Gandhi, Carpenter, Schreiner and the Crisis of Modern Civilisation at the Turn of the 20th Century

Abstract

In his published works MK Gandhi frequently refers the concept of ‘civilisation’. Gandhi divided this concept into two distinct types: modern and ancient. The former he identified chiefly with western industrial and technological civilisation that had, in his view, reduced the West to a state of ‘cultural anarchy’, while he viewed the latter far more positively. In his Platonic dialogue, Hind Swaraj, this distinction is drawn very emphatically. Hind Swaraj was strongly influenced by Edward Carpenter's essay Civilisation: Its Cause and Cure, in which Carpenter draws an analogy between civilisation and disease. Carpenter's essay rested in turn on the earlier anthropological researches of Lewis Morgan in Ancient Society, a substantial part of which is devoted to the structure of ancient Greek society, and which largely inspired Friedrich Engels to compose his study of the origin of the family. This article explores the implications of these debates on social structure, attitudes to property, and gender relations, which were shared by Carpenter's close friend Olive Schreiner, the proto-feminist author of The Story of an African Farm.

Key words:

• Gandhi
• Carpenter
• Schreiner
• civilisation
• imperialism
• liberalism

Acknowledgements

I acknowledge the financial support of the National Research Foundation of South Africa and research funding of the Department of Higher Education and Training of South Africa. I am grateful to King's College, London, for the invitation to attend the India and South Africa Conference: Comparisons, Confluences and Contrasts, 5–6 October 2012 and for its generous hospitality during this time.

Note on Contributor

John Hilton is Professor of Classics at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard College, Durban, South Africa. He was awarded his doctorate – a philological commentary on Books 3 and 4 of the Aethiopica of Heliodorus – by the University of Natal in 1998. He has contributed to studies in Classical Reception Theory and numerous chapters and articles on various topics, with particular reference to slavery at the Cape of Good Hope, the ancient novel (especially Heliodorus), onomastics (the name Azania and the names given to the nations of Africa), Classical reception studies, and computer applications in Classical philology. He is currently editor of Acta Classica: Proceedings of the Classical Association of South Africa.

Notes

1. For the use of the term ‘civilisation’ at the height of the modern period, see the published radio broadcasts of KD White (1957), discussed by Edmund Richardson (2013:161–9, especially) reviewed by Christopher Stray (2014) and Hilton (2014). It is easy to misjudge the discourse about civilisation in South Africa. Errol Harris (1952), for example, despite its unpromising title, is a liberal pamphlet, published by the Institute of Race Relations, which argues that white civilisation would best be preserved by racial integration rather than apartheid.

2. The bibliography on this is extensive. For general histories of the invasions, see Thapar (1990); Tarn (1951); Narain (1957). For a comparison between the two cultures, see Sedlar (1980), Bannerjee (1981).

3. See also the earlier account of Mathurin Veyssière de la Croze's History of Christianity in the Indies (1724), which argued that linga worship was essentially the worship of Osiris and Bacchus (as noted by Majeed 1992:14). Colonialist histories of India are discussed by Ranajit Guha (1998:2–3, especially): ‘Indian history, assimilated thereby [i.e. by coloniast histories] to the history of Great Britain, would henceforth be used as a comprehensive measure of difference between the peoples of these two countries. Politically that difference was spelled out as one between rulers and the ruled; ethnically, between a white Herrenvolk and blacks; materially, between a prosperous Western power and its poor Asian subjects; culturally, between high and lower levels of civilisation, between the superior religion of Christianity and indigenous belief system made up of superstitition and barbarism – all adding up to an irreconcilable difference between colonizer and colonized.’

4. Especially vol 2, book 2, chapter 10:107–64: ‘General Reflections: The importance of the inquiry into the state of civilisation among the Hindus.’ Mill held that Indian accounts of their past were largely fictional, that they had enjoyed no enlightened monarchical governments but rather had been subjected to cruel despotisms, that they had not constructed usable roads, that their wealth was grossly exaggerated, that their armies were ill-disciplined and incompetent, that they had no coherent legal code, that they mistreated women and animals, that they resembled the ancient Egyptians in being unclean, indecent and debauched, and so on.

5. Volumes 7–9, 1805–1835. See especially Wilson's preface to his edition of Mill's history (Mill & Wilson 1858, vols 7–9:xii). Wilson believed that Mill's negative account of Indian culture negatively influenced the attitudes of imperial administrators who usually read his work before setting out to India (Mill & Wilson 1858, vols 7–9:xii).

6. See the note at vol 2, book 2, chapter 10:164: ‘The Hindus, by the character of their institutions, and by the depressing influence of foreign subjugation, are apparently what they were at least three centuries before the Christian era. Two thousand years have done nothing for them, everything for us. We must, therefore, in fairness, compare them with their contemporaries, with the people of antiquity; and we shall then have reason to believe, that they occupied a very foremost station amongst the nations … Whatever defects may be justly imputed to their religion, their government, their laws, their literature, their sciences, their arts, as contrasted with the same proofs of civilisation in modern Europe, it will not be disputed by any impartial and candid critic, that as far as we have the means of instituting a comparison, the Hindus were in all these respects quite as civilized as the most civilized nation of the ancient world, and in as early times as any of which records or traditions remain.’ For later systematic comparisons between the Roman and Indian Empires, see Bryce (1914); Hilton (forthcoming). For the role of the Classics in shaping ideas and practices of the British administration of India, see Vasunia (2013).

7. For Gandhi's thoughts on civilisation see Iyer (1973:23–36). Gandhi (1869–1948) clearly knew the work of Hunter (Collected Works [hereafter CW] 1:182, 288–9, 29:22 and Gandhi 1927:404) and read widely while in prison (Frederic William Farrar's Seekers after God, for example, CW 25:82–7).

8. Many writers on Gandhi have commented on his rejection of all aspects of modern western civilisation, even when he relied on them as he did on the railways and telegraph (Lelyveld 2011:91–2). Compare also Sethia & Narayan (2013); Swan (1985:177); Erikson (1970:217–26).

9. Speech on Indian Civilisation, Indore (30 March 1918), CW 14:298–300. See CW <http://www.gandhiserve.org/e/cwmg/cwmg.htm> (accessed 30 June 2014), but the references in this article are to the print edition consulted at the documentation centre of the University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville. The reference to this speech in the online version is vol 16:376–8.

10. Ironically, Richard Sorabji (2012) has recently amply demonstrated how similar Gandhi's philosophy was to the thinking of the ancient Stoics. Compare also Mehdi (2007). Sorabji states firmly (2012:1) that there is no question of any ‘influence’ of Stoic ideas on Gandhi, or vice versa, however.

11. CW 13:260–4, speech at the Gurukil Anniversary (20 March 1916). Gandhi's antipathy to modern western civilisation have been traced to his traumatic experience of the new technology of fingerprinting in South Africa (1904–1908). For this, see Breckenridge (2011:331–48).

12. See Gandhi's comments in his autobiography (1927:138): ‘Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You’ overwhelmed me.’ Gandhi later named his communal farm in the Transvaal after Tolstoy.

13. On segregationist legislation introduced under the British administration of South Africa prior to the Union in 1910, see Du Toit (2005:419-48, especially 432 ff).

14. CW 8:244–5 taken from Indian Opinion 13 June 1908. For Gandhi's rejection of the doctrine of the ‘survival of the fittest’ see also CW 50:310. For Rhodes and social evolution, see Hilton (forthcoming).

15. ‘The British Rule in India’, Karl Marx, The New York Daily Tribune 25 June 1853. Marx was criticised for these remarks by Saïd (1978:153–7). For a full discussion exploring some of the complexities of these statements, see Ahmad (1992:221–42).

16. CW 13:44, letter to Esther Fearing Bettiah (9 June 1917).

17. For the Boer War as a life-changing experience for Gandhi, see Vahed (2000:201–19). On the ambulance service, see Lelyveld (2011:44–8).

18. See also the comments of Mill (1878 vol 1, book 2, chapter 7:309–19).

19. Compare also Rand Daily Mail 29 September 1913; Naidu (1921:35–8).

20. For these issues see Joshi (1988).

21. On the burning of saris made of foreign cloth, see CW 20:495 (Young India 11 August 1921).

22. CW 68:52–3 on ‘Woman's special mission’.

23. The quotation is taken from Bhana & Vahed (2005:14): ‘Fully aware that White rulers intended to exclude indigenous peoples from the system, Gandhi argued that “Indians” could indeed claim great affinity to Western civilisation because of their illustrious historical past. By contrast, the indigenous populations, referred to variously as “natives” and “kaffirs”, displayed no such advanced levels of development.’ For extenuating comments, see Lelyveld (2011:58–9).

24. Excerpt from 1908 YMCA debate on the role of Asiatics in the Empire, see note 14 above. The passage quoted in the text is also highlighted and well contextualised by Lelyveld (2011:60).

25. On Carpenter, see Rowbotham (2008). It is well known that Carpenter owed much to Tolstoy, John Ruskin's Christian-socialist critique of the Victorian political economy in Unto this Last (1860), and Max Nordau's Zionist treatise Degeneration (1892).

26. However, note Parel (1997:38): ‘Civilisation is not an incurable disease, but it should never be forgotten that the English people are at present afflicted by it.’

27. Morgan gave Carpenter the title of his poetic anthology, Towards Democracy, since he believed modern western civilisation needed to move on to a fuller democracy (Morgan 1964:552).

28. For the discussion of the transition of society from barbarism to civilisation, see Engels (1972:217–37); White (1964). For other Marxist analyses of Ancient History see Wood (1981:3–22; see also the UCT Classicist Benjamin Farrington (1938), whom Schreiner met in Cape Town in September 1920 (Olive Schreiner BC16/Box7/Fold4/Mar-Dec1920/20 in the MS archive of the University of Cape Town). On Farrington's Marxist views, see Atkinson (2010:671–92, forthcoming:356–79). The influence of Darwinian evolution is evident in much of this discussion. Desmond & Moore (2010) have recently traced the inspiration for Darwin's scientific endeavours to the debate over slavery in British society.

29. Carpenter adduces the myth of the Golden Age as evidence of the Greek awareness of a social and cultural decline (1921:10). Carpenter had chosen Mathematics over Classics at Cambridge, which his brother Charles felt was a mistake (see the correspondence between the two brothers in MSS 349/66-69 in the Sheffield archive, cited by Copley (2006:38–9). Nevertheless, Edward frequently refers to the Classics in his writings and had clearly read extensively in the field.

30. For Lang, see Hilton (2011:107–28). See Lang (1887) for an example of his anthropologically-inspired work.

31. For the influence of Indian thought on Carpenter, see Barua (1991:127–50). For the relationship between his homosexuality and ‘Orientalism’ see Bakshi (1990:151–77); Copley (2006:1–104). Arunachalam gave Carpenter a copy of the Bhagavad Gita, according to Copley (2006:22).

32. Although Carpenter makes no reference to his contemporary, Sigmund Freud, their views on this three-stage psychological development are remarkably congruent. Both accounts were strongly influenced by Plato. For Freud and Plato, see Santas (1988).

33. Like Gandhi, Carpenter found inspiration in the writings of Tolstoy, especially his essay ‘What is Art?’ (1930:182–3). This essay was translated by Aylmer Maude in 1904, the same year in which Carpenter's book The Art of Creation was published.

34. Carpenter (1927:134) calls Schreiner ‘that great and original authoress' whose ‘mental penetration and vigour’ he had the ‘greatest respect’ for. Carpenter's discussion of the hostility between the sexes as reflected in sculptures of the Amazons and in Aristophanes' Lysistrata reflects that of Schreiner (1923a:194–7).

35. For the underlying ‘animist’ beliefs of Schreiner, which she held in common with Edward Carpenter, see Knechtel (2010:259–82). The quotation is from a letter by Havelock Ellis (28 March 1884).

36. See Schreiner (1923a:322): ‘Whatever is evil in modern civilisation is ours, and also whatever is good.’

37. Letter 259, to Havelock Ellis (12 December 1887).

38. Olive Schreiner: Edward Carpenter SMD 30/32/j (National Literary Museum, Grahamstown). The letters of Olive Schreiner are available online <http://www.oliveschreiner.org>.

39. Theodor Mommsen, the famous German historian and Nobel laureate (1902), must be meant. See Rebenich (2002); Wiesehöfer (2005).

40. Olive Schreiner to Havelock Ellis (25 August 1912) in the Harry Ransom Centre at the University of Texas at Austin: HRC/UNCAT/OS-148-a.

41. Letter 492, to Mrs Francis Smith (20 November 1910).

42. Letter 488, to Anna Purcell (sometime in 1910).

43. Letter 492 (September 1913). On Murray, see West (1984); Wilson (1987); Stray (2007).

44. Benjamin Jowett, the Master of Balliol College, Oxford, and well-known translator of the works of Plato is of course meant, see Faber (1957).

45. Letter 359/97, to Edward Carpenter in the Sheffield archives (28 April 1911). Compare also her feminist reading of Gilbert Murray's translation of Euripides' Iphigeneia (which one is not mentioned) in a letter to Frederick Pethick-Lawrence (August 1910): Olive Schreiner BC16/Box8/Fold4/MMPr/AssortedCorres/FredPL/15.

46. Letter 484, written from De Aar (13 April 1913).

47. On Gandhi's relationship with Kallenbach, see Lelyveld (2011:88–97).

48. Letter 359/51 in the Sheffield archive (22 April 1891).

49. Letter 484, to Caroline Rhys Davids (12 April 1910).

50. Both letters are in the UCT MS archive at Olive Schreiner BC16/Box5/Fold1/1912/15.

51. Letter to Herman Kallenbach in the National Library of South Africa in Cape Town Msc26/23.4 (2 October 1914).