Ah, the early 21st Century. When we worry about the inequities of life, the problems of wealth and poverty, the unjust imbalance between the '1%' and the rest of the world…

Ah, the early 20th Century. In fact, just exactly 100 years ago. When two brave young people set out on an incredible undercover adventure that could have been called (but wasn't) 'Down and Out in Rochester, New York'. What is was called is A Honeymoon Experiment, by Margaret and Stuart Chase (1916). It comes in two parts: his and hers.

We think these two fine social researchers would have made great h2g2ers – they were miles ahead of their time. You can read the rest of the story on archive.org, if you like. 'Freedom from the mundane', indeed.

"Any worthy man that wants a job can get it!"

I believe that this statement, despite the deep groove that it has worn in the average unthinking mind, is utterly without foundation in fact. I want to tell you why I believe that it is not true. I want to tell you how I tramped for nine weeks through the streets of a great American city, and how I was unable upon application to secure work at a wage that would keep me alive.

And I want to tell you more. I want to tell you what it means to live as the average American citizen in this country has to live on his family income of $600 a year, as given by the United States Census. I want to suggest to you, if I can, something of the violent and absurd contrast between the way that some of us live and the way that most of us live.

We had had it rather easy, Margaret and I. We had had every normal advantage of the well-
to-do child – sheltered upbringing, school, college, travel, vacations, motors, country clubs, and all the rest. Between us and necessity had always lain the heavy upholstery of our families' care. We had gone our several ways accepting, occasionally demanding. And in our immature years we came to believe, as the overwhelming majority of our complacent class believes, that one's carefully adjusted standards of living must be maintained; that it is a disgrace to be poor; and that most misery and poverty and wretchedness arises from the unthrifty, dirty, and questionable ways of the "ignorant lower classes."

I am amazed, as I look back upon my upbringing and review the narrow class distinctions that pervaded it. The "brotherhood of man"which religion preached, "Democracy" as I learned it in American history, were matters infinitely remote and apart. They were fine but formless abstractions. They were all very well to proclaim of a Sunday, but they were held to be utterly impractical in everyday living. The practical things were these: One must not play with ragged little boys. They are contaminating. One must never mention one's cousin who had the grievous misfortune to work in a factory. One must cultivate an air of intimacy in mentioning certain rich and powerful names. One must early learn to treat servants as though they were non-existent – only so may they be kept in their rightful place. One must evolve a certain scorn for all manual labor. Above all, one must hope to succeed – that is, to get rich. It is immaterial whether this success comes from an inheritance, or a lucky gamble on the stock market, or any other source short of actual robbery.

I was given literally no standards whatever by which I might judge true worth. Education will always be the muffling, half-coherent thing it is to-day until girls and boys are taught the fundamental difference between owning something and doing something for a living, and the
fundamental bond of fellowship that links all humanity together.

These distinctions had never bothered us at home. We had never heard of them in college. It was only afterwards, when we came to do a little independent thinking, that there began to creep into our lives the virus of social criticism and unrest. We met each other in this questioning stage. We groped along together, asking Why. Our love is interwoven with the rebellion of youth against a future predestined to follow fixed and rigid social standards.

We came to feel continuously uneasy before the vast injustices of "Things-as-they-are." We wanted to know why we should be well off and protected, and why little Johnny Murphy down the street was having the very devil of a time. Our sympathies tended to drift strongly toward the working-classes. But we were overwhelmed by an avalanche of opposition from our friends. We were told that we did not know what we were talking about – that we were "theorists", ''dreamers . . . " Of course we were theorists, and very often we had to fight strange misgivings in our own souls!

But here at last was our honeymoon! It was ours, our own, to do as we pleased with. It was
the one time in all our lives when the world stood aside, and the path lay free before us. We decided to devote our honeymoon to the task of finding out more concerning the matters that so profoundly perplexed us. Ever since our first talks together we had wanted to know how it felt to live beyond the pale of family and class influence. Here was our chance. We could utilize these honeymoon weeks to start clean and clear at the bottom. We could go to some strange city as a homeless, jobless, friendless couple, and see what it meant to face existence without an engraved passport. And in living as the average citizen lives on his meager income, we could perhaps shake off some of the superfluous standards of comfort and nicety to which we had always been accustomed, and perhaps find out how much it really costs to live.

Ed. Note: If that whets your appetite, read the book. In fact, send a copy to your least favourite politician.

Dmitri Gheorgheni

27.06.16 Front Page

Back Issue Page