The Search for General Ludd: The Mythology of Luddism - Essay Example

I have chosen this article to have an in-depth understanding of the concept of Luddism. There have been numerous debates and discussions on the authenticity of ‘General Ludd’ but due to unavailability of adequate sources and direct evidences historiographers could not draw clear cut conclusion on the origin of the popular movement. This article provides with an elaborate analysis of the mythical existence of ‘General Ludd’ and also examines the reasons of its gaining popularity for a considerably prolonged period. The search for ‘General Ludd’: the mythology of Luddism The industrial revolution marked the modernisation of the industrial sector with the introduction of machines that made mass scale production faster and cost effective. But this attempt was not whole heartedly accepted by a section of the working class population as it came to believe that installation of machines would turn them jobless. The article discusses the movement of Luddism that was a mode of protest against mechanisation of labour. It was out of desperation that some members of the working class resorted to violence by destroying machines in the name of protest (Navickas, 2005, p. 281). This begins the movement of Luddism. The article accounts for the existence of the imaginary persona of General Ludd that has intrigued historians and critics of social history. According to historiographers the imaginary figure of Ludd had far reaching implications in providing the movement inspiration and motivation. The article tends to provide a comprehensive analysis of the reason behind the popularity of General Ludd that could perhaps help in the understanding of the ideology of Luddism. In this article Navickas points to the different theories and criticisms that historians and critics have put forward in trying to figure out the common unifying bond between the working class fraternities of different regions that were motivated by Luddism. She draws attention to the assumption made by historians from the data gathered from the personal notebooks of magistrates and spies that though the various trade union organisations and radical members of the working class groups were not directly involved in the main action of attacking the ‘labour saving machinery’ (p. 282) but supported it and probably had connection to the planning and plotting. Navickas highlights the multiple reasons for the working class to possess grievance and disgust for the government and ruling authority that have probably led them into such desperate acts. She points out the claims made by historians that the financial crisis and economic instability post war and the deteriorating condition of the labour class have served as grounds for such forms of revolt against the establishment and the factory owners. The movement was kept alive by occasional disturbances caused by those from the handloom weaving villages and industrial colonies located on the moors (p. 282). At the beginning of her discussion on Luddism Navickas has mentioned of the fact that the details that has been gathered on Luddism and General Ludd were from personal accounts of magistrates and spies as witnesses. She has particularly mentioned of the dire possibility of the accounts being biased. From her approach it could be said that Navickas in her article tends to document an unbiased and impartial presentation of the truth behind General Ludd. The article begins with the description of Luddism in terms of the main issue of the movement with an account of factual details regarding the organisation and members behind it. It is apparent that the article attempts to probe deep down to the actual reasons behind the increasing popularity of the movement and most significantly the reasons behind the creation of the imaginary figure of General Ludd and how it affected the general movement. Each of the conclusions drawn is based on factual data but at the same time it helps in creating a picture of the socio-economic condition of the 1800s. Navickas has focused on a significant aspect of working class politics in appraising Luddism and its effects. On one hand she points out the disorganised and disjointed nature of the movement that was a result of a lack of proper coordination between the different provincial groups and on the other hand she criticises the historians for not considering the ripples that it created nation wide and had prevailed for a pretty long time given the demoralising aspects like job cuts, reducing salaries and the general war weariness. She provides a significant piece of fact that trade unionism was still at its infant stages. It lacked organisational expertise and was fragmentary that was probably a result of lack of coordination between the different trade union groups across the country. The article explores the different methodology employed by theorists to interpret the myth of General Ludd and Luddism in relation to working class movement. It accounts for Binfield’s post-modern approach to decode the ‘myriad ballads, threatening letters and internal communications’ (p. 283) of the particular regions of 1811-1813. Navickas has pointed out to the concept of ‘pro-action’ in defining Luddism. She has emphasised upon Binfield’s claim that the movement of Luddism in absence of a real figure head worked on the principles represented by different ‘images’, ‘symbols’ and ‘discourses’. At this point Navickas refers to the concept of the ‘shared trope of General Ludd’ (p. 283) that forms the central debate in Binfield’s anthology of Luddite texts. She discusses the way Binfield’s anthology has analysed the term ‘General Ludd’ as being variously used as an eponym and metonym to represent both a reality and a whole set of beliefs. Navickas has referred to a number of possibilities and raised significant questions in relation to the reasons of taking the help of an imaginary character for carrying out a movement. She has tried to understand and analyse such an act from the psychological perspective. Navickas mentions of the historical evidence of a Ned Ludd as a worker who was held guilty of destroying stocking frames way back in the late 1700s (p. 284). But the designation of the General, according to Navickas, was a result of the impact of war on mass psyche. She mentions of the various interpretations of the existence of General Ludd particularly mentioning to the sociological theories about the conceptualisation of semi-mythical figures as a mode of collective identity. In this respect she refers to Smelser and the criticism of his theory of myths as being used as collective identity in ‘promoting movement’ (p. 285). In the light of Luddism Navickas has referred to sociologists like Tilly and Polletta who have provided explanation and analysis of the myth of Luddism from different dimensions. It could be said that Navickas has presented with theories and counter theories on Luddism for a better analysis of the movement and its impact. The article has provided with an elaborate picture of the socio-economic and political turmoil in the early 1800s. Navickas has given a detail account of the drastic actions of the radicals and their tactic of pressurising by threatening the ‘badgers’ to lower prices or selling the grains at what they called the ‘fair price’. The article acts as a historical document in providing records of the different incidents of clashes between the radicals and the authorities over a number of social and financial issues. But it is most commendable in Navickas in attempting to provide the other aspect of the movement. There has been an underlying effort to have an in-built system of order and discipline among the organisations of protests. While on one hand the radicals utilised destruction as an instrument of protest and opposition on the other hand there is a reformative ideology at the basis of the movements. Navickas has brought forth another significant aspect about the concept of General Ludd. It is believed that the conceptualisation of General Ludd’s character is a result of war. But she specifically makes it a point to differentiate General Ludd from the other popular fictional character that of John Bull. She draws attention to the point that while Bull stood for national identity General Ludd did not. The mind frame behind the creation of Ludd’s character was complex and motivated in a different way. General Ludd was more a representative figure, an ideal leader to the movement activists posed against ‘military centralisation and compulsion’ (p. 288). According to Navickas General Ludd symbolised the local identity as opposed to the national identity (p. 288). Navickas has also pointed to an important characteristic of the Luddites that “Luddite identity had multiple levels” (p. 291). She means to signify that Luddism was based on local issues but the character of General Ludd was ‘pan-regional’. Moreover she also mentions of the fact that the Luddites had good understanding and knowledge of economics and international political scenario and that it was not a movement carried out by a bunch of illiterate people. The creation of the character of General Ludd based on Napoleonic disciplines is an evidence of it. In conclusion it could be said that Navickas’ article approaches the topic of Luddism from every possible dimension. The article on one hand documents historical data providing with letters, personal accounts and important dates and on the other hand offers a critical perspective. The narrative technique is a combination of subjective analysis and objective reporting. The different sociological theories on the topic of Luddism and the semi-mythical character of General Ludd are forwarded for better understanding of one of the most popular movements post industrial revolution in England. Reference Navickas, Katrina(2005)The search for General Ludd: the mythology of Luddism,Social History,30:3,281 — 295 Read More