Abstract
Like much of Turner's oeuvre, this painting has usually been interpreted as totally apolitical or mildly patriotic. This article argues instead that it is a far from optimistic assessment of the progressive agriculture promoted by George III, and it is better understood as deeply critical of the social consequences of enclosure. Turner's juxtaposition of turnip cultivation and Windsor Castle, the ragged workers, the implied allusions to the Slough of Despond, the contemporary association of turnips with poverty and with satire directed against the Hanoverian kings, all serve to indict progressive agriculture as a source of increased hardship among the laboring poor.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
