Interdum nec, metus. Maecenas ornare lobortis risus. Donec mattis quam aliquam risus. Nulla non felis sollicitudin urna blandit egestas. Integer et libero varius pede tristique ultricies. Cras nisl. Proin quis massa semper felis euismod ultricies.
In Leah Price's piece "Cultures of the Commonplace" she goes into discussion about anthologies and their uses. Her piece does tend to criticize anthologists, particularly Knox's "scissor-doings" and the creation of his anthologies. The problem is explained to lie in the fact that the random samplings of what should be popular works almost exploit the reading audience, and the editor removes himself almost entirely so that there is no blame placed on him or her.
With the random mashing of anthologies, the distinctions between readers almost vanishes, and the books themselves only "record the voice of fame" as opposed to the diverse works of many writers from many different backgrounds. John Hollander and Frank Kermode added to their preface of the Oxford Anthology of English Literature that "English literature has generated its own history" but Price notes that "the anthology as the effect of an audience's cohesion rather than its cause" is more the case.
Part of the problem with the lack of completeness to an anthology however is the fact that not everything can fit within bindings. People like Margaret Ezell hope that with the digital age, the "full-text databases will render anthologies of women's writing obsolete," rather than a hashing of pieces, the complete works could be available. The Norton Anthology of English is attempting this online, it is hoped to be a "supplementary collection of texts to unwieldy to fit within its covers - it is tempting to imagine the electronic database will eliminate the economic constraints which have so long rendered the excerpt unavoidable."
Questions for Discussion
Do you feel that the excerpt really has been unavoidable, or do you think part of why women's writings were smashed together has to deal with the fact that they weren't deemed decent enough for full books of their own?
A preface to a history of audiences
Jonathan Rose discusses the autobiography in his essay. He states that the autobiography of a working-class writer dates back to around 1800. While these are an excellent view into the daily lives of these people, he does state to use them with caution.
"Although autobiographies will probably prove to be the richest sources for a history of audiences, they must be used with caution and balanced against other materials. ... Autobiographies were produced in every one of the several British working classes ranging down to tramps and petty criminals, but a disproportionate number were written by skilled workers and especially the self-employed."
This means that although almost every class of worker had an autobiography written, it took both a literate and well educated person of the class to put his or her life experience to text.
Rose points out that people are liable to forget or omit details in an autobiography as well, which doesn't always make them the best source of information if much of the original idea is lost or changed. He speaks of the fact that an upbringing can play a large role on how a person perceives texts in general, and how it can also influence what influences them. While discussing the 1906 survey of Parliament Members, 51 of them were asked to name authors or books that had been influential in their lives. Of them, 17 mentioned John Ruskin, 16 Charles Dickens, and 14 The Bible. He then goes on to say that "[i]nterestingly, only two MPs mentioned Karl Marx, while five cited at least one of the ancient Greeks or Romans. Granted, the 45 respondents were all politicians, all male, and all on the leftward half of the spectrum," which is not exactly a good representation of the "working class."
When looking at a written text historically, Rose points out the flaw in many historians observations. He says that "because literature was recreated by historical audiences, and may have been recreated in a fashion quite unlike anything envisioned by the author or the critic, the world view of the novel does not necessarily equal the beliefs of the reader, no matter how popular the work may be." This quote points out a major flaw in nearly all literary analysis, it is possible to look at a piece and, with modern understanding, say that it was politically charged or any other various conclusions one may draw from it, but it does not mean that is what the author had in mind at its time of creation. Nor does it mean that an autobiography written by someone of a working class that used the piece as inspiration is incorrect, or that they have missed the point.
Questions for Discussion:
Do you feel that these works of "great literature" misrepresents the working class?
Do you feel that the working class was incapable of drawing "correct" conclusions from these pieces?
Do you think that Robert's statement "Except in periods of national crisis or celebration, industrial labourers, though Tory, royalist and patriotic, remained uninterested in any event beyond the local, horse racing excepted" plays a role in the view of autobiographies as historical pieces?
From Caxton to the eighteenth century
Altick's piece describes the advancement of the want and desire for something to read by the common person. William Caxton played a large role in the advancement of the ability to get texts into these wanting hands. While no certainty can be placed on just how many people we're literate at the time, it is known that "the growing commercial life of the nation required men of the merchant class to read and write English in order to transact business, keep records, and interpret legal documents."
During this time education played a vital role in the advancement of literacy. As noted by Altick,
"No longer, in any event, was education limited, as it had been in the Middle Ages, to those destined for the religious life. Even if the prospects were that they would take up their father's occupation, the children of small tradesmen, farm laborers, and domestic servants had some opportunity to learn and read English."
This marks a rather gigantic evolution in the literate community. Skill schools started to develop with the prospect of teaching its pupils skills in literacy that would be required of them as adults in their trades. Altick notes that "[t]hese schools were open not only to those destined to go on to the Latin curriculum but also those who would begin their apprenticeship immediately after learning to read," which allows potentially all persons in a specific trade the opportunity to become literate.
With the growing number of literate people, on top of the ability to produce books and other texts at a much faster rate to a larger number of people, all the pieces were in place to expand the literate population exponentially. There was enough skilled professionals to produce material, and enough people wanted material to make it worth producing. However some companies limited the copies that could be pressed of a book in a certain type, which did slow the advancement down slightly. "How prices would have been affected had a printer been free to issue as many copies as he foresaw a sale for, we can only speculate," notes Altick.
Unfortunately the working wage did remain behind the price scale for many commodities such as books. While a copy of Hamlet with no bind sold for 6d, most of the workers made about 16d a day. "Thus a man who had seen Hamlet at the Globe and wanted to read it at his leisure would have to spend between a quarter and a half of his day's earnings. With the same sixpence he could have bought two dinners or gone back to the Globe ... for six more performances."
Questions for Discussion
It is amusing that Altick says that a quarter to a half of a day's work for a luxury commodity was asking a lot of the common worker. If the average worker today makes around $8 an hour, over an 8 hour day he will make about $64. If that person then wants to go buy a new video game on a modern console, he will spend about $59.99 + applicable taxes on this item. After sales tax is included, and taxes are taken out of his wages, one game will cost more than a day's work. Do you feel that this has become standard enough in modern times that we just deal with it? Or do you feel that there is more involved in the creation and distribution of modern luxury items to make the scale seem balanced?