The Verger Question and Answer — W. Somerset Maugham Story

The Verger is about Albert Edward Foreman, who is dismissed from his job as a church verger because he cannot read or write. Walking home, he notices there is no tobacconist on the street and opens one himself. It is a huge success — he opens more shops, invests wisely, and becomes wealthy. When his bank manager discovers he cannot read, he says Albert Edward might have achieved even more with an education. Albert Edward's reply — that he would still just be a verger — is the story's ironic punchline.

The main themes are: common sense vs formal education — Albert Edward succeeds spectacularly despite illiteracy; the irony of 'education' — the very quality that was supposed to limit him (no reading) turned out to be irrelevant to his success; dignity and self-respect — Albert Edward never loses his dignity; and social class and merit — a man dismissed from a humble position proves more capable than those who dismissed him. Maugham suggests that practical intelligence and good judgement are more valuable than formal education.

There are multiple layers of irony. First: Albert Edward is dismissed because he cannot read — but his inability to read is completely irrelevant to his subsequent success as a businessman. Second: the vicar dismisses him as inadequate, but Albert Edward becomes far more successful than any vicar. Third: the bank manager says Albert Edward would have achieved even more if he could read — but Albert Edward points out that if he could read, he would still be a verger. His illiteracy was the catalyst for everything. The very 'deficiency' that got him fired made him rich.

Albert Edward refuses because he is sixty years old and set in his ways — he has managed sixteen years as a verger without reading and does not see why he should learn now. More importantly, he has a dignified pride: he will not be compelled to change by someone who does not understand the value of what he already does. His refusal is not stubbornness but self-respect. He would rather resign with dignity than submit to a condition he sees as unnecessary.

After resigning from the church, Albert Edward notices while walking home that there is no tobacconist on the street. He decides to open one, rents a small shop, and starts a tobacco business. His instincts are excellent — he picks a good location, knows what his customers want, works hard, and treats people honestly. The shop does well and he opens more. He invests his profits carefully and wisely. Within ten years he has a chain of shops and considerable wealth — all built on the practical intelligence and good judgement that made him a good verger.

The ending is the story's perfect punchline and its deepest insight. The bank manager says that if Albert Edward could read, he might have achieved even greater things. Albert Edward replies: 'If I could read, I'd still be verger at St Peter's.' This is profound. His dismissal was the accident that gave him his fortune. If he had been able to read, he would never have been fired, never would have opened a shop, and would have lived and died in a humble position. His 'deficiency' was his liberation. Maugham inverts the conventional wisdom: sometimes what we lack is what frees us.

The story does not argue against education but it challenges the assumption that formal education is the only or primary route to success. Albert Edward has no formal education but he has integrity, practical intelligence, good judgement, and the capacity for hard work. These qualities — not literacy — built his fortune. Maugham is not anti-education; he is anti-snobbery about education. The vicar assumes illiteracy equals incompetence. The bank manager assumes literacy would have made Albert Edward greater. Both are wrong in different ways.

Albert Edward is a man of great dignity, practical intelligence, and quiet self-respect. He takes pride in his work as a verger — he does it impeccably for sixteen years. He is not ashamed of his illiteracy — it is simply a fact about him, not a measure of his worth. He is decisive: when offered the ultimatum, he chooses resignation without hesitation. He is an entrepreneur by accident but an excellent one by character. He is modest — even after becoming wealthy, he does not boast. He is Maugham's portrait of an Englishman at his practical best.

Maugham's humour is gentle and ironic — it emerges from the gap between what characters expect and what actually happens. The humour of Albert Edward's situation is never cruel: we are not laughing at him but with him. The vicar's pomposity, the bank manager's astonishment, and Albert Edward's simple, devastating final reply are all gently comic. Maugham never labours the irony — he presents it with great economy, trusting the reader to appreciate it. The story's wit is part of its lasting appeal.

The moral is that practical intelligence, integrity, and hard work are more important than formal qualifications. Albert Edward proves that success does not require literacy or formal education — it requires good judgement, self-discipline, and the willingness to seize an opportunity. The story also teaches that apparent failures or dismissals can be the start of something better: Albert Edward was fired from a modest position and became wealthy. What seems like a misfortune can be a liberation.