My visit to Keats House Hampstead, 10th Sept. '09.

[Malia]

Yes, that's Brown's room Raphael. And I believe that clock actually belonged to Brown, as well.

[Raphael]

Yes, that's Brown's room Raphael.

I thought it was from looking at the website- just wanted to be sure.

And I believe that clock actually belonged to Brown, as well.

Wow! I have a thing about old clocks, does it tick tock still? I am going to touch it when noone is looking when I go...
A certain someone may have touched it, or wound it up all those years ago...

[Malia]

I don't remember the clock working while I was there, Raphael. There was also a small table in the house that belonged to Brown and a watercolor that he drew (he was quite skilled!). I didn't notice everything that Brown owned as I spent much of the time musing and feeling a little melancholy about the fact that there was so *little* there that belonged to Keats. He had few possessions.

[Raphael]

I don't remember the clock working while I was there, Raphael. There was also a small table in the house that belonged to Brown and a watercolor that he drew (he was quite skilled!).

I bet it wasn't- in other old houses/museums I have been to they have not wound the clocks up- I wish they would as they create such an atmosphere- tick tocking and chiming...

I didn't notice everything that Brown owned as I spent much of the time musing and feeling a little melancholy about the fact that there was so *little* there that belonged to Keats. He had few possessions.

Yes- he wasn't that materialistic was he? All he wanted was books it seems. I read that he had about 100.

[Malia]

I think Keats's lack of possessions had more to do with his being poor than being non-materialistic.

Where did you read that Keats had 100 books? I've never come across that before. My understanding was that he had a handful (maybe 25-30?) and that he borrowed quite a bit from friends.

[Montmorenci]

In regard to his lack of possessions, yes, he was poor, but he was also always on the move. It seemed that he was always staying in someone else's house or room, etc. and so he probably didn't have very many possessions that he carried around with him. It seems that his books, pen, ink, paper and his Shakespear picture were his most prized possessions.

[Saturn]

Also, most people at that time, and indeed for most of human history, apart from the very rich didn't have material possessions in the same way, or in the same quantity as we have today in the post-industrial revolution consumerist materialistic society.

Until even my parents generation, it was not uncommon for people to live [as my father did in the 1950s and 60s] in a tiny 3 bedroom terrace house with 7 or more children and half their possessions in and out of the pawn shop. I think [no offence to our Transatlantic readers] it is hard for Americans to imagine how far below the standard of living is, or was in some working class areas in the UK, now, in previous generations and in Keats' day.

[Raphael]

I think Keats's lack of possessions had more to do with his being poor than being non-materialistic.

Possibly- but he wasn't into fancy clothes or table ware etc. He wasn't as poor as John Clare though! That poor man- his parents almost ended up in the poor house!

Where did you read that Keats had 100 books? I've never come across that before. My understanding was that he had a handful (maybe 25-30?) and that he borrowed quite a bit from friends.

I cannot remember exactly- it must be in one of the bios - I will check and get back to you on that one. It seemed a lot I did think.

[Raphael]

In regard to his lack of possessions, yes, he was poor, but he was also always on the move. It seemed that he was always staying in someone else's house or room, etc. and so he probably didn't have very many possessions that he carried around with him. It seems that his books, pen, ink, paper and his Shakespear picture were his most prized possessions.

Yes I think so.

[Raphael]

Also, most people at that time, and indeed for most of human history, apart from the very rich didn't have material possessions in the same way, or in the same quantity as we have today in the post-industrial revolution consumerist materialistic society.

Indeed!

Until even my parents generation, it was not uncommon for people to live [as my father did in the 1950s and 60s] in a tiny 3 bedroom terrace house with 7 or more children and half their possessions in and out of the pawn shop.

I grew up in a council house in the 70s and my 3 brothers had to sleep in one room, whilst I had a box room that was very small. We didn't get the amount of toys children have today as there were not all those discount stores like pound shops.I got my first radio at the age of 13 ( bought by my pocket money paid weekly)from a catalogue. it cost £13- a lot of money back then. Not as poor as some people in the 50s/60s but not the affluence of children today- it amazes me what they have- a TV, CD player and computer in their room EACH!!! And these are children whose parents don't even have a job...
When I compare what John Clare had/didnt have...it's staggering.

I think [no offence to our Transatlantic readers] it is hard for Americans to imagine how far below the standard of living is, or was in some working class areas in the UK, now, in previous generations and in Keats' day.

Yes, a woman in Liverpool wrote about her childhood in the 1930s- she was half starved and had to walk 5 miles to work at 14 with cardboard in the soles of her shoes. The Victorian slums were still there then.I had one of my neighbours complaining to me about the government and their greed the the other day and I told him, yes it isn't good but at least today if one isn't working one eats- unlike John Care's day. I read him bits out of the J.Bate bio to prove how lucky we are today.

[Saturn]

Indeed, my late Grandmother [born 1910] used to relate her childhood, going to work in the cotton mills very young in the 1920s it was like listening to someone talking about the third world now, and in terms of poverty and illness and destitution that world was every bit as horrific then as it must have been in Keats time too, very little would have changed even in 100 years.

[Malia]

My grandmother was born and raised in Mayo, Ireland at around the turn of the century (she was born in 1902). I remember her telling me that she and her siblings considered it to be a big treat to have a bowl of mashed potatoes with butter before going to bed. No candy at her house--she came from a very poor family. It is interesting to think that mashed potatoes would have been such a wonderful memory for my grandma. It reminds me of just how much I have in my life--and how much I take it all for granted!

[Saturn]

Ah Malia, I didn't know you had any Irish ancestry

[Raphael]

Indeed, my late Grandmother [born 1910] used to relate her childhood, going to work in the cotton mills very young in the 1920s it was like listening to someone talking about the third world now, and in terms of poverty and illness and destitution that world was every bit as horrific then as it must have been in Keats time too, very little would have changed even in 100 years.

I don't know if the conditions in the mills in the 20s had improved since the 1800s, do you know? The conditions in the mills in the 1800s were appalling.

[Raphael]

My grandmother was born and raised in Mayo, Ireland at around the turn of the century (she was born in 1902). I remember her telling me that she and her siblings considered it to be a big treat to have a bowl of mashed potatoes with butter before going to bed. No candy at her house--she came from a very poor family. It is interesting to think that mashed potatoes would have been such a wonderful memory for my grandma. It reminds me of just how much I have in my life--and how much I take it all for granted!

Mashed potatoes are indeed a treat- especially with carrots and swede mashed in.