The Road to Wigan Pier

The book opens with a foreword by the publisher, Victor Gollancz.  He offers praise for Orwell's documenting the tragic living standards of coal miners in northern England (the first half of the book) but then denounces Orwell's views on why socialism doesn't sell to these lower-class workers (the second half of the book).  Of course, Gollancz praises himself for publishing the book despite his clear objections.  Particularly funny (or tragic) was his defense of the Soviet Union.

It is 1936 and Orwell begins in a boarding house in Wigan where he stayed.  He shared a room with several other men and ate substandard fare.  It is rather bleak, but it gets worse.  He then descended the mine and discovered just how difficult was the miner's life.  He had met several who had been crippled in mine accidents and many more were killed.  Traveling the area, he describes the tumbledown homes that would be marked for demolition but for the paucity of housing.  Then there is the catastrophic unemployment that is worse than the government number indicate.  He provides a detailed accounting of how much a miner might make, the costs of living, the periods of unemployment, and the impossibility of escaping a life of hard labor.

Orwell moves on to discuss why socialism has failed to take hold despite the grim conditions he has just detailed.  He offers several reasons.  First, there is class prejudice.  He himself was raised on the lower rungs of the middle class (middle class in England would be white collar workers whereas the working class would be blue collar.  Middle class in England doesn't translate the same as middle class in the United States) and was raised to have a low opinion of the working class.  He further says that socialist are too intellectual, arguing points that would only be of interest to other intellectuals.  He notes that often socialism intersects with fringe or unpopular ideologies, such as vegetarianism or feminism.  This association gives the impression that socialists are a bunch of cranks.  Though he proclaims himself to be a devoted socialist, he says that socialists are using the wrong arguments to win converts.  He even posited that fascism was more likely to take hold in England in the next 10 years. 

It is eye opening to see the same arguments from today were being argued 85 years ago.  There is nothing new.  That Gollancz was a fan of the Soviets shows that he was in the dark.  He must have read Walter Duranty.  Despite repeated epic failures of socialism, there continue to be proponents for socialism.  Orwell is clearly a brilliant man, and yet he argues for socialism.  By the time he wrote 1984, he had come to understand where socialism leads.  Here, he had an inkling while writing this book.

Excellent book.  Recommended.