Source C supports Sources A and B because it supposedly shows unemployed men in Jarrow in 1932. From Source B we know that in 1932, 6,793 workingmen were unemployed, out of a possible work force of about 9,700. The photograph shows some men, who appear to be standing in the street, looking bored, because they are unemployed. They are wearing typical workman clothes, except for one man, who is wearing a suit, and could be a company manager.
The standard of dress is quite poor, and very assorted, as shown by the man who appears to have mixed his clothes, wearing a dark jacket and light trousers, which maintains Source A’s statement that they had to “patch up all their clothes as did all the others”. Also there is only one man in the background who is wearing a coat, so maybe the others couldn’t afford one.
The street itself appears quite run down, which supports Source A which says that “the streets were becoming dilapidated”. There is also litter and old newspapers in the gutter, which shows the lack of
money spent on street cleaning, and lack of money in general, as Jarrow received little or no monetary support from the government.
The photograph has also been taken from the middle of the road, and also shows some men standing in the road, which indicates that the photographer has no fear of being run over by a car, because there were only a few, and most people couldn’t afford one. The photographer also doesn’t think they will be hit by any buses or trams, as there is no form of public transport in the picture, again showing the lack of funding the council had, because compared to London at the same time, Jarrow was very poor, and because so much of the country was wealthy and economically secure, the areas that had been so badly affected by the depression were relatively ignored, and so received no money to help them.
Someone who lived outside Jarrow, because cameras were expensive extravagances, probably took the photograph and so almost no one in Jarrow had one. Therefore, as not many people would have reasons to visit and photograph unemployed men, the photographer may have been someone from the press or the local council, and so the photograph would have been biased to publicise Jarrow's plight.
However, these conclusions, or at least some of them could be false as the photograph may have
been doctored or altered in some way, making it unreliable. Also, we do not know for certain that the
photograph is actually of some unemployed men in Jarrow in 1932, because there are no discernible or
distinguishing features or signs which tell us the photograph is of Jarrow. Also, there is no way of
knowing for certain the date as it is not represented on the photograph, and it might not be a work day, so
the men would be standing outside because they didn’t have to work anywhere.
However, if the provenance is correct, Source C does agree with Sources A and B to show the poor
quality of life and conditions within Jarrow during the early 1930s.
