{"title":"非洲或阿拉伯的沙漠","authors":"J. Marriott","doi":"10.7765/9781526137838.00008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As a first stage in the exploration of progress and its antitheses I wish to focus on the problem of metropolitan poverty. We now have a reasonably secure understanding of its structural underpinnings in the modern era. Dorothy George’s London Life in the Eighteenth Century, written some seventy-six years ago, remains unsurpassed as an account of the socioeconomic conditions of the poorer classes.1 More recently, Gareth Stedman Jones has described influentially the locus of the casual poor in the late nineteenth-century metropolis, while more quantitative approaches have been used by Leonard Schwarz to explore economic fluctuations in the metropolitan economy up to 1850, and by David Green to assess the impact of economic change on poverty from 1790 to 1870.2 And yet we have a rather imprecise and highly selective grasp of how the poor were actively constructed as an object of concern. Recently scholarly work on the discursive landscape of the nineteenth-century metropolitan poor has identified epistemological shifts, thought variously as from pauperism to poverty, rationalist hedonism to social Darwinism, individual to societal, demoralization to degeneration.3 As abstract typologies expressing elite concerns around citizenship, poverty, political order and a range of social pathologies they are useful, but their selectivity masks real complexities and impedes a broader appreciation of the ways in which the metropolitan poor came to occupy an extraordinary centrality in the bourgeois imagination. To achieve this we need to go beyond government reports compiled by people well removed from their object of inquiry, and beyond fiction, which for most of the nineteenth century did not address the poor.4 Rather, semi-factual accounts written by urban travellers and evangelicals exerted the formative influence on how the poor were perceived among all sections of Victorian society, not least because they could lay claim to privileged access to the cultural and physical","PeriodicalId":288359,"journal":{"name":"The other empire","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Desarts of Africa or Arabia\",\"authors\":\"J. Marriott\",\"doi\":\"10.7765/9781526137838.00008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As a first stage in the exploration of progress and its antitheses I wish to focus on the problem of metropolitan poverty. We now have a reasonably secure understanding of its structural underpinnings in the modern era. Dorothy George’s London Life in the Eighteenth Century, written some seventy-six years ago, remains unsurpassed as an account of the socioeconomic conditions of the poorer classes.1 More recently, Gareth Stedman Jones has described influentially the locus of the casual poor in the late nineteenth-century metropolis, while more quantitative approaches have been used by Leonard Schwarz to explore economic fluctuations in the metropolitan economy up to 1850, and by David Green to assess the impact of economic change on poverty from 1790 to 1870.2 And yet we have a rather imprecise and highly selective grasp of how the poor were actively constructed as an object of concern. Recently scholarly work on the discursive landscape of the nineteenth-century metropolitan poor has identified epistemological shifts, thought variously as from pauperism to poverty, rationalist hedonism to social Darwinism, individual to societal, demoralization to degeneration.3 As abstract typologies expressing elite concerns around citizenship, poverty, political order and a range of social pathologies they are useful, but their selectivity masks real complexities and impedes a broader appreciation of the ways in which the metropolitan poor came to occupy an extraordinary centrality in the bourgeois imagination. To achieve this we need to go beyond government reports compiled by people well removed from their object of inquiry, and beyond fiction, which for most of the nineteenth century did not address the poor.4 Rather, semi-factual accounts written by urban travellers and evangelicals exerted the formative influence on how the poor were perceived among all sections of Victorian society, not least because they could lay claim to privileged access to the cultural and physical\",\"PeriodicalId\":288359,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The other empire\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The other empire\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526137838.00008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The other empire","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526137838.00008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
作为探索进步及其对立面的第一个阶段,我希望把重点放在大都市贫困问题上。我们现在对它在现代的结构基础有了一个相当可靠的理解。多萝西·乔治的《十八世纪的伦敦生活》写于大约76年前,作为对贫困阶层社会经济状况的描述,这本书至今无人能及最近,Gareth Jones Stedman有力地描述轨迹的休闲可怜的19世纪末期的大都市,而更定量的方法已经被伦纳德·施瓦兹探索使用1850年都市经济的经济波动,和大卫•绿色评估经济变化对贫困的影响,从1790年到1870.2,但我们有一个相当不精确和高选择性的穷人是如何积极构建作为关注的对象。最近,关于19世纪大都市穷人的话语景观的学术工作已经确定了认识论的转变,从贫困主义到贫穷,理性主义享乐主义到社会达尔文主义,个人到社会,道德败坏到堕落作为表达精英对公民身份、贫困、政治秩序和一系列社会病态的关注的抽象类型学,它们是有用的,但它们的选择性掩盖了真正的复杂性,阻碍了对大都市穷人在资产阶级想象中占据非凡中心地位的方式的更广泛的欣赏。要做到这一点,我们需要超越那些远离调查对象的人编写的政府报告,也需要超越那些在19世纪的大部分时间里没有涉及穷人的小说相反,由城市旅行者和福音派撰写的半真实的描述对维多利亚社会各阶层如何看待穷人产生了形成性的影响,尤其是因为他们可以声称拥有文化和物质上的特权
As a first stage in the exploration of progress and its antitheses I wish to focus on the problem of metropolitan poverty. We now have a reasonably secure understanding of its structural underpinnings in the modern era. Dorothy George’s London Life in the Eighteenth Century, written some seventy-six years ago, remains unsurpassed as an account of the socioeconomic conditions of the poorer classes.1 More recently, Gareth Stedman Jones has described influentially the locus of the casual poor in the late nineteenth-century metropolis, while more quantitative approaches have been used by Leonard Schwarz to explore economic fluctuations in the metropolitan economy up to 1850, and by David Green to assess the impact of economic change on poverty from 1790 to 1870.2 And yet we have a rather imprecise and highly selective grasp of how the poor were actively constructed as an object of concern. Recently scholarly work on the discursive landscape of the nineteenth-century metropolitan poor has identified epistemological shifts, thought variously as from pauperism to poverty, rationalist hedonism to social Darwinism, individual to societal, demoralization to degeneration.3 As abstract typologies expressing elite concerns around citizenship, poverty, political order and a range of social pathologies they are useful, but their selectivity masks real complexities and impedes a broader appreciation of the ways in which the metropolitan poor came to occupy an extraordinary centrality in the bourgeois imagination. To achieve this we need to go beyond government reports compiled by people well removed from their object of inquiry, and beyond fiction, which for most of the nineteenth century did not address the poor.4 Rather, semi-factual accounts written by urban travellers and evangelicals exerted the formative influence on how the poor were perceived among all sections of Victorian society, not least because they could lay claim to privileged access to the cultural and physical