Roberts, Robert. The Classic Slum: Salford Life in the First Quarter of the Century. Review

Authors Avatar

Boogerd

In Robert Roberts’ part-autobiographical, part recollection of village life, and part social history narrative, The Classic Slum, we see how life appeared in the slums of Salford during the early decades of the twentieth century. Roberts places all his knowledge within the context of the times, which saw people living out their days in “ghettos spawned by the industrial revolution”  in Britain. Essentially, Roberts’ work shows that before the First World War, unskilled labouring classes in Britain’s industrial slums resided in a working-class caste structure which enclosed them in a separate social world and left them without hope of ever going beyond it. This social world that Roberts depicts consisted of overlapping villages where industrial labourers, shopkeepers, and destitute people struggled to achieve and maintain respectability in the slums. The Classic Slum tries to deromanticize the Edwardian period; Roberts’ asserts that “slum life was far from being the jolly hive of communal activity that some romantics have claimed.” To understand how the British working class of the early twentieth century saw itself and why a social hierarchy emerged within their social world we must examine Roberts’ book, which looks at the fine grained distinctions made among these poor slum residents, the characteristics which put a family on the top or bottom part of the stratification system, and their desires to be self supporting, a central social value of the proletariat. Roberts’ book, on the whole, shows a culture that was devastated by lack of knowledge, monotony, repression and a crushing social stratification all which restrained the working classes will to rebel.

Some of Roberts’ most compelling evidence for such fine grained distinctions between the working class comes from the early part of this book which describes the divisions made among the poor in Salford; there were people with regular work and people who were periodically destitute, people who lived above their means, and people who were persistently in trouble. According to Roberts, an enormous effort was made by almost everyone in the slums to keep up the appearances of the family honour and its ability to afford what must be spent. Not all people succeeded and unfortunately, these were the rigid standards against which everyone was subject too and judged by. Roberts elaborates more on the social hierarchy by describing how material items, cleanliness and means of accumulating wealth indicated social prestige. Roberts described the working class as almost being obsessed with cleanliness. A dirty home or even a front step meant lower social status. Roberts wrote “Most people kept what they possessed clean in spite of squalor and ever-invading dirt. Some houses sparkled.” Furthermore, material items such as watches, clothes, pictures for walls and musical instruments also indicated social status. Thus, those who had more things had more status and the “social standing of every person within the community was constantly affected by material pressures.” In fact, as Roberts notes, “any new possession helped to stifle fear” possibly of being relegated lower in the caste.

Join now!

The morality of the working class extended well beyond that of how one obtained the means to buy material items. In chapter two, Roberts reveals that the working class did in fact embrace morality and he confirms this by saying that “Prestige…was not automatically increased by such proofs of affluence. One needed to know how wealth had been acquired. The fruits of prostitution we condemned.” Thus, the working class did have a moral code and this meant status had to be obtained legitimately.  In chapter three of The Classic Slum, Roberts gives further evidence to support morality in working class when ...

This is a preview of the whole essay