Introduction: Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
Setting aside the nuances of Carlyle and Engels concerning the poor conditions of the Irish and English, exploring how unsanitary conditions affected the Victorian Imagination poses a compelling question. In her remarkable book, “The Idea of Poverty,” written during the Industrial Age, Gertrude Himmelfarb asserts that the living conditions of the poor working classes were deplorable not only in London but also in other industrially advancing cities like Manchester (371). This dispute between two influential figures of that era sheds light on the horrendous living conditions of the laboring class, who toiled long hours and dwelled in unsanitary surroundings.
While the Industrial Revolution was expected to usher in prosperity and a better economic future for the general public, it, in reality, brought a surge of impoverished workers to the capital and other cities. These workers labored in looms, factories, mines, and various industrial centers, enduring exploitative working hours, filthy conditions, and hazardous handling of materials, coupled with mistreatment from industrial managers. Harold Perkins, in his article “Age of Great Cities,” cites a French visitor and Frederic Engels commenting on the conditions of industrialism during that time. Leon Faucher, according to Perkins, contended that industrial centers were breeding grounds for corruption, a significant contributor to immorality and ill health. Engels, too, referred to Manchester as having “squalid slums of the working classes” (06).
Comments of Intellectuals: Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
Although the sultry comments of the intellectuals of that time reflect the unsanitary conditions and unhealthy progress brought about by the Industrial Revolution in the United Kingdom, none depict the condition of the poor strata of life and other folks more than Henry Mayhem. In his four-volume mammoth tome, he has compiled almost all of his commentaries and articles published in the Chronicle at that time. In the description of different folks, he sheds light on the working conditions and ill impacts of the industrial conditions. For instance, a person tells him that he is “ill in health — poor in pocket” in “Of the Abodes, Tricks, Marriage, Character, and Characteristics of the Different Grades of Patterers” (134).
While he discusses almost all the folks working in London at that time, Gertrude Himmelfarb has summarized his major argument about the conditions prevalent in London in the fourteenth chapter of her book titled “London: A Special Case,” quoting Shelley that it was a “populous and smoky city” (307). However, the most harrowing comment comes from her, describing it as the “city of the poor,” and Rousseau’s comment about its own kind of “deadly breath” (309-310), which vividly portrays the atmosphere at that time.
If the conditions were indeed as dire as depicted, the ensuing health conditions have not been better summed up than in Anthony S. Wohl’s “Endangered Lives: Public Health in Victorian Britain,” an indictment of government failure on legislative and administrative levels. The workers were forced to work overtime, in dingy conditions, facing numerous diseases and toxicities amid the squalor and humdrum of the industries (257-258). These references reveal the situation of the entire society, which not only has been corrupted but also forced to endure the worst in terms of health and living conditions.
The culture of “occupation health” (259), as noted by historians according to Wohl, has been such that Chadwick’s report is quoted by him, likening the people of the working class to “the size of Lilliputians” in Swiftian terms (206). The depiction of such a culture in fiction, non-fiction, and other forms of arts must have changed the vocabulary and descriptive techniques.
Living and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
Regarding living arrangements, the prostitute’s interview conducted by Mayhem in his tome is an eye-opener. He stated that boys and girls, although not industrial workers, were living in deplorable conditions. To access treatment, they resorted to committing crimes to land in jails where treatment was available (209-211). Wohl also highlights the worst working conditions, quoting reports by Simon that emphasized the need for “good ventilation, cleanliness, control of dust and other impurities,” especially for women and children (263). It remains unclear whether the situation improved after this report.
Despite several governmental acts and their enforcement, it is evident that people suffered from diseases caused by these unsanitary conditions and exposure to hazardous materials like “lead, arsenic, and phosphorus,” resulting in anthrax and other illnesses (264). The question of whether these dingy conditions and their aftereffects on public health changed the culture is not difficult to answer. The proliferation of factories in major cities, increasing population, and unimproved, unhealthy working conditions undoubtedly provided writers and artists with the material to produce corresponding pieces of literature and paintings depicting the stark realities of that time.
English Literature and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
A brief review of the impacts of these transformations on English literature, particularly the Victorian depiction of that age by Dickens and paintings critiqued by Ruskin, provides a broader understanding of the illness and dingy living conditions and their effects on literature and arts.
Nidhi Malik, in her paper “Industrial Revolution: How it Affects Victorian Literature in a Progressive or Adverse Way,” succinctly explores the impact on Dickens’s fiction. According to her argument, Dickens’s work best illustrates the utilitarian and laissez-faire aspects of the Industrial Revolution and their effects on different characters (157). She contends that orphaned children, poor workers, and child labor were the norms of the day, and Dickens vividly depicted the “exploitation and repression of the poor” by officials and institutions, highlighting how this abuse became an institutionalized norm (157). Malik quotes Oliver Twist of Dickens regarding his observation of the treatment meted out to children in the schools of that time (157). In “The Idea of Poverty,” Himmelfarb points to the same fact, referring to Mayhem’s account of the cholera outbreak, stating that Bill Sikes’s death was a case of the same epidemic. Dickens likely read accounts of this disease in newspapers, and it is possible he visited the site and was inspired by it (314).
A more detailed study of “Hard Times” by Charles Dickens and Ruskin’s critique of painters of that time in his work “Modern Painters,” specifically in Chapter XI titled “Hesperid Aegle,” sheds detailed light on how the illnesses resulting from the aftereffects of the Industrial Revolution transformed literary and artistic expression.
Dickinson and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
Concerning Dickens’s portrayal of illnesses resulting from conditions produced by the Industrial Revolution, his novel “Hard Times” delves into great detail. The murky atmosphere of the novel vividly conveys the smelly and dingy conditions in which Stephen Blackpool was living. The evaluation of the impacts of these illnesses cannot be depicted better than the situation prevalent in the town of Coketown. In a paper by Stephen Spector, he eloquently presents the working class and their conditions with two epigraphs, one from Dickens and one from Locke, at the start, revealing the type of people living there (365).
Valentina Stinga’s opening statement in her article, “There has always been a close connection between real facts and their representation in literature,” is supported by Spector’s argument. He criticizes Dickens for not accurately portraying true working class conditions through Stephen and Rachael, who seem to embody “industry, honesty, self-denial, and deference” in their characters. Despite arguing that Coketown epitomizes the true industrial town and is a “model of a grimy factory town,” Spector suggests that Dickens may not have accurately captured the real living conditions of the working class or middle class. He contends that Dickens might have been an “observant professional” rather than someone with firsthand experience of the conditions. However, Spector acknowledges Dickens’s unmatched ability in describing conditions, offering a “verisimilitude of realism” for specific locations and societies (365-368).
In Deirdre David’s book, “Hard Times” is described as full of the actual hard times of that era, illustrating a “slump,” “scanty food,” and resulting “low wages.” This sheds light on the novel’s title, reflecting the overall situation due to the aftermath of the Industrial Revolution. David argues that the revolution transformed not only the landscape but also the lives of “men, women, and children” (11). These comments by different critics reveal the prevalent illnesses and their impacts on the Victorian imagination, particularly on Dickens.
Illnesses and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
When exploring the facts and realities resulting from living conditions and consequential illnesses in “Hard Times,” ample examples are found. In this context, facts and realities refer to information about the illnesses and living conditions of the working-class people, as well as how Dickens portrayed life in towns where factories were located.
Patrick Bartlinger, in his article “Dickens and the Factories,” begins by quoting Gissing and other critics in his critique of Dickens. He accuses Dickens of either being negligent or naïve in depicting the omission of the workers’ struggles in England, especially in the north. Bartlinger acknowledges Dickens’s portrayal of industrial scenes in several novels, including “Bleak House” and “Nicholas Nickleby.” However, when it comes to “Hard Times,” Bartlinger suggests a different approach and accuses Dickens of aligning with a party that supported Ruskin’s argument, praising British industry in his speeches. Bartlinger raises questions about Dickens’s presentation and views it as his unique vision of society as a dismal, unfathomable tangle, as seen in Coketown (270-271). Essentially, Dickens, according to Bartlinger, was well aware of the facts and realities of that time, which fueled his imagination in crafting “Hard Times.”
Building on this point, Joseph Butwin argues that “Hard Times” is a denigration of “hard facts” and an effort by Dickens to write self-consciously governed by facts. Even though it is a work of fiction presenting a town like Coketown, Butwin suggests that Dickens is writing with a conscious awareness of the facts (175). A closer analysis of the novel supports these arguments put forward by Bartlinger and Butwin regarding facts and realities and their depiction in “Hard Times.”
Hard Times and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
The first and most horrifying presentation of facts occurs in the opening chapter of the novel, where the education system and the way children are taught are laid bare. This reflects the impacts of the Industrial Revolution on the minds of writers, and Charles Dickens, too, could not remain immune to these unsanitary conditions. Above all, it is the harsh facts and realities that also constituted unhealthy activities. “Hard Times” reveals that children must only be acquainted with facts, echoing Gradgrind’s thunderous philosophy that suppresses the imaginative and creative powers of the children. The novel portrays Tom Gradgrind and Louisa Gradgrind, his children, as products of this utilitarian system imposed by Thomas Gradgrind. While this initial presentation of facts may not directly depict the illnesses and aftereffects of the working middle class, it is contrasted with the conditions of characters like Sissy Jupe and Rachel, who represent the working class. “Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts” (Dickens 01) is the resounding proclamation of Thomas Gradgrind. However, the narrative prompts us to question the meaning of these facts for someone like Stephen, who works most of his time, leading to the destruction of his family life.
Sickness and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
The second impact is evident in the presentation of unhealthy and sickly conditions, particularly in Coketown. Despite the Stone Lodge presenting a picturesque landscape, it stands starkly against the filthy background of Coketown, illustrating the adverse effects of the Industrial Revolution’s unhealthy and appalling conditions.
The first aspect of this impact is the widespread filth described by Charles Dickens in various ways. Coketown is portrayed as a place with a sky that is “unnatural red and black like the painted face of a savage” (Dickens 34). Dickens likens the town to a place full of machinery resembling serpents, emitting smoke that spreads far before dissipating in the air. The water is polluted, giving off a foul odor due to factory waste, reflecting the artificial lives imposed on the working class and their working hours in the industrial town.
Stephen Specter argues that Dickens’ imagination was significantly influenced by the prevailing system at that time, and this is reflected in his novel. Specter asserts that Dickens vividly depicts a complete transformation of the natural landscape into an “unnatural red and black” (Dickens 34), resulting from the denaturalization and metamorphosis of nature into something resembling or truly savage. Dickens employs words like “savage,” “snake,” and “elephant,” describing a horrifying change from a city of human beings to a city of brutes or non-human machines. This defamiliarization and disorientation, according to Specter, represent the merging of human beings into the system, reducing them to objects due to their behavior. This objectification, he suggests, is a product of a mentality influenced by the prevailing conditions (368). Although this may not be a direct illness, such conditions can undoubtedly lead to the deterioration of workers’ health and the well-being of other inhabitants.
Impacts and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
These conditions provide a sufficient background for understanding the unsanitary conditions that could have led to widespread epidemics. In this context, Gertrude Himmelfab’s study is particularly apt, as she opens the discussion of the city of London with a phrase similar to Dickens’s description of Coketown. Both cities are undergoing a metamorphosis due to the rail and industrial revolution. Himmelfab mentions fumes, chimney pots, yellow fog, and the “noxious form of pollution” (307) prevalent in these transforming urban landscapes.
However, the true impacts of this pollution, the prevailing health situation in the city, and the conditions of illness cannot be fully understood by focusing solely on characters like the Gradgrinds and other important bourgeois figures. While the description of Coketown implicitly suggests how industrialization has transformed the city, it doesn’t explicitly address its toll on health. It can be inferred that this toll is exemplified by characters like Stephen Blackpool, who constantly suffers from the toxicity of poverty and its impact on health. In this context, a paper by Thomas J. Papadimos is worth mentioning, as it reviews “Hard Times” in modern terms of health and public policy. This perspective adds valuable insights into the implications of Dickens’s portrayal of the industrial landscape and its effects on the health of the characters in the novel.
Health and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
Regarding health and illness, “The Hard Times” presents a true picture of the impacts of the Industrial Revolution, as stated by Thomas J. Papadimos. He argues that Dickens was truly empathetic towards the workers when he visited Preston during the strikes and observed the poor, unsanitary conditions they endured (02). Papadimos contends that Dickens’ characters depict a society strikingly similar to the present-day, where one class enjoys health benefits due to profiteering, while the other class suffers. He asserts that almost all the poverty-stricken characters also experience the detrimental effects of the Industrial Revolution. For Dickens, presenting characters in their true nature was a natural choice, given his staunch realism, and avoiding such conditions would have compromised his art.
Papadimos specifically highlights Mr. Sleary and Stephen Blackpool as individuals suffering from the illnesses of their time. Mr. Sleary’s manner of speaking is portrayed as a manifestation of the sickness Dickens witnessed during his visit, describing him as “troubled with asthma, and whose breath came far too thick and heavy” (51). Papadimos notes that this chronic obstructive pulmonary disease represents not only small business and self-employment but also the conditions of the poor working class (02). Another character Papadimos mentions is Stephen Blackpool, who faces two major issues, as Dickens points out. Firstly, he suffers from arthritis, and secondly, his wife frequently remains intoxicated (03). Papadimos draws attention to The Hard Times concerning insurance, benefits, and public health policy, asserting that its impacts still resonate strongly with the minds of 20th-century individuals.
It is inconceivable that Dickens would have overlooked such pervasive issues. Indeed, he sketched these distressing pictures of cities and people through his portrayal of Coketown and the characters of Mr. Sleary and Stephen Blackpool. Consequently, it can be asserted with certainty that the deplorable living conditions and pervasive filth resulting from the industrial revolution left a lasting impact on the Victorian imagination. However, a further analysis of Ruskin’s critique of the paintings of that time would shed more light on this aspect of the argument.
Ruskin and Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
Initially, John Ruskin presents two major arguments in his book Modern Painter Volume V. The first concerns the impact of the Victorian Period, while the second focuses on the articulation of this impact on the imagination. However, the second argument, addressing the impact on the imagination, is predominantly evident in artifacts such as paintings.
Regarding Turner, Ruskin asserts that the conditions of the Victorian era led to the degradation of flora and fauna. For instance, when commenting on Turner’s painting “Cocytus,” he argues that it appears as if the apple were broken, not due to its weight and healthy condition, but rather as if “a diseased tree would break” (336). This succinct critique clearly highlights Turner’s profound impact, depicting the tree not as healthy but as diseased through the imagery of the falling apple.
In reference to the same painting, Ruskin notes that Turner has depicted it in “a sulphurous hue, as relating to a paradise of smoke” (336), reminiscent of the environment in Coketown in “The Hard Times” (43). This comparison in terms of a smoky environment signifies the deplorable and unsanitary conditions of the time. However, this is most evident in the depiction of the environment with a smoky background, a characteristic found in most nature scenes. For instance, Ruskin criticizes another painting, suggesting that Turner should have portrayed the sun in its strength, but instead, it is depicted as “the sun rising not through vapor,” indicating the influence of smoke, as mentioned earlier (337). Attributing these choices to the use of color, Ruskin asserts that Turner’s art is “distinctively the art of coloring, not of shaping or relating” (340). Such color usage implies that the Victorian mindset was under the negative influence of pollution and fumes emitted by factories at that time. The habitual exposure to the same color scheme transforming into different colors underscores the pervasive impact of pollution on the Victorian mind.
Ruskin further contends that Turner’s innovation in using scarlet colors in various works is significant. Unlike other painters who traditionally employed golden and blue tones when depicting figures like Erytheia, Hesperid Aegle, and related goddesses and gods, Turner chose to use the distinctive scarlet shadow. Ruskin asserts that “none had dared to paint, none seem to have seen, the scarlet and purple” (340). This deviation in color choice, according to Ruskin, reflects a departure from the established norm, and he suggests that this change must be attributed to shifts in the environment. He is adamant that the altered color palette is indicative of environmental degradation, a point he believes Ruskin overlooks.
Ruskin’s commentary on the color scheme includes a reference to the rose of dawn and sunset, describing how the hues are influenced by the sunbeams passing through the earth’s atmosphere. However, he fails to acknowledge that this polluted atmosphere, as described, is indicative of the acrid and smoky conditions prevalent during the Victorian period. As a painter of natural landscapes, Turner would likely have been impacted by this environmental change, explaining the color choices that mirror the urban situations of the time. This connection can be drawn to Dickens’s portrayal of Coketown in “The Hard Times” (43), where similar horrible and unsanitary conditions result from excessive industrialization. Ruskin, to some extent, explicitly articulates this correlation, emphasizing the vocal acknowledgment of the impact of these conditions on Turner’s work.
Concerning color, Ruskin argues that since it is a form of love connected with the earth, its changing and transformation in a painter’s work vividly reflects the shifts and evolution in the artist’s mentality. He further emphasizes that the pursuit of larger houses and the insatiable desire for more lead people to destroy the beauty of the earth, and this degradation of the earth’s beauty influences the mindset.
In addressing the depiction of social disparities and conflicts between laborers and the upper class, Ruskin cites Turner, noting that he painted “the labor of men, their sorrow, and their death” (357), a departure from what most other painters were doing at the time. In essence, Ruskin suggests that Turner’s artistic vision was profoundly influenced by the unsanitary conditions and the stark differences in the lives of people during that era. Turner’s choice to portray the struggles and hardships of laborers, according to Ruskin, is indicative of the impact of societal conditions on artistic imagination.
Conclusion: Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
In short, the Industrial Revolution wreaked havoc on the environment, leading to detrimental living conditions for laborers. Despite various government interventions and administrative measures over time to ameliorate these conditions, the situation deteriorated. This upheaval profoundly impacted both great writers and painters who were witnesses to the clamor and chaos of factories and the deplorable state of the laborers surrounding them.
Charles Dickens, reflecting this grim reality, painted a dismal picture of Coketown and portrayed characters suffering from respiratory issues, capturing the harsh consequences of industrialization. Similarly, Ruskin observed in Turner’s masterpieces the depiction of a smoky environment, symbolizing the polluted surroundings. Therefore, it can be asserted that the unsanitary conditions, filthy environment, and the resulting illnesses had a profound influence on the Victorian imagination, compelling artists to articulate these conditions through their writings or paintings.
Works Cited: Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
- Brantlinger, Patrick. “Dickens and the Factories.” Nineteenth-Century Fiction, vol. 26, no. 3, 1971, pp. 270–285. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2933206.
- Butwin, Joseph. “Hard Times: The News and the Novel.” Nineteenth-Century Fiction, vol. 32, no. 2, 1977, pp. 166–187. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2933187.
- David, Deirdre. Fictions of Resolutions in Three Victorian Novels. Columbia University Press, 1981.
- Dickens, Charles. Hard Times. The University of Adelaide, 2014. Ebook.
- Himmelfarb, Gertrude. The Idea of Poverty: England in the Early Industrial Age. New York: Vintage Book, 1983.
- Mayhew, Henry. London Labor and the London Poor Vol. 1-4. Gutenberg, November 19, 2017 [eBook #55998].
- Malik, Nidkhi. ” Industrial Revolution: How it Effect Victorian Literature in a Progressive or Adverse Way.” International Journal of Advanced Education Research, vol. 2, no. 6 (Nov, 2017): 156-157.
- Papadimos, Thomas J. “Charles Dickens’ Hard Times and the Academic Health Center: A Tale of the Urban Working Poor and the Violation of a Covert Covenant, an American Perspective.” Online Journal of Health Ethics, volume. 3, no. 2. (2006). 1-14. htp://dx.doi.org/10.18785/ojhe.0302.02
- Perkins, Harlod. “An Age of Great Cities. From Victorian Urban Settings: Essays on Nineteenth-century City and its Contexts edited by Debra N. Mancoff and Dale J. Trela. London: Garland Publishing, 1996. 2-25.
- Stinga, Valentina. “The Industrial Imaginary in Mid-Victorian Literature: Charles Dickens’ Hard Times.” University din Pitersti, (2013): 185-190. http://www.diacronia.ro/ro/indexing/details/A6051/pdf Accessed on 04 May. 2018.
- Spector, Stephen J. “Monsters of Metonymy: Hard Times and Knowing the Working Class.” ELH, vol. 51, no. 2, 1984, pp. 365–384. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2872950.
- Wohl, Anthony S. Endangered Lives: Public Health in Victorian Britain. London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd. 1983.
Relevant Questions about Unsanitary Conditions Affected Victorian Imagination
- How did the pervasive unsanitary conditions during the Victorian era impact the collective imagination of society, influencing perceptions of health, well-being, and the broader understanding of social progress, and specifically, how unsanitary conditions affected Victorian imagination?
- In what ways did the literature and art of the Victorian era reflect or respond to the unsanitary conditions of the time, and how did these representations contribute to shaping public awareness and attitudes towards sanitation and public health, exploring how unsanitary conditions affected Victorian imagination?
- How did the prevailing unsanitary conditions in Victorian cities influence the development of public policies, urban planning, and social reforms, and what role did these responses play in shaping the societal imagination concerning the importance of sanitation and hygiene, and examining how unsanitary conditions affected Victorian imagination?
