February 19, 1893

I have almost completed packing for my move. I sometimes wonder if the decision I have made is the right one for me, but as I have now lost the last member of my family, I need a new beginning. London is that new beginning. It is only a two-hour journey into the city, but from this small town it feels like I’ll be entering a whole new world.

I have read Bradshaw’s Illustrated Handbook to London and its Environsin the past out of curiosity for the growing city, and have found that much of the information regarding the city has helped me prepare for my upcoming lifestyle. For clothing, I recall him writing this about the temperature, “The mean temperature is 52 degrees, and the extremes 81 degrees and 20 degrees; the former generally occurring in August, and the latter in January” (Bradshaw 17). Since I am moving in just a few days, I know to pack more clothes to bare the cold rather than the heat. I think that Bradshaw’s Handbookwill come in handy again soon, I will write further on the subject when it comes.

February 23, 1893

I am writing as we pull into King’s Cross Station and I do have to remark that Bradshaw’s Handbookwas right about the “London Fog” (17). It seems as though the view from my window is blurred, but I know it is not the glass, it’s the air. It feels almost warmer, but without the added heat, just a difference in the atmosphere.

The other stark contrast to my small town is the overwhelming amount of people on the platform. As we approach there is a sea of bodies, and I wonder how I will navigate through them all when I need to get off the train. In Bradshaw’s Handbookhe wrote about the growing population of London, “The number of houses is upwards of 298,000” (16). This number has most definitely risen since then as well. That idea overwhelms me, but I try to remain calm by noting that the more there are in the city, the more people I can begin good relationships with. Well, they just announced it’s time to exit the train, let my journey begin…

*Note before reading: from this view, Wordsworth would not have been looking at Big Ben because it would not have been built for another 32 years*

Upon first reading William Wordsworth’s poem “Composed upon Westminster Bridge, September 3, 1802” you get an immediate idea of his love for the city of London. What caught my attention was the intriguing juxtaposition of both vague and specific perspectives that he includes in his writing. The first line of the poem references Earth as a whole, so that creates a wide spectrum of discussion. Then, as he goes on he mentions “This City,” meaning London, so that starts to narrow down the lens of his influence (Line 4). Nonetheless, the city is still very large, so it is hard to tell what he could be reveling in so deeply. He continues to write more about the city’s beauty in lines 6 and 7, Wordsworth writes: “Ships, towers, domes, theatres, and temples lie open unto the fields, and to the sky.” These two lines are especially relevant to the juxtaposition, because while he does name particular places and things that are catching his eye, he names so many that it essentially becomes vague again.

I believe that this mindfulness of perspective is significant not just to Wordsworth, but also to the reader. This sense of perspective being so unclear allows the reader to wonder what Wordsworth is putting his focus of affection on, other than the city of London as a whole. While thinking on this concept, readers would then be prompted to wonder what their own personal focus would be of the beauty of London. Through this process, Wordsworth is causing his readers to view the city just the way he would, with love and admiration.

Even without the experience of the same view that Wordsworth would have been overlooking, readers get a unique angle into his relationship to the city and its characteristics. It also becomes a view that readers then yearn to experience after reading the poem, so it prompts them to visit London in person. Then they can truly decide for themselves what their favorite aspect of the city would be.

https://www.visitlondon.com/things-to-do/sightseeing/london-attraction/big-ben

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45514/composed-upon-westminster-bridge-september-3-1802

While the entirety of the text is very packed-full of surprising and gruesome events for poor Oliver’s life, the baby farm that he is sent to right after he is found from his abandonment, stood out to me right away, and wasn’t something I could seem to forget. In the multiple times I have studied this time in literary history, I have never heard of Baby Farms, and I wanted to learn more.

In the novel, it talks about the reason that children are sent to these farms being: “where twenty or thirty other juvenile offenders against the poor-laws, rolled about the floor all day, without the inconvenience of too much food or too much clothing, under the parental superintendence of an elderly female” (Dickens 30). This situation is kind of what you could deem a modern day “day care” but it’s more of a permanent residency for these children, and there is no fairness on how they are treated or their food levels. The old lady that Dickens mentions who runs this specific farm in the story is a very corrupt one. She takes most of the money that is supposed to be for the children and uses it for personal allowance, while only feeding the children what they need to survive. This is yet another reason why reader’s could imagine this being a horrible place.

These farms were a frequented place for misfit children around the 19^th century, especially in higher populated regions. The concept even reached across the ocean, as American society picked up the same idea. My biggest question is how we somehow went from these lethal traps for children to orphanages. That is not to say that all orphanages were necessarily good, but at least there were opportunities for the children to become adopted. It seems that for these baby farms, the only way you get out is if the Parishioners come to take you to work somewhere else, outside of the farm.

Nonetheless, I’m glad that this country now has proper child welfare laws to prevent businesses like these from ever existing again.

As many scholars have already written and published various works in regards to Austen’s famous novel, it is evident that the story has much to be speculated on. My personal interest in this novel is the loyalty and disloyalty that the family units provide for one another throughout the story.

For the sake of content, I would say that Austen wrote far more examples of familial loyalty rather than disloyalty. One of the first actions readers come across with this is when Elizabeth goes to stay with Jane at Netherfield when Jane fell ill. After reading Jane’s letter to her explaining her illness, Lizzy says, “I shall be very fit to see Jane—which is all I want” (Austen 29). Lizzy knew that her sister was struggling, especially being in a house full of people she wasn’t all too familiar with, so she went to her side immediately. This kind of action shows what Lizzy would do for her sister, out of loyalty and love.

Another character who exhibits great family loyalty is Mr. Darcy. While readers do not get to actually meet his younger sister, Miss Darcy, until closer to the end of the novel, readers are aware of her existence at an early stage of the story. Readers get the sense of how much Darcy helps out his sister when Wickham is telling Lizzy all about his relationship with the Darcy family. Austen writes, “He has also brotherly pride, which, with some brotherly affection, makes him a very kind and careful guardian of his sister; and you will hear him generally cried up as the most attentive and best of brothers” (Austen 76). Here the audience is hearing of someone is thought of as the antagonist to be a loyal family member. This is one of the first pieces of information that the readers get to signify he might be a better person than was originally thought.

Concerning the opposite, disloyalty to your family, Lydia hits the hammer right on the head when she runs away with Wickham toward the end of the novel. Readers are made aware of the situation through a letter that Jane sends to Lizzy while Lizzy is away with her aunt and uncle. In it she writes, “What I have to say relates to poor Lydia. An express came at twelve last night, just as we were all gone to bed, from Colonel Forster, to inform us that she was gone off to Scotland with one of his officers; to own the truth, with Wickham” (Austen 245). As all readers know, they did not end up going to Scotland, and their choice to not marry and stay in London had put the whole family under scrutiny and disgrace. This act, while it may have been naïve on Lydia’s part, was incredibly selfish and therefore disloyal. She clearly was not thinking straight, but she should have thought enough to realize the effect it would have on the entire family.

Austen, Jane, and Carol Howard. Pride and Prejudice. Barnes & Noble Classics, 2003.

Blog Post #1-Close Reading of Gustave Dore’s Illustration

Though I closely examined all of Dore’s work in his collection of illustrations titled London: A Pilgrimage, for my close reading I settled on image #9 in the collection. This image portrays the housing developments of the time in London. There are a few aspects of these developments that really stood out to me. First of all, the are all connected in a row, with absolutely no space in between each of them from side to side. The main row of the houses featured as the subject in the illustration seems to go on almost into the foreseeable future as it may be. Viewers of the image can tell that the houses represent lower class living because not only are the houses all crammed next to each other, but they are very small in terms of the width of each home. They all span only the width of one window, with what would appear to be a few feet of space on each side of the window. Even without ever having been in these houses, viewers can almost feel how tiny they would be just by looking. Each house does have a back patio, where some people are featured to be utilizing in the image. This space contradicts the modern use of a back patio, how most would see it as extra space to use to enjoy the outside while at home. But, these spaces are strictly seen as functional—with many of them having laundry lines and barrels for storage. This again emphasizes the idea of the poorer working class inhabiting these houses.

Another characteristic of this image is the ominous tone it gives off to viewers. It almost seems as though there is no sunshine at all in the sky, everything looks so dreary and dark. Considering that whatever medium Dore used to create this piece was just black or gray, it is evident that no actual color was ever going to exist, but viewers can get a good idea of how the tone is intentional through his shading. Dore makes the sky look darker than the subject of the housing, and it almost seems as though he’s casting some sort of shadow on the row as it moves further back in the image. Since this illustration is depicting housing of that of the lower class, the tone of the image seems to mimic how people view this class of Londoners. Overall, the piece gives a very specific idea of London living, one that most viewers most likely do not want to experience.