https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/london-illustrations-by-gustave-dor

Gustav Doré’s works are very captivating and full of details that allow him to convey a powerful and effective piece. In this illustration, Doré depicts London, England and Harrow Alley from the 19th century. Since then, the name has changed but Doré depicts what London was like back then. The incorporation of every aspect of fine details in this piece add character and life to the work and make it seem so realistic. Taking a close look at the image, the viewer notices only one single light on above the people and the tallest person in the image appears to be a man, whom I have inferred is the dad or father figure of the group hovering below the light attached to what looks like a storefront or possibly a home. The emotions and facial expressions cast off by the characters, especially the one woman who looks older than the rest of the women in the image is that off sadness and depression, perhaps even anger or frustration. There are two young children cowering under a blanket in the front at the bottom of the image. It appears as if they are trying to stay warm any way possible. The clothes they are wearing seem to be very similar to one another and the shoes are piled near a bench which seems to house many hats and other clothing items. There is what looks to be another family in the left of the image, again expressionless and motionless. There also is a man sitting with his back against the wall which appears to be a part of another alley where he is sitting. The only legible words on the image are “Harrow Alley” which as I mentioned earlier was in London back in the 19th century. It is also ironic that this alley happens to be eerily similar to narrow alley, which is what many of the alleys are in London. In front of the large family are teapots and containers for water or other items but what is not present is food or a sense of covered shelter in this image. Maybe Doré is suggesting that the majority of people in the 19th century were in a constant state of starvation and lack of shelter. This is certainly what the image depicts.

After reading Dickens’ Oliver Twist, I was impressed with how Dickens was able to establish the background of Twist’s life early on in the novel and establish a sense of progression early on before the stories began. I enjoyed the book and I wanted to focus on the turning point, in my opinion, of Oliver’s life at a young age that would define the rest of the novel. Early on in Chapter 2, we find Oliver at a workhouse after being taken away from Mrs. Mann’s house by Mr. Bumble. Oliver works as an oakum picker alongside many other boys who are also starving and are given very little for food. The boys decide to draw straws to see which one of them will ask for more food. Oliver draws the shortest one and is the lucky one to ask for more food. Oliver approached the master and asked for more food.

“The evening arrived; the boys took their places. The master, in his cook’s uniform, stationed himself at the copper; his pauper assistants ranged themselves behind him; the gruel was served out; and a long grace was said over the short commons. The gruel disappeared; the boys whispered each other, and winked at Oliver, while his next neighbors nudged him. Child as he was, he was desperate with hunger, and reckless with misery. He rose from the table; and advancing to the master, basin and spoon in hand, said: somewhat alarmed at his own temerity: “Please, sir, I want some more.”
The master was a fat, healthy man; but he turned very pale. He gazed in stupefied astonishment on the small rebel for some seconds, and then clung for support to the copper. The assistants were paralysed with wonder; the boys with fear.
“What!” said the master at length, in a faint voice.
“Please, sir,” replied Oliver, “I want some more.”
The master aimed a blow at Oliver’s head with the ladle; pinioned him in his arms; and shrieked aloud for the beadle.” (Oliver Twist 38)

In the novel, Dickens describes the master as being astonished and shocked that one of the boys would ask for more food. We as the readers eventually find out that this infamous short straw that Oliver picked was also the last straw that broke the camels back. Oliver is locked away and the parish board offers a reward for anyone to take Oliver away from them. After reading the journey that Oliver endured bouncing from location to location, it all leads back to Oliver’s young life at age nine when he drew the shortest straw and asked the master at the workhouse he was a part of for more food. The novel focuses and branches off of this one scene where Twist simply asked for some more food. It is quite intriguing to realize at the end of the novel that Oliver had endured all of the forced crime and work and conditions he faced because of this one scene where he was forced to ask for more food for himself and the rest of the boys he worked with.

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.

In William Wordsworth’s poem “Composed Upon Westminster Bridge” he paints a very romantic and almost fantastical image of London. Through this poem is it very clear to see Wordsworth loves London and finds a great deal of peace in the beauty of the city. He described the city so beautifully, not one word with a negative connotation can be found in this poem. Instead, Wordsworth chooses to use phrases to detail the city such as “Earth has not anything to show more fair,” and “a sight so touching in its majesty”. The imagery in this piece is incredible as he describes ships, towers, domes, rivers, fields, and even the sunlight. Wordsworth wishes to portray exactly the beauty that inspired this poem, as well as the overwhelming sense of calmness this scene provided him. Not only does the diction in this poem provide the reader with a vision of calming beauty, but the rhyme scheme of the poem reinforces this. The use of rhyme gives the poem a calming, song-like quality as it helps tremendously with the flow of the piece. In addition to this, the rhymes are rather common ones—there are no surprises in the imagery or the sounds of the poem. While the rhymes add to the calming power of the poem, they also help in expressing Wordsworth’s subsequent excitement on his topic. He is clearly very passionate about London and his love for it, and the rhymes, lists, and exclamation points could speed up the reading of the poem, thus reflecting Wordsworth’s excitement. Wordsworth also uses personification throughout the piece, which aids in romanticizing the city. London “wear(s)/ the beauty of the morning,” and the “very houses seem asleep”. He also uses third person pronouns when referring to the river and the sun. It is almost as if this poem is a love letter to London. All in all, this poem only increases my excitement for our journey to this lovely city, and I hope to be able to stand upon Westminster Bridge and experience the beauty and joy William Wordsworth did over two hundred years ago.

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.

Henry Mayhew’s “Watercress Girl” and G.M.W. Reynolds’s Mysteries of London depict the two differing sides of defeating one’s poverty and accumulating wealth which becomes hard work versus theft. Each text makes its own statement in terms of how people choose to create their wealth in a time when poverty is common throughout the area. While Mayhew’s “Watercress Girl” presents an image of working how one can in order to make money, Reynold’s first few chapters of Mysteries of Londonpresent the narrative of taking another’s wealth and claiming it as your own.

Mayhew’s “Watercress Girl” presents a conversation with an eight-year-old little girl about her life in the city of London. The girl tells of the little money that she is able to make by buying cresses and selling them to the people who walk through the streets. She tells of the sharing of spaces with her parents and three siblings and how she must work in order to help out her family. While she describes some days as making a good amount of money, she also recounts how some days she is treated rudely as people want to only pay her what she herself paid to get them. In the tale, Mayhew notes how the girl though so young has the mentality of a woman. “Watercress Girl” shows the effects that poverty in nineteenth century London impacted the family dynamics and the lives of each child. While most children have little more to concern themselves with than what to play, this girl is forced by poverty to stand out on the streets and work attempting to make enough money to help out her family. Through the girl, Mayhew presents poverty in London as a problem that ages those effected forcing them to become a part of the work force that they should not have to experience until a much later age. The tale acts as a commentary towards wealth as it shows that wealth is to be accomplished through hard work and takes time to achieve for all those involved.

Reynolds’sMysteries of London presents a conversation between two men in an uninhabited house where they are hiding the wealth that they accumulate within the walls. These men a seen to be burglars who have only been coming into the wealth through theft against homes and people that they see to be easy targets for one reason or another. Through these men, Reynolds is showing a way in which some individuals chose to fight poverty and develop wealth in nineteenth century London. These men thieve on the vulnerable as a way of making money for themselves that instead of sharing or putting to good use as buying their own house, they choose to hide it away from the rest of the world. This thieving could lead to the potential poverty of those being stolen from and if not used leave the men with nothing as well. Reynolds shows how some chose to steal their wealth instead of working for themselves and finding their way out of poverty.

Mayhew’s “Watercress Girl” and Reynolds’s Mysteries of London present opposing images of the character of individuals within poverty as one side chooses work and the other chooses theft. The age difference between Mayhew’s girl and Reynolds’s two men is substantial yet the mentalities towards wealth could not be more different. While Mayhew depicts the pursuit of wealth and reaching out of poverty as a means to help one’s family, Reynolds shows the pursuit of wealth as purely selfish. Mayhew shows that hard work in the face of poverty creates more value in the wealth that comes out of it while Reynolds’s shows that theft in pursuit of wealth leads to a lack of value in the wealth one possesses as they will always want more. These two tests depict images of poverty and wealth in nineteenth century London through the means in which individuals would choose to live their lives.

This was the first time that I have ever read Arthur Conan Doyle’s short stories about Sherlock Holmes. To my surprise, the adventures are from the point of view of Sherlock Holmes’ partner in sleuthing, Watson. The Sherlock Holmes short stories are set in London in the 1890s. London as a setting plays an important part in each storyline. Overall, the setting in a big city creates interesting characters for Sherlock to investigate. When I think of being able to see a bunch of different type of characters, I tend to think of cities before I think of countries or suburbs. From Adventure 2: The Red-Headed League, Sherlock Holmes says: “I know, my dear Watson, that you share my love of all that is bizarre and outside the conventions and humdrum routine of everyday life.” Another important part of the city compared to any other setting is the way news travels. In this adventure, it was important for the client, Mr. Jabez Wilson, to see the advertisement to be a part of the Red-Headed League. In cities, particularly, it is easier for news to travel. Newspapers are something that everyone in the city is expected to read in the 1890s. Sherlock Holmes being in the city of London plays an important role as well. First would be the economic struggles between the rich and poor and how they treated each other in London. As shown in this adventure, John Clay went to great lengths to satisfy his greed. When I think of the typical criminal, I think of one that just robs stores, however, these criminals realized that they had to get creative in order to gain more money. Another aspect that is specific to London is the way the city is set up. As explained by Arthur Conan Doyle, the city of London seems to be a lot of shops and businesses all close together. In the Red-Headed League adventure, the Cellar of the bank was close enough to the basement of Mr. Wilson’s pawnshop for the criminals to make a whole in 8 weeks that is deep enough to get into the bank. Imagining Sherlock Holmes in a city like Pittsburgh may work for a specific type of adventure, but overall Sherlock Holmes is better in London and adds to the success of the series overall.

Charles Dicken’s Oliver Twist is described by the narrator as a melodrama of the tale of an orphan boy named Oliver Twist. His tale is one big series of unfortunate and fortunate events. The theme of death runs throughout the entire book. For Oliver, even when the chapter entails fortunate events for him, he still has death or deathly omens around him that foreshadow his future.

A less fortunate time for Oliver was in the fifth chapter of the book. Oliver is taken to the Sowerberry’s where he is to be an apprentice for an undertaker:

“But his heart was heavy, notwithstanding: and he wished, as he crept into his narrow bed, that there his coffin, and that he could be laid in a calm lasting sleep in the churchyard ground, with the tall grass waving gently above his head, and the sound of the old deep bell to soothe him in his sleep” (Dickens, 34-35)

At this moment in the book, Oliver had to leave all of his friends and people he knew at the workhouse. Oliver being taken by the undertaker is interesting not just for the storyline, but for Dickens. First, Oliver being the Undertaker’s apprentice got him closer to death than he had ever been before. As an apprentice, Oliver views funerals with Sowerberry. Oliver at this point in the story is working with death and since he sleeps under the counter with the coffins, he is seeping among death as well. This is one of the times in Oliver’s life where he is trapped by death. As for Dickens, it is interesting that he decided to have the undertaker buy Oliver from the workhouse. This mirrors the undertaker at the beginning of “A Christmas Carol”, the Undertaker is at Marley’s funeral. Another similarity between Oliver Twist and “A Christmas Carol” pertaining to death is how both of the stories begin. In “A Christmas Carol”, the first line in the short story is: “Marley was dead”. Dickens opens with what some authors have as the rising action or climax to other stories. However, this isn’t Marley’s story. In Oliver Twist, Dickens begins with the death of Oliver’s mother. This adds another layer to Oliver’s character throughout the book: the death of Oliver’s mother after birth lurks in his brain. This is a metaphorical shadow that follows Oliver in his tale.

In William Wordsworth’s poem “Composed Upon Westminster Bridge, September 3, 1802” he describes a beautiful scene looking out onto the Westminster Bridge. His description is very specific to London, and would never be used to describe common American cities. Wordsworth starts off the poem by saying “Earth has not anything to show more fair”. The speaker describes London as being an incomparable place. London is like nothing else that Earth has to offer. Wordsworth uses the word “fair” in the first line of his poem, which is a word that has been seen in another one of his poems “She Dwealt among the Untrodden Ways: “—Fair as a star, when only one is shining in the sky”. I think that Wordsworth is using the word “fair” in the same way to describe London. However, the description he gives that really tells his audience how he views London is when Wordsworth writes: “Open unto the fields, and to the sky;/All bright and glittering in the smokeless air.”. This along with describing London as “silent, bare” tells the audience that Wordsworth finds beauty in what is quiet, but open and free. When I think of the average, beautiful American city I tend to picture New York city: fast moving, lots of twinkling lights, cars throughout the streets, citizens on their way to work. However, Wordsworth wouldn’t find as much beauty in New York City as he would London. London is serene, clean, and free.

The last three lines of Wordsworth’s poem makes me excited to go to London and see the sight for myself: “The river glideth at his own sweet will/ Dear God! The very houses seem asleep;/ And all that mighty heart is lying still!”. Wordsworth promises a calmness from the sunset behind the Westminster Bridge that can only be felt when you are actually there. It gives me a sense of longing for something I haven’t even seen with my own eyes yet.

When thinking about the poem it makes me think of English culture. What does the average day look like for someone who lives in London? It also makes me wonder what the English think that American cities are like.

External Sources

“fair, adj. and n.1.” OED Online, Oxford University Press, March 2018, www.oed.com/view/Entry/67704. Accessed 17 May 2018.

Wordsworth, William. “She Dwelt among the Untrodden Ways.” Poetry Foundation, 2018.