An analysis of Mr.

Know All written by William Somerset Maugham

The author of the text - William Somerset Maugham is one of the best known English
writers of the 20th century. He was not only a novelist, but also a one of the most
successful dramatist and short-story writer. As you may know, Somerset Maugham
was the master of the short, concise novel and he could convey relationships, greed
and ambition with a startling reality.

The subject is simple. A rich British merchant of Oriental origin, called Mr. Kelada,
meets a group of Westerners on a ship sailing across the Pacific Ocean. His cabin-
mate, a British citizen who is the nameless narrator of the story, dislikes Mr. Kelada
even before he sees him. However, at the end of the story Mr. Kelada, the Levantine
jeweller, proves to be a real gentleman when he sacrifices his own pride and reputa-
tion to save an American lady’s marriage. As a result, he earns the respect of the nar-
rator.

The basic idea of the story is that appearances are sometimes deceptive. Mr. Know-
All who is described as a selfish person, who shows, that he knows everything better
than others, is in real life, a sensitive and kind gentleman who wouldn't hurt others.
But Mrs. Ramsay, whose modesty and good qualities no one questions, has been un-
faithful to her husband.

Mr. Know- All is a story with a moral lesson. It`s a post-war time and as we know
usually during period of the war feelings of prejudice and dislike for foreigners grow
stronger. So maybe it`s a reason why we have here such a protogonist as Mr. Kelada.
Although to be honest it`s a problem which goes through the ages and wars just dis-
close this wound of humen.
The ship as neutral place becomes a symbol here of the world with people who are
prejudiced and even racists.
We can devide all characters to some groupes as the prejudiced: the narrator and Mr.
Ramsay; The non-prejudiced: Mr. Kelada, the doctor and Mrs. Ramsay. The charac-
ters are described by their appearance and characteristics, except for the narrator.

The story is told in the first person – the narrator sees everything and is a part of the
plot.

From the start, the narrator expresses his prejudices against the man with whom he
must share a cabin (Mr. Kelada). At the beginning I dislike the protagonist, because
Mr. Kelada was too selfish and egotistic: "Mr. Kelada was chatty.....He discussed
plays, pictures, and politics. He was patriotic...... He managed the sweeps, conducted
the auctions, collected money for prizes at the sports, got up quoit and golf matches,
organized the concert and arranged the fancy-dress ball. He was everywhere and al-
ways. He was certainly the best hated man in the ship."
But, at the end of the story, he appears to us as a good and a decent person.
The writer reveals Mr. Kelada by means of narrative description with explicit judg-
ment. At first from both fact and judgment we derive the impression of the main
character as as a disgusting person. But the following action of the protagonist: “Sud-
denly he caught sight of Mrs. Ramsay's face…...She was staring at him with wide and
terrified eyes…..Mr. Kelada stopped with his mouth open……"I was mistaken," he
said”clearly shows, that Mr. Know-All is a good and brave man.

The plot deals with the conflicting relationship between the narrator and Mr. Kelada;
with the relationship between Mr. Kelada and Mr. Ramsay.
Compositionally the text falls into 3 logical parts.
The exposition gives us the opportunity to present the whole situation, marked in the
text, main and major characters and the atmosphere of the story. The general atmos-
phere of the action is calm, which later becomes awkward and by the end – tense. At
the beginning of the text the author introduces us the main characters.
The climax lies in the episode when Mr. Kelada and Mr.Ramsay argued among them-
selves about the pearl bracelet. And the main character sees Mrs. Ramsay's face: “It
was so white that she looked as though she were about to faint. She was staring at
him with wide and terrified eyes. They held a desperate appeal; it was so clear that I
wondered why her husband did not see it.
Mr. Kelada stopped with his mouth open. He flushed deeply. You could almost see
the effort he was making over himself “.
The denouement: Mr. Know All decides to lie in the dispute, in order not to destroy
marriage.

The types of speech employed by the author of the analysed story are narration, de-
scription, dialogue.

The writer brilliantly uses metaphor and personification which help to reveal the
main character’s nature. “Mr. Kelada was born under a bluer sky than is generally
seen in England” or “ It shone in her like a flower on a coat – (it was about modesty)”
or “Mrs. Ramsay was a very pretty little thing, with pleasant manners and a sense of
humor”. We can see that in the beginning author liked Mrs. Ramsay. Of course he
changed his mind later but here he again misunderstood a person nature so we can
make conclusion that there are two variants: The narrator is not good in identification
of a real substance of people or it`s not a rare case when people seem in different for
the first impression then they are indeed. Just look what epithets the narrator use to
describe Mr. Kelada: “Mr Kelada was short and of a sturdy build, clean-shaven and
dark-skinned, with a fleshy hooked nose and very large, lustrous and liquid eyes”, “A
row of flashing teeth”. In addition the narrator doesn`t escape of the chance to put an
irony, his favourite device: “ He spoke with a fluency in which there was nothing
English…”.
To force the impression of Mr. Kelda, to make the protogonist a bright example, the
narrator deals the final by hyperbole: “he ran everything, he was everywhere and al-
ways”. And it wasn`t just opinion of the narrator but of everybody what convienced
by oxymoron: “the best hated man”. Mr. Kelada characterise himself by antithesis:
“You don`t think I look like an American, do you? British to the backbone, that`s
what I am”. So trying to be objective we can say that Mr. Kelada is discrepant person
like most of us. But nobody are to be judjed by the first sight. Unfortunately it`s in
our nature, prejudice is a way of a fast adaptation to new circumstances but it`s in our
power not to make withdrawals and not to judje without complete comprehention of
the person and the situation at all.

In my harmble opinion this is a story about culture, manners, first impressions, values
and – most importantly of all – prejudice. Prejudice arises because it is human nature
to stereotype new people we meet based on race or how they look before getting to
know them. The message of the story can perhaps best be summed up in the proverb:
You should not judge a book by its cover.