The picture on the right, Gin Lane by William Hogarth (1751), is now used extensively to characterize the Gin craze of London, an epidemic similar to crack cocaine in the 80s.
Beer Street, is much less well known and less popular, but the two are meant to be viewed together. The reason this isn’t always done is because Gin Lane is used to shock contemporary audiences, and also to convince them of the dangers of alcohol. Viewing it alongside Beer Street takes away the sting of the argument (oh wait, he’s saying Gin is bad but beer is good…)
On one side, we see the really prosperous inhabitants of Beer Street, but why are they so prosperous? It’s because they are norished by locally brewed beer. Hogarth isn’t just making a case for the lower alcohol content of beer, he’s also advocating economic policy. There are strong hints (the pawnbroker) that the success of Beer Street is also the reason for the failure of Gin Lane. England’s free market economy and decision to allow the distillation of Gin, a cheap, potent, alcohol made widely avaialable by the industrial revolution are the subjects of Hogarth’s critique. As noted by the words on the Gin Cellar:
Drunk for a penny
Dead drunk for twopence
Clean straw for nothing
It’s easy to see the two pictures as good vs. evil or beer vs. gin, but it’s not that simple. It’s more accurate to say that this is a product of an artist, and a people, coming to terms with the good and the bad effects alcohol has on our lives, resulting in so much joy and so much misery simultaneously. We see this again and again throughout alcohol history.
-
mygiddy liked this
-
mixologywine posted this
