Annie Besant and the Appeal to Empathy and Rationalization

Short Synopsis of Besant's Background and Beliefs

In order to more fully understand Annie Besant's pamphlets English Republicanism and Is the Bible Indictable?, it's imperative to understand the philosophy of this 19th century advocate of social reform and Theosophy. Besant is known famously for her leadership in the Theosophical Society, whose original doctrine promoted "the Universal Brotherhood of Humanity" and investigations into religion, philosophy, and science. It was heavily influenced by Eastern Mysticism, and members believed that "the universe, seen and unseen, was One Life, which evolved to consciousness... through a diversity of forms, governed by the mechanics of karma and reincarnation" (Dixon 4). Before she turned to the Theosophist doctrine in 1889, she was an active member of the National Secular Society and became a popular writer and speaker in the English free thought movement. She and Charles Bradlaugh edited the National Reformer during the 1870s, a publication "which advocated advanced ideas for the time on topics such as trade unions, national education, womens' right to vote, and birth control" ("Annie Besant" 1). During this time, she and Bradlaugh were charged with obscenity when distributing a birth control pamphlet; Is the Bible Indictable? is a response to the indictment.

Purpose and Method Behind 'English Republicanism' and 'Is the Bible Indictable?'

The intended audience for the pamplets in this free thought collection is clear when observing the forum in which Besant chose to write. These were not expensive books, out of reach of those of a lower class; they were relatively cheap and widely distributed. This made information easy to obtain for those without the money to pay for most of the scholarly books of the time. Besant believed knowledge shouldn't be privileged to the rich, which is perhaps her main motivation for writing Is the Bible Indictable?. She believed the common people had a right to knowledge, and it is to the English common people she writes.
Often in her organization of her arguments to this audience, she tries to first establish a solidarity with them before promoting a cause that may have been more controversial for the contemporary society. Instead of comparing the English Republic to that of the contentious Germany or France, she opts to choose more favorable, neutral countries like Switzerland and Denmark. This is, of course, after she establishes her firm belief that the English government model at its core (the Republic) is by far the best option; this would appear very favorably to her English audience. Under the unification she has gathered in the mind of her audience, she then asserts that these nations have exemplary forms of government due to the rationalization they built were on-- more universal suffrage, a component lacking in the British system. This was an object of great debate during the time, but Besant manages to undermine the effects of the controversy by building a point of empathy with her audience before extending her argument, which is supported by logical and comparative reasoning.
There is no use in the effectiveness of Besant's arguments though if they were not meant to incite some sort of action. The ultimate purpose of these pamphlets, besides simply educating the audience, was to have some change arise from the conclusion. All is well if an author can relate to their audience and convince them to change or challenge their mindset on a particular issue. The most challenging component is for said audience to actually do anything about this newly acquired knowledge. With the extensive use of rhetorical questions, both pamphlets encouraged the reader to actively think of the assertions-- a certain level of mental engagement. Nearing the end of the pamphlets, the reader is then challenged to a practical engagement. At the end of Is the Bible Indictable?, Besant asks her readers to judge for themselves the unfairness of the ruling in regards to the legal definition of obscenity. English Republicanism enforces the idea that the people should advocate a more Republican form of government by emphasizing the benefits of the system. Through the structure of her arguments, one can see the effective pattern Besant employs to convince her audience of the necessity of social and political reform by first emotionally engaging them, rationally engaging them, and finally practically engaging them.

Synopsis of 'Is the Bible Indictable?'

Besant wrote Is the Bible Indictable? to challenge the ruling of Lord Chief Justice Alexander Cockburn in relation to the charge of obscenity for publishing a birth-control booklet by Charles Knowlton. Cockburn defined obscenity as something that "depraves and corrupts those whose minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication of this sort might fall" (Besant 2). She attacks the logic of punishing the publisher for the intents of the reader and points out the inconsistency to which the law is enforced to other works that could fall under this definition of obscenity. Shakespeare was a particularly effective example since his works no doubt can arise passion in its readers, but his literature was obviously beloved in his country of birth and would hence never be denied circulation despite meeting the legal definition of obscenity. This holds true for The Bible as well; no one would dare challenge to bring a charge against it because to do so was to seemingly attack the foundations of Christianity. Besant then goes on to point out all of the sections of the Bible which could be considered obscene but reassures her audience at the end that she is not insinuating that charges be brought against the publishing of the Bible. Indeed she emphasizes that "the right way would be to prosecute none of these books" (Besant 15).

Salient Questions to 'Is the Bible Indictable?'

In order to inspire any potential comments, it's interesting to see the tie between Besant's philosophy and how she promotes her arguments for reform. She seems to highly value empathy and rationalization. Would this have been effective to the late-19th century audience? Who would it seem to appeal more to in terms of social class and gender? In Kate Millet's Sexual Politics, she discusses the concept of patriarchal religion that could be seen as "demoting, discrediting, or eliminating goddesses and constructing a theology whose basic postulates are male supremacist" (340). Considering that Theosophisy is heavily influenced by the Eastern mysticism, what would you believe Besant's thoughts would be of the implication of this quote? Could this have influenced her decision to use the Bible as a principle example of obscenity to promote her argument? Why do you think she ultimately decides to use the Bible and not stress authors of literature that could also fall under the ruling of obscenity? How do other polemicists that we have read in class effectively incite a call to action in their audience?

Sources about Annie Besant:
http://bit.ly/fqclz4 (url shortened for vanity's sake)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/besant_annie.shtml