P. G. Wodehouse gained recognition for his depiction of peculiar, elitist, and socially-dependent noble individuals in his various stories. Lord Emsworth, the protagonist in the Blandings Castle Books, is situated in the fictional Emsworth estate where he holds the supposed position of authority. Lord Emsworth exemplifies a classic “Wodehouse type,” exhibiting the distinct and comical traits that contribute to their awkwardness.
Lord Emsworth is a character who holds a high rank and position in the upper class, but lacks intelligence and common sense. In typical Wodehouse fashion, this character has a name that is both unique and ridiculous, resembling the long historical names of old English powerhouses. The deliberate use of multiple consonants in the name further emphasizes its grandeur, mirroring how aristocrats would have named themselves in Wodehouse’s society.
Even though Emsworth is advanced in age, he lacks the typical qualities associated with it, such as wisdom and maturity. He often forgets things, sleeps for extended periods, and generally remains unaware of his surroundings, except for his beloved animals and flowers. However, a crucial characteristic of any Wodehouse character is their skillful employment of language.
Wodehouse combines the Eton jargon of the younger generation with aristocratic snobbish expressions to establish a distinct language for his characters. Lord Emsworth, an easy-going yet conservative peer, is defined by his polite speech towards others and his frequent use of the phrase “dash it” as his preferred way of expressing anger. Ignorance and idleness are the central traits that Wodehouse emphasizes in order to satirize the upper-class lifestyle.
Lord Emsworth is a member of British society who embodies the idle upper classes. This societal group lives off their family names and fortunes, attending prestigious universities like Oxford or Cambridge for the sole purpose of boasting about it. Later in life, they become the center of a superficial social circle, indulging in mindless entertainment such as estate balls, hunting, and more. Similar to his peers, Lord Emsworth is wealthy but lacks ideas on how to utilize his wealth effectively.
Due to Lord Emsworth’s idle and unintelligent nature, he spends countless hours caring for his cherished award-winning and enormous pumpkin, which he has named “The Hope of Blandings.” This pumpkin is a leading contender at the Shrewsbury plant show. Adding to the chaos, Emsworth’s worthless son Freddie has been pursuing a romantic relationship with McAllister, the daughter of Emsworth’s top gardener. This behavior infuriates McAllister, causing him to quit his job at Blandings. The overall storyline aims to portray Lord Emsworth and his son as lacking reason and imagination.
In comparison to McAllister and Mr. Donaldson, the common people, the aristocrats distinguish themselves with their foolishness in both behavior and thinking. It is also noteworthy that the upper-class individuals appear to be reliant on the assistance of the common man in various tasks. Lord Emsworth, for instance, requires his gardener’s intervention to lift his pumpkin, and Freddie seems incapable of finding any beneficial employment until Mr. Donaldson arrives.
Thus, the narrative showcases the opulent lifestyles and steadfast commitment to outdated customs of the wealthy in England after World War I, amidst significant societal shifts that would ultimately impact the aristocracy as a whole. McAllister and Donaldson symbolize the external world beyond Blandings estate, capable of independent existence and adaptable to change. In contrast, Lord Emsworth and his son exemplify the diminishing upper classes, gradually declining due to their inability to navigate the evolving social landscape.
The essence of understanding Wodehouse lies in comparing his characters to the typical upper-class men of earlier generations. Wodehouse combines sarcasm and ridiculous situations to highlight the silliness and emptiness of aristocratic heritage. This is what makes Emsworth and his peers both amusing and likable. “The Custody of the Pumpkin” by P.G. Wodehouse is a unique short story that differs from others read in class.
One of the first comedic short stories I have ever read from the early 20th century, this particular story has a slapstick comedy vibe. It begins with a delightful description of the setting at Blandings Castle, where the morning sunshine showers down like amber, creating a warm and comforting glow. At first, everything appears to be ordinary, as if the story will simply take up ten pages to depict the protagonist’s fortunate life. However, the comedy starts to unfold in the fifth paragraph.
Thanks to Mr. MacKnight, I now understand why the critics praised this short story. Initially, it seemed like a collection of meaningless sophisticated words to me. However, I soon discovered that beneath the fancy language lies a simple and humorous tale about Lord Emsworth, a nobleman, and his foolish attempt to win the pumpkin competition. It all began with Lord Emsworth being unaware of how to use a telescope because he failed to notice the cap covering it.
After being reminded by his servant, Lord Emsworth uses the cap on the instrument to secretly spy on cows. One particular part of this short story that I enjoy is when Lord Emsworth realizes the cap is hindering his vision and expresses his frustration to his butler. The butler suggests removing the cap to achieve better results, which prompts Lord Emsworth to ask if there is a cap present.
There is a sense of satisfaction in Lord Emsworth’s voice as he instructs Beach to take something off. Beach obediently adjusts and twiddles, continuing to please his lord. Lord Emsworth expresses delight at the improvement, exclaiming that he can now see a cow. It is amusing how Wodehouse uses sophisticated language to describe such a silly thing, ultimately revealing Beach’s hidden sarcasm and annoyance towards the Lord’s ignorance.
This passage also demonstrates Wodehouse’s sarcastic stance towards the hierarchical order in Britain, evident through the numerous titled individuals such as “Lord” and “Knight.” What adds to the humor is our anticipation that someone of Lord Emsworth’s supposedly high intellectual capacity, like a Lord, would have the opportunity to admire a picturesque scenery, despite the mishap with his cap. However, in reality, Lord Emsworth finds himself gazing at a mere cow instead.
Wodehouse playfully undermines the stereotypical image of ranked people and their fancy language in another example of a mismatch. The story continues to a point where the Lord becomes bored with his spying on cows. P. G. Wodehouse skillfully depicts this simple and seemingly deep and complicated situation: Eventually, the cow’s appeal to the audience began to decline. Although it was a good cow by cow standards, like many cows, it lacked continuous dramatic interest.
Lord Emsworth grew tired of watching the cow chew cud and stare blankly, so he decided to rotate the telescope in search of something more exciting. Wodehouse could have used simpler language, such as “After a while, Lord Emsworth found looking at cows boring and turned his telescope away,” but he deliberately chose this form of expression, which proves to be highly effective.
The quote includes the Lord’s ironic and sarcastic use of “the cow’s audience-appeal” to highlight his own fascination with cows. The phrase “sustained dramatic interest” emphasizes the absurdity of Lord Emsworth using equipment to stare at a cow for a long time before realizing it is not interesting at all, which is completely ridiculous. Later, he notices his son Frederick kissing a girl, and eventually realizes it is Angus McAllister’s daughter, who works as his gardener.
Once again, the text highlights the irony of hierarchy, as Lord Emsworth is portrayed as unintelligent, yet everyone must still comply with his demands, a theme that Wodehouse humorously mocks in “The Custody of the Pumpkin.” McAllister had no choice but to leave or send his daughter away. Lord Emsworth ponders the fate of the pumpkin now that Angus McAllister is gone.
Once again, Lord Emsworth is depicted as a person who trivializes important matters while being excessively obsessed with the pumpkin fair that his pumpkin was scheduled to attend. This comedic element resurfaces when his son, Freddie, encounters him outside the Castle despite being grounded. Despite Freddie’s intention to share something important, Lord Emsworth innocently believes his lie of “I came out to see you” and immediately associates it with his cherished pumpkin.
There are a multitude of quotes and points to include, but none capture the sheer delight and laughter I experienced when I first read it. It is a timeless classic that can bring joy to anyone, anytime. Theocritan shepherd Humour The Greek poet Theocritus (ca. 310-250 BCE) was renowned for his pastoral poetry, which depicts a picturesque world of nymphs and shepherds as a contrast to the corrupt city life. Blandings itself, and specifically this story, serves as a noteworthy example of the influence of the pastoral ideal in English literature. In his narrative “The Custody of the Pumpkin,” P. G. Wodehouse employs various techniques to create humor.
The passage is from a story that portrays Lord Emsworth’s annoyance with his delinquent son, Frederick, who has been showing an interest in the gardener’s daughter. One amusing moment occurs when Lord Emsworth shouts, “Frederick! Lovely day, isn’t it?” Startled, the troublemaker immediately stops in his tracks.
Engrossed in a blissful state, he failed to notice his father’s presence. However, his cheerful disposition remained unaffected by the encounter. He joyfully approached his father and greeted him with a “Hello, guv’nor,” struggling to come up with a pleasant topic of conversation, as it was always a challenge on such occasions. His father, uninterested in discussing the weather, moved closer, resembling the individual who suffocated the young princes in the Tower.
The use of the verb “bellowed,” particularly when it is followed by the phrase “his lordship,” creates a humorous effect due to the unexpected contrast between the forceful verb and the dignified aristocrat. The phrase would lose much of its amusement if it had said “bellowed Emsworth” or “bellowed the lord.” Adding to the comedic effect, the refined term “his lordship” seems out of place after the verb “bellowed.”
The characterization of Frederic as the “villain of the piece” is entertainingly exaggerated, as Frederic is not malicious or harmful. This use of comic exaggeration is seen throughout the story. The contrast between the furious Emsworth and the infatuated Freddie adds to the humor, as Freddie remains “sunken in a roseate trance.” The humor in the story relies, in part, on the comedic overstatement exemplified by the aforementioned phrase.
Wodehouse’s portrayal of Freddie’s continued infatuation wouldn’t be as entertaining if he had simply stated that Freddie was “still thinking about his beloved.” The phrase “roseate trance” exemplifies flamboyant exaggeration. The inclusion of playful verbs, like “gamboled,” creates a sense of whimsy that sharply contrasts with Lord Emsworth’s mood. Additionally, the use of humorous slang, such as when an English aristocrat’s son addresses his father in a cockney manner by saying “Hullo, guv’nor,” adds to the comedic effect.
The speech aimed at diminishing his father’s anger is likely to have the opposite effect, making it an example of comic irony. Additionally, the humor in this passage can be further explored through the use of a comic simile. It compares Emsworth’s appearance to that of the man who smothered the young princes in the Tower. This phrase is humorous due to its exaggeration, vividness, surprise element, and inventiveness. If Wodehouse had simply stated “like a man full of anger,” the effect would be drastically different.
Paraphrased and unified:
According to the text, it is humorous to think of the Blandings estate needing “hope” because it is already very rich and powerful. Additionally, Lord Emsworth’s obsession with the well-being of a pumpkin reflects Wodehouse’s satirical portrayal of aristocrats during his time. The pumpkin’s actual significance is that winning the competition would bring Lord Emsworth happiness. As he has no other interests in life except for his large, prizewinning pig, winning the contest is seen as a great accomplishment in his eyes. This ironic perspective is reflected in the story’s title.
The first hint is that “custody” usually refers to children, not pumpkins. In the story, Lord Emsworth appears to value his prize-contending pumpkin more than his own son, whom he has “little use for.” The Earl of Elmsworth, who is described as “fluffy-minded,” struggles with prioritization (p. 43). He appears to prioritize his garden and his prized pumpkins, showing greater concern for his gardener resigning than his son’s desire to marry the gardener’s cousin. Reason, forcefully expelled, gradually returns and a sudden chill grips his heart (p. 49) Uh oh!
The pumpkin is being neglected as there is no one to take care of it. The pumpkin will definitely not achieve any awards under the supervision of the “deputy head gardener” who is deemed unfit for the task of preparing his cherished pumpkin, as mentioned in “The Custody of the Pumpkin Q&A P. G. Wodehouse Hope of Blandings” on the enotes Wikipedia page. This irony arises from his concern for the pumpkin rather than his own son. P. G. Wodehouse’s “The Custody of the Pumpkin” illustrates how the class system can be prejudiced and punishing, with Lord Emsworth and his son Freddie embodying the aristocratic society of post-World War I England.
This social class is intriguing because it consisted primarily of established English families who desired to maintain the traditional hierarchy: Aristocrats would have all the privileges and respect, while the “ordinary” people would have to strive for their desires. Lord Emsworth, therefore, represents one of these wealthy and still-titled families whose influence was being overshadowed by the emerging middle and upper-middle classes, consisting of hardworking individuals who built businesses and significantly transformed England.
This being said: Notice how “The Custody of the Pumpkin” illustrates this with the way Wodehouse contrasts his characters. Lord Emsworth possesses wealth and prestige, but lacks intelligence and talent. Consequently, he relies entirely on his gardener, Angus, to engage in his favorite activity – tending to his award-winning colossal pumpkin. Similarly, Lord Emsworth’s son, Freddie, who is also affluent, lacks motivation and purpose in life. Consequently, he depends on Mr. Donaldson’s employment offer as a means to secure his father’s approval after impetuously marrying Aggie, who is the gardener’s somewhat distant relative.
In these two cases, Lord Emsworth displayed prejudice as he was against his son, Freddie, marrying Aggie, a woman from a lower social class. This was particularly true given Aggie’s connection to Lord Emsworth’s gardener. It was only after Lord Emsworth’s incident in Kensinton Gardens that he recognized the value of connecting his son to Mr. Donaldson. Lord Emsworth realized that only Mr. Donaldson could help Freddie transform from being a good-for-nothing and ultimately relieve Lord Emsworth of his responsibilities. Wodehouse also demonstrates that the class system has its own form of punishment.
The class system hinders people from exercising their freedoms, leading to problems such as Freddie and Aggie’s difficulty in getting married. Lord Emsworth’s abundance of leisure time, unlike the rest of the world, can also be attributed to his upbringing within the class system. As a result, this particular social structure both punishes and discriminates within a society that highly values family names and their historical significance. Consequently, these names receive deferential treatment and advantages.
The relationship between Freddie and Lord Emsworth in P. G. Wodehouse’s “The Custody of the Pumpkin” demonstrates a recurring theme in Wodehouse’s portrayal of the paternal bonds between aristocratic fathers and sons. Wodehouse frequently presents them as contrasting figures who serve as adversaries to one another. This preference arises from the fact that Wodehouse typically assigns similar traits to the older aristocrats, such as absent-mindedness, eccentricity, limited intelligence, leisurely lifestyles, excessive wealth, and prestigious titles.
The Custody of the Pumpkin Q&A P. G. Wodehouse depicts the younger aristocrats as reflecting their wealthy parents by not being bright or creative. Wodehouse portrays them as lazy drones who spend their time attending social events, enjoying themselves at the men’s social club, and relying on their family’s wealth. Lord Emsworth and his 26-year-old bachelor son, Freddie, exemplify this, with Freddie’s youth becoming a growing concern for his anxious father over time.
The Earl of Emsworth, similar to many British nobles, had little regard for his Younger Son, Freddie Threepwood. Freddie proved to be an especially challenging younger son. In typical Wodehouse style, the description of Freddie’s significance to his father is amusing. Essentially, it implies that the father attempted to arrange a marriage for Freddie with a wealthy woman just to give him some purpose. Furthermore, Freddie is so ineffectual that his father actually fares better without his presence.
Freddie is not the kind of son that every father brags about as the future of the family. He is actually seen as a wasteful person by both his father and the rest of the family. This is because whenever Freddie goes to London, he always finds himself in trouble, accumulating debts, and causing various kinds of trouble. His closest family members believe that there is no way of dealing with him. If he is allowed to stay in London, he continuously accrues debts and engages in mischief. When he is brought back home to Blandings, he becomes sullen and brooding.
Lord Emsworth had a suspicious feeling towards his son Freddie, as he seemed curiously cheerful and unlike his usual despondent self. Lord Emsworth sensed that Freddie was up to no good and needed to be monitored closely. As a result, their father-son relationship suffered greatly. Lord Emsworth viewed Freddie as a waste of time and money, and Freddie did nothing to change his father’s perception of him. In P.G. Wodehouse’s “Custody of the Pumpkin,” the author explores the strained relationship between Lord Emsworth and his son.
In the story, Lord Emsworth and his 26-year-old bachelor son Freddie are depicted as adversaries, even if not openly acknowledged. Lord Emsworth is visibly annoyed with his son and doesn’t enjoy his company. He constantly keeps a watchful eye on Freddie, expecting trouble whenever he is around. The mere sight of his son causes Lord Emsworth’s serene expression to transform into a frown (pg. 20).
Freddie had become such a bother to Lord Emsworth that he wished Freddie belonged to someone else and lived far away. Lord Emsworth grew paranoid towards Freddie, even his inner voice told him that Freddie had malicious intentions. Lord Emsworth’s predictions about Freddie turned out to be true. Additionally, Lord Emsworth disapproved of Freddie’s choices, including his marriage to Angus McAlister’s cousin.
The reason behind this was because he insisted on Freddie conforming to his own vision. Similar to a father, he imposed the expectation of perfection on his son without taking any substantial action to help him achieve it. However, his son’s imperfections bothered him and led to a growing dislike or even hatred. Eventually, after a conversation with the bride’s father, he changed his mind. He only agreed to this change in order to get his son to do something and to distance him from Lord Emsworth. The quote “…tell him-er-not to hurry home” (pg. 131) also suggests that he hoped to avoid seeing his son for quite some time.
In literal terms, the father harbored such a deep hatred for his son that he wished for Frederic never to return home and bother him again. On the other hand, Frederic Threepwood acknowledges his father’s negative views of him, but like his father, he takes no action to change his behavior. He understands that he is a troublemaker and is of no use in his father’s eyes, often accumulating debts and causing problems. However, he simply doesn’t care. In fact, he pays little attention to his father’s words, merely informing him of his actions without considering his opinion. He acts without restraint and willingly breaks various rules, even venturing into forbidden territory like London. Despite knowing this would upset his father, he remains indifferent.
In his short story “The Custody of the Pumpkin,” P. G. Wodehouse mocks the system of social class in Britain right from the start. Examples from just the initial pages include Lord Emsworth’s inability to notice the cap attached to his newly-purchased telescope, while the butler, of lower social status, is evidently more observant and possibly more intelligent.
Lord Emsworth has the butler fetch his hat and then has the butler put the hat on his head, showing his preference for having others complete even simple tasks for him. Lord Emsworth’s treatment of his son, Freddie, is unfavorably compared to a codfish’s treatment of its offspring, which humorously portrays Lord Emsworth. Despite coming from an aristocratic background, Freddie is unable to effectively handle his finances and consistently goes into debt whenever he visits London.
Freddie is portrayed as shallow and lacking depth. His life of privilege and idleness has hindered his personal growth. Freddie’s speech is colloquial and casual, reflecting his lack of seriousness, which can be attributed to his comfortable position in the British social classes. Lord Emsworth’s anger at his son’s engagement to a commoner highlights the significance of money over love in his perspective on marriage.
The gardener of Lord Emsworth, who is portrayed as a person of honesty and intelligence, is considered inferior to Lord Emsworth solely because Lord Emsworth has more wealth and a longer lineage. Angus McAllister possesses honesty and intelligence to a great degree. On the other hand, Lord Emsworth’s son lacks both exceptional honesty and intelligence, but holds a higher social status than Angus McAllister. The Writer employs various literary techniques such as irony, tone, repetition, hyperbole, contrast, and benign conflict, in order to create the colorful and captivating characters of Lord Emsworth and Angus. Irony is often utilized to highlight Lord Emsworth’s undertakings, for instance when he is depicted as “in conference,” conveying a serious occupation.
The conference’s subject is the highly elevated theme of sweet peas, which adds irony and a playful tone to the character. The author’s voice infuses the narrator’s tone, similar to Austen’s writing, with a light and almost lilting quality.
The tone of the text is formed by using literary techniques of assonance and repetition. The names of Lord Emsworth and Angus exhibit assonance. Lord Emsworth’s official title is Earl of Emsworth, both beginning with /e/, creating assonance. Angus’s full name is Angus McAllister; the /a/ sounds generate assonance. Occasionally, when talking about Angus indirectly, Emsworth repetitiously comments that he looks “Scotch.” The narrator employs hyperbole by sarcastically describing Emsworth as a “sensitive employer.”
By frequently disrupting Emsworth’s peacefulness during discussions on important subjects like sweet peas and pumpkins, Angus is seen as more of a finicky employer. The use of hyperbole is evident in the exaggerated description of Emsworth as the “owner and overlord” of the castle. The utilization of contrast also contributes to the vivid portrayal of the characters, such as hosting a conference in a potting shed. A key technique in developing vibrant characters is the amicable conflict centered around sweet peas, pumpkins, and gardening methods.
“The Custody of the Pumpkin” is a humorous short story written by P. G. Woodhouse, a British comic writer. Woodhouse cleverly employs humor to bring vibrant personality traits to characters such as Lord Elmsworth and Angus McAllister. Through amusing descriptions and comical actions, both characters are presented in an entertaining manner. Lord Elmsworth, the central character, is depicted as an affable and absentminded old gentleman with a penchant for new toys.
At the start of the story, Lord Elmsworth is seen with Beech, the butler, and a telescope. However, he struggles to use the telescope until Beech suggests removing the cap. Lord Elmsworth amusingly exclaims, “Eh Cap? Is there a cap? So there is. Take it off Beech.” This depiction of Lord Elmsworth as a selfish yet foolish earl serves to generate humor within the story.
The butler assists him in taking off the telescope cap and proceeds to observe the cow in the meadows. While most people purchase telescopes for studying celestial bodies such as stars or the moon, Elmsworth utilizes it solely for gazing at a cow. He finds this ordinary creature captivating, referring to it as “remarkable”.
The author elaborates on Lord Elmsworth’s peculiar fixation, which happens to be a Pumpkin. “Although his garden was the primary focus of his life,” it is quite unusual for someone to be obsessed with pumpkins. This also serves as a satire targeting the British upper class. Following Angus McAllister’s resignation as head gardener, the earl begins experiencing nightmares about his beloved pumpkin, The Blandings Hope. “In the corner of the frame sat a withered object, no larger than a pea.” He ventures to London in search of a new gardener, yet after numerous failed attempts, he ultimately offers Angus double his salary to lure him back. This obsession adds an element of humor to the narrative.
