Abuse and sexual violence continue to be a major theme in the news. The same preoccupation was underlined in eighteenth century England where more humanitarian ideals arose to combat the brutish male instincts of female and child exploitation.
These subjects are brought to the fore in the Coram Foundation exhibition in London on Joseph Highmore’s art entitled ‘Basic instincts’, which runs until January 7th next year.
London’s Foundling Hospital, established for abandoned children by Thomas Coram in 1739, is a prime example of a new attitude in facing mankind’s darker side. Charitable institutions, philanthropists, benefactors and movements for moral reform paved the way for the great century of Victorian social change with all its contradictions (but without which organizations such as Oxfam, MSF and the YMCA would not exist today).
The change in attitude towards rectifying the miseries of life, especially in the expanding cities of the early industrial revolution, are underlined in the novels of Samuel Richardson. These treat moral questions in a quite different way from the picaresque works of writers like Fielding and Defoe.
The themes of virtue rewarded in ‘Pamela’, or virtue crushed in ‘Clarissa’ (incidentally, at 1534 pages one of the longest novels in the English language and a gripping read for all that) spilled over in painting, especially in the art of Hogarth. His series ‘Rake’s Progress’ (at the Soane museum in London) are an astonishing insight into the seamier side of 18th century life imbued with the pox, corruption, cheap gin and bribery and leading the unbridled passions of young bloods to the manacles of the madhouse (where fashionable society would visit the inmates for amusement rather than for charity).
The painter Joseph Highmore (1692-1780) belongs to the genre of ‘moral’ painting developed by Hogarth (1697-1764). Like Hogarth, Highmore was associated with the Foundling Hospital. Abandoning a legal career imposed upon him by his family, Highmore started painting portraits for the middle-class and eventually received royal patronage.
The fascinating exhibition focuses on three aspects of Highmore’s works.
First are exquisite portraits of family groups, including the artist’s own. In a pre-photographic age these are the closest we’ll ever get to visualising the modest elegance and intimate family affections of English 18th century bourgeoisie).
Second is the transition towards the narratives of virtues and vices. In 1744 Highmore painted twelve pictures based on ‘Pamela’, which were subsequently engraved to form a sort of serious comic (if that oxymoron may be allowed). These genre paintings are quite wonderful and could be compared in domestic sentiment to those of eighteenth century Venetian painter, Pietro Longhi (1702-1785).
Third are the biblical narratives like ‘Hagar and Ishmael’ and a painting of terrible power, now exhibited for the first time ever: ‘The Angel of Mercy’. At first sight this looks like a characteristic ‘Virgin with Child’ picture. Examining it more closely the painting reveals a planned infanticide by strangulation stopped just in time.
The revelation is, indeed, shocking but justly reflects the age where birth-control was another word for killing babies and where abortion all too often led to death. The Angel of Mercy is clearly a symbol for such institutions as the Foundling Hospital.
The exhibition is small and well-documented. As it was just round the corner where I am receiving treatment at UCLH, it has been one that I have returned to and discovered new insights every time in this area of London (Bloomsbury) which breathes mercy, benefactors and the higher aspects of humanity through its hospitals, foundations, trusts and university colleges.
Technically local councils will not support women/men found homeless because of voluntarily leaving an abusive relationship. Especially childless women, and women over the age of sixty. Renting in the private housing, stipulates, no benefits, and no pets, so if you cannot pay the rent at the end of the month you lose your home, bedsit, or room in shared accommodation.
Firstly, Francis, UCLH? It’s quite a place. I hope they are working their magic for you/yours.
Secondly, Jane, I am not sure that your perceptions of the situation are correct. As far as I know, local councils are obliged to accommodate the homeless in their area. Accommodate, not re-house. Regardless of their situation. It is, I believe (and am open to correction) true that those who ‘voluntarily’ make themselves homeless are given less points (ie priority) that they might otherwise be given, but they should still be found accommodation.
Private landlords are just that, private. They can choose who they wish to rent their houses to (obviously without discriminating) and bitter experience can lead to some landlords choosing not to let to people with – for example – several huge dogs or a hundred cats. If you cannot (or will not) pay your rent it takes a minimum of six months before you can be forcibly evicted. There are far too many ‘rachman-like’ landlords but, equally, far too many ‘disrespectful’ tenants.
Street sleepers are a fast increasing ‘problem’, particularly in the coastal towns where cheap accommodation is available for wealthier councils to export their problem tenants to. Unfortunately these people – almost all single men, almost all from out-of town, have multiple difficulties with drugs, drink, aggression etc. and are very difficult to help and often reject the various ‘solutions’ offered. It almost seems, from the outside anyway – to be a lifestyle choice. We now have tents on the beach and in the churchyards, mini-communities, that are very difficult to deal with. Solutions are just as difficult to find now as in Victorian times.
Hi there long time no hear. Interesting comments. Certainly in London I am amazed at the number of street sleepers often outside stores like m and s etc. It is all very sad and very Dickensian.
Uclh are certainly doing well with me
Best christmas wishes to you and your family.
Dear pheroneous,
‘So they established the rule, that all poor people should have the alternative (for they would compel nobody, not they,) of being starved by a gradual process in the house, or by a quick one out of it.’ – Dickens, Oliver Twist.
Hi Jane.
I bow to no-one in my admiration of Mr Dickens and his wonderful soap operas.
I draw to your attention two observations: Firstly, you will have noticed that poorer areas can almost be defined by the presence in overwhelming numbers of betting shops, short term loan companies and cheap/nasty food outlets. Should you be a romantic, you might say that these establishments attempt to provide an escape route for the poor. Should you be a cynic you might accuse them of attempting to rob the poor of what little they have left. Secondly, that street sleepers co-exist with half-full shelters and hostels, i.e. some solutions are available but unused.
I find that I am increasingly disturbed by the street sleepers here. Disturbed because I see no end. Indeed, I wonder if there is – or even should be – a solution. It is – for some – insoluble. The socialist in me wants to give them a flat, an income, a job. The cynic in me thinks that such would be trashed, wasted and rejected. The tory in me says that solutions exist for the “deserving poor” and the “feckless poor” choose their own fate. Many individuals, many charities, many agencies try their best to help but the problems seem to be fast running ahead of their capacity to help.
I find it difficult to reconcile my belief in individual responsibility and rejection of the ‘nanny state’, and my human instinct that wants to reach out and help others, however often such help is rejected.
Solutions… I think the army should take much more care of and responsibility for their past employees. I think that the NHS should develop far greater care programmes for the mentally challenged. I think that councils/charities should establish a far wider range of hostels and that they should be open all day as well as at night. I think that we should respect those who live the life they love and love the life they live. Tramps used to tramp the land without let or hindrance. Finally, the statistician in me asks that we cease to define the poor in percentage terms (the poverty line) and seek an objective definition. Many people manage perfectly well on incomes below the ‘poverty line’. (eg me!)
These are pipe dreams. All I can do is drop a pound or two into the upturned hats.
Dear pheroneous, I agree with your pipe dreams, but they are what they are pipe dreams. Life is not simplistic and the measures to correct them are not simple, humanity is complex. The shelters are half full because of the difficult system to access them, also applications to social housing. If you want to tell me your poverty line, I will tell you mine.
Jane.
Much as I support free speech I do not think it is appropriate to use a post in my blog as a separate discussion which has veered away from my original intention. I would have rather preferred to have heard views regarding Highmore, Richardson and the exhibition itself. I am therefore removing all further comments
Thankyou
Understood. Not the slightest problem. Apologies for any disturbance.