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 reputation to save an American lady’s
marriage. As a result, he earns the respect of the narrator.

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 unfaithful 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 disclose 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 characters 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 always. 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 judgment. 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: “Suddenly 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 atmosphere 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 themselves
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, description,
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 always”. 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.