Smithers-Jones: An Analysis

Here we go again, it's Monday at last, – 3^rd Person Narrative
He's heading for the Waterloo line
To catch the 8 a.m. bus, it’s usually dead on time,
Hope it isn't late, have to be there by nine.[1]
Pin stripe suit; clean shirt and tie;
Stops off at the corner shop to buy The Times.[2] 
'Good Morning, Smithers-Jones.[3] - Addressing SJ (1)
'How's the wife at home?[4]
'Did you get the car you've been looking for?' (x2)[5]  

Let me get inside you, let me take control of you. – 1^st Person Narrative
We could have some good times,
All this worry will get you down.
I'll give you a new meaning to life - I don't think so.[6]

Sitting on the train, you're nearly there.[7] – 2^nd Person Narrative
You're part of the production line.
You're the same as him, you're like tinned-sardines.[8]
Get out of the pack before they peel you back.

Arrive at the office, spot on time,
The clock on the wall hasn't yet struck nine.[9]
'Good Morning, Smithers-Jones,[10] – Addressing SJ (2)
'The boss wants to see you alone.
'I hope it’s the promotion you've been looking for' (x2)

'Come in, Smithers old boy.[11] – Addressing SJ (3)
'Take a seat, take the weight off your feet.
'I've some news to tell you:[12]
'There's no longer a position for you;[13]
'Sorry, Smithers-Jones.' 

Put on the kettle and make some tea, – Return to 2^nd Person Narrative
It's all a part of feeling groovy.
Put on your slippers turn on the TV,
It's all a part of feeling groovy.
It's time to relax, now you've worked your arse off
But the only one smilin' is the sun-tanned boss.[14]
Work and work and work and work till you die
‘Coz there's plenty more fish in the sea to fry.  

---

[1] Sets the scene in 3^rd person narrative. Puts reader alongside SJ in rush hour of London. Use of the word ‘again’ is first suggestion of repetition and routine.

[2] Introduces protagonist as white collar worker of lower middle-class, the favoured protagonist of modernist/sensationalist literature (Note protagonists of: Collins, Wilkie; Stoker, Bram; Wells, H. G.; Orwell, George).

[3] Introduces dialogue (unreciprocated, see note 5).

[4] Conclusion of story will affect others besides protagonist.

[5] Speaker is an unobservant one as SJ would not be taking the bus/train if so. Classic small talk justifies the unanswered questions in that we can likely guess SJ’s responses. The fact that we hear no responses from SJ to these questions is part of the author’s intent to portray him as a man without a voice, someone content to allow others, including us (the reader), to speak for him. And not just without a voice, but without a first name. We see nameless, voiceless people in society daily and here we follow the story of one, seemingly selected arbitrarily. Line also hints at consumerist/materialist culture.

[6] Stanza shifts narrative into first person, presumably addressing SJ. Final statement, however, suggests an internal monologue – possibly a thought from an unsympathetic author.

[7] Narrative shifts again into second person. Multiple perspectives are used to show SJ through numerous perceptions of him. London is a busy place, SJ is exposed to numerous observers, which is what author is here reflecting in narrative shifts. The 3^rd person narrator appears to state the facts only, as though pragmatic or not wishing to interfere whereas 1^st person narrative appears to view SJ as a failure who is easily and succinctly dismissed. 2^nd person narrative, however, appears to be ridiculing SJ whilst simultaneously urging him to take matters into his own hands. ‘Start doing what you want to do’, this narrator seems to say. Poor SJ is being passed around from one hand to another without really putting up any resistance.

[8] This line shows SJ as a conformist. The simile evokes a mass-produced uniformity of people without a voice and possibly dead inside.

[9] Line indicates the routine SJ adheres to on a daily basis and the futility of this routine as will be illustrated in subsequent stanza.

[10] Introduction of third character, a colleague of SJ. This misleading proponent provides the fulcrum of the story in that they present the reader (and SJ) with the prospect of change, the twist in the tale if you like. The change is engineered by this proponent in his/her speech. The important word in this section is ‘hope’ because it evokes the perception that SJ is worthy of something more than is his lot. The suggestion also of a ‘promotion’ as something SJ has ‘been looking for’ portrays him as someone with ambitions and dreams, however small. The reader, having now gotten to know him a little better, is rooting for SJ as he engages in the crescendo of his story: ‘The boss’, SJ’s antagonist, places SJ at a disadvantage. He is the underdog.

[11] The greeting is ambivalent in that by addressing SJ by the first element in his surname, the boss maintains a formal attitude, but by following this with the epithet ‘old boy’ (evoking the boss’s class: I imagine it as Etonian), the boss has cleverly and immediately conjured up an informal attitude. This would disorientate SJ, and the reader, and keep us guessing as to what happens next – a miniature cliff-hanger, if you will. ‘Take a seat’ is again formal whilst ‘take the weight of your feet’ is informal. The boss is taking us for a ride, fat bastard. Can you imagine him with a big cigar? Capitalist wanker.

[12] This is it. The climax of the story. The boss is about to contribute something momentous to both the story and to the protagonist. What we might call a ‘bombshell’.

[13] This could have gone either way. If the boss had delivered the line ‘I have got a promotion for you’, he would have given SJ his happy ending. As it is, however, the boss has introduced a tragic realism to the story. We feel for SJ whom we have followed from the beginning and ‘hoped’ that he would get what he deserves. Now there will be no car and we are forced to conjecture how his ‘wife at home’ will take the news. Furthermore, the boss’s apology, ‘Sorry, Smithers-Jones’ seems insufficient and fabricated.

[14] Here we return to the same voice of the 2^nd person narrator, the one that seemed to be most sympathetic toward SJ. Again the narrator is urging, or instructing, SJ to forget about what had happened; life goes on, the world is full of horrible bastards that you can’t fight so why bother? Do what you want, SJ, every fucker else does. Please yourself.

The story asks the question ‘What is the point of all this conformity?’. Although the story ends on a cliché (‘plenty more fish in the sea’, reprising the sardine analogy – a fish is a mindless creature identical to its fellows) it is an apt one with the strong message of anti-assimilation, SJ’s dismissal being a chance to re-invent himself etc., etc…