How Convincing Is Historian Alan Mayne’s Argument

915 Words4 Pages
Alan Mayne does not say there are not poor areas of urban cities, what he claims is that other writers exaggerate the extent of the problems of the nineteenth-century slum. Alan Mayne’s main arguments are that reading texts from that time are open to interpretation depending on the reader and that care should be taken when relying just on texts of that time. He states the slums are socially constructed by the bourgeois. He states that the newspaper article, that historians, rely on are written in a sensational style to sell newspaper, also the journalists that went to the slums so they could write about them were accompanied by “municipal officer” who had their own agenda and only showed the writers the worst part of the city Mayne claims the journalists in the nineteenth century use a number of different tactics to sensational the slums. They often used trigger words, metaphors, repetition and dramatization to capture the imagination of their readers and to sell as many newspapers as possible. Words like “filth, festering and rotting” were used (Mayne 1990 p.74). the journalist play on the insecurities of peoples attitude towards immigrant, “The Chinese are likewise branded repulsive”(Mayne 1990 p.74). Also because the journalists often accompanied municipal officers to the slum areas they were only shown the worst areas as the municipal officers were there to condemn the buildings. “Bourgeois efforts to impose their definitions upon the cityscape” show that the slums were socially constructed by the bourgeois. (Mayne 1991 p.76) It was the bourgeois that labelled inner cities as slums; this came from the word slumber, always sleeping and therefore gave the impression of laziness. The bourgeois were prejudice against the working class mainly because of what they have read in newspaper as many of them have never been to these areas. The bourgeois want to rid

More about How Convincing Is Historian Alan Mayne’s Argument

Open Document