In The Condition of the Working Class in England and in “What’s Good About Slums” both Engels and Glaesner set out to describe what drives poor people to move to cities, the conditions of the urban poor, and the opportunities available to them. Writing about English cities at a key point in industrialization, Engels (1958[1844]) does this particularly effectively. Engels makes it clear that opportunities for the working class to care for their families and make wages are quickly concentrating in the cities, while those who remain in the country remain in the vestiges of the feudal system. Still, Engels points out that while an industrial worker’s wages may provide for him, there is little security for the industrialized worker, stating, “The worker knows only too well that employment and food today do not mean employment and food tomorrow. He knows that any whim of his employer or any slackness in trade may throw him back into the morass of unemployment.” (p. 32) Engels illustrates through the text that life for those employed in these cities is not without difficulty. As he describes the housing, clothing, and nutritional resources available to the working class, he illustrates that the working person in the industrialized city lives in unsanitary conditions without many of the things he needs to live comfortably or healthily. At the same time, Engels makes clear that the unemployed in these cities face an even worse fate, living in true squalor. In the preface and throughout his text, Engels makes note of the numerous studies of the conditions of the English working class that support his conclusions and the limits of the work done by the English government. For example, as he discusses the findings of a doctor who studied the English slums during the cholera epidemic, he notes that as there was no effort to improve the living conditions of the working class ahead of the epidemic and that as illness spread “all that could be done was to clean the filthiest streets and houses… It goes without saying that the places reverted in a few months to their previous filthy condition.” (p. 77) Through his unity of personal experience in English cities and the studies conducted by others or commissioned by the English government, Engels account is thorough, systematic, and affecting.

Glaesner (2012) also sets out to describe what drives poor people to move to cities and what kind of life they have there. Like Engels, Glaesner concludes that poor urbanites have more access to diverse opportunities and employment. Unlike Engels though, Glaesner does not do much to consider the instability of this work or the struggles faced by those unable to stay employed. Glaesner also concludes that the urban poor are more able to move up in class and social position through various examples of those who have access to the opportunities cities provide. Glaesner is clearly right that in cities there are more and diverse opportunities, but his argument that there is seemingly plentiful opportunity for class advancement is somewhat unpersuasive. The story of the Kennedy family’s history is less convincing if the reader is aware that the average net worth of a Black family in Boston was $8 in 2017 (Johnson, 2017).  Glaesner’s only non-white example of the prosperity available to the urban poor, Richard Wright, is striking, but it seems notable that the biggest early opportunities available to Wright were through large federal programs. Glaesner briefly discusses the legacy of redlining in northern American cities, but concludes that transportation access and educational opportunity are larger drivers of segregation in cities. Glaesner does discuss some ways that policy changes may further desegregation, such as through housing vouchers, but does not consider the larger impacts of a private housing market on segregation on the working class. Glaesner’s makes statements such as “the abundance of cheap housing in places like Detroit of St. Louis also benefits the poor” (p. 86) or “if America allowed vouchers or charter schools that would foster more competition in urban school districts, then their quality would rise” (p. 90) without sufficient support for such conclusions. While some of the arguments Glaesner makes about cities, such as the importance of diverse opportunities or that cities are more likely to have social support networks seem certain, many of his conclusions seem insufficiently supported or even specious. 

In evaluating these two texts it is evident Engels strategy in collecting and presenting information creates a clearer picture of life for the working poor and better supports his conclusions. Still, there is more at play. Engels’ work has a clear political perspective, beyond describing life in cities, Engels sets out to evaluate the system that creates these conditions. Engels is clear in these political aims from the start, as he powerfully dedicates his volume to working men and calls for them to join together toward their common liberation. This furthers the insights he provides and gives them staying power, conclusions like “the more land rose in value the more furious became the search for new building sites. The health and comfort of the inhabitants were totally ignored, as a result of the determination of landlords to pocket maximum profit” (p. 64) remain as powerful and certain in the modern age as in the 1840s. Glaesner lacks a political perspective in his writing. It is hard to value his insight as he fails to consider the role of capitalism, capital, and other larger systems in the lives of the working poor and in the structures of cities themselves.

Citations

Engels, Frederick. (1958[1844]). “Engels Preface,” “Dedication,” and “The Great Towns” In The Condition of the English Working Class. London UK: Basil Blackwell.

Glaeser, Edward. (2012). “What’s Good about Slums?” In The Triumph of Cities: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer, Smarter, Greener, Healthier and Happier. New York NY: Penguin Books. 

Johnson, A. (2017, December 11). That was no typo: The median net worth of BLACK Bostonians really is $8. BostonGlobe.com. https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/12/11/that-was-typo-the-median-net-worth-black-bostonians-really/ze5kxC1jJelx24M3pugFFN/story.html.