Blog Post 5: Poverty in “A Christmas Carol”

In the time of Charles Dickens there was a large gap between those who could afford to live and those who could not. The poor of Victorian England had a hard life, especially after the passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834. This demolished the old ways of poor relief that was run through the churches and created a system that sent the poor to workhouses where many of the poor died of starvation, disease or simply being overworked. A particular depiction of poverty that sticks out in Dickens’ writings is “A Christmas Carol.” In this short story an old miser is visited by three ghosts on Christmas eve and warned to change his behavior or this Christmas will be his last.

One particular instance of poverty creeping into the cushy life of Ebenezer Scrooge is whenever he is visited by the Ghost of Christmas Past. The ghost takes him back to his childhood and how he was a poorer soul at one point:

“This is the even-handed dealing of the world!” he said. “There is nothing on which it is so hard as poverty; and there is nothing it professes to condemn with such severity as the pursuit of wealth!” “You fear the world too much,” she answered, gently. “All your other hopes have merged into the hope of being beyond the chance of its sordid reproach. I have seen your nobler aspirations fall off one by one, until the master-passion, Gain, engrosses you. Have I not?” “What then?” he retorted. “Even if I have grown so much wiser, what then? I am not changed towards you.” (Dickens 40)

Here the ghost is telling Scrooge that his life has turned out the way it has simply because he feared the life of the poor. The poor had a very harsh life in his time and many of them died young. The lavish, but isolated, life that Scrooge has is because he’s afraid that he’s going to lose everything that he’s earned. Dickens has making a commentary about the workhouses and the state of the poor. He made his main character so terrified of falling into that kind of life that he pushed away all of his loved ones and lives an isolated life with his riches. A life of poverty was so terrifying to him as a child that he shut himself off from the world and decided then and there that the only person he needed to worry about was himself. This may also be a commentary on the upper-class of the time as well and their unwillingness to help the poor of the country.

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.

Charles Dickens’ “Night Walks” and Elizabeth Banks’ “Campaigns of Curiosity” both represent poverty and the working class in that both authors put themselves on the level of the classes they are speaking about. Dickens leaves his house to experience his version of houselessness, and Banks poses as a housemaid to know more about the working class.

In Dickens’ “Night Walks,” Dickens leaves his house to experience houselessness. He says that he does this because he cannot sleep, and he just wished to get through the night. The result is what he calls an “amateur experience of houselessness,” which led him to “sympathetic relations with people.” He would not have encountered these people if it weren’t for his insomnia, and it was not his direct intent to seek them out and empathize with them. However, he begins to equate himself with them as he goes on his walks, and he consistently uses the word “we” in his descriptions of the houseless. Dickens represents those on the street in some gruesome ways, effectively communicating the impact these people had on him. When Dickens discusses the children in Covent Garden, his descriptions of the children were particularly impactful for me. He says that the children sleep in baskets, fight over food, and are thieves. At the end of the passage, he says “A painful and unnatural result comes of the comparison one is forced to institute between the growth of corruption as displayed in the so much improved and cared for fruits of the earth, and the growth of corruption as displayed in these all uncared for (except inasmuch as ever-hunted) savages.” Any description of a person as a savage definitely comes from a place of privilege, but the passage communicates the idea that the city is failing its children, as they are not cared for, and nobody cares if they are taken care of. I think that the nighttime setting is important because the houseless population comes to life, as Dickens describes. Those in the city who are at home, asleep in their safe beds, are paying no mind to the chaos and havoc going on in the streets surrounding them. The idealized version of the city is swept aside for this realistic representation of the people suffering at the hands of their misfortunes, and Dickens appears to be the only privileged man aware of it – and the only one willing to speak of it.

Elizabeth Banks uses a similar place of privilege in order to speak about the working class in “Campaigns of Curiosity.” She is first made aware of her naivete in the first chapter, when she offers the sewing woman a “better” job. The working woman couldn’t be more offended, and she accuses Banks of trying to take away her independence. Banks recoils, confused as to how a working woman could be considered independent. The whole scene was humorous to me, but I admired the way Banks handled the situation: she tried to understand. She sought out a job that would allow her to be an “ordinary servant.” Once she finds a job, she gets a wake-up call. She did not realize how much work would be involved in being a housemaid, and how unlivable their wages were. Annie tries to teach Elizabeth the ways of the house, but she can’t help but laugh when Elizabeth underestimated the work. On page 29, Annie tells Elizabeth that it’s too bad she “took such a hard place for [her] first time in service!” On the same page, Elizabeth says that she pitied herself for all of the work she had to do. She subjected herself to the pains and struggles of the working class, but she was easily able to evade them as she saw fit. She even has to get food from her own home rather than buying it with her earnings. Her privilege is clear in that scene because she evades the confines of the working class and uses her wealth to benefit her, even though she wanted to experience being in the working class to its fullest. Therefore, she brought her own privilege into her experience, and her experience was biased by her greater wealth than the woman she was emulating. Although her intentions may have been just, her methods were not. However, because her wealth is so clearly juxtaposed by the working class, it makes the struggles of the women all the more clear, and it paints them in a very respectable light.

Both Dickens and Banks take themselves out of their places of privilege in order to understand and speak about those in poverty and the working class. Their understanding, then, is influenced by their own wealth and success, and it shapes how they view the people they speak about. There is a barrier created in each of their pieces that both of the authors must overcome, but I would argue that it gives the reader a more thorough understanding of the wealthy and the poor/working class because of that discrepancy. The reader is able to know the authors’ presuppositions, and the reader is able to see how the author shapes him or herself based on what they find out. In taking themselves out of their privileged places, they are able to communicate the struggles of the poor and of the working class, and they serve as witnesses to their experiences. If it were not for them, the reality of poverty and of the working class may not have been as evidently clear.

Works Cited:

Banks, Elizabeth. Campaigns of Curiosity. F. Tennyson Neely, 1894.

Dickens, Charles. The Uncommercial Traveller.  ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/d/dickens/charles/d54ut/chapter13.html.

The work of John Thomson and Adolphe Smith really struck me, and the photographs had a particularly lasting effect on me. Thomson’s photograph “The Crawlers” was the first image that stuck out to me when I was viewing the group as a whole. Upon closer inspection, there’s so much to unpack in it. First and foremost, the woman is at the center of the photograph, and it is well composed to make her the focus. She does not face the camera, but rather she looks down at the ground as the photo is taken. She appears exhausted, leaning up against the wall to rest her head. As she sits on the stoop, she is holding a baby in her lap. At first glance, it appears as if the baby is covered with its own blanket; actually, the woman is covering the baby with her shawl, protecting the child and herself at the same time. The focus of the image is blurred behind the woman, which heightens her prominence and brings her to the forefront even more. The leading lines in the door and on the wall also direct the focus to the woman’s face, which is arguably the most important part of this image; she is wrinkled, worn, and exhausted, clearly at odds with her situation. While the baby is an important part of this image as well, the child is out of focus, its face overexposed. The photograph is also angled down to the woman, and it was clearly taken when Thomson was standing up. The angle makes the woman seem even smaller and, coupled with her sitting position, it makes her appear all the more weak.

I’d like to compare “The Crawlers” with one of Gustave Dore’s illustrations, which communicates a similar idea. Dore’s image “Orange Court – Drury Lane” depicts a much more chaotic scene. The illustration itself is very thin, and it depicts a narrow street that appears to be even narrower as it continues to the back of the image. Several people line the walls of the street; men, women, and children alike are all crowded together. There are several men in top hats, and many of the women have their heads covered, but the children do not appear to be as protected from the elements. On the left side of the image, there is a man working at some sort of a device. An elderly woman walking with a cane is at the front of the image. Dead center, however, is a girl who looks young. She is barefoot, and she is carrying a baby who appears to be the same size as her. This girl is separated from the chaos of the people surrounding her, and she has room around her, which makes her all the more prominent. There are other girls around her carrying their own children, but this girl is at the forefront of all of them. There is heavy shading in this image, particularly further up the street, which gives it a somber, nighttime note. While there are many people in the image, many of them appear emotionless as their faces are stagnant. The girl holding the child, however, has a solemn look about her face.

When comparing the images, the first point I noticed is that they both depict women with young children. Both of these women in each of the images are the focal point of the image, and their struggle with their children and their situations is apparent. I was drawn to the expression on the woman’s face in “The Crawlers,” and the same emotion drew me to the girl in the illustration. The girl in the illustration, however, does not communicate her emotions as clearly because she is surrounded by the chaos of the population. She appears to be washed out by everyone else in the image, and I believe that to be the point. I did not notice the girl on first glance, and it was only after a closer viewing that I saw her facial expression. While the woman in the photograph is alone, the girl in the illustration is purposefully surrounded. It makes her all the more vulnerable, as she is likely to be swept up in the chaotic population. The viewer of the illustration has many other people to look at, which can communicate the reality of the situation as well. The woman in the photograph, however, is the only subject, which heightens her situation in a different way: the viewing audience has no choice but to look at her.

I personally found the illustrations to be very exaggerated and overwhelming, and I’m inclined to say the photographs held more truth for me. While it can be argued that truth lies in the fact that the illustrations show more of the situation at hand, and more people experiencing the detriments of it, there’s something about the photograph that resonates with me more. It just feels as if it was a raw moment that would have happened regardless of whether or not someone was there to view it. The illustration, however, feels contrived to me. Maybe that’s just my way of denying the horrible nature of the situation, but this one woman’s struggle in “The Crawlers” resonates with me much more than the scene in “Orange Court – Drury Lane.”

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>.