Anthology of Primary Sources

Erin McCawley
Modern Lit
Dr. John Pruitt
11 May 2016

Preface
Throughout this semester, finding good primary sources has been a bit of
a challenge. Though I struggled a lot, I ended up learning a lot. The process of
finding the perfect source is part of the learning. If primary sources were easy to
find, then this probably wouldn’t even be an assignment. I’ve read some
interesting sources, I’ve found really boring ones, and I’ve found a few sources
that ended up fitting my needs quite well. What I find the most interesting about
this search for primary sources is that it seems as though you can find anything
BUT what you’re looking for. You may even come across a primary source that
you like more than what you were originally looking for. So, this has been a fun
learning assignment.
The sources I have found cover a range of different topics, considering I
found primary sources for each book we read in class. However, I found sources
that I believe could help any other student just as they have helped me this
semester. Before this assignment, I didn’t understand the need in finding primary
sources. But now, I see the importance. You can learn so much by reading
someone’s letter, or painting, or reading a newspaper written in the time of the
book. Therefore, I’ve grown to really enjoy finding primary sources. And, I think
once you do it a few times, you get better and better. The primary sources I have
provided are a few that helped me understand what was going on in our books,
so I hope it could do the same for anyone else reading these novels.
Our first novel, The Secret Agent by Joseph Conrad, was a novel set in
Greenwich in the early 1900s. It is a scenery painting by Canaletto. It helped me
with my sensory learning and gave me a better understanding of the setting. For
The Lodger, by Marie Belloc Lowndes, I chose to research lodginghouses, since
that seems to be a pretty big part of the story. Before reading the novel, I had no
knowledge of lodginghouses. I found a great article from A Survey of London by

John Greenacombe that came me a great understanding of what they are and
why they were around. The next two primary sources both come from my
interests in Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf. I first wanted to look into women’s
sexuality during that time. I found an article by Vern L. Bullough titled Presidential
Plenary: Our Feminist Foremothers. The article talks specifically about the
progression of women’s sexuality throughout the 20th century. This really helped
me to be able to know what women of the time period were allowed to do, talk
about, etc. And, I decided to use Virginia Woolf’s suicide letter as another
primary source because her suicide is similar to Septimus’s in the novel. They
both suffered from mental illnesses—and little was known about them or their
treatment at this time—and chose to end their lives rather than live with their
illness. And, finally, for our last book Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley, I
looked into the meaning of soma, which is their special drug-like drink. I found
the Oxford English Dictionary definitions and origins. I found my findings very
interesting. Each primary source bettered my understanding of a certain aspects
of the novel.

Overall, I thought finding primary sources helped the whole reading
process because it was used to understand something unfamiliar. I think
everyone should have to use primary sources for something—and probably will
at some point—so it’s a really good skill to have. And, I hope other students
could learn as much as I did throughout this semester.

Primary Source #1
While reading The Secret Agent by Joseph Conrad, something that
interested me was what Greenwich actually looked like. I have never heard on it,
and honestly, didn’t even know it was in Europe until reading this book, so, I
figured I would better my understanding on that and hope it would help with the
overall understanding of the book. Conrad is always making London seem to be
a dark and gloomy place, so I wondered what it was really like. I found a painting
by Canaletto called ‘A View of Greenwich From the River’ that helped me
understand Greenwich’s appearance. It was painted circa 1750-52 in Greenwich.
Canaletto did a lot of outdoor painting, which is how he created most of his
landscape works (he is most famous for that type of painting). His larger
landscapes tended to portray the city’s pageantry and waning traditions. His
painting was most likely painted for anyone who wanted to look at it. He did this
because he loved art and liked to paint, so I don’t there was a specific reason
behind this particular piece. His work consisted mainly of landscapes and his
works are often said to have anticipated Impressionism. As seen in this picture a
little, the thin, but visible, brush strokes, and the emphasis on light. He was a little
bit before the great Impressionist artists such as Monet and Renoir.
What I got from this painting is the landscape actually isn’t so dark (all the
time). It seems like a very nice looking place. While, yes, Canaletto may have
exaggerated his picture with more colors and a lighter atmosphere, when reading
about this particular spot, it is said that it’s almost the only view of London which
is altered little today. This view has been around for a long while and no one has

wanted to change it. Canaletto is known for his realistic paintings, which means
we can trust the way he paints (for the most part).

This painting helped better my understanding of the fact that Conrad
purposefully made London out to be a dark place intentionally for effect. It helps
me grasp his imagery as a way to make you feel a certain way as you’re reading.
And it worked. I think it made me really feel the gloominess of the streets of
London so that when the terrible events happened in the book, we weren’t
particularly surprised. But, I think Conrad wanted his book to be this way. I mean,
obviously, or else he would have written it differently. This painting, while nice to
look at, also makes me interested in what people think of London. I’m sure others
look at London as Conrad describes it in The Secret Agent – a dark, grave
place—but I don’t believe that it is always that way. I’m sure the painting was well
received by the people of the time because there truly is no harm done with this
painting. But I think we can all agree that Greenwich is actually a pretty place that
isn’t so dark and mysterious—at least not all the time. It might be sometimes,
especially after that bomb went off. But, overall, I can now picture where this
story is taking place and that helps me especially because I’m a sensory learner.



Primary Source #2
The article is from a Survey of London: Volume 45, Knightsbridge,
originally published by London County Council in 2000. Titled “Trevor Square
Area: Social Character,” the article talks about class and social character in the
late 1800’s.
Since it was a survey, no specific person necessarily wrote it, but John
Greenacombe was the Editor. Looking at his background, he does most work
with History. I can’t find much about his education or training, but it seems as
though he knows what he is talking about. Also, since he was and Editor, he just
had to compile things together, in this case, to make a sort of anthology. It was
written mainly to inform and educate people willing to read it, so it seems. It is
Volume 45, which means there have been many before this one. Educating
people about London’s past is important, especially for times like these. The
language, for the most part, seems to be rather casual and modern since it was
actually written in 2000. The specific things they discuss, such as lodginghouses
and drapers, are true to the time period, though.
“There was a tendency for later middle-class residents to be lodgers rather
than householders, and by 1861 most houses were lodginghouses or otherwise
in multiple occupation.”
Above is a quote from the article that I found to be relevant to the book
The Lodger. When I first started reading the book, I really had no idea what
lodginghouses were. After finding that out, I wondered what kinds of people were
taking part in the housing of strangers. From this article I found that it was
actually pretty popular during that time. Which seems odd to me, but I live in
America and it’s over 100 years later than their prime.
Another thing I found interesting was the fact that the lodgers, as it says,
are mostly middle class. This means that Mr. and Mrs. Bunting were, at some
point, a part of the middle class. Which makes sense because how could the
lower classes afford to have a nice place for lodgers to stay anyway. Also, I think
there was a time when Mr. and Mrs. Bunting were not as poor as they were at

the beginning of the book. They do mention all the things they had to give up,
meaning that they did have the money at some point to afford such things.

“Trevor Square did not really begin to lose the ambiguous social position
typical of a lodging-house district until the twentieth century, long after
neighbouring Montpelier Square had begun to attract a number of fashionable or
well-to-do residents.”

This trend went of for a while and began to die out into the 20th century. As
the quote above says, more fashionable and well-to-do residents changed the
way things were in London and lodginghouses, I’m sure, became less popular.
There are certainly lodging-type houses out there still but the etiquette is much
different. All the serving and cleaning is most likely not apart of it anymore.

Overall, the article helped me to understand the lodginghouse situation
more and so I get why it is so normal to have a random, and even strange,
person living in your house with you.

Citation
'Trevor Square Area: Social Character.' Survey of London: Volume 45,

Knightsbridge. Ed. John Greenacombe. London: London County Council,
2000. 102. British History Online. Web. 2 March 2016. http://www.british-
history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol45/p102.



Primary Source #3
I chose to research the topic of female sexuality in the 20th century. This
sparked my interest while reading Mrs. Dalloway because I wondered what
women were “allowed” to do, say, think, etc. This book brings about some “girl-
on-girl” action, so to speak, and it peaked my interest because of the lack of
rights women had in the early 1900s. Therefore, I decided to dive into it and
discover what it was truly like at this time.
The article I found is titled Presidential Plenary: Our Feminist Foremothers
and is written by Vern L. Bullough, who was a visiting professor at the University
of Southern California. This article talks specifically about female sexuality
progressing through the 20th century. Men have always wanted to control
women’s sexuality, and in turn, women in general. When women achieved the
vote and prohibition, they wanted control of their sexuality, as well.
For most of the 20th century, sex was to be reserved for the martial bed for
reasons ONLY of procreation; a woman should deny their husbands of anything
else. Most women and men of that time believed “although reproduction as the
noblest of ‘all human powers,’ sexual intercourse should only be engaged in with
the most sincere intentions of bringing a ‘new being into the world’” (Bullough
92). As many people believe, even today, sex should be the act of bringing new
life to this world, not for pleasure. However, I think we all know that a large
amount of people do not believe that. Not saying that everyone in Mrs. Dalloway
had to be having sex in order to feel something for the other person, but I had
wondered what would be acceptable during this time. Obviously, being unfaithful
is, and will always be, unacceptable, but the “rules” on premarital sex and
homosexuality during this time were unclear to me. Women of this time who
wanted their sexuality to be more acceptable had to be very careful of not coming
of too “mannish.” It had to be made clear that though women wanted change, it
did not lessen their feminity.
This relates to Mrs. Dalloway because of the time period and all the
different relationships we see throughout the book. Specifically, the relationship
between Clarissa and Sally sparked interest because I figured it was not

necessarily acceptable. And, upon further research, it has come about that it
would not be “right” during this time for women to engage in any type of sexual
acts because there is no way it could be to bring new life into the world, it would
be simply for pleasure. Therefore, their relationship is a bit scandalous. As for
Clarissa and Peter, they were never married so they should not have engaged in
any sexual activity, either. But, nonetheless, there are always those who break
the rules and we have no proof otherwise.

This article helps to give me a better understanding of what the social
norm was at this time, in regards to sexuality, and what women felt about that.
Obviously, as time goes on, everyone wants just as many rights as anyone else,
so it is no surprise that women wanted to be more open about their sexuality.

Citation
Bullough, Vern L. "Presidential Plenary: Our Feminist Foremothers." Journal Of
Sex Research 33.2 (1996): 91-98. Academic Search Complete. Web. 5 Apr.
2016.





Primary Source #4
For this primary source, I chose to look closely at Virginia Woolf’s suicide
letter. This interested me not only because it is a written letter by Virginia Woolf
herself, but also because of the fact that Septimus also kills himself near the end
of the novel Mrs. Dalloway.
Virginia Woolf wrote the letter on paper with ink. The letter was written on
March 28, 1941, just before she committed suicide. She killed herself by filling
her coat pockets with rocks and then walking into the River Ouse behind her own
house. Virginia Woolf had suffered a breakdown when she was younger, but was
able to have a full and successful life for about 25 years, until she began to have
symptoms again around 3 weeks before taking her own life. She wrote the letter
for her husband Leonard.
I think the letter is incredibly heartbreaking because she talks about how
she could no longer live with her “terrible disease.” What’s even worse, is during
this time depression and other mental illnesses were not easily—or sometimes
ever—cared for. At this time, the most likely choices people with mental illnesses
would have would be to either be sent to what they called insane asylums, be
given the choice to have seriously detrimental treatment, or just live without any
type of medication. It’s crazy to think about, especially with all the technology and
medication we have today. But Virginia Woolf had none of that and her disease
drove her mad.
Septimus, in Mrs. Dalloway, was faced with a similar situation. He could
have undergone some kind of treatment, which probably would not have even
helped him, and lived the rest of his life as, basically, a vegetable. But he didn’t
want that kind of life and his only other choice was to end it. He was also driven
mad by voices in his head and other symptoms.
The language of this letter is common for this time and place. Her English
is very proper but even she points out that she can’t write the letter. Her
handwriting itself is very sloppy and some of the words look like they could be
spelled wrong. This letter was obviously written at a time of serious distress. It’s
unfortunate that there wasn’t much that could be done for her disease at this

time. But it’s also very upsetting that even people today feel that this is their only
way out.

Though this letter probably wasn’t terribly influential in its time, many
people have read and reacted to this letter since then. However, when the letter
was written and made public, there were many members of the British press did
not wish her away in a very generous way. They took her suicide letter in a
different way than it was (probably) intended, not that we can know for sure.
They took some things out of context—like the reasoning for her suicide—and to
that, Leonard, Virginia’s husband, responded with the truth and defended his
wife. Though the press made comments that Virginia Woolf had killed herself
because of the hard times so many people have, her husband made it clear that
it was her disease that drove her to take her own life. I found this letter overall
very interesting and it helped to understand why Virginia Woolf killed herself in
relation to why Septimus killed himself.



Primary Source #5
For this primary source I decided to look into the meanings and origins of
the word “soma.” In the novel, soma is obviously a very prevalent part of society.
It is a drug they use to find harmony in society, almost like a narcotic. It is
brought up and used several times in Brave New World, so I thought I would see
where the actual word came from.
What I found, in the Oxford English Dictionary, was this meaning
“An intoxicating drink holding a prominent place in Vedic ritual and religion.”
It originates from the Sanskrit language, which was the classical language of the
Indian and the liturgical language of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. Sanskrit
actually b=means “refined,” “consecrated,” and “sanctified.” It is one, of 22,
official languages of India.
Furthermore, soma “was prepared from the juice of a plant which is
commonly supposed to have been Asclepias acida or Sarcostemma viminale (or
acidum).” Looking farther into this, both the Asclepias and Sarcostemma (which
was renamed Cynanchum) groups are milkweeds. They both have been used for
healing and can be toxic. They called it the soma plant then, though the actual
plant can no longer be directly found, only things similar to it. The most remark
about what the soma plant is comes from R.G. Wasson and he identifies the
soma plant as Amanita muscaria.
Soma is described (within the definition, from other primary sources) as “a
powerful spirit” and “a storm of drunken joy.” Clearly, people outside of the
fictional story enjoyed this drink.
Now, how this relates to Brave New World. Well, obviously, soma is used
in the story to induce comfort and euphoria. In the book, soma is described a few
times. Once, by the experience: “Eyes shone, cheeks were flushed, the inner
light of universal benevolence broke out on every face in happy, friendly smiles.”
And it is also “a pain-killing, pleasure-giving pill called soma, at once the perfect
substitute for alcohol, opium and benzedrine, has not yet been wholly fulfilled.”
The people in Brave New World take this drug to have a pleasurable experience.

I find it interesting that soma actually came from a drug-like drink. When I
first thought about it, I figured the Huxley simply made up a name for his made-
up drink. But, as it turns out, this comes from reality.

As for other aspects of the primary source, some are unknown. The
influence of this word, I’m assuming, was not widespread. The Indian’s must
have used it, as well ad Hindus and Buddhists, but I do not think it was that
popular of a term. Nor do I believe it was a popular drink. The language is true to
when it was written, in the 1800s. Since it was in the Oxford English Dictionary,
professionals must have been apart of the writing process.

So, that concludes what I found on soma. I thought it to be very
interesting!