Larkin's poetry cynically portrays a society in which the proletariat "are deluding themselves" rather than presenting a hopeful picture of a society where "they [go] beyond the limits which society sets for them" To what extent do you agree with this statement? Make close reference to FOUR Larkin poems.

Larkin's poetry cynically portrays a society in which the proletariat "are deluding themselves" rather than presenting a hopeful picture of a society where "they [go] beyond the limits which society sets for them" To what extent do you agree with this statement? Make close reference to FOUR Larkin poems.

The statement that: Larkin's poetry portrays a society in which the proletariat "are deluding themselves" rather than presenting a hopeful picture of a society where "they [go] beyond the limits which society sets for them" is proven to be correct in four of his poems. This is demonstrated in 'The Large Cool Store' because Larkin presents the proletariat as trying to buy clothes from Marks and Spencers (the equivalent to Primark in this time) in order to make themselves look as if they have more money than they actually do. Similarly in Larkin's poem 'The Whitsun Weddings' this statement is proven to be correct because the proletariat see marriage and religion as a way of escaping their social class label, however this does not happen. Furthermore, in the poem 'here' by Larkin, this statement is backed up again because it is similar to 'the large cool store' in the sense that Larkin describes yet another store where the proletariat are purchasing cheap commodities in order to try and look as if they are part of the bourgeoisie. However, this statement is no backed up in Larkin's poem 'nothing to be said' because in this particular poem, he seems to be showing a side where he feels sympathy for the proletariat.





Firstly, in 'The Large Cool Store' Larkin does portray a society in which the proletariat "are deluding themselves" rather than presenting a hopeful picture of a society where "they [go] beyond  the limits which society sets for them" because of how the word 'cool' is used. One of its meanings is whether something is popular or fashionable or not and by using this word in the title it's an example of commodification and how the proletariat buy clothes based on the way they look and not actually for practical reasons and what their function is. They will try to buy clothes to make them look as if they are a part of the bourgeoisie to attempt to escape their oppressive, miserable lives. Also with the second interpretation of the word 'cool' it's cold and heartless and emotionless, this could be seen as to represent the feel of the actual store itself. It could be cold because it represents the capitalist society in which Larkin presents to us and emotionless like the bourgeoisie because they can so easily oppress the proletarians in order to keep themselves more rich and better off. Therefore, the society portrayed does show the proletariat 'deluding themselves' rather than representing a hopeful picture of society where 'they [go] beyond the limits which society sets for them' because of the fact they shop in this store and buy cheap clothes that look expensive to try to look as if they've got more money than they have. They're evidently 'deluding themselves' because "your social circumstances determine much, if not all, of your life" as stated by Bertens, thereby suggesting that you can never escape your social class due to buying things - you may be able to make yourself look a different way however the truth of a capitalist society is that you cannot escape your social class.

Also in the 'Large Cool Store' Larkin presents a society in which the proletariat are "deluding themselves" because of when he describes the colours that they wear for work like 'browns and greys' and then the contrast of colours for their 'weekend' clothes which are much brighter colours like 'lemon, sapphire, moss-green'. This demonstrates how advertising creates a false consciousness because the proletariat will think they're free at the weekend because they wear brighter clothing and feel as though this frees them from their boring day-to-day lives at work but actually they're "deluding themselves" because they can't escape the reality that they belong to the lower working class. Therefore in this case, Larkin does not portray a hopeful picture of society where "they [go] beyond the limits which society sets for them".









In addition to this, In Larkin's poem 'The Whitsun Weddings', he again portrays a society in which the proletariat are "deluding themselves" because they see marriage as an escape from their social class  and especially because it was on a religious day in the poem and that religion promises the proletariat the reward of heaven in their after life as long as they're 'good' and continue with their work that is boring and unrewarding. Therefore from a Marxist perspective, religion is just another way of keeping the proletariat in their place and making sure that they won't go against the status quo of the capitalist society although the proletariat view it as a chance to be able to get freedom from the capitalist society. The function of religion in society (according to Marxists) feeds into false consciousness because it allows the proletariat to think and feel as if they live in a free society where they can achieve any ambitions they may have, even though this is wrong. In actual fact religion allows the proletariat to accept their place in society without questioning the inequality that they experience. Furthermore, Marx believed that the function of the family in a capitalist society is to teach the children obedience and how to comply to authority which goes in favour of the bourgeoisie because this means the proletariat will obey and comply to the bourgeoisie unquestioningly.







Therefore this isn't a picture of a society in which the proletariat "[go] beyond the limits which society sets for them" because marriage is essentially a trap which the proletarians fall into so that they think they have gained freedom when in actual fact, they have not. This is evident as Larkin describes the different classes of people involved in weddings 'fathers with broad belts under their suits and seamy foreheads; mothers loud and fat; an uncle shouting smut; and then the perms'. These descriptions may demonstrate how Larkin may not be showing any sympathy for the proletariat as victims of the capitalist society  but how he's actually sneering at them and looking down on them as he's from a higher class than them and as his character is on the train journey at the time with all of these people from the wedding joining, it could be showing his true opinions of the proletarians.

Furthermore, in the poem 'here' by Larkin, he portrays a society in which the proletariat seem to be "deluding themselves" yet again because of the fact that he describes yet another store (which is a bit similar to 'The Large Cool Store') that's selling cheap items for the proletariat. We know this store is selling cheap things because of when he describes the store's shoppers as 'a cut-price crowd, urban yet simple'. This demonstrates a society that is not going "beyond the limits which society sets for them" because they're trapped in this endless cycle of only being able to buy their essentials such as 'electric mixers' and 'toasters'  from this particular store with low prices, therefore they're entrapped within the ways of the capitalist society throughout Larkin's poems in the way he depicts the proletariat lives.







Moreover, Larkin then goes onto describe the 'solitude' of this area where the proletariat live in the 'raw estates' and it demonstrates to the reader how with them being stuck within the ways of their society that it brings them loneliness so they feel the need to buy things like 'cheap suits' in order to make themselves forget about the limits that society puts on them due to their economic position. However, this is how the proletariat are "deluding themselves" because they create a false consciousness for themselves  by thinking that buying these possessions will make them look a certain way so therefore they think people in society will respect them more if they appear to be richer than they are however this is not actually the case because the truth is that they can never escape their social class and this is what the proletariat don't realise so they're creating a false consciousness for themselves.









However, in contrast to Larkin's previous poems that I've looked at, for Larkin's poem 'nothing to be said', I disagree with the statement that he is portraying a society where the proletariat are "deluding themselves" rather than going "beyond the limits that society sets for them". This is because in this poem I believe he is demonstrating a sympathetic approach to his views of the proletariat because he describes 'life' as 'slow dying' which could suggest that he understands that as a working class citizen in a capitalist society; that life will be almost like 'slow dying' because of how little respect you get with having to suffer on low wages for your entire life with no escape from your social class.



Also, Larkin identifies that life for the bourgeoisie is not like 'slow dying' because they spend their days 'holding a garden-party' as opposed to the proletariat (who spend their days 'hunting pig') which could demonstrate how Larkin is actually showing a side where he feels sorry for them as he notices that their lives are of a lower quality than people of his social and economic class and the fact that these people don't have the same economic power as him and so they don't get to enjoy a materialistically rewarding life like Larkin can. Therefore, in this poem, I disagree with the view that he is presenting a society where the proletariat are "deluding themselves".









To conclude, across the four Larkin poems, he does present a society in which the proletariat do not "[go] beyond the limits that society sets for them" apart from his poem 'nothing to be said'; I disagree with this view as he seems to be writing the poem from a different perspective towards the proletariat. However, throughout the other three poems, I do agree that Larkin is portraying a capitalist society in which the proletariat are in fact "deluding themselves".