Cashel Byron's Profession

by George Bernard Shaw, 1stworld Library (Editor)

Moncrief House, Panley Common. Scholastic establishment for the sons of gentlemen, etc. Panley Common, viewed from the back windows of Moncrief House, is a tract of grass, furze and rushes, stretching away to the western horizon. One wet spring

Genres: Fiction, Classics, British Literature, Irish Literature

284 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1886

About the author

George Bernard Shaw stands as one of the most prolific and influential intellectuals of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, a man whose literary output was matched only by his fervent commitment to social reform. Rising from a modest background in Dublin to become a global icon of letters, Shaw redefined the purpose of the stage, transforming it from a place of mere entertainment into a forum for rigorous intellectual debate and moral inquiry. His unique "Shavian" style—characterized by sharp-witted dialogue, paradoxical reasoning, and a relentless assault on Victorian hypocrisy—ensured that his voice resonated far beyond the footlights. As a playwright, critic, and philosopher, he remains a singular figure in history, being one of only two individuals to have been honored with both a Nobel Prize in Literature and an Academy Award. This rare crossover of high-art recognition and mainstream cinematic success speaks to his versatility and the enduring relevance of his narratives. His dramatic work, which includes over sixty plays, often tackled the most pressing issues of his day, from the rigid structures of the British class system to the complexities of gender roles and the ethical dilemmas of capitalism. In masterpieces like Pygmalion, he used the science of phonetics to demonstrate the artificiality of class distinctions, a theme that would later reach millions through the musical adaptation My Fair Lady. In Man and Superman, he delved into the philosophical concepts of the "Life Force" and the evolution of the human spirit, while Major Barbara forced audiences to confront the uncomfortable relationship between religious idealism and the industrial military complex. Beyond his theatrical achievements, Shaw was a foundational force in political thought, serving as a leading light of the Fabian Society. His advocacy for gradual socialist reform, rather than violent revolution, helped shape the trajectory of modern British politics and social welfare. He was instrumental in the creation of the London School of Economics, an institution that continues to influence global policy and economic theory. Shaw was also a formidable critic, whose reviews of music and drama set new standards for the profession, characterized by an uncompromising honesty and a deep knowledge of the arts. His personal lifestyle was as distinctive as his writing; a committed vegetarian, teetotaler, and non-smoker, he lived with a disciplined focus that allowed him to remain productive well into his ninth decade. He was a man of contradictions, often engaging in provocative public discourse that challenged the status quo, even when his views sparked intense controversy. His fascination with the "Superman" archetype and his occasional support for authoritarian figures reflected a complex, often elitist worldview that sought the betterment of humanity through radical intellectual evolution. Despite these complexities, his core mission was always rooted in a profound humanitarianism and a desire to expose the delusions that prevented society from progressing. He believed that the power of the written word could strip away the masks of respectability that hid social injustice, and his plays continue to be staged worldwide because the human foibles he satirized remain as prevalent today as they were during his lifetime. By blending humor with gravity and intellect with accessibility, Shaw created a body of work that serves as both a mirror and a compass for modern civilization. His legacy is not just in the scripts he left behind, but in the very way we think about the intersection of art, politics, and the individual’s responsibility to the collective good. He remains the quintessential public intellectual, a man who never feared to speak his mind or to demand that the world become a more rational and equitable place.

Reviews

[zhixin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Oh, my, god. What have I just read! This book is ASTOUNDING.

Think classic Shaw combined with the cheekiness-- and sympathy-- of Austen. This book is perfect. I have no idea why there are only sixteen reviews of this book, because it is just. so. GOOD.

There are so many things right with it: caricatures, but tinged with understanding; A WHOLE LOT OF WIT; absurd ideals undaunted, but not disregarding, realism; and so much more that if I could choose to be a book-- or choose to be represented by a book-- this would be it.

Maybe I'll come back to write something more coherent when I'm not hyperventilating over how good this book is.

[Lemar · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of the few novels by George Bernard Shaw. It’s such a pleasure to read the work of an author from this time over 100 years ago who was progressive in his outlook and outspoken in broadcasting his beliefs. The future playwright draws a compelling portrait of British society busy stifling creative, unorthodox people. Our protagonists are a supremely confident woman brought up and educated by a maverick father, and a fiercely independent man whose profession is alluded to in the title.

[Red Fox · Rating 4 out of 5]

The scene-stealer in this book is Lydia Carew, who claims, "I prefer a man who is interested in sport to a gentleman who is interested in nothing," and who Shaw summarizes with, "She made no distinction between the subtlest philosophical sophism and the vulgarest lie."

[LJ · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have admired Shaw's writing since I was about sixteen or so and first read the revised version of Pygmalion (in which he finishes off with an essay on why the movie ending SUCKS and what really happened to the characters after the play ends). But the more I read of his plays, the more I always felt that they read more like novels than scripts and what a shame it was that he wasn't a novelist.

Well, turns out he was actually a failed novelist before he became a successful playwright. So I thought, oh goody, and sought out one of his failed novels. I really should have seen what was coming.

Cashel Byron's Profession isn't awful - there is still enough of Shaw's sharpness to make it readable, but I couldn't say that I enjoyed reading it. Sometimes I actually groaned when a certain scene or speech would just run on forever. Some of Shaw's personal ideals including feminism and being against cruelty to animals and various sort of leftist anti-establishment stuff just spewed all over the page. They are all ideals I agree with, but really seemed to have no natural place in the story and read like a soapbox lecture. (Speaking of, both Shaw's introduction to the text written years later and his essay on boxing at the end start off really interesting but then JUST KEEP GOING. He really had no filter.)

Here are the things I didn't like about it:

The first few chapters focus on Cashel, the male lead, but for the rest of the book he is not the focus and we hardly get his POV, with Lydia, the female lead, really being the main character (if there is one), so I don't know why we wasted the time on Cashel at the start. It almost feels like that was the start of a different novel and Shaw forgot to rewrite it.

Every now and then, and I don't know what the literary term is for this, but a chapter will be written in a sort of extreme third person. The whole book is third person, but every now and then a chapter will be from an almost completely outside perspective observing the characters from a distance and it was really jarring and off-putting.

Alice Goff. Now, Alice was actually my favourite character, by which I mean she was the only understandable and sympathetic character and I cared about what happened to her, but all the same, why does she exist? When she turns up, we focus on her for a chapter or two and then she pretty much vanishes from the story until near the end we get another chapter that focuses entirely on her. Why invent a character and then forget about her?

The leads, Cashal and Lydia, are not remotely likeable. Cashel is childish, violent and stupid. Lydia, while supposed to be incredibly accomplished and independent, is just... cold. It's like she has no consideration for other people at all because she is so frickin perfect. So, I actively dislike Cashel and I completely don't care about Lydia and the ludicrous idea of them having a romance is just annoying. I don't want them to get together, but if they do and make themselves miserable, well, who cares? Serves them right, I guess. Oddly at the end Shaw even tells us exactly what happens after their marriage and frankly that was obvious. Lydia seems to think that because she is intelligent and heartless that it is her duty to get married and have babies or she'll regret it... but, I mean, why? Who would want to be stuck with Cashel for the rest of their lives? Yuk. Frankly, she just seemed to be young and naive but not understand that she was.

So, didn't like the characters and didn't want them to get together. Romance fail. Would it be dumb to seek out his four other failed novels?

[Ric · Rating 3 out of 5]

Cashel Byron’s Profession
By George Bernard Shaw

It was the title of this novel that caught my attention. I love novels with interesting titles - I’m currently chasing The Notable Brain of Maximilian Ponder by J.W. Ironmonger – a 2012 publication... and talking of year of publication CBP was printed in 1882. As soon as I made this comment at work, one of my work-mates said: “That gives it a yawn factor of 10” – I beg to differ. I know that I am obsessed and that CBP is the 1882 rung of my ladder of novels going back to the dawn of time (currently I can quote a different novel by a different author for every year from 2012 back to 1882 - see my 'year-by-year' list). My other attempts at 1882 were abandoned due to yawn factor 10, but to my astonishment, I enjoyed CBP.
I know that devout readers hate spoilers so consider this your warning (yet I doubt the average reader will ever open the dusty covers of CBP), so I’ll let rip........
George Bernard Shaw was an Irish author most famous for his plays – particularly Pygmalion. Before his plays however he wrote novels (and performed musical criticism – whatever that may be – wonder what he would have thought of punk rock). Cashel Byron’s Profession is his 4th novel. As an interesting side note, I found out in researching CBP that George is the only person to have been awarded both a Nobel Prize in Literature (1925) and an Oscar (1938), for his contributions to literature and for his work on the film Pygmalion (adapted from his play of the same name). Pygmalion may be more familiar to movie goers as “My Fair Lady” the musical based on the play. It won 8 academy awards in 1964.
Why do I make so much of the Pygmalion / My Fair Lady thing? Well it’s because CBP is the male version of Pygmalion. Cashel Byron (at the beginning of the novel) is a wild commoner – son of an actress (how low can you get), his father is not mentioned until the novel’s dénouement 80% of the way through. Until then Cashel grafts his way through life: he escapes a draconian boarding school where his mother had put him so that she could follow her career unhindered (any 21c equivalent here do you think?); he stows away aboard a ship bound for Australia; he begs, borrows and steals in the ‘Colonies’ until his brawling comes to the notice of an ex boxing champion of England. From here Cashel climbs the ladder of his ‘profession’ until he is the 19th century equivalent of world boxing champion.
Eventually, Cashel et al come back to England to fight in an engagement for an English nobleman. Much of England’s male gentry are present, as is Lady Lydia Carew. Lady Carew is as blue blood as you can get and is worth about $40,000 a year (a 19th century income equivalent to that of Bill Gates). As you would expect the Lady is disgusted by the pugilists and (as you would also expect) Cashew falls head over heels for her. The next 3rd of the novel sees Cashel and Lydia prancing around in relation to how Victorian society considers 2 people at different poles of the social spectrum associating. This is mirrored in Pygmalion (written 20 years later) where the cockney lass, Eliza Doolittle, is educated and introduced into society by the redoubtable Professor Higgins.
Anyway I won’t spoil it to the end, you’ll have to read it yourself to find out who Cashel’s father is, whether Cashel is truly fit to marry Lydia in society’s eyes, and for that matter whether they do wed.
Took some getting into, but by the end a good ‘romance’ – worthy of the 1882 rung.
3.5/5

[Martin Fletcher · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very clever story with loads of period detail and color, much of it taken from real life. Shaw was a great fan of 'The Fancy' as pugilism was called in the nineteenth century. He's a great story teller and although the plot could hardly be simpler, it's also the most time-honored - boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back again. Hurray! Lovely simple quick read.

[Fábio Shecaira · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not a great book. The unlikely coincidences and implausible turns of events made it too soapy for my tastes. Yet I liked the characters and they stuck with me. I now find myself missing Cashel’s pathetic blunders and Lydia’s biting witticisms.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

In my student days at London University, I used to read a lot of George Bernard Shaw, a witty socialist (as they once could be!) with a very pungent view of Britain's well-aired, inadequately-heired class system in the late 19th century, when quite a lot of social progress was taking place under the Irish eyes of Shaw.
I bought this book - at full-price...£1.25!...- back in 1979 but had 'neglected' it into a bookcase unread, where I recently unshelved it, bemused at my reluctance to read it! Why had I not devoured its contents about prizefighting being of boxing-stock myself - a great-grandfather was alleged to have been a professional, briefly at Blackfriars Ring, London! - as I actually enjoyed Shaw's writing again in 2023? (My record at school: 2 bouts, 1 win, 1 k.o...me!...& a prompt retirement on my mum's advice on facial damage from being haymakered on the nose!)
I was certainly entertained & amused by his thorough treatment of personal relationships between a boy & his famed actress mother, & the same boy, Cashel Byron, in his difficult liaison with a rich heiress, Lydia Carew, as he returns home from Australia as a celebrated prizefighter.
As the story unfolds, it becomes clear that embarrassing misunderstandings are everywhere in that class-conscious world of British life. Byron is not what Lydia naively imagines, as she falls, somewhat reluctantly, for his robust character & lively personality, not to mention his physical appeal as a paragon of male power.
The catalogue of events are believable & the pungent dialogues reflect Shaw's wit & humour, as he lays open the common hypocrisy of judging an individual purely on his perceived social class.
Byron proves to Lydia that he can step up both to the challenge of flying fists & the torturous challenges of dealing with the grand women in his life, as his thespian mother & his putative lover, Lydia Carew, meet, & disentangle his social problems with the mutual awareness that he is a man of qualities beyond his apparent lowly origins.
Shaw's reputation was well-deserved as a master storyteller, most projected on the stage rather than on the page; but this 260-page novel is a good read indeed.

[Lucy · Rating 3 out of 5]

This read very much like the wordier of his plays, some of it does go on a bit. I didn't find the characters particularly real or involving, and I'm afraid I skipped the bloodier descriptions of the fights - I don't read modern novels much because of the violence in so many of them, I don't think I'd have started this if I'd known. But it was an easy read and I did keep turning the pages to see if they would get together in the end.

[Ryan Wilcox · Rating 4 out of 5]

Knowing how to fight doesn’t make you a brute, and acting polite at parties doesn’t make you a gentleman. Cashel Byron is the perfect synthesis of strength and sensibility, you truly get the best of both worlds with this guy. What a fun read!

[Kari Whinnen · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was good. Very different from his Pygmalion. I wondered how his novel writing would differ from one of his plays. The depth of plot was missing, but I enjoyed the characters and the story. He was a talented writer and I will read more of his works.

[Keith Jones · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bit of a mixed bag but overall entertaining

[Muaz Jalil · Rating 2 out of 5]

I have a hardcover from Brentano's printing 1916 US. It's Shaw's fourth novel, a prize fighter trying to woo an aristocrat. Not the Shaw of Pygmalion or Man and Superman

[Alastair · Rating 3 out of 5]

Slightly amateurish, very fun

[Sam · Rating 2 out of 5]

Eigentlich ist klar, wohin das Treffen der beiden Hauptfiguren führt, und auch meine Goldmann-Ausgabe von 1960 macht kein Geheimnis aus der letzlichen Eheschließung zwischen dem Uptown Girl Lydia und dem Prügelknaben Cashel. Aber darum geht es auch gar nicht so sehr, sondern mehr um die Vorurteile, die sich berechtigt und unberechtigt in unserer Gesellschaft breit machen, um Scheinmoral und Handeln um des schönen Scheins willen.

"Früher einmal habe ich ihn [Cashel] einen Raufbold genannt – ich ziehe den Ausdruck jetzt nicht zurück. Ich hoffe aber‚ daß Sie ihm seine Raufboldigkeit vergeben werden, wie Sie einem Soldaten seine Morde verzeihen und einem Rechtsanwalt seine Lügen."

Von vorneherein ist klar, dass die beiden füreinander bestimmt sind, nur ihre scheinbar ungleiche Stellung steht ihnen im Wege.

Shaws erster gedruckter Roman (in Schreibreihenfolge war es der vierte!) hat schon seine lustigen und schönen Momente, war insgesamt aber arg zäh. Muss Cashel wirklich über 8 Seiten und mehr seine Weltsicht vortragen?

Dennoch sind mir die Protagonisten direkt sympathisch gewesen: Der ewige Schuljunge Cashel, dessen impulsive Unbeholfenheit ihm immer im Wege ist, und die allzu rational denkende Lydia, die aber stets die Wahrheit sagt, auch wenn sie unangenehm ist. Das sind wunderbare, weil unvollkommenen Charaktere, in denen ich gerne ein wenig Entwicklung gesehen hätte. Aber hier ändern sich nur äußere Umstände, ihrer beider Wesen bleibt konstant.

"Kümmern Sie sich nicht um mich. Sie tun, was Ihnen beliebt; und ich tue, was Ihnen beliebt. Sie sind eine gewissenhafte Person. Ich weiß daher, daß alles, was Sie wollen, immer das Beste ist. Ich bin der Geschicktere von uns beiden, Sie die Klügere. Na, wollen Sie?"

Die Nebenfiguren sind oft eher Karikatur und also vor allem unterhaltend (die hysterische Mutter, die schnell eingeschnappte Gesellschafterin, der beleidigte Nebenbuhler).

Die Geschichte lebt von der Prämisse, dass Boxen im 19. Jahrhundert illegal war. Dadurch war der Beruf vor allem Damen eher unbekannt, so auch Lydia, die sich niemals in Cashel verguckt hätte, wenn sie von Beginn an von seinem Beruf gewusst hätte. Und da hakt es, denn der auf der Stelle entzückte Cashel will mit aller Macht seine Profession vor der Angebeteten geheim halten, macht dabei aber Andeutungen und gebärdet sich dermaßen, dass es mir seltsam vorkam, dass Lydia ihm nicht auf die Schliche kam, sondern von Dritten die Wahrheit erfahren muss.

Man könnte sagen, die Story ist schlecht gealtert. Shaw hat den Roman 1882 geschrieben, damals war er also durchaus aktuell zu nennen. Heute wirkt dieses Versteckspiel eher an den Haaren herbeigezogen. Vom Verstand her ist klar: Genau so hätte es damals laufen können. Aber weil die Geschichte nicht analytisch geschildert wird, sondern man in sie hineingesogen wird, muss man sie auch nachempfinden können. Und da fühlte ich mich als moderne Leserin wie ein Anachronismus, weil ich das Handeln und Denken der Figuren nicht immer nachvollziehen konnte.

Ich kann diesen Roman leider nicht weiter empfehlen. Der leichtfüßige Grundton und die profunde Gesellschaftskritik werden von einer Handlung überwogen, die für heutige Leser nicht mehr gut nachzuvollziehen ist. Auch die alte Übersetzung macht das Buch streckenweise langatmig.

[Kim Ligon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Shaw's love of boxing shows through in his highly descriptive account of Cashel Byron's boxing talent. He also allows this man of strength to meet his match in the lovely and head strong, Lydia Carew. It is a delightful romp of hope, strength, and finding love in themost unexpected places.

[Rea · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wasn't expecting a lot when I picked it up, but it hooked me quickly which is rare for a book of its time and kept up the pace. Thanks G.B. Shaw!

[Brainsgalore · Rating 2 out of 5]

Illegal "Prizefighting" is highlighted - An intelligent Lydia should not have married the "ruffian" Cashel

[JoAnn · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read the play based on the novel only. It was humorous and odd.

[Mortisha00 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Old school but still so good.

[k e · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wickedly good piece of writing. George Bernard Shaw is a quote machine and this book provides excellent evidence of that.