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…

When considering the texts we read for this course and how each portrays London, the two that stand out the most to me are “London” by William Blake and “Night Walks” by Charles Dickens. Each work highlights a lot of the negative aspects of Victorian Life in London that invoke a lot of pathos in the reader, but each author completes this task in their own unique ways.

The poem “London” by William Blake is organized in 4, 4 line stanzas which constrains the topics and style, leaving Blake a relatively short space to work with. This being said, he gets right into life in London as uses his depictions of life to set the scene, a first-person point-of-view, and his diction to create a dismal tone. In stanza one, he uses diction such “weakness”, “woe”, and “charter’d”: “And mark in every face I meet / Marks of weakness, marks of woe” (3-4). His word choice is quite interesting as he depicts the people as incapable of helping themselves. Dissimilarly with his use of “charter’d”, the city itself is presented as confined, mapped, and under government control (according to Google’s definition). This theme blaming the royalty/ government carries on within each stanza. In the second stanza, he uses words such as cry, fear, ban, and mind-forg’d manacles. Cry is repeated 3 times in the poem, and two of them are in this section; once time is found in “every man” and once referring to every infant. This stanza focuses a lot on the pain and suffering of the people in the streets. “In every voice: in every ban, / The mind-forg’d manacles I hear” (7-8). The use of “ban” again shows government or royal restriction, manacles refers to shackles or constraints (according to the google definition), and mind-forged implies that these men and children are constrained by the minds and beliefs of how others see them, as well as how they see themselves.

In stanzas 3 and 4 he moves away from broad generalizations of “every man” and “every face” to very specific encounters. In stanza 3, Blake refers to crying chimney-sweepers and blackened churches. Puling a little knowledge from Blake’s “Songs of Innocence” and “Songs of Experience” the chimney sweepers are often kids sent to work quite young, so again a child is crying. The blackened churches I read as possibly being covered in soot from the chimney, or blackening in sin and impurity as white is regularly associated with purity as well as in church ceremonies. Stanza 3 also refers to “And the hapless Soldiers sigh / Runs in blood down Palace walls” (11-12). These lines lead me to believe that Blake is blaming royalty and the government for the bloodshed and the deaths of its people as it stood back and watched. In stanza 4, “How the youthful Harlots curse / Blasts the new-born infants tear” brings a lot of emotion to some ordinarily overlooked individuals. Words such as tear, plagues, and hearse are all centered around a “new-born infant”. A harlot, being a prostitute, appears to be cursing at a newborn in the streets because the baby has plagued rapid and wide spread death on the importance and meaning of marriage. Marriage is often associated with government, conformity, and a way of life. It is symbolic that the birth of the infant is bringing an end to the prospects of marriage for the woman, as well as causing a widespread plague on marriage throughout the city. According to Blake, life is awful, dreadful, full of misery, and at the center of all of the sadness: royalty is to blame.

In Charles Dickens’ “Night Walks”. he has a lot more room to expand on his dismal outlook on London. He does so in a one-person point-of-view like Blake, but in the story-like fashion of a man walking through the city streets. He gives specific details of the roads he turns down, his surroundings, and of the locals he encounters with. He eases his way into the darker elements of London at night, starting off with a restless city at “half-past twelve”. It was filled with “houseless people” and he describes the drunkards, the taxis and “that specimen was dressed in soiled mourning”. He says different kinds of people and happenings late at night appear to band together with others of a similar state of mind. Throughout his story, Dickens writes from the persona of a homeless person, while contradictorily referring to the others like him as “specimen”, “it”, “savage”, “creature”, and “wild bears”. While Blake focused on who was to blame for the situations in London, Dickens seems to focus on the widespread homelessness and disease. He talks a lot of the high rate of suicides, dry-rot developing in men, and how there are more dead than there are living. He describes dry-rot in such a way that is seems as if the working class that have it all, are working themselves to both physical and mental exhaustion. The results of this overworked nature of life causes depression and loss of will to live so that they quite literally rot away and die.

“Night Walks” also has sections where children and the government palaces are referred to, though the government is referred to more sarcastically and less direct in nature than Blake. Dickens walks past the Courts of Law and he writes that they were “hinting in low whispers what numbers of people they were keeping awake, and how intensely wretched and horrible they were rendering the small hours to unfortunate suitors”. Yet, just before he calls Parliament a stupendous institution in the eyes of other nations. This quote is symbolic in that in the eyes of its own people, the government appears to be failing. Yet, while this is such an important and central cause of dismal life, this section takes up only a small paragraph in Dickens’ work. In a contrasting manor, Blake’s whole poem alludes to the situation of everyday life being the fault of parliament and royalty. The children are also not used in Dickens’ story to draw more sympathy, but describes them as hunted and uncared for savages who fight and allude police in Covent Garden: “But one of the worst sights I know in London, is to be found in the children who prowl about this place; who sleep in the baskets, fight for the offal, dart at any object they think they can lay their thieving hands on, dive under the carts and barrows, dodge the constables, and are perpetually making a blunt pattering on the pavement in the Piazza with the rain of their naked feet”.

Dickens describes how hard these men work and how tough life is, but in a different way than Blake. Blake’s poem is representing these men as consumed with sorrow and feeling sorry for themselves rather than the tough and nasty conditions of working. Blake’s poem is more effective in drawing immediate pathos through large generalizations, but Dickens’ story captures the reality of life that can only be seen at night by presenting real places, real people, and very specific scenarios. Each author carries a different tone in their approach to the topic; Blake’s is dismal and sorrow, where Dickens is shameful and disgust. Both authors are attempting to draw awareness and pathos to their depiction of life through the connection and trust offered through a first person point-of-view, but in vastly different ways of telling their story and drawing the attention of the public to their cause.

Having read and discussed Wordsworth’s optimism in “Composed Upon Westminster Bridge” in a previous blog post, I was intrigued to find a much more realistic view in “The Prelude.” His tone is much more critical of London, and I think that stems from the extended time he had spent there by this point. He was no longer subject to the starry-eyed vision that comes with a traveler’s first visit, but he had been exposed to the reality of London and the secrets that it held.

One thing that was of particular note to me is the way Wordsworth describes London as a sort of paradox in saying that the city is so busy and full of life, yet full of secrets. He does so in lines 115-118, saying, “Above all, one thought Baffled my understanding: how men lived Even next-door neighbours, as we say, yet still Strangers, not knowing each the other’s name.” Wordsworth appears to take stock in the fact that Londoners do not seem as concerned with acquainting themselves with others, but rather they are more focused on their own lives. The paradox of London becomes even more clear when he takes note of just how busy the city is in line 151, saying, “Thou endless stream of men and moving things!” It’s almost as if everything around him is moving, yet he is unable to make any sense of it. He notes the diversity of the city by pointing out how many people are there from varying countries, and he goes on to discuss London’s history and what he expects (and what others expect) the city should be. It seems to me, however, that he is having a difficult time arriving at a conclusive and cohesive view of the city. The poem itself is muddling through a lot of chaos; he uses words like “roar” and “monstrous” to describe the city and the people in it. London, then, appears to be a sort of beast which cannot be tamed. More than that, the city may not be able to be defined. Wordsworth, however, does not take on a pessimistic tone, rather I think he’s simply trying to make sense of it all and where he fits in in the chaos. Where Wordsworth seemed like a third party observer in “Composed Upon Westminster Bridge,” in “The Prelude” he is very much in the scene. There’s a stark difference that comes about as a result of Wordsworth’s participation in the scene. Any city is going to become idealized when looked upon with fresh, eager eyes. When Wordsworth begins living in London long term, however, and becomes more exposed to the realities and the secrets of the city, I think he begins to question his role as a member of the society and how he fits in. His active participation no longer lets him sit in the blissful ignorance of visitation, but rather he is forced to confront the realities of his decision to become a citizen.

Literature from 19^thcentury England portrays London in many different ways. The fact that this time was very controversial era between the success and beauty of the city and the treatment of the working and lower-class citizens is reflected through the works of writers such as William Blake and Charles Dickens. In Blake’s poem “London,” he details the tragedy that is the lives of common Londoners. Every face Blake sees has “marks of weakness, marks of woe.” His repetition of the work “every” emphasizes how widespread these injustices are and show that every man, every infant, every person he sees is suffering. Men and children are crying, soldiers are dying, women are forced into lives as harlots and have even more children that cannot be taken care of. The image Blake paints of London in this poem is a dreadful and almost hyperbolic one, and one that represents disgust for a city plagued with such horrors.

In his essay “Night Walks” Charles Dickens paints a more realistic but equally depressing image of London. Blake focuses on the weariness of the people in his poem, but Dickens acknowledges it as a whole in London; not just found in the people, but in the rivers and architecture as well. Dickens is more realistic in his portrayal in that there seems to be no use of hyperbole in his text, but rather a tone of frankness. For example, he states that “to walk on to the Bank, lamenting the good old times and bemoaning the present evil period, would be an easy next step, so I would take it…” He is rather straightforward in not only his admitting that the present times are “evil” but that the activity he described is the easy thing to do, so he did it. This tone carries throughout the piece. He still admits the wonders of London, such as the “perfection of [the] stupendous institution” that is the walls of British Parliament and that “Covent-garden Market, when it was market morning, was wonderful company.” It is these admissions intertwined with the descriptions of the horrors Dickens has seen during his night walks that supports the reality of his portrayal of London. Overall, both writers have some rather unpleasant things to say about London in the 19^thcentury, but whereas Blake is more hyperbolic in his approach, Dickens is more realistic and still shows that there is something to be admired in the great city. London used to be great, and could be great again, but in the present time of these works she and her people are suffering.

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.

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.

Flipping through John Thomson’s Street life in London, the photo that popped out to me the most was “Public Disinfectors”. Each of the photos in the album Thomson created has a light Sepia film due to the time period and how the photo film came out in 1876-77. However, this captures the overall melancholy mood that the men are emanating. At first glance, a viewer notices the two men on the right side of the photograph. These men are in bright white and are the focal point of the photograph. Although they are positioned to the right, they are more towards the center of the photograph than any other point in the photo. The man furthest to the right has a long beard and is looking off into the distance. His stance makes me feel as though he doesn’t want to be there. Typically, when someone is looking off into the distance they have a longing for something. Thomson captured this in this man. The man in white on the right has his hand on his hip and giving off the look of displeasure. In both men, you get a sense that the job that they are working for is something that they do every day. As a viewer, I get a sense of monotony. From the title, the viewer can infer that two men in the white are the “Public Disinfectors”. The mini description that is given underneath the picture says: “[The Public Disinfectors] constantly face death to save us from peril”. This statement Is very ironic since the speaker is saying that the men are putting their lives at risk so no one else has to or they must face death so that no one else has to face death. The speaker makes it sound as though peril is of more danger than death itself. However, when put into context (VictorianLondon Street Life Historic Photographs written by John Thomson) explains that the workers put themselves in danger so that the rest of the city can stay safe. These type of men are very heroic when thought about in this way. However, the men are standing on both sides of a cart—I’m guessing to house their disinfectant supplies. The men are situated on both sides of the cart, similar to mules or donkeys carrying supplies. The way the men are situated around the cart looks humiliating in a way, nowhere near heroic or noble. It is also interesting that the two men’s uniforms are all white. Usually when someone works with death or is celebrating the life of someone (ex. funeral) the person wears black. The men are constantly facing death, yet they are wearing white. This makes me think of ghosts walking through London. At the same time, the men wearing white could give them a sense of hope, since they are saving lives by putting their lives in danger; instead of ghosts, they could be seen as the angles that are saving London. The only other aspect of the picture is the other man wearing an all-black suit and tall black hat. He is facing the two men in white directly and has his fist clenched. He seems to be the disinfectors superior. The one that is sending them into their death, which is why it feels right that he is wearing the color black. He creates lots of tension and the picture and makes the other two men awkward and inferior in relation to the man in all black.

External Sources

Thomson, John. Victorian London Street Life in Historic Photographs. Compiled by Adolphe Smith, New York, Dover Publ., 2000. Google Books, books.google.com/books?id=pA7CAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=public+disinfectors+definition&source=bl&ots=g9B5unBDk8&sig=HjjMG1qE8Hei6eERiY_WPE3Uak8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj28KWw_YzbAhVhoFkKHZEVBGEQ6AEIWDAF#v=onepage&q=public%20disinfectors%20definition&f=false.

William Wordsworth’s poem “Composed upon Westminster Bridge” and William Blake’s poem “London” offer two starkly different views of the city. Whereas Wordsworth’s poem seems to be bathed in light, soaking up the silence of a bright new day, Blake’s appears bogged down with the dreariness he sees around him. Each poem offers a different narrative of the city, and some of the key ideas I saw both of the authors using were visual cues with light and aural notes with the senses of sound, to communicate their visions of London.

As I previously mentioned, the stark contrasts of each of the poets’ usage of light is apparent. In Wordsworth’s poem, the shining promise of a new day is upon him, and it helps to illuminate the beauty he is surrounded by. Everything he describes around him is “bright and glittering in the smokeless air.” The calm that emerges because of this light fills Wordsworth with the joy he professes here, and he can then view the city with a more appreciative tone. Blake, however, contrasts Wordsworth in his descriptions of the city. While Wordsworth says the air is smokeless, Blake says the churches’ walls are blackened, and he notes how the chimney sweepers cry. Blake’s word choice, with words like “blackning” and “midnight” lend to a very dark image of London. Coupled with the melancholy imagery he uses when describing the individuals he sees, and the hopelessness inside of them, Blake’s view of London is a very depressing one, to say the least.

Wordsworth and Blake both use sound in their poems to convey their messages as well. The morning Wordsworth is discussing is described as silent and calming, to the point where even “the very houses seem asleep.” The only sound that is really conveyed in his poem is the sound of the river freely flowing, which is a calming sound. Blake’s poem, however, communicates a much more chaotic scene through his usage of sound. There are men crying, infants crying out of fear, and “youthful harlots” who are cursing. Each of them seems stuck in their melancholy viewpoints with no escape, and it makes it so that the scene is very unappealing. If it were quiet, at least Blake could be offered some calm to gather his thoughts. I think this is part of the reason why he focuses so much on the people in this poem: they are what he can make sense of, because they are being so loud.

The two representations of London are definitely apparent in these two poems, but they both speak to some of the same ideas in describing their surroundings. Wordsworth and Blake both mention the Thames – Wordsworth sees it as free flowing, Blake describes it as chartered. They also both mention places of worship in the poems (temples and churches, respectively). I think it’s interesting how different their representations of the city are, and how Wordsworth’s poem seems so full of hope, while Blake sees no escape. I wonder, too, if Wordsworth would consider Blake to be the dull man devoid of soul he describes in lines two and three, as Blake passes by the majesty. I’m intrigued by the slightly different historical periods they were written in, given that they were written eight years apart. I’d be interested to see how this history ties in to their shaping of their viewpoints.