Dickensians! discussion

Here is the thread to discuss the short piece titled "A Nightly Scene in London" from Selected Journalism, 1850-1870 by Charles Dickens. Reading and discussion will be between 29th August and 11th September.

This read will be hosted by Sam.

***Please allow Sam to comment first and give details! Thank you.

Here we come to the last of the summer reads. And for me, it feels like the end of a period that extended back at least to the beginning of Oliver Twist and for me, probably back to Petra's discussion of Somebody's Luggage which started in February. I feel this for a couple of reasons. The beginning of September always feels like an ending to me, from that feeling as a schoolboy that it was the end of the play, the freedom, the warmth of summer. It was the harvest season and you measured time as various crops came to fruition and the fields devoted to them were laid bare, with pumpkin and apple harvests soon to close the season.

In the group, it feels like the end perhaps of a theme, with Oliver Twist behind us and Laurence Sterne's The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman about to begin.

With this feeling of endings, I feel my role is the bouncer cleaning out the strays after the last show, or the janitor collecting up what thoughts have been left from earlier discussions. I had that spirit in mind when I chose the work for this discussion, "A Nightly Scene in London." It has many of the qualities that I was seeking for the last summer read. It segues well from previous works and leaves a hopeful but decisive ending IMO clearing the way for something new. It is short and not too demanding for those of us with real life activities hogging our early September time. It is clear and easy to read with little need for summary or explanation.

Unfortunately, it appears hard to find in both hard copy and ebook on the internet. I am hoping that some of you will join me taking the extra time to try and obtain a copy, or to access it from one of the links I provide. The piece is worth reading and a fine palate cleanser for what we have done this past few months of 2023.

The piece is the opener from the January 26, 1856 issue of Household Words here is a link from Dickens Journals Online where you can read the text from a replica of the actual yellowed journal or from the copied text on the side of the journal page. The site was a little wonky when I tried to access it originally and suggest you try the link for a trouble free reading.

https://www.djo.org.uk/household-word...

There is another link to the text from Harper's Magazine where the piece was reprinted in April, 1856 for the U.S. audiences. This site required a login from link I provided but when I typed "A Nightly Scene in London, Harpers " into my google search, the search provided a link which yielded the full essay when selected.

https://harpers.org/archive/1856/04/a...

I am posting a third link to the issue of Household Words with the essay from the internet archive. One can download from this site but I have not experimented with doing so and haven't further info. I can experiment if anyone has a problem getting a copy. But the article can be viewed in the link below.

https://archive.org/details/household...


I will post a reading schedule tomorrow and we will begin on the 29th of August.

This reading schedule may seem complex but the required reading is very light, usually two or three paragraphs per day. The prose will require little explication. I think best part of this discussion should come from those that participate. I hope you will share a few of your thoughts on what Dickens says and how he chooses to say it. Otherwise this will be a boring discussion of my rambling interspersed with a few delightful comments by Dickens, and the more you post, the less I will ramble.

Reading schedule for A Nightly Scene in London:

Tuesday, August 29. The first three paragraphs of the article.

Wednesday, August 30, Read from the line,
"What is this! " said my companion. "What is this!" to
"The man lingered near us a little while, wished us good-night, and went on."

Thursday, August 31, Read from where we left of to the line:
""Good night, gentlemen!" And out we came again."

Friday, September 1, through Monday September 4 will be free days for a holiday weekend in the U.S. and for everyone to catch up on personal business before school terms starting in September.

Tuesday September 5th. Instead of reading, we will have a linked video from Youtube to watch.

Wednesday, September 6 Read from where we left off to:
"For GOD'S sake get it then!"

Thursday, September 7 From where we left off read the next three paragraphs that end:
"...and they opened away for us in profound silence, and let us go."

Friday, September 8. Finish the article.

The last few days left in my period will be for any final thoughts on the article or any thoughts members have concerning shared themes relating to our reads from 2023 to present.

Welcome to the discussion of A Nightly Scene in London. The piece is an editorial, published January 26, 1856 as the lead story in Household Words, a Dickens' edited weekly publication aimed at the middle class that ran for the decade of the 1850's. Publication figures vary, running highest at the beginning of the magazine's run, then dwindling for awhile but soon doubling again with the serialization of Hard Times in 1854. Christmas issues sold the most copies and though circulation slowed again toward the latter part of the decade I imagine this issue would reach anywhere from 20,000 to 35,000 people, a sizable number, indeed.

I selected this piece for its continuity in theme with either my own contributions or those of recently discussed works The article adds another night walk to some I previously discussed last September and revisits themes seen in Oliver Twist, and our side reads of Ruth Richardson's Dickens and the Workhouse: Oliver Twist and the London Poor and John Forster's Life of Charles Dickens

You will note the daily reading is extremely short and my hope is that we can approach this editorial with an intent toward a close reading similar to what we would do in the explication of a poem. Dickens is very direct in this piece and the prose is not complex, thus not needing read after read to find the meaning. I think this may be one of the most easily readable pieces he wrote,( at least that I've read), so in examining the piece I found myself feeling like I had at my earliest attempts at analyzing literature, where one finds the simple joy of identifying what rich meaning we find in close reading; I hope some of you may find that when you study this as well. Simplicity need not be a bore. With that in mind, note my summaries will be very short, almost nonexistent. Dickens has simplified things here for a reason and I think it is important to hear his thoughts, not mine.

This read begins today!

Summary number 1:
On the fifth of November, on rainy miserable night Dickens and an unnamed friend while walking the streets, accidentally run into several figures huddled in the rain before the workhouse in Whitechapel.

In the third paragraph, Dickens switches from a fairly direct prose to a more literary poetic style to describe these people.


Crouched against the wall of the Workhouse,
in the dark street, on the muddy pavement-
stones, with the rain raining upon them, were
five bundles of rags. They were motionless,
and had no resemblance to the human form.
Five great beehives, covered with rags— five
dead bodies taken out of graves, tied neck
and heels, and covered with rags— would
have looked like those five bundles upon
which the rain rained down in the public
street.


And that is all there is to the summary for today!

I think the full impact of these early paragraphs are far more enhanced when read by Simon Callow, who also quotes an extra line from tomorrow's reading. The link is from the BBC site of the actual reading that has an introductory advertisement.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/entertain...

I love the way you've decided to go about this, Sam, and appreciate the background on Household Words. I'm reading through the Harper's link you provided, and will happily share a few thoughts on this first section.

Close reading can be so revealing, and I found a bunch of things of interest to me! I'll just mention three, all about word choice, beginning with the title. I noticed it includes the word “nightly.” Dickens must want to draw readers attention to the pervasiveness of the issue he'll be discussing.

In these three short paragraphs, rain is mentioned six times and mud three. As a reader, I start to feel beat down into the mud myself.

And the end of the last sentence struck me. This is a "public street." They may have come upon the scene accidentally, but it is meant to be a place for all of the public.

That third paragraph is a great piece of writing, and meant to be shocking! It reduces what he is viewing to something other than human, just bundles of rags lying in the cold rain on the cold ground. It's making us ask why people have nowhere to go for at least some minimal shelter in November, and are being treated as less than human. When he writes "five dead bodies," we wonder if they are dead or alive.

Note how Dickens clearly defines himself as Conductor (editor) in the first paragraph. It is obvious he wants us to know this editorial reflects his thoughts and I think that important. In reading this, I get the feeling these are Dickens' true thoughts and feelings, not those put forth by a persona to satisfy his readers.

Also note the description of the unnamed friend, "well-known to the public." I am not sure if the identity of the man is important. One source named him as John Forster and two including Richardson name him as Albert Richard Smith, a lesser known writer and friend of Dickens today, but who would have been familiar to the readers of the period.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_...

But less than knowing the unnamed friend's identity, Dickens is encouraging our interest to read on, adding a little mystery for us to solve.

Although I have more to add on the third paragraph, l think we will let those thoughts percolate and I offer the topic to all of you for your thoughts.

At less than five pages long--admittedly in rather small print in my edition--even I shouldn't have trouble keeping up with this one.

I particularly noted the iteration, re-iteration, re-re-iteration of certain words in the third paragraph, giving it a near musical and definitely doleful cadence. For example, both "bundles" and "rags" (and "five"!):

"five bundles of rags"
"Five great beehives, covered with rags"
"tied neck and heels, and covered with rags"
"like those five bundles"

In the first paragraph, Dickens starts off with "On the fifth of last November," and later in the same paragraph "It was a miserable evening". Along with the rain and mud that Kathleen mentions, a miserable, rainy autumn night is evoked. I think its being autumn is important to the mood, too.

“Five great beehives”. How unnatural for a beehive, normally a place of activity, a shelter and a home for thousands of worker bees - and a queen - ripped from its natural setting and dropped on a wet, dark pavement!

This takes the reader to an odd and uncomfortable place, physically and mentally. I wouldn’t want to be there as an observer, yet Dickens is forcing me to LOOK.

Beth wrote: "At less than five pages long--admittedly in rather small print in my edition--even I shouldn't have trouble keeping up with this one.

I particularly noted the iteration, re-iteration, re-re-iterat..(and "five"!):."

I liked the re-iteration you pointed out Beth. If I could add one, it's also the Fifth of November. Another "five"

November 5th is also, Guy Fawkes Day. So, it's a day of celebration and fireworks (I think, having not been to London on Nov. 5th, I'm not sure). That makes these poor people seem even sadder somehow. That others are celebrating while they are in trouble.

Definitely fireworks! We have a huge public display every November 5th over the river Thames, which reflects them so you get a double image. It's breathtaking, and only bettered by Sydney's (Australia) I think 😊 (It's televised nowadays, but not then of course.)

Beth and Lee G-- I agree with you 100 per cent that Dickens is trying to create in us a feeling of discomfort, almost revulsion, in the prose describing the weather and the appearance of these individuals. I suuggest we keep that in mind as we continue.

Bridget and Jean-- I had not made the connection with Guy Fawkes Day! Nice catch! I am not well read on Guy Fawkes Day in the 1850'S, but aside from patriotic pride was there not an anti-catholic sentiment to the celebration with the Pope being burned in effigy or some sort thing? I am curious if the choice of date may have some ironic element to it? More tomorrow.

Sam, Thank you for including the narration of Simon Callow! He is fabulous. Will we be able to hear him read the entire piece?

As an American, it is also remarkable to hear Mr. Callow's British accent, which makes the reading very, very true to my ear.

". . . accidentally strayed into Whitechapel."

This would have caught the attention of the London readers since Whitechapel in the East End was considered to be an area known for poverty and the high crime rate. Dickens does not say that they "walked" into Whitechapel, but "accidentally strayed," giving the impression that he was viewing the area as an outsider along with his readers.

Sam wrote: "with the Pope being burned in effigy"
Yes, indeed! The Observance of 5th November Act was repealed in 1859, and this issue is from 1856, so, before that. These celebrations could get quite violent before that. Here's a link about mobs in Exeter:
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-...
It was probably not as scary as that all over the country, but this is still the kind of 'celebration' people of the time probably had in mind.

Today and tomorrow, my area is experiencing a storm with power and internet interruptions so I may have some difficulties posting.

Lee G--I could find no more of the Callow narration other than what I posted. I could not even find information on whether he recited any more than the passage posted. There may be more at BBC which I could not access because I am not authorized. Although we have no more video, what we have is still quite good. I love how Callow has narrated this with a tone of anger as that is my perception of how Dickens intended us to read it.

Connie wrote: "". . . accidentally strayed into Whitechapel."

This would have caught the attention of the London readers since Whitechapel in the East End was considered to be an area known for poverty and the h..."

Glad you noticed this Connie. I tried to stress the accidentally in my summary for the same reason as you stated but your post clarifies it perfectly. My belief is Dickens was very intentional in the choice of words as well.

Plateresca wrote: "Sam wrote: "with the Pope being burned in effigy"
Yes, indeed! The Observance of 5th November Act was repealed in 1859, and this issue is from 1856, so, before that. These celebrations could get qu..."

There may be no relation to this in the essay but I see a strong religious allusion here.

Summary#2:
We begin today's reading with a quote from Dickens' companion which you heard if you listened to the Simon Callow video,
"What is this! " said my companion. "What is this!" in reference to the bundles. Notice the repetition with the italic stress on the word is to note a different emphasis in expression.

Dickens responds that he thinks these are people "locked out" of the casual ward. (The casual ward was an annex of the workhouse that allowed homeless shelter for the evening in trade for work over the following day or two. Unfortunately space was limited and no arrangements made for overflow. )
Dickens the writer makes an allusion to the story mythological Theban Sphinx and its riddle from Greek tragedy known from the story of Oedipus. In this allusion, these five people are like Sphinxes with their unspoken riddle,
" Stop and guess! What is to be
the end of a state of society that leaves us
here!"

At that moment a "decent working-man" with the "appearance of a stone-mason," approaches Dickens and his companion saying that these poor are "an awful sight...in a Christian country."
Dickens emphatically agrees and the stranger goes on to tell them that he often sees people lined up here in larger numbers and notes it is a "shocking thing to see." to which Dickens agrees, A shocking thing, indeed," after which the man bids them "Good Night," and moves on.

In this section of the essay, the question moves from "what are these bundles, who are these people" to "why is this allowed?" The emotion moves from repulsion or disgust to outrage. There are a number of religious associations, nondenominational, and calling into mind the Golden Rule. “In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you. . . .” And I want to stress that aside from the allusion to the riddle of the Sphinx, all of this is plainly stated with a number of repetition's used to reinforce.

BTW, the Sphinx riddle is a variation of "What goes on four legs in the morning, on two legs at noon, and on three legs in the evening? I'll leave the answer for you.

I am curious if the stone-mason reference is to the virtues of freemasonry. Though Dickens was not a freemason he had friends and relatives that were and Faith Hope and Charity fits in this piece.

BTW, I do not know how to post pictures. Feel free if any wish to add some of their own. On Tuesday the video I link will be about the Victorian workhouse and has a number of pictures.

On to you!

Just backtracking a bit (sorry - have been at the Dickens museum in Doughty Street today, among other things!)

Simon Callow is a Dickens enthusiast. He's quite prominent in the Dickens Fellowship, and often tours, gives "readings" in the same spirit as Dickens himself did; capturing the persona of Dickens quite well. He has written many books, as well as his acting work. One excellent book is Charles Dickens and the Great Theatre of the World, which really brings it home how acting was The Inimitable's first love.

At the risk of going into concordance mode, I can point out a number of words in this segment that increase the reader's impression of the outrage Dickens and the two unnamed other men are feeling: miserable, horrible, awful (x2), shocking (x2).

Building on the previous segment, I see these five figures as both objects of pity for their observers, and a sort of jumping-off point for them to criticize their society's indifference and cruelty. Objects of pity is somewhat appropriate, since all we see from Dickens' point of view are miserable, unmoving bundles of rags. They have no faces or limbs that can be seen, no age, no gender.

We know from our reading of Bleak House that Dickens had a dim view of charity done from a safe distance. I can easily imagine he won't be content to merely observe, feel outrage and pity, then go back to his part of town to live his life as usual. But I am sticking with the schedule, so don't know for sure. :)

I thought it very clever of Dickens to compare these forlorn people to the Sphinx. It's a mystery (or riddle :-) to me how prosperous, Christain cities can allow anyone to be without shelter on any night of the year, but especially in inclement weather. Maybe that's not what Dickens intended with his allusion, but that's where my imagination took me.

I'm also wondering who this person is that Dickens is walking with. He said the person is "well known". Whoever he (she) is I get the feeling this companion is not as familiar with this neighborhood as Dickens is. And it makes me wonder if Dickens purposefully (and not accidentally) brought this companion along for his nightly stroll.

Sam, I wish you luck, and hope you're safe! I have a friend in Florida.

Bridget, oh yes, I thought this was somewhat reminiscent of Dante and Virgil in Inferno.

My first thought was that at this point of the story, the stonemason does not seem to be a freemason to me; we have all noticed that many words are repeated in this short story (which is, by the way, unusual for short stories, but typical of Dickens who enjoyed using rhythm), so maybe the stonemason's profession is here to echo the pavement stones, to increase the impression of everything being hard and cold.
But then I thought some more about it. The words that I associate with freemasons would be 'brotherhood', 'society'. Also, such societies often provided an alternative to insurance to their members and their families. So maybe it is meaningful, after all.

Jean-- Thank you for the further information linking Simon Callow to Dickens.

Beth-I think concordance mode is appropriate in the approach to this piece. Dickens seems very particular about his word choices in trying to give the most clarity while keeping his reputation as a literary writer intact. The work almost seems pedestrian but I think it is from close study that my appreciation derives. For example, his use of repetitions in a piece this simple would normally put me off, but I think Dickens has given careful thought to how he employs them and their effect on the reader. And as we see today you are right about Dickens intent to do more than observe and record.

Bridget-- I liked how Dickens used the Sphinx as well. I think the use is to appeal to his more well-read readers, but he makes the intended message very clear to those not understanding the allusion. I hope everyone was familiar with the story. I remembered it from when I was young and it seemed a more common allusion seen in books I was reading then. I am curious if it would prompt a Google search from a younger reader of today when the canon is less respected or read.
I wondered how the readers of the time responded to the mystery of the accompanying friend. I think the mystery makes the piece more memorable, but also like Plateresca's comparison to a Virgil/Dante role.

Plateresca-- Thanks for the concern. All was fine after some early glitches with power and internet.

I was reaching with the freemason connection, but I do wonder why Dickens singled out the trade. This was well before our present day associations with freemasons and I thought the virtues and brotherhood might be what Dickens was implying. The mystery of this character's source or purpose is almost as interesting as that of the friend.

Well my hour's work into writing a summary disappeared as soon as I tried to post it so for the moment I will have to post a very brief alternative.

Summary #3.
After parting with the working-man and fellow sympathizer, Dickens and his companion seek to inquire into the situation and knock on the Workhouse Gate with Dickens to be spokesman. A porter answers and Dickens offers a calling card to be given to the Master.
The Master comes out full of bluster but Dickens asks him if he recognizes the name on the card. After the Master calms, Dickens claims he is going to be civil and pass no judgement on the Master, and asks if the Master is aware of the creatures outside. The Master is aware and after some hemming and hawing the Master tries to excuse himself by stating the ward is full and the Master has tried to accommodate to the best of his ability. Dickens calms the Master again and using another tack asks if the Master has anything against those outside, if they are thieves. The Master knows nothing of them and Dickens, noting he intends to give them money asks again to which the Master again replies that he knows nothing. Dickens makes a point of stating, "That is to say, they are shut out, solely because the Ward is full?" and the Master replies, "Because the Ward is full."
After a little more banter, Dickens again states his civil and nonjudicial intent, and they bid each other "Good Night."

This is a little less polished but will have to do.

I admire how Dickens develops this essay and especially the specific details he employs. We mentioned repetition and this section is rife with it. I think I would liken Dickens work in this essay to that of something built by a well-skilled craftsman. The repetitions are like the reinforcing of the structure or like the repeated layers of lacquer used to get the right finish but here it repeated words is to get the right message.

I also like how Dickens has put himself front and center as the speaker, which is again reiterated in various ways. I love the detail of using the calling card to show recognition.

I think we can see how this is moving from an essay or story into an editorial and that the intent is to send a message.

On to you. Sorry for the abbreviated last two posts.

Sorry, I was traveling and have just joined the discussion.

In the first section, I couldn't help noting: We had forgotten the mud and rain in slowly walking along and looking about us, when we found ourselves at eight o’clock, before the Workhouse. I wonder if Dickens doesn't want us to note how easy it is to forget these people exist if not confronted directly with them. Even the inclement weather has been put aside as they are strolling and enjoying the night, and then abruptly they are brought to the workhouse and the sight of the "bundles of rags".

The stone-mason is a man with a job and income, a lucky position in comparison to these poor people who have none. He makes a point of saying this is a much smaller number than he is accustomed to seeing, but he is still touched by the inhumanity of the situation. Dickens means us to understand that we are looking at the tip of an iceberg.

Sam - Your statement that The repetitions are like the reinforcing of the structure or like the repeated layers of lacquer used to get the right finish but here it repeated words is to get the right message. seems perfect to me.

Dickens' walking companion is oddly silent and invisible in this segment. Maybe they were willing to let Dickens take the reins and not interfere in the conversation between him and the workhouse's master.

The master here seems like not a bad sort, but he is also strikingly noncommittal. "I haven't seen them, but I dare say there are [five people outside]." "I don't know anything about them." Maybe he's dealt with other visitors who would be quick to place blame, since Dickens assures him more than once that that isn't his intent on coming in to the workhouse to see him.

I can understand the dilemma on the workhouse master's part. Either he comes under scrutiny from advocates, or people in the neighborhood, etc. for turning people away from the workhouse door, or he could get into trouble from the higher tiers of the bureaucracy for overcrowding the premises, leading to unhealthy or unsafe conditions for the tenants.

I also note the conditional nature of Dickens' potential assistance to the (presumed) women outside the door. It's strongly implied that he would withhold his aid if they were thieves.

"Why, Lord bless my soul! what am I to do? What can I do?" I like this repetition, and it is a question I hope is answered as we read further.

Also, when I read your comment above, Sam,
I would liken Dickens work in this essay to that of something built by a well-skilled craftsman.
it brought to mind the earlier question about why he used a stonemason. Perhaps it puts into our subconscious the idea that these problems are built layer upon layer, and perhaps must be analyzed and solved brick by brick too. An alignment of subject, style, and character.

Sam wrote: "Summary#2:
... Dickens responds that he thinks these are people "locked out" of the casual ward. (The casual ward was an annex of the workhouse that allowed homeless shelter for the evening in trade for work over the following day or two. Unfortunately space was limited and no arrangements made for overflow. )"

Jennifer here, catching up. Life has been busy recently, but I wanted to chime in and say how much I appreciate this thoughtful dicussion!

Sam, thank you for selecting this essay. I had no trouble accessing the Harper's reprint online.

The Simon Callow reading is excellent.

I very much appreciate the close reading. Dickens is so easy to read that it is easy to coast through without noticing what he is doing. His text does indeed bear up to this kind of close reading.

I stopped and startd over when I got to the third paragraph. There's so much going on. I think some editors might have flagged "with the rain raining upon them," as repetitive. I loved it. It's the phrase that insisted I slow down and listen to the language here.

The phrase "casual ward" was new to this American reader. I went looking for more information and found a first-person account of a night in one in a 1928 piece in the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2...

I hope everyone had a nice weekend and either got some relaxation time in or got some work accomplished. Thank you everyone for posting comments while I was absent and hopefully we will get back to the essay tomorrow after a quick review on what we have read so far.
Dickens and a well known but unidentified friend on a night walk have accidentally ventured into the less desirable Whitechapel and stumbled upon several "bundles," or similarly described impoverished individuals, huddled in the rain on the street in front of the casual ward. Almost in answer to Dickens' companion's twice spoken question, "What is this?," a passing stone mason helps identify the bundles as people who have been shut out of the casual ward, goes on to mention there are often three, four five times the numbers and that "it is an awful sight in a Christian country." Dickens feels motivated to investigate the situation and perhaps help the people. He interviews the manager of the casual ward, ascertaining the manager's awareness of the people outside; gaining the manager's testimony that they are blameless and he is not aware that they have done anything wrong; and that they are there only because they are shut out of the casual ward. We leave off with Dickens intending to help the individuals with money. And in our reading for tomorrow, we will get to meet those individuals. I encourage you to read close because I find the way Dickens describes the interaction with these people to be exceptional.

But I think we have read far enough to be able to start answering the questions of Dickens' intent in writing this essay. What is his goal and how is he effecting it using this particular style of prose? For example, why has he stressed he does not find the master of the ward responsible for the harm to the individuals? We all just finished Oliver Twist and I saw no effort on Dickens part to excuse the culpability of figures lower on the ladder of authority in Oliver's case. In fact, I would argue that Dickens probably exaggerated their evil in developing the characters. But here Dickens emphasizes he does not hold the manager responsible. I hope we can answer that question in the last few sessions.

In the meantime, I planned video today and I want to especially thank JenniferAustin, for she seems to have anticipated the topic and added the wonderful account of an experience in the casual ward. The video I am linking, defines the casual ward and those that would make use of its offering. Then the narrator reads from a chapter in Jack London's The People of the Abyss that recounts his experience waiting in line for a bed in the casual ward and the stories of fellow individuals who waited with him. This text is available at Gutenberg and can be read in the chapter entitled, 'Spike." I have linked the chapter but the whole book may be downloaded.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1688/...

The video is entitled, "The Poor of a Victorian Workhouse (People of a Casual Ward)," and is one of several videos on Victorian workhouses provided by the youtube provider Fact Feast.
The narration is credited to markmanningmedia.com but I could not find out if it was actually Mark doing the narration. Regardless, I found the narration quite enjoyable. Here is the link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON1S1...

I won't testify to the accuracy of all presented but wanted to include this not so much for academic accuracy, but more for atmosphere and the wonderful pictures included. Though these mostly postdate the Dickens essay, I feel they still give a good picture of the situation.

I hope you enjoy this and see you tomorrow with a continuation of reading.

JenniferAustin wrote: "Summary#2: ... Dickens responds that he thinks these are people "locked out" of the casual ward. (The casual ward was an annex of the workhouse that allowed homeless shelter ...)"
Thanks so much JenniferAustin for this link to the workhouses. This is apparently a much more complex social plan than I realized. It is interesting that the casual ward provided warm baths and food. It doesn't sound like the work was overly or cruelly difficult, although those who chose to go to these places were probably not in the best of health.

Still, a casual ward does show an attempt to deal fairly with these people, letting them work for an exchange of simple necessities.

Sam, thanks so much for both the "Spike" link and the video. I read the entirety of the chapter and found it both fascinating and distressing. I could barely endure it on paper; imagine living it. It certainly does help to set the stage in a very visual way!

It's not directly relevant but I have to say how much I am reminded of George Orwell's first essay The Spike. A “spike” was a slang word for a workhouse or hostel for vagrants, and in 1927 he was there anonymously with a crowd of other homeless people. What he describes is eerily, and depressingly similar, and of course also in East London. (I've reviewed it if you would like to know more.)

I'm really enjoying your lead of this, thank you Sam, although I have to say I have never come across Dickens "exaggerat[ing] their evil in developing the characters". For instance there are records of the school up North which Dotheboys Hall was based on, and it is far worse!

I suppose what is true is that he would select instances and personalities which would both suit his purpose, and be believed. Remember in Oliver Twist, the middle classes and some members of parliament did not even believe that such a dire place as Jacob's Island existed, until the social reports.

Edit - sorry Sara - I had not seen you mention of a "spike" - cross-posted!

Sam wrote: video: "The Poor of a Victorian Workhouse (People of a Casual Ward).."

I will not delete my previous post although now I am confused. JenniferAustin's post was not as harsh as the video shared by Sam. Such horrors the poor faced!

And what we call "homelessness" in the US is also pitiful and cruel, although I believe we do provide more social services. I see tents of the homeless and beggars on the streets every day.

Bionic Jean wrote: " A “spike” was a slang word for a workhouse or hostel for ..."
Thank you for explanation of the word "spike".

Human nature? Bionic Jean says, "Remember in Oliver Twist, the middle classes and some members of parliament did not even believe that such a dire place as Jacob's Island existed, until the social reports".

Someone would have to be very desperate to expose themselves to the diseases and vermin in the spikes described in both Jack London's and George Orwell's works. The immune systems of the homeless would not be up to fighting off diseases due to poor nutrition and lack of shelter.

I've read novels set in the late Middle Ages where the homeless lined up for soup and bread outside convents and monasteries. I was wondering if the dissolution of the monasteries and convents around 1540, during the reign of Henry VIII, had a lasting effect on the amount of aid available to the homeless. Did the government ever step in to fill this void, or was this a loss of nutrition for the poor that lasted hundreds of years? (Maybe the answer will be in the video which I have not had the chance to watch yet.)

I watched the video this morning, and was impressed with the number of old photographs they found to accompany the audio. There were so many people in such tragic situations.

Thank you for the video, Sam. Jack London is a wonderful writer, and really illuminated the scenes here. I also found the images fascinating. This reminded me of Orwell too, but of his later depiction of the situation in the 1930's, Down and Out in Paris and London. Things change a little through the years, but at heart, the problem sadly stays much the same.

Bionic Jean wrote: "I'm really enjoying your lead of this, thank you Sam, although I have to say I have never come across Dickens "exaggerat[ing] their evil in developing the characters". For instance there are records of the school up North which Dotheboys Hall was based on, and it is far worse! "

As usual Jean is catching me using my lazy melodramatic prose which becomes my goto when I am tired or worn down. To clarify, I was comparing Dickens use of supporting characteristics, both good and bad when writing characters in Oliver Twist. They help shape our feelings toward those characters. For example, the attendant during the birthing of Oliver is not only inattentive but has been drinking. Were we to look at Mr. Bumble the list of negatives just keep expanding each time Dickens writes of him. He is sadistic, unscrupulous and cowardly in his actions. Now comparing " A Nightly Scene in London," Dickens begins his description of the porter at the gate and the subsequent arrival of the Master of the Casual Ward with some supporting material that would influence us to dislike them but in the main interview, Dickens refrains from adding those touches in his description of the Master. I would say we have a very neutral view of him after reading the passage and are likely to retain Dickens' repetitions, I don't blame you...I have nothing to say against you." My point for trying to bring that to everyone's attention was to suggest that Dickens has a different intent in mind with this piece that took him from his typical character renderings. I suggest he specifically wants us to avoid blaming or even considering middle management. I will state more tomorrow.

I am glad you are proofreading me though, Jean, since tomorrow, I am attempting to include in my comments a very brief history of the growth of nineteenth century newspapers based on extremely little research and will need as may fact-checkers correcting and editing me as I can find.

Lee G wrote: "Sam wrote: video: "The Poor of a Victorian Workhouse (People of a Casual Ward).."

I will not delete my previous post although now I am confused. JenniferAustin's post was not as harsh as the video..."

I am glad you posted both of these posts Lee, since I feel many readers of the time would have similar mixed feelings as do many of us today. We wish to exercise compassion but we also do not want to reward those that take advantage of such compassion.

Summary #4.

Having bid the Master of the Casual Ward goodnight, Dickens and his companion move to help the people outside. I cannot possibly convey in summary how brilliant and perfect I find Dickens' prose in today's passage. I find it so carefully phrased and so utterly moving that I have been tearful in each consecutive reading prepping for this discussion and I can't decide whether it is in sympathy with the individuals or in admiration of Dickens skill in rendering this scene.

We went to the ragged bundle nearest to
the Workhouse-door, and I touched it. No
movement replying, I gently shook it. The
rags began to be slowly stirred within, and
by little and little a head was unshrouded.
The head of a young woman of three or four
and twenty, as I should judge; gaunt with
want, and foul with dirt; but not naturally
ugly.

Dickens asks why she is there and she responds because she can't get into the Workhouse. Note Dickens description of her from his point of view.

She spoke in a faint dull way, and had no
curiosity or interest left. She looked dreamily
at the black sky and the falling rain, but
never looked at me or my companion.

He asks her follow-up questions on whether she had been there the previous night, who her companions were and what she did during the day, finally asking what she had eaten that day. The woman replies, "Nothing," and Dickens rephrases the question to her in disbelief. She elaborates she had nothing but what she could pick off the streets and punctuates her truthfulness with an italicized exclamation, "Why, look at me!" while exposing her neck for him to see.

Dickens asks her could she get food and lodging for the night if she had a shilling and she tells him yes. Dickens responds with his own exclamation that balances here earlier one.
"For GOD'S sake get it then!"

She takes the money and leaves but in the prose Dickens uses, again reflecting his point of view, he leaves us with for more than any summary can explain

She never thanked me, never looked at me— melted
away into the miserable night, in the strangest
manner I ever saw. I have seen many
strange things, but not one that has left a
deeper impression on my memory than the
dull impassive way in which that worn-out
heap of misery took that piece of money, and
was lost.

Dickens uses more of this type of description to depict giving the other bundles money, stressing his impression of the interaction.

We will end today's passage with an addendum to the scene where Dickens explains that to give these people money he and his companion had to cross the street to a public-house to make change. In so doing they attracted the attention of those in the area who came closer to spectate on what on what was happening.
And Dickens points out that none of the spectators begged in any way though Dickens and his friend would have obliged them. We end with,
But, there was a feeling among them all, that
their necessities were not to be placed by the
side of such a spectacle; and they opened a
way for us in profound silence, and let us go.

This is where we end today. Tomorrow's read is short but meaningful and concludes the piece.

I feel completely drained after trying to summarize today's reading. It is a testament to Dickens that his prose can affect me so much and leave me in such a state. I had intended to spend a little more of my own words in responding to today's reading, but my after feeling is that it was best to let the words sink in without more elaboration. I am not sure how to describe it, but there is a mystic or religious sense to this reading which leaves me feeling akin to the way I feel after a particularly good sermon at church. So on to you!