Sherlock Holmes is of course a very beloved character, and the setting of his stories being London seems to be a significant part of his character. Considering all that I’ve read so far about London in the novels and other texts (it is crowded, it is easy to blend in, it has a lot of poverty, crime is a rampant issue, etc.) I could see why Conan Doyle would be so inclined to write stories about a detective in London. During the Victorian Era, policing was a developing profession. As we read about in Oliver Twist, mobs of onlookers and other people on the street took it upon themselves to apprehend criminals. This was not (as we read) a very effective means of policing. In the first Sherlock story we read, “The Red Headed League,” we also are exposed to some of the problems/corruption with this developing force. One of the characters in on the stakeout is a police officer. He at one point says of Sherlock, “He has his own little methods, which are, if he won’t mind my saying so, just a little too theoretical and fantastic, but he has the makings of a detective in him. It is not too much to say that once or twice, as in that business of the Sholto murder and the Agra treasure, he has been more nearly correct than the official force.” His dismissal of Sherlock as someone with simply the “makings of a detective,” only “nearly more correct than the official force” (which we know is a gross underestimation of his skills and success) reveals him to be a very proud and self-serving man.

Conan Doyle’s method of writing is very easily accessible for any reader (especially in comparison with Dickens and Austen). His language is simplified, and his sentences are mostly concise. Part of what makes his stories so easily understood is how well he describes the characters, settings, props, and action of his stories; his stories are very descriptive, without overdoing it. For example, consider the following passage from “The Red Headed League”: “I had called upon my friend, Mr. Sherlock Holmes, one day in the autumn of last year and found him in deep conversation with a very stout, florid-faced, elderly gentleman with fiery red hair. With an apology for my intrusion, I was about to withdraw when Holmes pulled me abruptly into the room and closed the door behind me.” This opening to the story immediately pulls the reader into the room with Watson, creating a clear image of the scene, and especially of the man in it. That said, London, being such a big and bustling city, is a place that is full of noteworthy and descriptive people and places. Readers would easily be able to call such images to mind not only from Conan Doyle’s writing, but also from their own experiences.

After looking at all of the images from each of the collections, Dore’s and Thomson’s, I was really struck by how different they seem to be. While each are portraying London from the working classes, they seem to have very different images of what the horrors of this class entail. In Dore’s illustrations, the viewer gets a sense for how horrible conditions were for the poor in London at this time. His images of these people in many different setting including markets, work, and homes are all illustrated to be very dark. In comparison, the few images which represent the upper classes of society are colored in a much brighter and whiter way. This color contrast alone is relating to the viewer the stark contrast of the classes, and the injustice of these deplorable differences in condition.

In Thomson’s photographers, it is with a much more forgiving and upbeat tone that the viewer takes in the scenes. This is especially made evident in the text accompanying the images. For example, the viewer is often given a short history of the person in the image, telling a story of someone who has overcome odds, pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, and outweighed the evils of their condition with hard work and sacrifice. A specific example from the image titled Workers on the “Silent Highway” perfectly demonstrates this attitude: “Fortunately, the very nature of their occupation compels the men to enjoy plenty of fresh air and invigorating exercise, and this naturally counteracts the evil effects resulting from their occasional confinement in cabins unfit for human habitation.”

In order to better express the truth in this argument, consider the following two images, each depicting a similar scene:

In the first, the scene is clearly overcrowded. There are multiple ships, all one on top of the other. There are also many men at work, all of whom seem to be seriously employed in completing a task. These jobs appear to be very dangerous: there are men supported only by the bows of the ship, some are covered in what must be heavy ropes, and others are climbing unsupported up the masts. Add in the the fact that there are no empty space in the image, and the subsequent darkness of it, and the viewer gets a sense for how undesirable a job of this nature would be.

On the other hand, the second image appears significantly less scary. In it, there are only two men on a much smaller vessel, which is also not overcrowded by a multitude of other ships. While the men still appear to be employed in a task of some sort, their jobs look less vigorous and dangerous than those depicted in the illustration.

While the photo is by its nature more realistic than the illustration, it still seems to be holding back from revealing the true nature of their position. This is evident in the quote stated above which describes why their jobs are “fortunate.” The illustration therefore almost seems more truthful. However, it too seems to hold some level of exaggeration in order to favor a certain point of view of the subject. After all, it seems impossible that so many ships could ever truly function if they were that close to one another. Therefore, it takes a close reading of both images, analyzed and interpreted with open-mindedness and a concern for the true condition of the poor, working class of society to get a realistic depiction of the truth.

In terms of close reading images, there seems to be a lot to dissect when it comes to the photographs of London by John Thomson. Thomson, in his collection Street Life in London, presents images of the jobs and life seen within the streets of London and the lives that these working individuals lived during these working hours. Two images in particular stood out to me as they seemed to represent the darker side of the street life. “The London Boardmen” and “The Crawlers” both depict an unsavory image of life within the London streets when faced with old age or physical inabilities.

The image entitled “The London Boardmen” portrays an older man walking with an advertising sign both on the front of his body and the front of his hat. As a boardman, the older man is acting as a physical advertisement for whatever he is being asked to promote which gives very little compensation. Jobs such as these were left as one of the only options for making a living if a person does not have education or is not physically capable of doing much else except walking. The man within “The London Boardmen” photograph appears to be of significant age, upon inspection could be judged to be within his seventies or eighties. It stands out as significant to notices that he appears to be holding a cane in his left hand that he is using in order to walk. His entire job is to walk around as an advertisement yet he is using a cane and appears to be walking with a lean that might cause discomfort walking around the streets all day. Upon close viewing of the photograph it strikes me the sad expression that the man has on his face. He does not appear to have any enjoyment for the job that he is doing which brings a somber tone to the photograph as I would have hoped that by so late in a person’s life they would be in a place that they are happy.

The image entitled “The Crawlers” portrays an older woman sitting with a baby in her arms on what appears to be a doorstep. The quote describing the content of the image claims that the old woman in the photo was the widow of a tailor and had been living with her daughter and son-in-law but soon left to the streets after much fighting with the family leaving her penniless and in the streets. In the photo, the woman appears tired and worn out leaning her head against the stone wall. Her skirt looks worn and dirty as if she has been too long out on the street without anything. It strikes me as significant the way her body seems to be weary and frail as she leans against the wall seemingly for support as if she has been sitting there for a long period of time. The image seems to portray the impact on older women when they are left with no one to care for them and no means to care for themselves due to old age or lack of knowledge for jobs. Her face is covered in harsh lines and a frown which gives a somber tone as the woman does not appear to be happy nor have been happy in a long time.

In comparison, both “The London Boardmen” and “The Crawlers” by John Thomson depict the effects of a lack of physical ability and personal means on individuals in London once the reach the elder part of their lives. These two images show individuals in the later stages of their lives in which they are seemingly alone and forced to find their own ways to get by in any means necessary in the streets of London. The photographs should be examined together as they each have a very somber mood and force the viewer to see a darker side to the stories or images that might come to one’s mind when they think of London. For myself, personally, these images made me feel very sad for the individuals within them as the elderly where I have grown up have been retired or cared for by their families where they are not expected to continue working passed their ability or treated in an alienated manner. I believe Thomson’s images “The London Boardmen” and “The Crawlers” allow for the darker side of the London streets to be seen.

Although I do not particularly consider myself a Charles Dickens fan, Oliver Twist is one of the most impactful novels I have ever read. I can vividly remember being horrified the first time I read it in high school. Dickens powerfully describes some of the most gruesome conditions faced by the poor in nineteenth-century London, and by doing so, his novel provides modern-day readers at a glimpse of how dehumanized the lower classes were in England at the time. Dickens develops a realistic tale, and through his vivid descriptions, the horrific results of extreme social stratification are highlighted as a key theme.

The representations presented in Oliver Twist substantially relate to the British Poor Laws of the nineteenth-century. These laws forced families in poverty into workhouses, which were comparable to prisons. Despite a decent size of the English population experiencing poverty, the general gap between classes created a lack of understanding which created the laws of the time. Dickens is sure to create a bold distinction between the classes through his characters. As represented in the novel, Dickens believed workhouses amplified the worst attributes in people of power. This is illustrated by characters like Sowerberry and Mr. Bumble. The power is used by them to hold the lower classes hostage. Descriptions of Sowerberry do not necessarily paint him as inherently evil, but rather as a character who is insensitive to people grieving and he does nothing to help those who he watches to suffer. This makes him a very human character and relates him to many readers of both then and now. Sowerberry thinks of Oliver in terms of profit rather than thinking of what would best help Oliver. Mr. Bumble likes power and outwardly uses it to manipulate people. As he reigns over the workhouses, he does so in an inhumane way. He meets his fate at the end of the novel, but he ultimately represents the hypocritical “charitable” institutes.

In contrast, Dickens paints a more sympathetic image of those experiencing poverty and those who have no other choice, this is mainly developed through Oliver. Oliver’s spirit remains although he is forced to live on unsustainable amounts of food and sleep in shameful sleeping quarters. Dickens highlights Oliver’s spirit and innocence in a manner that illustrates the good nature of the poor, despite the cruel treatment from the other classes. When Oliver is born, the narrator says he could be the “the child of a nobleman or a beggar.” When the authorities intervene and wrap him in the identity-erasing parish clothes he is “badged and ticketed, and fell into his place at once—a parish child—the orphan of a workhouse.” This illustrates clearly that Oliver had no chance against the authorities, and they stepped in when he was vulnerable to force him into a life where he has no other choice. Oliver develops into a realistic symbol for those suffering in poverty at the time, and he serves as a symbol of nineteenth-century poverty for modern-day readers.

Dickens also does not glorify the conditions the boys in Oliver Twist are forced through, rather he describes them for what they were: filthy and miserable. This keeps poverty from looking desirable, and it shows the desperate need for change, pulling on the hearts of nineteenth-century readers. From the beginning of the book, readers are set with the conditions when they read about how the children are treated. Dickens writes parish children

“had contrived to exist upon the smallest possible portion of the weakest possible food, it did perversely happen in eight and a half cases out of ten, either that it sickened from want and cold, or fell into the fire from neglect, or got half-smothered by accident; in any one of which cases, the miserable little being was usually summoned into another world.”

Although this is only one of the many descriptions Dickens provides of the conditions in Oliver Twist, and it speaks to the nature of poverty in London at the time. Dickens does not shy away from showing the grueling nature of these conditions, highlighting the raw reality of poverty through his use of characters representing social classes and grueling descriptions of workhouse conditions.

Works Referenced:

Dickens, Charles. Oliver Twist. 1838.  <http://literatureproject.com/oliver-twist/index.htm>.

Richardson, Ruth. Oliver Twist and the Workhouse. 2014. Web. <https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/oliver-twist-and-the-workhouse>.

Two art works that stood out to me in the Gustave Dore’s illustrations. The first one is “A Ball at the Mansion House”.Gustave Dore put a lot of effort with the little details in this print. The women’s dresses and the small details of layers and decorations make them look elegant and expensive. It really show you what social class they are in. The chandeliers have a lot of detail and even the walls with the columns.  This image makes me feel smug for some reason. Just the way they present themselves with their posture and their facial expressions.

Another print that stood out to me was the print of a mother and her kids in poverty. They look like they are trying to sell items to get money. This print is darker then the “A Ball at the Mansion House”. The lines are really close together making the image darker and dull. He made this print darker to show the poverty in London and not all things are great. There are families who have to make their own work, so they can get by. The people in this image are slouching/slumping, they look tired and upset. The women is resting her elbow and you can tell be her facial expression she is looking lost. There is a man looking down on her. He doesn’t look like he is in poverty by this top hat and coat. It looks like to me he is shaming her.  Looking at this image it makes you feel sad for them. There is nothing happy about this image at all. There are two kids wrapped up in a blanket looking cold, just wanting a place to stay.

Comparing the two you can see the difference between the two. You can tell that it is about two different social classes by the way they look. But with the body language they have really speaks volumes. In art it is hard to express feelings through paintings especially black and white. He did a good job of using the body language to show you what they are feeling.

These  images are the difference between two social classes. The lower class needs to create work so they can live day to day. They have no days off. Whereas middle/upper class can go to balls and not worry about money. He showed that by the lightness of “A Ball at the Mansion House” and the darkness in the other image.

I have heard a lot about Pride and Prejudice, but this is the first time that I have picked up this book. Reading it for the first time was an experience. It took me awhile to understand what I was reading and what it was about.

One topic that caught my attention was how social class played into this society. The majority of the adults were invested in their social class and took pride in it. Mrs. Bennett wanted her daughters to marry rich. Right in the beginning Mrs. Bennet was excited to here that Mr. Bingley was moving into the estate near them,

“A single man of large fortune; four or five thousand a year. What a fine thing for our girls” (Austen 6).

It shows how social class is important in this society. Mrs. Bennett this whole book wanted her daughters to marry into a wealthy family. Reading this book, it looks like to me that the older generation of Mrs. Bennet & Lady Catherine took social class seriously.  Whereas Elizabeth didn’t care, she just wanted to be with someone who has a good personality.

Lady Catherine really showed her social class through her words,

“Not so hasty, if you please. I have by no means done. To all the objections I have already urged, I have still another to add. I am no stranger to the particulars of your youngest sister’s infamous elopement. I know it all; that the young man’s marrying her was a patched-up business, at the expense of your father and uncles. And is such a girl to be my nephew’s sister? Is her husband, is the son of his late father’s steward, to be his brother? Heaven and earth! —of what are you thinking? Are the shades of Pemberley to be thus polluted?” (Austen 346).

Lady Catherine takes pride in her social status and finding out that Elizabeth was “thinking” about marrying Mr. Darcy her nephew. Lady Catherine was upset because the Bennet’s don’t have many connections. Also Mr. Darcy’s friends are wealthy, and they will have strong opinions about the marriage. The underline of this I believe is that Lady Catherine doesn’t want her to marry him because she wants her daughter to marry him.  She is using Wickham and Lydia’s elopement to try to scare Elizabeth away. Lady Catherine doesn’t want to be associated with Wickham and if Elizabeth marries Mr. Darcy they will have a connection and she doesn’t want her reputation  to be ruined.

Austen did a good job of tying in social class of the older generation into a generation that some just want to marry someone that they love.

I’d like to first give a little background on my relationship with Pride and Prejudice, because I am a huge Jane Austen fan, and although it may be the basic choice, Pride and Prejudice is unapologetically and with no hesitation my favorite Austen novel. My first experience with the novel was actually the 2005 adaptation (you know the one: Keira Knightley in earthy muslins, sweeping landscape shots, gorgeous score, and a brooding Mr. Darcy in that infamous rainstorm proposal scene. LOVE IT). Yes, it’s true, I watched the movie before reading the book. I happen to hold the unpopular opinion that it doesn’t matter whether you watch the movie before reading the book, particularly if both are good. Anyway, for those of you that have read the book for the class and have not seen the 2005 adaptation, it might be interesting to go back and take a look, as it is often criticized by Austen fans for straying from the novel at important points.

Clearly, I happen to love the movie, including the ways in which it differs from the novel, and have seen it approximately 36429384 times and counting (make that 36429385 by the time we depart, because what better way is there to prepare for a trip to England?). Though it is slightly different, the differences lend themselves well to the manifestation of an on-screen period drama. I also maintain that this version, as well as the similarly well-loved 1995 miniseries, helped form public opinion and perceptions of Pride and Prejudice, and of Austen herself (i.e. they have given way to masterpieces like Bridget Jones’ Diary, The Jane Austen Book Club, and Austenland—all comedies that are enjoyed by plenty of people who have never so much as touched an Austen novel).

I think I have digressed enough to make it very clear that Pride and Prejudice has had a great influence on the way I enjoy literature. After I read it, I couldn’t get enough, and started exploring the rest of Austen’s novels and similar novels from the Regency period and beyond. I hope that everyone loves the book as much as I do—I truly believe it has something for everyone, and each time I read it, it just keeps getting better. Again, I apologize for the rambling, but hopefully it is sufficient explanation for why this blog post will probably be very passionately written.

—

The scene that I’ve chosen to look at is part of a very interesting conversation that occurs between Mr. Darcy, Mr. Bingley, Caroline Bingley, and Elizabeth during Elizabeth’s stay at Pemberley to visit a bedridden Jane. The group sit around and talk about the qualities of a good woman; the tone of the conversation becomes tense, as the four individuals have opposing thoughts on the topic and come from very different social stations. It is Bingley’s comment, made in response to a praise of Georgiana Darcy’s accomplishments, that sets off the discussion:

“It is amazing to me,” said Bingley, “how young ladies can have patience to be so very accomplished as they all are” (Austen 38).

The reason that I love this scene is because I think the way that each character contributes to the ensuing debate reveals much about their character and how they act in scenes throughout the novel. As seen in the above quote, Bingley is overflowing with praise and prepared at all times to be completely astonished by the talents of any woman he should meet. He goes on to describe several forms of feminine decorative arts and hand crafting endeavours as being perpetually impressive to him. This optimistic, kind, and not wholly unrealistic view of the accomplishments of females is a classic representation of Bingley’s ever cordial and gracious demeanor.

The notion that all women are equally talented, let alone talented at all, is absurd to Darcy, and subsequently Caroline, who effectively reiterates every one of Darcy’s opinions in a desperate attempt at winning his attention and approval. The two vehemently disagree with Bingley’s statement—one that was given innocently and was almost certainly not intended to create a new strain of discourse among the group. Caroline rattles off a list of traits that must necessarily be found in a woman before she can think to be called accomplished:

“Oh! certainly,” cried his faithful assistant, “no one can be really esteemed accomplished who does not greatly surpass what is usually met with. A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing, and the modern languages, to deserve the word; and besides all this, she must possess a certain something in her air and manner of walking, the tone of her voice, her address and expressions, or the word will be but half deserved” (Austen 39).

Many of these traits, you will notice, could only be attained by women of Caroline’s standing, that is, women with the monetary resources to have a well-rounded education and with adequate leisure time to pursue so many different pursuits. This statement, then, is not only intended to uplift women of her own station (although it certainly does accomplish this), but is mostly meant to suggest the promotion of herself and her own talents, and probably specifically to the bachelor Darcy. This endeavour is less than successful, however, since Darcy later makes a pointed comment condemning “the meanness in all the arts which ladies sometimes condescend to employ for captivation” (Austen 40).

Elizabeth then criticizes Darcy and Caroline for being too severe in their criteria. Although her comments are delivered fiercely and are possibly rooted in her own bitter understanding that neither Caroline nor Darcy consider her to be a well-accomplished woman, Elizabeth’s stance on this topic is by no means unreasonable. She makes the most sensible case out of anyone in the party. She does not make the claim that all women are equally talented, like Bingley, but she comes to the defense of the only minorly accomplished women that Caroline and Darcy apparently expect to be masters of many kinds of feminine occupations. Elizabeth and Darcy’s final exchange effectively ends the conversation for good: 

“I am no longer surprised at your knowing only six accomplished women. I rather wonder now at your knowing any.”

 

“Are you so severe upon your own sex as to doubt the possibility of all this?”

 

“I never saw such a woman. I never saw such capacity, and taste, and application, and elegance, as you describe united” (Austen 39).

As I tried to outline in this post, each character’s contributions to their debate about what makes a woman accomplished in extremely telling of their role as character in the bigger picture of Pride and Prejudice. Their opinions also work to foreshadow their actions, particularly in each one’s romantic endeavours. Bingley’s praise of accomplished women eventually extends to focus on the canonically perfect Jane Bennet, Caroline’s value of a complete mastery of all activities (which she believes herself to have) does not actually end up being enough to secure the man she wants (contrary to what she argues in this scene), and of course, Elizabeth and Darcy’s disagreement foreshadows the conflicts that their relationship must endure before finally ending up together—which only happens after each person acknowledges their faults along the way.

Here is a clip from the 2005 movie adaptation of Pride and Prejudice if you’d like a visual and comprehensive refresher on the scene I’ve been writing about!

My edition of Pride and Prejudice is the 2003 Barnes & Nobles Classics publication.

One of the most obvious themes of this novel is marriage. That said, the first passage that stood out to me as I was reading Austen’s novel happens when Charlotte becomes engaged to Mr. Collins:

The whole family, in short, were properly overjoyed on the occasion. The younger girls formed hopes of coming out a year or two sooner than they might otherwise have done; and the boys were relieved from their apprehension of Charlotte’s dying an old maid. Charlotte herself was tolerably composed. She had gained her point, and had time to consider of it. Her reflections were in general satisfactory. Mr. Collins to be sure was neither sensible nor agreeable; his society was irksome, and his attachment to her must be imaginary. But still, he would be her husband. — Without thinking highly either of men or of matrimony, marriage had always been her object; it was the only honourable provision for well-educated young women of small fortune, and however uncertain of giving happiness, must be their pleasantest preservative from want. This preservative she had now obtained; and at the age of twenty-seven, without having ever been handsome, she felt all the good luck of it. (Austen, 120).

What I find so interesting about this quote is the stake the entire family seems to have in the engagement of one of its daughters. The bride herself feels “lucky” for becoming engaged to a man at her age, especially “without having ever been handsome,” despite the fact that Mr. Collins is such an unagreeable man to take as a husband. Then of course there are her sisters to consider, who are rejoicing about the union because it means that they could be given the chance to be married soon next. Finally, the brothers are grateful to not have to worry about the shame and expense of a sister who is an old maid. For a modern reader such as myself, these motives are highly unsatisfying in seeing characters get married. It in no way evokes the same kind of reaction from me as when reading about Jane and Lizzy’s engagements. Their bridegrooms at least seem to be men whom they admire and love. For Charlotte, the entire marriage is more of convenience and advantage, just like Mr. Bumble’s in Oliver Twist.

The tone of this passage seems to suggest that Austen’s novel views this aspect of society, where women marry only for the advantage of their family and to avoid becoming an old maid, with contempt. The description of Mr. Collins that Lizzy gives us here is what really sets this contemptuous tone. The suggestion that his attachment, “must be imaginary” is a comical way to represent his character. This description also inspires sympathy from the reader for Charlotte, who has no interest in either men or marriage. However, as stated about, “it was the only honourable provision for well-educated young women of small fortune. This suggests that to not marry would make a woman of such social rank stupid. The comparison of the marriage to a preservation of self is another example of how the language is inspiring the reader to feel sympathy for Charlotte, and contempt for the way in which society is forcing her to merely preserve herself from a wanting status, whether that include want of money or relations. As this passage suggests, not getting married would be shameful for the entire family, and leave the girl not only broke, but unfavorable to her friends and relatives.

There are a multitude of heart wrenching scenes and interactions throughout Oliver Twist that elicit deep sympathy for Oliver from the reader. In fact, after the first several chapters, I stopped being so surprised by the awful circumstances that Oliver continues to find himself in. Time after time, Oliver proves his mental and physical resilience as he is put to work and forced to live on almost no food and barely livable clothing and sleeping accommodations. To me, this seems to have been a device used by Dickens to emphasize Oliver’s good heartedness and strong spirit. By showing Oliver’s very human reactions to the grotesque events that occur in his life, Dickens is also putting an individual face, a face of childhood and innocence, on the concept of poverty in mid 19th century England.

There is one scene in particular that I think best represents the ideas I outlined above: an interaction between Oliver and another child named Dick. It goes as follows:

‘I heard the doctor tell them I was dying,’ replied the child with a faint smile. ‘I am very glad to see you, dear; but don’t stop, don’t stop!’

 

‘Yes, yes, I will, to say good-b’ye to you,’ replied Oliver. ‘I shall see you again, Dick. I know I shall! You will be well and happy!’

 

‘I hope so,’ replied the child. ‘After I am dead, but not before. I know the doctor must be right, Oliver, because I dream so much of Heaven, and Angels, and kind faces that I never see when I am awake. Kiss me,’ said the child, climbing up the low gate, and flinging his little arms round Oliver’s neck. ‘Good-b’ye, dear! God bless you!’

 

The blessing was from a young child’s lips, but it was the first that Oliver had ever heard invoked upon his head; and through the struggles and sufferings, and troubles and changes, of his after life, he never once forgot it. (Dickens 54).

This scene is painful for many reasons. For me, it was a reminder of the serious physical abuse and emotional neglect that the boys must have experienced at the hands of Mrs. Mann, a woman who was obviously only boarding the, to reap the benefits of their stipends, and who was responsible for the deaths, by starvation, of countless children. Despite the kind words and hopefulness of both boys, the way that Dick speaks about heaven and embraces Oliver during the interaction strongly implies that he knows it will be the last time they will see each other in this lifetime.

Most importantly, the detailed way in which this conversation was described, as well as its placement at the end of a chapter, right before Oliver makes his own way to London, forced me to pay attention to this scene. The narrator writes that Dick’s blessing resonated with Oliver so much that “through the struggles and sufferings, and troubles and changes, of his after life, he never once forgot it.” This statement is encouraging for Oliver’s story, if not Dick’s. After reading this passage, I certainly continued to notice the relentless tragedies, small and large, that afflict Oliver throughout the novel. However, with this perspective, I no longer have to wonder what keeps Oliver so strong and motivated to survive through his many conflicts—I just remember this scene and the profound impact it had on little Oliver.

Oliver and Little Dick, Sol Eytinge, Jr. (1867), Image taken from http://www.victorianweb.org/art/illustration/eytinge/180.html

B5: Wordsworth’s Representation of London in “Composed Upon Westminster Bridge”

“Composed Upon Westminster Bridge, September 3, 1802” by William Wordsworth depicts a sleeping and arising London in the early morning. The narrator appears to be in awe of the city and the new nature the morning brings. It focuses on the beauty of the city, and a small second of the narrator’s life in which everything seems perfectly in place. This poem attributes value to the moments in life when everything slows down, and to the peace that comes as a result of these moments.

Based off of how glorified Wordsworth’s poem is, it is safe to conclude that he has positive relationship with London overall. The narrator in “Composed Upon Westminster Bridge” sounds like a traveler experiencing the scenic quality of the city for the first time or a person who being shocked back to an understanding of life just by passing over the Westminster Bridge. If Wordsworth had lived in London all his life, he most likely would have already been accustomed to the scene, and he would not have perceived this scene in the same sense. Since he is looking at the city with fresh eyes, he reproduces the city as a beautiful world. Wordsworth’s word choice reflects his impressed response. He uses words such as beautiful, majesty, and fair to describe the city, and his reaction to the scene is described as an unmatchable deep calm feeling. He goes as far to say that people who do not recognize the beauty are “dull.” Wordsworth’s awe and appreciation for London could not be any more explicitly stated.

The structure of the poem also works to emphasize the glory of London by drawing attention to the elaborate descriptions. The poem is structured as a Petrarchan sonnet, consisting of fourteen lines divided into two unequal sections. The first half of the poem, differentiates the beauty of the scene from anything else the narrator has ever experienced. It also describes the scene, and creates a foundation for the reader for the second half of the poem which looks at the effect of London on the narrator. By using this structure, Wordsworth successfully illustrates both the scene of London and the Thames from the bridge while emphasizing the unparalleled calming nature of the experience.

This poem draws out the idea of cities being just as beautiful and inspirational as rural areas and nature. The final line of the poem reflects this theme. The line, “And all that mighty heart is lying still!” is a paradox by itself. But, it connects London to existing as a metaphorical, majestic heart of the country. In the early morning, when London is still, the peace the beauty provokes is comparable to the feeling being surrounded by nature can induce. Since a lot of Wordsworth’s other works focus on nature, this comparison is justified as he speaks about London in a comparable way.

Personally, I related this poem to my own previous travels. As a visitor in any new area, I often feel similarly astonished by scenes with immense beauty. The first time I ever traveled to New York City, I can remember passing over the bridges entering the city, and being entirely in awe, especially since I was used to rural America. Yet, the people in the city, although very proud to be New Yorkers, seem to be so accustomed to life there that the wonder is gone. Wordsworth represents his relationship to the city in a manner relatable to any traveler or visitor to a new area, and his stylistic choices further emphasize the overwhelming calmness of these serene moments.