Cultural and Political Differences Between Blake's "London" and Addison's "The Royal Exchange"

1046 Words3 Pages

William Blake’s poem “London” focuses on the sufferings and trials of the lowest social class in London society. In contrast, Joseph Addison’s essay “The Royal Exchange” explores the benefits of trade for merchants and other wealthy benefactors in English society. These two texts share one similarity – they both are set in London. However, this is where their similarities end. Both texts showcase distinct aspects of London culture – one highlights the lives of the impoverished, and the other focuses on the wealthy tradesmen of London.
Whereas Blake’s poem focuses on universal suffering, Addison’s essay proves that Addison has a limited view of London society – he only revels in things that advantage the wealthy. When Blake wrote his poem in 1794, he did not have the formal education possessed by most of his contemporaries, which is reflected in his writing. Blake often focused on spiritual issues; he had an obsession of sorts with prophesying through poetry. In contrast, Addison’s essay was published in 1711. This essay was published at a time when foreign trade was just beginning. One might argue that Addison’s essay takes on a more materialistic stance than Blake’s poem. The two share few similarities, so where is the purpose in placing them in conversation with each other? I would argue that these texts are compared in order to gain a better understanding of London. There is no one way to study the city itself. These texts are crucial because they show the lowest and highest people in London society. Here are a few central propositions to illuminate my argument: Blake’s poem and Addison’s essay reveal different cultural and political views. To begin, these cultural differences appear through a few choice words in each ...

... middle of paper ...

...ering views reveal the multi-faceted nature of the city. Though written at two different times, these authors reveal that London cannot be viewed in one, simplistic way. Rather, the city boasts all types of people and classes. Blake would argue that the universality of suffering is a defining trait of London society, and this is exemplified in his nameless, faceless, timeless narrator. However, Addison would recognize London as an opportunity for economic (and personal) growth worldwide as evidenced in his obsession with foreign places and his first-person narrator in his essay. I would propose that both of these aspects of London need to be addressed in order to better appreciate the city as a whole. Cultural and political differences aside, both authors would advocate that London is a unique city, thus why there is a need to write on all aspects of city life.

Open Document