RHONA HAMMOND
Reappraising ‘Value Judgements on Art and the Question of Macho Attitudes: The Case of Derek Walcott’ by Elaine Savory Fido

It is as if woman has little reality in Walcott’s imagination, and that there is little between romanticism on the one had and appalled rejection on the other in her treatment in his works. (Savory Fido 1986)

Elaine Savory Fido’s 1986 article entitled ‘Value Judgements on Art and the Question of Macho Attitudes: The Case of Derek Walcott’ which appeared in the Journal of Commonwealth Literature has cast a long shadow. Other critics had already remarked briefly on Walcott’s attitudes towards women but not as strongly or clearly or with as much supporting evidence as Savory Fido did in this article.

Savory Fido argued that ‘not only is the work of Derek Walcott … inclusive of strong prejudices about women but that these are often associated with weakening of power in his writing’ (108). She went on to acknowledge that whilst Walcott writes about:

racism, colonialism and the situation of the poor masses with intelligence, anger and originality … his treatment of women is full of clichés, stereotypes and negativity. I shall seek to show how some of his worst writing is associated with these portraits of women…. (110)

Savory Fido’s position was, in essence, that if artists like Walcott displayed a negative attitude towards women in their poetry, then this would reinforce negative attitudes towards women in the wider community. She struck a balance, acknowledging Walcott’s achievements whilst arguing that this flaw diminished them to some extent. Savory Fido felt that although these attitudes may be widespread throughout the culture of the islands and reflective of the society from which Walcott comes, these views are particularly reinforced when a major talent such as Walcott repeats them. Since 1986, Walcott has become a Nobel Laureate and local hero. The main square in Castries has been named after him and an annual festival constituted in his honour. Walcott’s cultural authority has increased considerably.

Savory Fido’s contention that the artist has a responsibility to resist the dominant thinking is a matter of concern because such an expectation imposes restrictions on Walcott’s treatment of the women of the Caribbean and dictates how they should be represented. This seems to be inherently dangerous territory, bordering on the intentional fallacy (wherein the design or intention of the author is neither available nor desirable as a standard for judging the success of a literary work). Furthermore it raises the question of what should be expected of Walcott and what does he himself expect from his own writing. His views on the role of the poet as a politician or revolutionary have changed over time but he has certainly not claimed to be a feminist. Savory Fido partially acknowledges this flaw in her approach but she continues to insist that it is a reasonable requirement:

Racism, class prejudice, sexism and colonialist attitudes are endemic in so many cultures that it might seem unfair to ask that writers control/eliminate them in themselves, but that is indeed the issue as we continue to look to serious art for moral sensitivity and the expansion of our conceptual horizons. (110)

Savory Fido relied on the work of Hugo Meynell to provide her with a framework to link the aesthetic and the moral. Savory Fido said that: ‘What I suggest in this paper is that relative technical incompetence (or alternatively, aesthetic limitation, over-control or linguistic evasion) arises out of limitations of perception as much as of the artist’s talent and training’ (110–11). So in other words, Savory Fido is arguing that because Walcott fails to deeply engage with the lives and complexities of his female characters, he fails to appreciate them fully and this weakness is associated with technically inferior poetry.