I take that kind of stuff seriously, do you? […] But look
here, Alfred, you don‟t mean I ought to take it seriously, do you? What
are you getting at?‟[…] „I mean why you are a medievalist ? […] You
don‟t look to have any special interest in it, do you?‟ Bessley asked. „No,
I don‟t, do I? No, the reason why I am a medievalist, as you call it, is that

29
the medieval papers were a soft option in the Leicester course, so I
specialized in th em.‟ (Amis 33)
Dixon feels professionally unprepared and he is afraid of anyone who could reveal his
weakness; thus he expresses some kind of fear towards Michie. He is a diligent student
who is interested in Dixon‟s course for the next term and he is all the ti me asking Dixon
additional details about it. This insistence of Michie annoys Dixon, who tries to reject the
student‟s requests and answers in an elusive way:
„Have you got that syllabus together yet, Sir?‟ […] „Oh, yes, that
syllabus!‟ Dixon said. He hadn ‟t got it together yet. Michie pretended his
question needed amplifying. „You know, Sir, the list of stuff or your
special subject next year. You said you were going to distribute copies to
the Honors people, if you remember.‟ „Yes, oddly enough I can
reme mber having said that,‟ Dixon said and pulled himself together; he
mustn‟t antagonize Michie. „I‟ve got the stuff ready in my digs, but I‟ve
not given it to the typist yet. I‟ll try to have it ready for you early next
week, that‟s all right.‟ (Amis 27)
Self conscious that he is not a good teacher and that the others have taken knowledge of
this fact, Dixon becomes bored of the job and expresses disgust towards the academic life
he involved in. He is in a desperate situation and doesn‟t know what he should d o in such a
case:
He was tired of being blackmailed, by the hope of improving his chances,
into grubbing about in the public library for material that „might come in
handy‟ for Welch‟s book on local history, into „just glancing through‟ the
proof of a long article Welch was having printed in a local journal of
antiquities, into holding himself in a readiness to attend a folk -dancing
conference ( thank God he hadn‟t had to go after all), into attending that
terrible arty week -end last month, into agreeing to lecture on Merrie
England – especially that. And it was getting very late in the term: les than
one moth to go. (Amis 82)
Nevertheless, he displays the same unconcern when writing the lecture and all the
matter proves to be a total fail; before the lectur e he drank some alcohol and, in an attempt
to re-establish the presentation, he loses control over it and eventually masks his
incompetence by a fake faint. Dixon insulted in this way the institution and Welch. The
matter being very clear in his mind, Dixo n is meditating of the next steps he should take;
though he is sure he should leave the university as soon as possible and never come back.
He realized that his work there was nothing of a waste of time and that he didn‟t bring any
merits to the university . In the end, after being dismissed, Dixon finds his luck by being
offered a secretarial job at Gore -Urquhart‟s office in London.

30
2.7 Jim Dixon’s women and the upper -class
Lucky Jim involves two love chains in which Jim Dixon engages simultaneously . The girls
concerned are Margaret, a department mate of Dixon‟s, and Christine, the niece of rich
Gore -Urquhart.
Margaret is a friend of Dixon; they have a good relationship, although Jim thinks
her hysterical. The only difference is that Margaret sees i n Dixon more than a friend and
even tries to commit suicide to catch the others‟ attention. After the suicide attempt, Dixon
displays mercy towards Margaret and tries to comfort her, though she is annoying and
jealous. They meet often at university, go to the pub to drink bear and attend the events
held at Welch‟s. Dixon ignores Margaret‟s attempts to get closer to him, because he has
never desired to have a relationship with her. The only reason Jim keeps in touch with
Margaret is that he wants to offer he r unconditional support. Throughout the time, Jim has
several attempts to stop the relationship with Margaret. But the thought that he could be
left alone, with no friends around and even worse, that the relationship with Christine
would come to an end, ma kes him use Margaret as a substitute in case bed events will
come across, as she is more accessible then the other woman. Although Margaret has
hysterical way outs when Jim displays wonder towards Christine, although she is stingy
and wants him to pay at t he pub all the time, although she has more money than him,
although she wants to be with him but without sleeping together, Dixon wants to break up
with her but does not have enough strength to do it, as he reveals:
„I don‟t see how either you can be very happy with the other one‟
Christine said. „No, I don‟t suppose we can, but there‟s nothing to b e
done about it‟ replied Dixon. (Amis 200 -1)
Jim is weak and can hardly resist Margaret; they make up and all the time he lets her
torture him verbally until Dixon can‟t resist the pressure anymore and decides to end any
affair they have. What made him take a decision was the beginning of a relationship with
Christine Callaghan.
Christine is the niece of the rich Gore -Urquhart and the girlfriend of Bertrand.
Dixon first saw her at the party organized by Welch and couldn‟t take his eyes off her.
Gradually they get closer and Dixon even dares to take her from the party, because she
wasn‟t feeling very comfortable, as Bertrand was ignoring her. Dixon takes a taxi and they
go to Welch‟s house, where she was staying. For the next day, Dixon invites her to have
coffee together, which she accepts.

31
Dixon dreams of having a relationship with Christine, although he feels
embarrassed and low self -confident because of the class -difference between them. Even so,
he soars to conquer the girl‟s heart, who he sees unreachable. As time passes, they get to
know each other better and feel comfortable together. Now Dixon‟s target is to have
Christine and feels lucky that they get a long well:
He was filled with awe at the thought that she seemed, not only not to
dislike him to any significant extent, but to trust him as well. And how
wonderful she was, and how lucky he was to have her there. The
admissions the implied confessions abo ut his feelings for her he‟d made
to Carol had seemed outlandish at the time; now they see med perfectly
natural and just. (Amis 135-6)
In order to get Christine, Dixon has first to face Bertrand. Bertrand treats Christine
badly and the only reason he sta ys with her is that her uncle promised to offer him a good
job. Besides Bertrand‟s annoying nature, Dixon hates him because he is envious with
Bertrand and gradually, the fight to get Christine turns into a fight with Bertrand. Dixon
and Bertrand have seve ral quarrels but the most relevant one is at almost the end of the
novel, when Bertrand beats up Dixon:
Dixon stepped aside, but his feet slipped and before he could recover,
Bertrand‟s fist had landed with some force high up on his right
cheekbone [..] Be rtrand fell down, making a lot of noise in doing so and
dislodging a china figurine from the mantelpiece. […] The impact has
hurt them rather. (Amis 209)
The interest Dixon has in getting Christine is made obvious in the scene when he has to
catch the trai n supposed to take her to London. Jim feels under pressure and realizes that
this would be his last chance to accomplish what he planed:
He couldn‟t allow Christine to escape him today; if she did he might not
see her again at all. Not at all. This was a d isagreeable phrase. (Amis 242)
But fortunately, due to a misunderstanding, Jim arrives in time and meets Christine. He
also tells her that Bertrand had been cheating on her with Carol Goldsmith. The novel ends
with Dixon and Christine passing by the Welche s, who were going to have lunch.
By using the satire as a means of expression, Amis manages to bring in the
foreground the main concerns of the 1950s generation through Jim Dixon. In his novel,
Amis approaches all the aspects of the society, the social inequality, the faulty educational
system, love seen as an escape from the daily routines and thus designs a social fresco of
post-war Britain.

32
CHAPTER THREE

Hurry on down and the British society of the 1950s

Among the first novels of the 1950s that marked the emergence of the Angry
Young Men, Hurry on Down contains strong evidence of the author‟s anger directed
towards the social class distinction. Wain designed the novel in the form of a social fresco
at the heart of which lingers the conflict and the opposition between the lower and the
upper -class. Each of the major characters framed by the author finds his place within the
two classes. This chapter will be concerned with the depiction of the social class pr oblems
through the portrayal of the novel‟s characters.
3.1 The upper -class lenses
Several characters of the novel, due to their origin, belong to the upper -class, but
the most representative for the upper -class thinking and attitude are Edith and Robert
Tharkles. Edith is the sister of Sheila, Lumley‟s fiancée, and Robert is her husband.
Throughout the book, the narrator doesn‟t make many references to the couple, but the
fragment in the beginning of the novel is the most extensive instance in which the re ader
can see the two people acting furiously when challenged. The challenge consists of
Charles‟ ignoring the pieces of advice submitted by Edith and Robert.
After graduation, Lumley decided it‟s time he visited his lover, Sheila, at the house
of her par ents, as it has been a long time since he last saw her. But the unavoidable
happens and Charles finds home only Edith and Robert, two enemies of him. The meeting
unfolds as a ceaseless attack of reproof s that the couple, especially Edith, directs to
Charle s. The meeting eventually ends up with Charles completely behaving foolishly,
insulting Robert and leaving the house nervous and resigned.
Edith represents the woman that shares most of the upper -class people‟s beliefs.
The conflict with Charles arises fr om her discontent that her future brother -in-law is

33
indifferent and doesn‟t show any interest in acquiring a good social status and become a
successful man:
It was one of the typical meetings that Charles had with Robert and Edith.
Not because he was not s uccessful they were against him; in their eyes,
the lack of success was not a guilt meant to be punished […]. What they
found irritating was t hat he didn‟t even seem to try. (Wain 41; my
translation)
It is unacceptable for Robert that Charles displays such a defiant attitude towards his
parents, who tried to provide the necessary resources for their child, now gone:
Last days I met your parents. We discussed different issues. I have
to tell you -his voice became firm and energetic, authoritative,
willing to emphasize the essential aspects -, I think that it is time
you realized that there is a great dissatisfaction regarding your
evolution. [..] Your father told me that you didn‟t even give him
your address. […] I have to admit that this is quite rude.
(Wain 43-4; my translation)
It seems that Edith shares the same opinion and disagrees with Charles‟ decision to follow
his destiny without his parents‟ help; she admits that Charles looks totally unwilling to
rewards his parents for their help (Wain 44). Both Ed ith and Robert are narrow -minded
and consider it shameful that Charles betrayed his class:
Although they couldn‟t express it, their objection was that he was not
wearing „a uniform‟. Had he worn such a uniform that a prosperous
merchant of the middle -class does, like Robert, they would have accepted
him […] in their world, the first liability of every person was to wear „a
uniform‟, to define his social position, vocation and ambition […]
Charles seemed to didn‟t be aware of the sacred responsibility o f
disguising for his own role. (Wain 41; my translation)
The Tharkles are the representation of the upper -class people, obsessed with the
social -status and who accept around them only people of the same rank and reject the
others. For them it is unacce ptable how a man belonging to the bourgeoisie, like Charles,
could give proof of such boldness when he wills to run away from his class and hide his
origin. They are the reflection of the upper -class hypocrite people who are imprisoned in
the cage of their own mentality.
3.2 Working -class characters
Under the oppression of the upper -class, characters of the lower -class try to break
away from the social prejudices and make their own life. Within the working -class
characters, George Hutchins is the one that b est represents the post -war man‟s desires.

34
Hutchins is one of Lumley‟s ex -mates, “an unpleasant youngster, dogged and devoid of
humour ” (Wain 36; my translation), who tries to cross the limits imposed by his own class
and find his place within the upper -class. Hutchins is the type of working -class person who
is ashamed of his origin and wants to hide it. When Charles meets Hutchins‟ parents in the
train, he recollects the day he first saw them:
It was obvious that they were feeling more embarrassed than the y felt two
years before, the day when he entered Hutchins‟s room […] and found
them three silent and stiff. Hutchins was obviously ashamed because of
his parents‟ ordinary appearance and behaviour , so that he avoided to
introduce them, hoping that Charles wouldn‟t realize the relation between
them. […] His parents w ere neither wealthy nor famous.
(Wain 37 -8; my translation)
When Charles meets Hutchins‟s parents, it happens that they inform him about their son‟s
success, who has been recently offered the job as a university lecturer. Not only are his
parents proud of their son‟s success, but also is Hutchins proud of his new status. The new
social position enables him to consider himself above the others and judge them. But the
lecturer position he has acq uired doesn‟t really imply the Hutchins is good in his job:
Hutchins was looking around, impatient and angry. His pipe was
prepared, in case it would be necessary for him to play his role,
unexpectedly, the teacher role. (Wain 331; my translation)
Hutchin s pretends to be an intelligent man, aspiring to study in America (Wain 333), but
the fate fails in fulfilling his dreams. His destiny often interferes with Charles‟, who he was
previously criticizing:
„You don‟t have a system ‟ Was he exclaiming contemptuo usly, looking
the books Charles was having in the library. „A random bunch of texts
[…]. All you do is play. For my part, I can‟t afford to do the same. […] I
make a preliminary reading, then I read more carefully and after three
months I recap. […] This i s the way in which people like Lockwood
achieved the status they have toda y and I‟m going to do the same.
(Wain 36; my translation)
Although enemies, Hutchins and Lumley had the chance to meet again, now as employees
of the same rich man, Mr. Braceweight. The irony and the superiority of Hutchins‟s
language can be observed when he addresses to Lumley and expresses regret for Lumley‟s
decline, who is working as Mr. Braceweight driver. But Lumley appears to be cleverer and
addresses Hutchins in a way that of fends his feelings and pride:
What could be more obvious? I drive the car of the great man. You are
trying to varnish the box in which Mr. Braceweight‟s son keeps his brain.
Actually, the only difference between us is that my job in certainly
useful, while you won‟ t have any reason to be proud.

35
(Wain 335; my translation)
While the Tharkles are the reflection of the upper -class snobbish people, repugnant to the
lower -class, Hutchins is the reflection of the ordinary people, descendants of the working –
class, ashamed of their origin. He dreams of climbing the social ladder and the lecturer job
he is offered makes him proud of himself, although he has no reason to be.
3.3 Social class opposition
The contrast between the two main social classes that “dispute” their supremacy,
the lower -class and the working -class, is the main theme in Hurry on Down . Wain‟s most
important concern was to create the proper environment in which the members of these
classes would “fight” for their rights. At the heart of this “fight ” stands the protagonist,
whose permanent struggle is the result of the social discrimination that is made and which
he is dissatisfied with. Charles Lumley himself finds in his revolt a kind of courage at
which other young people crave:
[…] he was thinkin g of all men about town of the ‟30s that had done, or
had intended to do, or had said that would do something, somehow
similar to what he was doing, turning away from the environment that
coddled them; and they all had failed right from the start, because the
motive of their rebellion was the desire to identify with the Nation, that,
in their consciousness was quite vaguely defined and whose way of
thinking they couldn‟t even try to imagine; and even if one of them had
succeeded in it, his life would have b een like a hell. Charles was at least
realizing, congratulating himself for it, that he has always been right
about them , he was righteous to despise them… (Wain 75; my
translation)
Although Lumley has been born and raised in the bosom of the upper -class a nd his
parents have provided him everything he needed, he decided to abandon his family and
break any contact with them. This revolting attitude aroused from his conception that the
privileged people are the prisoners of their own class. Thus, for the mome nt, he decided to
escape any class control and “remain outside the social classes” (Wain 76). Gradually,
Lumley‟s conflict turned into a conflict against his class, against his peers, against Sheila
and his conservative family, against his parents, against all the other people that displayed
any form of contrariety against his decisions and plans.
Lumley‟s revolt against the snobbery of his class begins as a change in his life, a
change that involves shifting from a class to the other, shifting from a job to another.
Lumley decided that the upper -class doesn‟t fit him anymore and thus he finds it more

36
convenient to integrate among the lower -class people. Changing several job s, first working
as a window -cleaner, after as an orderly or later as a drug dealer, Lumley finally finds the
job that best suits his expectations. Lumley‟s struggle to find his place in the society ends
in his resignation and total abandonment of what was meant by bourgeoisie -family and
acquaintances that shared the beliefs of this class .
3.4 Charles Lumley and the social climbing down
Charles Lumley, the protagonist of Hurry on down, is affected by the same lack of
attention from the society as Jim Dixon was, but his attitude to life is a bit different from
Dixon‟s. He was raised in a go od family and has taken the Bachelor degree at Oxford; after
graduation, he takes time to put his thoughts in order and prefers to spend a while in the
little town where he used to study. Lumley is a contemplative person and meditates on his
life; he feels insecure and undecided, but certainly does not want to follow his class and
please his parents. He hates the snobbishness of the middle -class to which he belongs and
wants to find his own way without belonging to any social class. Lumley is courageous to
take his life in his hands and chooses to differentiate from the common patterns of the class
arrangement.
Charles Lumley chooses to begin his new life by chasing away the obstacles that
would hold him back: as a first prevention, he decides to break any contact with his family,
as they would do anything to change his mind and influence him to follow the bourge oisie
way. He knows this new life won‟t be easy but at least will bring him the desired
independence and this will start by finding a job to provide him the necessary money for
living a decent life. Lumley‟s new life means a transition through different se ctors of work,
all the time acquiring experience, which makes him even stronger and willing to proceed
his fight against the social arrangements. But the fight seems to have come to an end when
he marries Veronica, also the niece of a wealthy man, like Chr istine was in Lucky Jim.
The struggle to detach from the rules and find his own way consists of the
protagonist‟s facing a series of conflicts with the society he lives in. The others around
disapprove with him especially because he represents a disagree ment in the society. The
people criticize him because he dares to betray his class and engage in activities considered
humiliating for the people belonging to it. The first to criticize Charles for his choice are
his girlfriend‟s sister and her husband, Ed ith and Robert. They didn‟t accept him from the
first time they met because he doesn‟t match the expectations their family has:

37
Although they couldn‟t express it, their objection was that he was not
wearing „a uniform‟. Had he worn such a uniform that a pr osperous
merchant of the middle -class does, like Robert, they would have accepted
him […] in their world, the first liability of every person was to wear „a
uniform‟, to define his social position, vocation and ambition […]
Charles seemed to didn‟t be awar e of the sacred responsibility o f
disguising for his own role. (Wain 41; my translation)
When Lumley goes to visit his lover, Sheila, he finds home only Edith and Robert, who
ask for explanations on whether he has decided something for his future. Edith t ells
Charles that she has met his parents, who lost contact with him. Charles thinks the struggle
came to an end and it‟s time he should not endure the couple‟s offends any longer:
It seems that you would never want to reward those that tried to help
you”, Edith commented […] “Your hint seems to have reached its target,
Edith”, said her husband. “Our friend doesn‟t really know what to reply.
You‟ve reduced him to silence” […] “I was not thinking of what Edith
said” Lumley answered almost apologizing. “I was wandering how could
have it been possible that no one ever thought of shaving your stupid
moustache and use it as a brush, like those hanging outside the
windows …(Wain 46; my translation)
The quarrel stops with Lumley fighting against Robert by throwing i n his face the basin
which Edith recently used for cleaning the dishes. Charles leaves the house and the love for
Sheila all behind, decided to continue his life on his own way.
Other conflicts Lumley has with different people he meets in several jobs he
employs in. For example, not few were the times when Charles met his ex schoolmate,
Hutchins, now become a successful teacher, as his father confesses to Lumley. Charles
considers Hutchins “a disgusting snob” (Wain 38), come from a modest family, who wants
to pose in the position of a middle -class boy. Hutchins considers Lumley an inferior man
and has a lot of understanding for his decline (Wain 205).
No matter who Lumley has quarrels and fights with, the main idea is that the people
are against him and di sagree with his attempt to find a job, no matter if he works as a
window cleaner, delivery man of drugs, orderly or driver. The others around feel disdain
for him because he humbles himself in doing jobs usually suitable for the lower -class
people and can‟ t understand why he should do this instead of choosing a good job and
become a representative of his original class. An important scene for emphasizing the
narrow mentality of those who belong to the middle -class is the paragraph in which
Charles gets crit icized and made fun of by Burge, one of his friends from school:

38
„Tell me! I was told that you‟ve taken a job at the hospital as an orderly.
You are carrying the buckets and emptying bedpans. What‟s your plan ?
[…] Do I understand, Burge […] that you are involving my right, the
absolute right of a citizen, to do whatever work he may choose?” Lumley
replied. “[…] this sort of work ought to be done by people who were born
to do it. You have some education, some upbringing […] you ought to
have found some dec ent job, the sort of job you were brought up and
educated to do and leave this to people who were brought up and
educated for slops emptying. ‟ (Wain 286; my translation)
Burge not only criticizes Lumley but also accuses him of betraying his own class
and doing miserable work that only the lower -class people would do. His opinion is that
one should follow his way within the class he was born and raised in and not want to
deteriorate his own image to such an extent of descending to the lower rank. But Lumley is
not ashamed of the work he does; he is not ashamed of being considered a worker instead
of a man with a respectable job. He harshly expresses disgust towards those belonging to
the lower -class who really betrays their class by imitating the higher -class people and
being ashamed with their families. Such examples is Hutchins, who imagine s himself as
belonging to the middle -class and criticize Lumley for his choosing an incompatible job in
relation with his upbringing. That‟s why Lumley doesn‟t want to be a fake man of his class
and prefers to behave naturally in an environment that is more suitable for his condition:
He belonged to the world in which Froulish was typewriting in a derelict
loft, in which Dogson was killed while he was seeking for sensation al
news, in which Ern was serving his sentence in prison or in which
Blearney was organizing provincial shows […] Those who belonged to
the same world as him to were sick, disgusting, devoid of success, comic,
but still full of life […] (Wain 363; my t ranslation )
He decides to leave his environment and engage in another place, where the people are
aware of their place within society and where he feels comfortable:
He was realizing with satisfaction his becoming accepted and integrated
in the community of the hospital, finding his place in a feudal pyramid –
shaped society that doesn‟t allow exceptions concerning the social status
[…] here, there could be no false pretentions because the rank, the
prestige and the privileg es were settled automatically.
(Wain 272; my translation)
The general anger of Lumley is directed towards British society and its establishments;
Lumley is not willing to respect the traditional arrangements of neither the class system nor
the authorities .

39
3.5 Higher or lower expectations for a decent life
Charles Lumley never aspires to hold a good position within society; he just wants
a job from which to earn enough money to live a decent life. Recently graduated from
university, Lumley doesn‟t have in mind a certain job, he doesn‟t aspire or a well paid job
and rather chooses the jobs by accident, simple jobs designed for those of working -class.
Throughout the novel we are confronted with Lumley‟s crisis of identity, regarding his
career. He will change several jobs that fit his pers onality and self -expectations.
Sitting in a bar, Charles hears the barman talking to a man about somebody who
earns good money by cleaning windows. Reasoned by the success story of the man in
question, Charles has an idea to start his own business. Borrowi ng money from his uncle,
Charles bought the necessary tools for cleaning the windows and meanwhile met his high
school mate, Froulish, who invited him to leave together in a shabby house. At a time, he
meets Ern Ollershaw and the two get associated in the job, in hope that the income will
increase.
One day Lumley decides to move from Froulish, as he discovered that Betty is a
prostitute, and goes to Ern. Here Lumley discovers Ollershaw being arrested and soon
understands the reason. This is the way how Char les discovers the Expert Express Bureau,
where Ern previously worked, and that was specialized in transport. But it was the secret
behind the company that most attracted Lumley:
Some weeks ago, if somebody had asked him to list the most scummy
villains, h e would have probably placed the drug dealer pretty on top of
the list […]. And here is it he now assisting to smuggling pull out of the
docks and deliver heroin and marijuana or what else abominable
substance was there inside the envelope. He became a mem ber […] of the
band who was responsible with delivering these drugs within the country.
Why was he doing that? (Wain 185, my translation)
Lumley was delighted by the amount of money he earned from this unlawful business,
although he was content with it, b ut at least the drugs trafficking satisfied his immediate
need of money:
He was looking out of the train window, with his blurred eyes, detesting
himself, detesting his own d ecay. And why was he doing it?[…] While
Charles was going upstairs, he was having an odd feeling, as though
something pressed him aside. It was the wallet. The feeling was odd
because it was the first time when the wa llet was packet -out with
money… (Wain 186 -7, my translation)

40
One day the drugs delivery went wrong and Charles ended up i n the hospital. Slowly, he
remembered for what reason he got there and couldn‟t imagine himself doing the
dangerous job anymore. Thus, after recovering, Lumley decided to work as an orderly:
It seems mere and natural, hence at long last, after his cure had ended
[…] to solve the job matter, engaging as the one useful to all in the
hospital. (Wain 271, my translation)
Here, in the hospital, Charles felt self -contented because he found the desired peace
to psychologically recovering from the suffered trauma. He likes the atmosphere and gets
easily accustomed to it. It happens while working as an orderly when Lumley meets
Braceweight, a rich man with whom he develops a nice friendship and who asks him to
become his personal driver. The job at Mr. Braceweight gives Charles the inner peace he
hasn‟t been having for a long time. He gets on well with Braceweight wives and also with
their son, Walter. But the peace Lumley enjoyed was disturbed by the coming of his ex –
mate, Hutchins. He came to have private lessons with Walter during holiday time,
Hutchins feels surprised to see Lumley doing that kind of job and concludes that he is
“down on his luck” (Wain 335) . Hutchins is the type of person come from a working -class
family but who is very bragging and thinks he is over the others. The same he does with
Lumley and makes an attempt to humble him:
„I regret, Lumley that you got so bad. Allow me to confess that I was
thinking you could get a better job than this. Two years ago surely I
realized that you lack the sense of reality. But I could never imagine that
you would fall into such a serious decay.‟ (Wain 335, my translation)
The quarrel with Hutchins makes Lumley realize that even the job at Mr. Braceweight does
not completely suit him and he decides to move on, lea ving behind the world of those who
put the bias first. He realizes that he belongs to those people that are in some kind of
trouble, who understand him alike, because they share the same attitudes and feel the same
frustration.
Meanwhile Lumley stops work ing for Mr Braceweight and accepts the job offered
by Mr. Blea rney. Lumley becomes a bouncer, but shortly after he decides to look for
another job . He is offered a job at a local radio station. He takes into consideration and
eventually accepts the offer t o become a member of the humorous group that makes up the
scripts for the “Flimmer and Punque” transmission. After a short period, Charles receives a
letter from Terence Frush, the redactor of the transmission, who informs that he will be
permanently hired , as he proved his skills and seriousness in accomplishing his duties.

41
Charles feels released, as the news is an assurance that the job will be a lasting one and
very consistently paid:
Neutrality; he finally found it. The unceasing struggle between him an d
society had ended without a certain prospect […] the society had decided
that he must be paid, and well paid, that he must revaluate his abnormal
condition […] For him it was like an armistice that seemed to would have
lead to an abeyance of the hostilit y. (Wain 404, my translation)
The new job rewards Lumley with satisfaction, as he now feels superior to the others that
hate him and expressed their disagreement with the choices he made. He improved his
social status in the eyes of the others and the goo d money he earns, more than the others
do, enable him to act according to his own will and create the financial independence he
has never had.
3.6 Charles Lumley’s women and class constraints
Hurry on down involves three love chains in which Charles Lumley gets involved
at a time, three different stories, women, attitudes and feelings which influence his life. He
doesn‟t know what to expect from a relationship, he doesn‟t know which woman is more
suitable for his condition but finally he finds his salvation by marrying a rich girl. The first
woman Wain introduces to us is Sheila, Lumley‟s girlfriend. They‟ve been together for a
long time; they have made plans together and eventually would get married. After
graduating, Lumley goes to visit Sheila at the hous e of her parents, tired and confused and
willing to find the calmness he needed so much:
The desire to see her, terribly muffled for months, aroused his entire
being […] He needed so much to see her again, to be understood, to have
a place where to relax, where nobody reproaches to him and where he
wouldn‟t feel forc ed to take immediate decisions.
(Wain 39 -40, my translation)
He doesn‟t find Sheila home, only her sister and brother -in-law, who welcome him
roughly. He departs disappointed and determined to give up the relation with Sheila.
Although they planned to get married, Charles thinks is time to move on and forget Sheila,
for he thinks her embodying all the bad habits of her parents:
[…] he saw Sheila‟s face pale, bright, firm and behind it, her fathe r‟s
face, of a petty scrupulosity, her mother‟s face, insipid and wrinkled,
Edith‟s over waxed eyebrows and, presiding over, Robert, w ith his
execrable calf head […] (Wain 49; my translation)
It was over. „No more Sheila‟ and „SILENCE‟ were the words
bewi ldered in from of his eyes, on a yellow panel.

42
(Wain 49; my translation)
Soon after leaving behind Sheila, Lumley sees a young lady in a hotel lobby and falls in
love with her at first sight. The girl‟s name is Veronica and she is the niece of the rich Mr.
Roderick. Seeing Veronica determines an inner struggle for Charles; he is aware of the
class difference between them and tries as much as possible to give up thinking of her:
He did not even know who she was or where she lived. And it wouldn‟t
cost him an ything to find out. Whoever she was, it was obviously that she
clearly moved in circles that one could entry if only he had money […]
any crawling vermin who happened to have his pockets full of money
could have surpassed him in the race. (Wain 136, my tra nslation)
Gradually, Charles becomes more and more attracted by Veronica and realizing
how hard it is to lie to his heart and forget the image of the woman he fell in love with, he
becomes the bait of his own fate and decides to do anything necessary to br ing the girl next
to him. The only difference between them would be the money he lacks and for love‟s sake
he accepts to be a drug dealer, job which will provide him with a lot of money. He is
determined to sacrifice his life in order to get Veronica:
He k new that he would commit any lawlessness, that he would steal, kill,
cripple, that he would ruin the lives of people who never harmed him
intending to posses her, but to give himself the small chance to posses
her. He knew that neither his mind nor his bo dy could recognize
something as wrong or right regarding that desire.
(Wain 186 -7, my translation)
When they get to know each other personally, Charles gets to love her even more,
although she treats him like a puppet, for she noticed he is always ready to do everything
for her. When in the hospital, Charles is surprised and confused at the same time to see that
somebody was taking care of his health from remote and found out that it was Mr.
Roderick. The whole situation was made clear when Roderick confi rmed that Charles
supposition was true: Roderick and Veronica were lovers and Roderick probably engaged
to pay for everything Charles needed in the hospital in hope Veronica will break any
contact with him:
„We will never meet again. Veronica promised me t hat she will never talk
to you again. If this little gift from me surprises you […] I can tell you
that I made it on her request. She agreed that you need to take proper
notice of the real nature of the affair […] and to tell you before you get
better an d cherish hope, relying on what happened between you two,
hope for when you will get out of here. […] She thought you would need
an extra supp ort in order to face the shock.‟ (Wain 268; my translation)

43
But the unexpected change of plans occurs at the end o f the novel, when Veronica visits
Lumley. She neither gives Charles any explanation for the relation went wrong between
them and nor apologizes for it, but states that something strange happened that she changed
her mind. Charles stands perplexed and her r eturn could be interpreted in only one way:
Mentally, he so interpreted her statement: „Now you are rich, you are in
smooth water as Roderick. And y ou are fifteen years younger.‟
(Wain 406; my translation)
Charles is convinced that once he got financiall y potent, this will tempt Veronica to leave
Roderick, as now he can afford to feed her claims. The way in which Wain chooses to end
the novel doesn‟t provide the reader with a certain idea of what happened between Charles
and Veronica, of whether he accept ed or denied her return.
The third women that involves in Charles life is Rosa. While Lumley was in the
hospital trying to forget Vero nica, he got closer to the girl who was working as a servant
and who fell in love with him. Their relation was natural an d sincere; Charles was
content ed that he didn‟t need to meet any requirements in order to have a relationship with
Rosa -she accepted him as simple as he was. He felt that she was the type of girl matching
his condition and also her family liked him, pleasa nt people who understand and don‟t
judge him and his decisions. But the situations turns upside down when Charles goes at a
pub with Rosa and it happens that she wears the same handbag as Veronica; as he begins to
think of Veronica again, he makes the stup id mistake of hurting Rosa and ending their
relationship:
He looked her in the eyes. His mind seemed to stand still. He wanted to
explain her that it was not his fault He didn‟t want to hurt her, he just
made the mistake to think that he was the right man to make her happy, to
benefit of her own way of being, natural and full of life […]. Helpless, he
was trying to explain her, without using any word, that it all was a
mistake. And she, also speechless, in response, was blami ng him.
(Wain 320, my translati on)
Charles Lumley appears, after all that happened to him, to be a hero. Rejecting the
snobbishness and the hypocrisy of his class; in a heroic attempt, he successfully manages
to integrate in the class of the ordinary people. The jobs considered humiliating by the
upper -class people do not have force to discourage Lumley from his attempt to find his
place among people who accept his dreams. After a long struggle against his peers, Charles
Lumley finally feels that the fight is over and his desires have been accomplished. Like Jim
Dixon, he accepts to compromise.

44
Conclusion

World War II not only had a disastrous effect on The Great Powers of the world,
but also on Great Britain, who wa s affected by huge damages. The governments that were
elected in the years following the end of the war competed in restoring the Empire its lost
honour , but in fact none of them really succeeded in doing so. The disorder in the socio –
political environment influenced the people‟s views, while those who were the most
unhappy with this lack of order were the lower -classes.
The aim of this thesis has been to show the way in which the views of the Angry
Young Men movement are reflected in two important novels of the 1950s: Lucky Jim by
Kingsley Amis and Hurry on Down by John Wain. Therefore, Chapter I has been
concerned with a presentation of the movement. The Angry Young Men were the group
that emerged from the lower -class, whose members succeeded in bringing a touch of
novelty to British literature. In the early 1950s, all of a sudden, the literary scene was taken
over by a s eries of new faces that promised to bring a change. The movement included
young writers like Kingsley Amis, John Wain, John Braine, Allan Sillitoe, and John
Osborne, whose works achieved a great success not long before their publication. The
name of the gr oup was first used in 1954, in one of the articles of The Spectator , when its
editor, J.D Scott, published John Osborne‟s play Look Back in Anger, thus hoping to attract
more readers. The publication had the effect expected by J.D Scott and immediately aft er,
the readers began to be interested in the authors of The Movement, unknown at the time to
the general public. The success of Osborne‟s play encouraged other members of the group
to publish their work and soon everybody was talking about “the angries” a nd their novels.
The novels by the Angry Young Men immediately began to be an attraction for
most readers because they focused on the major issues of the time. These novels took the
shape of their authors‟ discontent with the society they were living in. As people of
working -class origin, The Angry Young Men had been at some point in their life treated
with indifference and discriminated by the society and especially by the upper -classes.
They transposed in their novels the anger towards the Empire‟s inab ility to deal with
current social problems, from whose anger emerged a new type of protagonist. The new

45
hero was a young working -class man, generally a graduate and a beneficiary of the Butler
Education Act. Dissatisfied with his life, the protagonist init iates a struggle to defeat the
pre-established conceptions of the society, but the disappointment that he cannot succeed
in doing so leads him to making a compromise. The compromise consists in his accepting
the snobbery of the upper -class by engaging in a love affair with a girl be longing to higher
social class.
Lucky Jim and Hurry on Down are two important novels of the 1950s because they
mark the beginning of the new era, in which their authors deny the traditional forms and
pave the way to a new kind o f fiction: the novel of social revolt. The novels resemble each
other to the extent to which the action of both takes place in industrial cities, having as
protagonists two young graduates, Jim Dixon and Charles Lumley. The protagonists
display a persisten t disappointment towards the social arrangements, a major feature of the
Angry Young Men‟s fiction. Although the reason of Dixon‟s and Lumley‟s anger are
similar, they are ho wever two different characters who have opposite beliefs and
expectations.
Chapte r II has dealt with the analysis of Jim Dixon, the protagonist of Lucky Jim by
Kingsley Amis. In order to show that the character fits in the world of Amis‟ anger
directed towards the society, an analysis of the social classes has been provided. Thus, the
opposition between the two social classes that fight for their rights, the lower -class and the
upper -class, has been emphasized by discussing the particularities of each of them, as
reflected by representative characters. The character that best represents the snobbishness
and the hypocrisy of the upper -class is Pr ofessor Welch, a self -centered and a selfish man.
Although he lacks needful qualities that a teacher must have, Welch pretends to be the
most intelligent and thus he affords to keep the others und er observation. In opposition, the
working -class has been depicted by discussing the character of Margaret Peel, a junior
lecturer at the history department led by Welch. She is the personification of the frustrated
working -class woman, discontented with h er life, who does not do anything to change it.
The protagonist has been analyzed in several instances in which his personality is reflected.
The emphasis has been laid on the attitude which Jim Dixon has towards the people
surrounding him as well as on th e interest he pays to the academic career he has just
engaged in. As a new lecturer, Jim Dixon gradually realizes that the academic environment
does not meet his expectations and he has “to fight” Professor Welch. Dixon‟s competence
is always overshadowed by Welch‟s, who disregards him and defeats his every attempt to

46
prove that he is an intelligent person. Disappointed with the campus life, Jim Dixon
struggles to achieve a good social status outside it, even if this involves making a
compromise. Although he displays anger towards the upper -class, Dixon makes the
compromise to ge t amorously involved with Christine, a rich girl, and to accept the
well-paid job offered by her uncle, thus getting rid of the social restrictions and
abandoning his class of origin.
While Chapter II has been concerned with the portrayal of Jim Dixon , Chapter III
has dealt with the analysis of the major character of John Wain‟s novel, Hurry on Down. In
order to determine the nature of Charles Lumley‟s protest, it has been necessary to bring
into discussion the social environment in which the character s live. Typical of the post -war
period is the difference between the lower and the middle -upper -class, represented in the
novel by George Hutchins and by the Tharkles, Edith and Robert. While Hutchins is the
reflection of the working -class man, ashamed wit h his origin and ready to do anything in
order to climb the social ladder, the Tharkles represent the middle -lower -class people, who
measure the importance of a person according to the “uniform” he is wearing. This is the
reason why they cannot stand Lumle y, who cannot stand them either and who, in his
struggle to defeat the social arrangements is reasoned by the Tharkles‟ hypocrite opinions
towards career. Charles Lumley decides to give up a quiet career which he could have got
due to his higher education and prefers to live from hand to mouth just because he does not
want to resemble the others of his class in snobbishness or hypocrisy. In his attempt to find
the suitable job for his condition, Charles Lumley climbs “down” the social ladder and
changes sev eral jobs until he finally discovers where he belongs to: he is hired as a
joke-collector at a local radio station. Lumley‟s decline involves not only the struggle to
defeat the prejudices of his class of origin, but also the struggle to defeat his co nceptions.
The love for the rich girl, Veronica, determines him to make a compromise, consisting of
abandoning all standards of a quiet life and engaging in a dangerous job, in order to get the
necessary money to “support” such a lady.
As Chapter II and I II have dealt with the individual analysis of Jim Dixon and
Charles Lumley, respectively, the subsequent section has been aimed at submitting a
comparative analysis of the two protagonists, on the basis of the information that has been
provided in the prev ious chapters.
Unlike Jim Dixon, who wants to get higher on the social ladder and hold a good
teaching position at the university, Charles Lumley wants to get rid of the snobbishness

47
and arrogance of the middle -upper -class and prefers to stand at the perip hery of the
society, living a natural life, without being constrained to satisfy the requirements of this
class. He wants to place himself outside the social conventions and live a happy life. In
opposition, Jim Dixon wants to keep his academic job, even t o get promoted, but does not
do anything for it. The two characters are similar to the extent to which they both hate the
social stratification. While Jim Dixon hates the upper -class people because he is envious
with them and wants to access the social sta tus that would enable him to resemble them,
Charles Lumley hates the middle and upper -classes due to their pre -established mentality
and does not want to follow their lead, but he rather prefers to descend to the lower -class
where he can be contented with his achievements.
Second, regarding the protagonists‟ career, there are also differences that may be
pointed out. On the one hand, Jim Dixon is the reflection of the superficial student, who
attended university only to see his dream accomplished. Dixon‟s d ream is to have a good
social status and eventually to succeed in climbing the social ladder until finding his
contentment. He is neither satisfied with the lecturer job nor wants to find something better
to do and more suitable for his abilities. On the o ther hand, Charles Lumley never aspires
to hold a good position in the society; he just wants a job which would provide enough
money to live a decent life. Recently graduated from university, Lumley does not have in
mind a certain job; he does not aspire t o a well -paid job, but rather chooses his jobs by
accident, simple jobs designed for working -class people. Throughout the novel we are
confronted with Lumley‟s crisis of identity, regarding his career. He will change several
jobs in order to find one that fits his personality and self -expectations. Charles Lumley is
the personification of the dissatisfied man who wants to go beyond the borders of his own
class, in order to find self -contentment and place in the society. He is willing to fail in
other people ‟s eyes, but to rise in his own. Unlike Jim Dixon, he changes many jobs until
he finally finds the one which best suits his background and beliefs. While Jim Dixon
dreams of keeping the job, although he is pessimistic and wants to get higher on the social
ladder, Charles Lumley represents the opposite, he has the dream of getting a job that will
suit him and thus he is ready to disclaim his native social class, because he sees no more
chances to keep belonging to it .
Third, concerning the emotional side of the protagonists‟ personalities, there are
differences as well as similarities. While, Dixon represents the hypocrite who is not aware
of his social status, dares to marry a rich girl, Christine, and even fight Bertrand for her,

48
Lumley represents the calm person who is aware of the class gap between himself and
Veronica. Both protagonists dream of the girl from the upper -class, but the difference
between them is obvious. Jim Dixon aims at getting Christine, but does not do anything to
improve his condition. As a working class man, he wants to cross the borders of his class;
he thinks he deserves everything, without doing any special effort to get it. In contrast,
Charles Lumley desires to get Veronica, but in order to make this happen, he decides to do
whate ver necessary in order to have the money required to meet the expectations of a girl
like her. In the end, while Dixon is looking forward to getting the job offered by Gore –
Urquhart and Christine at the same time, thus having access to the advantages of th e upper –
class, Lumley achieves social and financial satisfaction and, therefore Veronica‟s return
fails to move him.
Both protagonists appear as two different personalities, each having his own beliefs
and desires; however the endings of the novels bring b oth Dixon and Lumley on the same
path. Irrespective of the ups and downs they have been confronted with, the end of the
story promises to offer them a brighter future: they both see the reason of their struggle to
get the rich lady as an achievement.
In co nclusion, the Angry Young Men‟s views on life, career and the social classes
are definitely reflected in the novels under discussion. The dissatisfaction of the authors
with the snobbishness of the upper -class, their tough struggle to bring the differences
between the social classes to an equal level or to minimize them are all illustrated by the
personalities of the two protagonists.

49
LIST OF WORKS CITED

PRIMARY SOURCES
1. Amis, Kingsley. Lucky Jim. London: Penguin Books, 1987.
2. Wain. John. Hurry on Down. Bucharest: University Press, 1989.

SECONDARY SOURCES
1. Bentley, Nick. Radical Fictions: the English Novel in the 1950s . Bern: Peter Lang,
2007.
2. Carpenter, Humphrey. The Angry Young Men: a Literary Comedy of the 1950s. London:
Penguin Books, 2002.
3. Ciugureanu, Adina. Post-War Anxieties. Constanta: Ex Ponto, 2006.
4. Gindin, James. Postwar British Fiction: New Accents and Attitudes. Berkley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press, 1962.
5. Head, Dominic. The State of the Novel: Britain and Beyond. West Sussex: Blackwell
Manifestos, 2008.
6. Karl, Frederick Robert. A Reader’s Guide to the Contemporary English Novel. London:
First Syracuse University Press, 2001.
7. Keulks, Gavin. Father and Son: Kingsley Amis, Martin Amis and the British Novel since
1950. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 2003.
8. Lea, Daniel; Schoene, Berthold. Posting the Male: Masculinity in Post -War and
Contemporary British Literature. New -York: Edition Rodopi, 2003.
9. Leader, Zachary. The Movement Reconsidered: Essays on Larkin, Amis, Gunn, Davie
and their Contemporaries. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
10. Lee-Brown, Patrick; Merz, Caroline. Post-War Literature: 1945 to the Present.
London: Evans Brot her Limited, 2003.

50
11. Luebering, J.E . English Literature from 19th Century through Today. New York:
Britannica Educational Publishing, 2011.
12. Marwick, Arthur. British Society since 1945 . Harmondswoth: Penguin Books, 1996.
13. Morrison, Blake. The Movement: English Poetry and Fiction of the 1950s . Oxford:
Oxford University Press,1980.
14. Salwak, Dale. Interviews with Britain’s Angry Young Men. San Bernardino: Borgo
Press, 1984.
15. Shaffer, Brian W. Reading the Novel in English:1950 -2000. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing, 2006.

INTERNET SOURCES
1. Burgess, Anthony. English Literature. Accessed 14 Apr. 2013
< http://www.vitorrent.org/torrent/1ca8eaf99a8f569f2da42d91479cfdc16171f14c> .
2. “Dystopia”. Charles’ George Orwell Links. Accessed 15 Mar. 2013.
< http://www.netcharles.com/orwell/articles/col -dystopia.htm >.
3. Encyclopaedia Britannica online, “ Angry Young Men”, Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc.
Accessed 27 Mar. 201 3.
<http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/25251/Angry -Young -Men>.
4. Jackson, Andrew. “Social reform: 1930 -1950.” Designing Britain: 1945 -1975. Accessed
11 Mar. 2013.
<http://www.vads.ac.uk/learning/designingbritain/html/crd_socreform.html >.
5. Kroll, Morton. ”The politics of Britain‟s Angry Young Men”. The Western political
Quarterly. Accessed 16 Apr. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/i218707 >.
6. McVey, Esther. “We are building a fair Welfare State.” The Guardian. The Guardian, 2
Apr. 2013.Accessed 14 Apr. 2013.
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/02/fair -welfare -state-make -work -pay>
7. “The proletarian writer”. The Orwell Prize. Accessed 20 Apr. 2013.
<http://theorwellprize.co.uk/george -orwell/by -orwell/essays -and-other -works/the –
proletarian -writer/ >

51
8. Saunders, Peter. “ Social class and stratification”. Accessed 16 Apr. 2013.
<http://mhgdaniel.blog.fisip.uns.ac.id/files/2011/12/Social -Class -and-Stratification .pdf>
9. Wroe, Nicholas.”Talent Spotter.” The Guardian. The Guardian, 12 Mar. 2005.Accessed
11 Mar. 2013.
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2005/mar/12/featuresreviews.guardianreview14 >.
10. Zuckowski, Tadeusz . “What did the Angry Young Men have to be angry about?”. Accessed 17
Apr. 2013. < http://www.nkjoleszno.pl/publikacje/tzuczkowski1.htm >