Nature vs. Modernization Theme Analysis

“The Custody of the Pumpkin” takes place in two primary settings: the rural Blandings Castle (a recurring fictional location in Wodehouse’s works) and London. Wodehouse initially establishes a strong contrast between these two locales, presenting Blandings as an idyllic countryside paradise and London as a loud, crowded, and “hopeless” town rife with materialistic opportunists. This contrast is further emphasized by the rift between the story’s protagonist, Lord Emsworth (a traditionalist who views nature as a retreat), and his son Freddie (who is prone to piling up debts when left to his own devices in the city). Given this, the story may at first appear to be a criticism of the modern world, and a call to return to more traditional roots. However, at the story’s end, Wodehouse subverts this established contrast entirely, with Emsworth accosted by an angry mob in the park, and Freddie seeing financial gain by moving to Long Island City. By setting up this divide between nature and the modern world only to later subvert it altogether, Wodehouse seems to suggest that modernization, although initially intimidating, need not necessarily be feared.

Blandings—and, by extension, nature itself—is deliberately portrayed at the story’s beginning as a place of beauty and respite from the modern world, as well as being synonymous with tradition. From the very first paragraph, Wodehouse frames the estate as a picture of pastoral bliss, describing the morning sunshine as it lights the “green lawns and wide terraces […] noble trees and bright flowerbeds.” With this opening statement, Wodehouse both emphasizes the charm of the countryside, while at the same time inextricably tying Blandings Castle to the natural world. Continuing from this, Lord Emsworth is repeatedly shown to have a deep affection for nature—so much so that the “main interest of his life” is his garden —and, most notably, owns the estate itself. In associating an aristocratic character like Emsworth with such positive portrayals of nature, there is an implication of traditionalism. Historically, the English aristocracy earned their keep through agriculture, and with this in mind, it seems that Wodehouse is deliberately harkening back to these days and choosing to portray them in an idealized light.  

Meanwhile, in a sharp contrast to the calm and traditional “paradise” of Blandings, the story portrays London as the fast-paced, modern, and altogether less desirable epicenter of what Wodehouse describes as the “age of rush and hurry.” This thematic distinction between the two locations is established in the city’s introduction, in which Emsworth decries the “miserable town” for “its crowds, its smells, its noises: its omnibuses, its taxis, its hard pavements.” This short list, depicting a flurry of senses and movement in quick succession, lends the city a frantic and impersonal air, particularly when contrasted with the altogether slower and more scenic introduction of Blandings and its inhabitants.

In addition to this atmosphere of overwhelming haste and detachment, the city is also associated with financial ruin and frivolousness. The character of Freddie demonstrates this point; his “spirited escapades” in London have frequently left him in debt (so much so that he has been forbidden from visiting altogether), and his father describes him as the product of a “crass and materialistic world”. With these negative aspects so clearly defined, the reader might sympathize with Lord Emsworth’s assertion that only an “imbecile should want to come to London when he could be at Blandings,” as well as his desire to retreat back to nature and his traditional roots when feeling overwhelmed by the modern world.

However, these two directly opposing themes, despite being so firmly established by the narrative, are directly subverted in the story’s final pages. This sudden contrast implies that while rapid industrialization might at first seem intimidating, and traditionalists such as Emsworth may feel a desire to retreat back into nature, in truth the modern world is not necessarily a threat. After a confrontation with Freddie in London that leaves Emsworth “profoundly stirred,” an “imperative need for flowers and green trees” overtakes him, and he retreats to Kensington gardens. Given Wodehouse’s previous portrayal of nature in the story, the reader might assume that the gardens will be a place of positivity. However, it is here that the largest conflict of the novel occurs, wherein Emsworth illegally picks some flowers and is accosted by a park-keeper, a constable, and a crowd of spectators. This is a hectic scene far removed from the natural tranquility portrayed thus far. Meanwhile, despite the city having been established as the root of Freddie’s financial woes and a source of anxiety for Lord Emsworth (who, in addition to loathing the town, has frequently been forced to foot the bills for his son’s “mischief”), in the end both men’s problems are solved when Freddie’s father-in-law, Mr Donaldson, a wealthy American businessman, offers his son-in-law a “steady and possibly lucrative job” in Long Island City. In the end, Lord Emsworth’s view of nature as an implicitly safe space is exposed as an unrealistic ideal, while the modern world he so despises provides Freddie with the opportunity to make a name for himself—an opportunity that, by Emsworth’s own admission, he never expected the boy to have.

By deliberately establishing a strong dichotomy between the natural world and the modern, only to later defy these established themes altogether, it seems that Wodehouse is directly addressing 20th-century anxieties over modernization. Through Emsworth, Wodehouse highlights these fears and lends validity to those with an idealized perception of nature. However, by having the story ultimately resolved by Mr Donaldson—a millionaire who has undoubtedly benefited from the Industrial Revolution—Wodehouse seems to imply that while these anxieties may not be entirely unfounded, it is certainly possible to find positivity in progress.