In his pathbreaking study of effects of Industrial Revolution on English society, Peter Laslett has argued that the removal of economic function of patriarchal family at point of industrialization created mass society; further, he contends that this new society turned people who worked into mass of undifferentiated equals, . . . bereft for ever of feeling that work was family affair, done within family.! The primary economic unit of pre-industrial England was extended household, consisting of married couple, their young children, and any journeymen, apprentices, laborers, relatives, or servants who could also contribute to and be supported by family business. When this system worked properly, its benefits were immediate and concrete, and they provided an implicit justification for power structure which produced them; emotional security, social acceptance, and economic success could all be traced to same source. However, when new methods of achieving social and economic success began to compete with old system, drawbacks of that system became more troubling, if only because possibility of circumventing it had finally presented itself. Although by no means industrialized, London during first half of eighteenth century was, as Laslett puts it, a city on an industrial scale,2 and as such it was full of such possibilities. One option available to disaffected workers in eighteenthcentury London was life of crime, and one reason for widespread popularity of criminal biographies during this period may have been that some members of literary public saw
Read full abstract