Prophecy of Passivity

I’m particularly interested in the roles of the characters in The Time Machine, especially the roles of the dinner guests and the Eloi.  Much of the Time Traveller’s narrative, and consequently much of the novel in general, is devoted to his time in the future.  There he is exposed to the degradation of the human race and the emergence of two separate species of man.  The Eloi are described as beautiful, fragile, and cherubic.  They have degraded into a species of man that is passive and idle.  Then there are the dinner guests about whom we know very little; they lounge around while the Time Traveller recounts his tale and quickly pass it off as nothing more than a story.  They ask very few questions and express very little interest in his adventure.  The men voice more concern about how late it has gotten and whether or not there will be any cabs to bring them home. 

I think the Eloi and the dinner guests are purposefully juxtaposed.  In the dinner guests, we begin to see the inklings of mental passivity, and in the Eloi, we see its manifestation.  Wells uses this juxtaposition to show (or warn) his readers that we are already on track towards the Eloi’s state of being. This passivity is even mirrored in the Time Traveller.  Upon finishing his story, he says, “No. I cannot expect you to believe it. Take it as a lie—or a prophecy.  Say I dreamed it in the workshop.  Consider I have been speculating upon the destinies of our race until I have hatched his fiction.  Treat my assertion of its truth as a mere stroke of art to enhance its interest.”  He so quickly concedes to the fact that no one will believe his story and no longer tries to convince his colleagues of his travels.  He becomes passive about facts that he knows to be true.  If this evolutionary track has already begun, is there really any escape? 

Despite this prophecy about passivity, the narrator, Hillyer, at least entertains the ideas that the Time Traveller presents and takes a more active role.  We can’t be sure that the narrator completely believes everything that he has been told, but we can infer that he at least believes some of it. I view the narrator as an exception to the prophecy outlined by the Time Traveller, and I think it is crucial to note that he describes the future as “black and blank.”  Even though he has heard the tale, he has hope for the future and refuses to believe that we can just sit back and let things happen.  The future is ours for the taking, which is a far more active and optimistic response than anything presented by the Time Traveller or dinner guests.

Is the narrator an exception to the prophecy of passivity?  What is his role in all of this?  Or do you think he is no more important than the other dinner guests?